Tuesday 5 October 2021

Stages of Transition from Neoliberalism to Scientific Governance Model


 Moving from the neoliberal state model, which has been in practice since the 1970s, to another model cannot be expected to be completely painless. Every change carries its own difficulties. Even though the new system is perfect compared to the old one, there are some difficulties due to human habits.

While explaining the Scientific Governance Model, I started with Weber's understanding of bureaucracy and the example of Belgium. The first step of the transition phase that I will propose for the transition to SGM will again be the Weber bureaucracy. Because at a time when the political system is actively in office, it is necessary to expect that politicians will do their best to prevent the transition to the SGM. It is necessary to reckon with its privileges, its posh location, its super-luxury vehicles, its magnificent buildings, its power to change society with one decision, the power to manage the wealth of a country's taxes, and of course the resilience of anyone who has to lose their job.

While the Weber bureaucracy is in operation, universities create their own SGM modeling programs. However, since they will need to fully understand the system to be passed through, they all need to understand the situation and their new positions mentally and adapt. There may be those who do not grasp this position well and think that one of them will manage everything, or there may be those who sneakily pursue this aim. Humans are rational by nature, but whispers from outside and high bribery supplies can cause this essence to be misdirected. For these reasons, I think that it may be necessary to use psychological counseling service actively and necessarily in a planned manner during this transition period. Otherwise, it would be an unnecessary step to test the academics and professors of each university on their scientific competencies. However, it is important to apply KPIs regularly and crosswise when explaining the SGM model. By cross I mean different universities apply each other and each time this order changes randomly.

SGM models have two main structures. The first structure is the one that is open to development and for testing purposes within the relevant university. The other structure consists of intercollegiate models. The aim here is to test the efficiency of the results obtained after entering the data of the subjects to be studied and to put them into practice as an inter-university model when the most suitable model is developed. Of course, it is necessary to foresee that the first models can be reached after many meetings and long-term studies. For these reasons, it can be expected that it will take several years to 10 years to move from the Weber bureaucracy to the SGM model. It is necessary to eliminate the possibility that a rapid transition with unprepared models can cause serious collapses and chaos.

The challenge here is the long-running scientific debates in the university environment that prevent too quick decision making. Although science works with tests and evidence, when the subject is society; It is the society itself that will be tested, which is quite risky. Therefore, it requires models to be tested virtually after data has been processed. This, on the other hand, increases the possibility that the debates will take a long time, as it will cause differences in scientific opinion.

Internal assignments will need to be made after the models for each department are ready. This detail should not be forgotten. Individuals will not make decisions. The system itself, the models themselves, will decide how the state will operate. (It does not mean AI governance model control whole system. Humans will do the active implementation. However AI based models creates the solutions and humans discusses if those solutions are accurate and how/when/sequences of steps to be used in implementation.) Here, the role of the university should be developed in such a way that the models can be most scientifically accurate. It is important that the malfunctions that may occur after the model is put into practice are foreseeable. Thus, while the model number X is implemented, the efficiency of the operation can be analyzed and the design of the next model can be started.

Let me try to exemplify a little. This is what is expected when the data that will flow from society, economy, banks, liquidity in emission, companies' income, taxes, geography, city plans, roads, dams, running waters, atmosphere and every other area are transferred to the SGM model. In the light of all these data, what does the country need for investment, what are the social problems and in which subjects, can the citizens meet their needs, in which details are the class differences concentrated, etc. reports should be obtained. According to these reports, SGM should give algorithmic recommendations for each problem. Like what? I have a headache -> Go to the doctor -> The doctor examines it -> If he does not see a very serious problem that may cause headache, he writes the appropriate pain medication. -> If he is worried about any serious problem he will request tests like...... Algorithmic thinking is a construct of processes such as if, and, or, if. The SGM system will also be expected to analyze all data and produce algorithmic recommendations for related fields.

Algorithmic recommendations should be created separately for each field, but by evaluating the total data. Thus, if there is a need for a change in the field of law; this change will be rational. I think it is understood that there will be a change that will be made as all possible preliminary possibilities have been evaluated from the beginning. This is not how rational work is done in bureaucracy or political governance systems. There are many factors that can disrupt the rational flow. Habits, traditional approaches, religious approaches and influences, concerns, personal ambition, greedy people, lobbies etc. What makes the SGM system rational is that all data is entered continuously. These data are not just technical data. At the same time, data flowing from non-governmental organizations, data flowing from citizens thanks to the e-government system, requests, problems, etc. The system keeps a lively democracy alive within itself at all times. This analysis makes it possible to instantly identify conflicting requests or conflicting technical issues, thanks to the data flowing from the ever-living democracy.

Thus, the most rational solutions possible are formed thanks to the system outputs that will be formed by algorithmic methods. Another benefit of this method is that it solves future problems arising from conflicts from the current day.

Some businesses and some people may be dissatisfied with the outputs of the EOM system, since the citizens' primary objectives are to balance the benefit of society with the benefit of nature at an optimal level. For example, thermal power plant operations or those who have built settlements such as houses and hotels in the forest may not be satisfied with the relevant EOM decisions as they are damaging to this optimal balance. Because thermal power plants may be closed, settlements and businesses in forests may have to be demolished. There are so many practices in society that violate the rights of nature that it is impossible to list them one by one at the moment. But what we clearly know from a scientific point of view is that the more we disrespect the rights of nature, the more it comes back as harm to us humans. For example, a factory secretly dumps its toxic waste into a river. The river carries that waste to the sea. The river is poisoned, the seabed is poisoned. Shellfish die suddenly. Oxygenation is reduced. Small fish get sick. Big fish that eat small fish get sick. At the end of the process, we catch and eat big fish. The disease spreads to the community. etc. etc. For these reasons, continuous flow of data from every field is extremely important. In addition, ensuring the regular flow of these data is another very important issue that needs to be established.

Intra-university and inter-university hierarchy

The SGM structure rejects intra-university and inter-university hierarchy. Professors, academics, rectors and deans in all fields are at an equal level. The hierarchy system applied for the functioning of the universities does not exist in the SGM system. Its purpose is to ensure that only scientific data and scientific information are used. There is no democracy in science. No scientist decides which scientific data is correct at the sigma 6 level by voting. Or, those with a higher level of hierarchy do not have the right to talk about which data are scientific truths. It is only science (proven knowledge) that speaks. Within the framework of this logic, people take charge in SGM. The approach of one person or a group in a single university is not suitable for implementation in the SGM system. The fact that all universities reach the same scientific results on the accuracy of the same information can ensure the implementation of the relevant step.


13.06.2023 Addendum:

Economic Approach

Switching the political system to the Scientific Governance Model; It will not be enough to change the economy system without changing it. One of the most fundamental problems of the economy is the supply-demand approach. The price of a product is determined by the demand for that product. Money itself acquires a value as a result of supply and demand. However, the point on which economic theories are based is by pushing the society; It is based on forcing the individual to a point, a behavior model, using his/her selfishness. In reality, it is an increase in the profit margin without changing the production cost of the product. If the economy model is based on cost accounting; if supply - demand is completely excluded; The prices of the products become realistic. For example, when 100 people live in a village; Since the bakeries here can produce 80 breads a day, why would the demand be higher than the supply and change the production cost of the bread? If the production cost does not change; Why would the selling price increase? In case of a large number of producers, the price of the product begins to fall below the cost, and those who do not have sufficient financial means go bankrupt. It also causes unnecessary corporate warfare. The losers in the entire table from start to finish are usually consumers. The survival of producers depends on consumers consuming more and more all the time. The result of this is excessive pollution. It is climate degradation. It is the destruction of the planet. If the cost accounting system is applied in all areas, inflation will not occur. The cost need not increase unless an increase in costs occurs. Costs, however, are the depletion and non-maintenance of the relevant raw material; It depends on factors such as the implementation of new production technologies and the large amount of R&D studies that will affect the cost. It will not depend on the supply - demand of the raw material. As a result, companies that compete on price compete over the added value of the product and each excess value it offers to the consumer.


Money is a medium of exchange. It is not a product to be priced based on supply and demand. So money needs to be thought of as a unit like the meter. The meter does not lengthen or shorten from city to city or country to country. It is a unit of measurement. If money is used as a unit of measurement; currencies of all countries become equal. The exchange value does not change over time. At this point, it is necessary to answer the question of who will earn how much income in terms of employees. It is not very difficult. 1 unit of work = education time + experience + Qualifications + unit work time. With this perspective, income justice can also be achieved.



No comments:

Post a Comment