• Ella Libanova Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
  • Sergii Romaniuk Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine



institutionalized multi-subject decision-making, multi-subject decision making regimes, decision-making in many-subject surrounding


The article is devoted to the generalization of theoretical views on governance as extended relations in society that are formed between subjects — natural persons and/or legal entities — when solving complex problems, overcoming which in various social spheres requires of them collective decisions and actions. The relevance of the work is due to the need to systematize modern views on the possibilities and conditions of practical application of decision-making and implementation mechanisms in multi-subject surroundings. The purpose of the article is to substantiate the universal definition of governance based on the generalization of its modern conceptions by various scientific schools. The novelty of the research is in the interpretation of governance as decision-making in multi-subject surroundings. The research methodology is based on the use of an interdisciplinary approach in outlining the most essential characteristics of decision-making process, which are the subject of numerous scientific studies of this social phenomenon. The article summarizes modern approaches to understanding the concept of governance. Its main characteristics, which manifest when it is used in various social spheres, have been revealed. This term is defined as institutionalized decision-making, which constitutes a mechanism for independent subjects to make coordinated decisions to obtain benefits determined by their interests when solving problems that would require significant efforts and resources to be overcome on one’s own, or it would be impossible at all. This interpretation makes it possible to substantiate the universality of the use of decision-making in social relations; it is due to the perceived need of subjects for the joint with others search and implementation of solutions to achieve their own goals. The content-dependency inherent in modern scientific approaches is proven when the concept of governance is defined, which is determined by the specifics of relations, the peculiarities of the institutional environment of a specific social sphere. Based on the most widespread modes of institutionalized multi-subject decision-making, a classification of its types and forms is proposed. The formation of social capital within the framework of the network regime of governance is considered. A conclusion is made about the need to build social relations in the conditions of decentralization reforms in Ukraine using the mechanism of governance.


  1. Levi-Faur, David (2012). From «Big Government» to «Big Governance»? The Oxford Handbook of Governance.
  2. Schneider, V., & Hyner, D. (2006). Security in Cyberspace: Governance by Transnational Policy Networks. In: Koenig-Archibugi, M., Zürn, M. (Eds). New Modes of Governance in the Global System (International Political Economy Series). Palgrave Macmillan,
  3. Kjaer, Anne Mette (2004). Governance. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. 256 p.
  4. Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2020). A postfunctionalist theory of multilevel governance. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 22(4), 820—826.
  5. OECD (2001). Governance in the 21st Century. OECD Publishing, Paris.
  6. Assche, Kristof, Beunen, Raoul & Duineveld, Martijn (2015).0 An overview of EGT’s main concepts. In: Beunen, Raoul, Van Assche, Kristof, Duineveld, Martijn (Eds). Evolutionary Governance Theory: Theory and Applications. P. 19—33.
  7. Kolodiy, A. (2012). Concept of public (new) governance and its implications for democratic and transitional systems. Democratic Governance: Academic papers collection, 10 (10), 1—12.
  8. Tkalia, O. (2020). The understanding of good governance in modern conditions. Scientific Notes of V.I. Vernadsky Taurida National University. Series: Juridical Sciences, 31(70), Part 2, № 2, 125—130.
  9. Shaulska, Н. (2018). Modern Occidental management models. The Scientific Papers of the Legislation Institute of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 3, 111—116.
  10. Jessop, B. (2011). The state: government and governance.
  11. Eising, R. & Kohler-Koch, B. (1999). The Transformation of Governance in the European London: Routledge.
  12. Beunen, R., van Assche, K., & Duineveld, M. (Eds) (2015). Evolutionary Governance Theory: Theory and Applications. Springer.
  13. Peters, B. Guy (2014). Is governance for everybody? Policy and Society, 33 (4), 301—306.
  14. North, Douglass C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press.
  15. Rosenau, J., & Czempiel, E. (Eds) (1992). Governance without Government: Order andChange in World Politics (Cambridge Studies in International Relations). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  16. Heritier, A., & Lehmkuhl, D. (2008).The shadow of hierarchy and new modes of Journal of Public Policy, 28, 1—17.
  17. Börzel, Tanja A., & Risse, Thomas (2010). Governance without a state: Can it work?Regulation & Governance, 4, 113—134.
  18. Sørsensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2005). Democratic anchorage of governance networks.Scandinavian Political Studies, 28 (3), 195—218.
  19. Khan, M. (2011). Governance and Growth: History, Ideology, and Methods of Proof.In: Noman, A., Botchwey, K., Stein, H., Stiglitz, J. E. (Eds). Good Growth and Governance in Africa: Rethinking Development Strategies. SOAS. University of London.
  20. Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies analysis and antitrust implications:a study in the economics of internal organization. New York: Free Press. 288 p.
  21. Commons, J. (1932). The Problem of Correlating Law, Economics, and Ethics. WisconsinLaw Review, 8, 3—26.
  22. Williamson, Óliver (2005). The Economics of Governance. American Economic Review,95, 1—18.
  23. Coase, Ronald (1937). The Nature of the Firm. Economica, New Series, 4/16, 393—7.
  24. Williamson, Óliver (2002). The Theory of the Firm as Governance Structure: From Choiceto Contract. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16, 171—195.
  25. Klijn, Erik Hans & Koppenjan, Joop (2016). Governance Networks in the Public London: Routledge.
  26. Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge: Harvard University
  27. Jankauskas, Vidmantas & Seputiene, Janina (2007). The Relation between Social Capital,Governance and Economic Performance in Europe. Verslas: teorija ir praktika, 8, 131—138.
  28. Baycan, T., & Oner, O. (2022). The dark side of social capital: a contextual perspective. TheAnnals of Regional Science, 70, 779—798.
  29. Hardin, Garrett (1998). Extensions of «The Tragedy of the Commons». Science, 280(5364), 682—683.
  30. Janssen, Marco (2022). A Perspective on the Future of Studying the Commons. International Journal of the Commons, 16, 243—247.
  31. Hooghe, Liesbet & Marks, Gary (2016). Community, Scale, and Regional Governance:A Postfunctionalist Theory of Governance. Vol. II. Oxford University Press.
  32. Ostrom, V., & Ostrom, E. (1999). Public Goods and Public Choices. In: Polycentricityand Local Public Economies: Readings from the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  33. Spatial Foresight (2015). Local and Regional Partners Contributing to Europe 2020.Multi-level governance in support of Europe 2020. Directorate-General for Regionaland Urban Policy. European Commission. Brussels.
  34. Allain-Dupré, D. (2020). The multi-level governance imperative. The British Journalof Politics and International Relations, 22(4), 800—808.
  35. Charbit, C. (2020). From ‘de jure’ to ‘de facto’ decentralised public policies: The multilevel governance approach. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations,22(4), 809—819.
  36. Hooghe, Liesbet, Lenz, Tobias, & Marks, Gary (2019). A Theory of International Organization. A Postfunctionalist Theory of Governance. Vol. IV. Oxford University
  37. Tuomela, Raimo (2007). The Philosophy of Sociality: The Shared Point of View. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  38. Brousseau, E. (2017). Contract as reference points: A new approach to contracting andimplications for relationships among levels of government. 23 January 2017. EC-OECD.Seminar Series on Designing better economic development policies for regions and cities.Paris, France.
  39. Public governance in Ukraine: Implications of Russia’s war (2022). OECD Policy Responses on the Impact of the War in Ukraine.

Author Biographies

Ella Libanova, Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

Academician of NAS of Ukraine, Dr. Sc. (Economics), Prof.

Sergii Romaniuk, Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

Chief researcher, Doctor of Economics, Associate Professor, Honored Economist of Ukraine



How to Cite

Лібанова, Е., & Романюк, С. (2023). CONCEPTUALIZATION OF GOVERNANCE IN SOCIAL RELATIONS. Demography and Social Economy, 53(3), 33–53.