Академія національної безпеки

Ensuring Sustainability of the Social Order as a Priority in the Field of National Security

Sytnyk H.P.,
Doctor of Science in Public Administration, Professor, Professor of Public Administration Faculty of Philosophy Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3083-5733,

Orel M.H.,
Doctor of Science in Public Administration, Professor of Public Administration Interregional Academy of Personnel Management,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9071-5602

 DOI: https://doi.org/10.53305/2523-4927.2021.29.01


 The purpose of the article is to analyze the factors on which the stability of the social order depends and to substantiate the expediency of its priority in the sphere of national security.
The scientific novelty of the article is the justification of the interrelationship between national security and the stability of the social order in the need’s context to merge society around the goals that guarantee its security.
Conclusions. The study shows that the sustainability of the social order ensures the existence and security of society and social institutions. We analyzed the axiological dimension of social order and sustainability through the disclosure of the social function of value orientation. We see them as the basis for the choice of action of the elements of social systems. In this context, we emphasized justifying the importance of a conceptual framework for its sustainability that considers the socio-cultural specificities of society and the values of the indivisible. We have shown that the main reason for the danger of social order and stability leading to the disintegration of society is the disparity of traditional values. They inform society of the ideological principles, program goals, and legal norms concerning its existence and the development of the State, which are determined by the highest political leadership. This makes it advisable to study the social system in question, its hierarchical levels, and their interrelationships. Hierarchical levels (moral, legal, conceptual) are described, their interrelationship is described, and it shows the category of sustainability to reflect the qualitative and quantitative assessment of the social order as a social system. Level – the quality (conflict-free) of its internal structuring. Emphasis has been placed on the desirability of distinguishing, at the conceptual level, the social order from the conceptual and ideological, and programmatic aspects this ensures that political decisions are made at the strategic level of public administration and that the strategic objectives of society, the means, and means of achieving them in national security, are justified. It has been established that the most effective means of destroying the State is to generate the prerequisites for threatening the stability of the social order, Therefore, the priority task of the actors of public administration and administration is to develop and implement a set of measures aimed at structuring and harmonizing principles, values and objectives at and between hierarchical levels of social order. We have identified basic prerequisites for the effectiveness of these measures, including mutually agreed goals, timetables, means, and methods of implementing strategies for socio-political and socio-economic development.

Key words: social order, national security, public administration, social order and stability risks, value orientations, social order levels


  1. Bek U. (2007). Power and its opponents in the era of globalism. New World Political Economy. Moscow: Prohress-Tradytsyia; Yzdatelskyi dom “Terrytoryia budushcheho” (Seryia “Unyversytetskaia byblyoteka Aleksandra Pohorelskoho”) [in Russian]
  2. Bodryiiar Zh. (2006). Consumer society. Moscow: Respublyka, Kulturnaia revoliutsyia [in Russian]
  3. Kuryn S.Ia., Vorobev V.P. (2009). Diseases of the state. Diagnostics of the political system of public administration and law. Moscow: Izd-vo “MGIMO (U) MID Rossii” [in Russian]
  4. Hobbs T. (1991). Leviathan, or matter, form and power of the church and civil state. (Vol. 2). Moscow: Dumka [in Ukrainian]
  5. Horbulin V.P., Kachynskyi A.B. (2010). Strategic planning: solving national security problems. Kyiv: NISS [in Ukrainian]
  6. Orel M.H. (2019). Theoretical foundations of public administration in the field of political security. Kyiv: Polihraf Plius “Ts-SI” [in Ukrainian]
  7. Stankevich A.A. (2018). Sustainable development of systems: from concept to social sustainability. Scientific newsletter “Finance, banks, investments, 2, 174-180 [in Russian]
  8. Sytnyk H.P., Orel M.H. (2020). Public administration in the sphere of national security. Kyiv: Vydavets Kravchenko Ya.O. [in Ukrainian]
  9. Dyurkgeym E. (1995). Sociology. Its subject, method, purpose. Moscow: Kanon [in Russian]
  10. Toynbi A. (2009). Exploring History: The Rise, Rise and Decay of Civilizations. (Vol. 1). Moscow: AST [in Russian]
  11. Mogilevskiy V.D. (2002). Dynamical systems: technologies of transformation and destruction. Safety concerns in emergencies, 1, 86-99 [in Russian]
  12. Sharp Dzhin (2004). From dictatorship to democracy: conceptual ambushes for freedom. Lviv: Spolom [in Ukrainian]
  13. Bauman Z. (2008). Fluid modernity. St. Petersburg: Peter [in Russian]
  14. Bauman Z. (2005). Individualized society. Moskva: Logos [in Russian]
  15. Gibbon E. (2008). History of the Decline and Fall of the Great Roman Empire: the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. (Vol. 1). Moscow:TERRA [in Russian]

Sytnyk H.P., Orel M.H. (2021). Ensuring Sustainability of the Social Order as a Priority in the Field of National Security. Scientific Journal the Academy of National Security, 1(29), 8-25 [full text in Ukrainain]

Published online – 2021-04-24; published – 2021-04-24