Features of the Relationship 4D = “D + 3D”: Demoetic – Demographic – Democratic – Demoeconomic and Environmental Components in the Assessment of Sustainable Development of Regions

  • Rinat Zhanbaev National Engineering Academy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Kazakhstan
  • Daniil Maksimov Department of Public Service and Personnel Management, Udmurt State University, Izhevsk, Russia
  • Gakku Gakku Tansykbayeva National Engineering Academy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Kazakhstan
  • Makpal Nurkenova National Engineering Academy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Kazakhstan
  • Rimma Abdykadyrkyzy National Engineering Academy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Kazakhstan
  • Makhmut Tomanov National Engineering Academy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Kazakhstan
  • Makpal Kozhakanova National Engineering Academy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Kazakhstan
  • Мeruyert Sadykova National Engineering Academy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Kazakhstan
Keywords: Demography, Demotics, Democracy, Demoeconomics, Sustainable Development

Abstract

In the conditions of the current unstable geopolitical situation, entailing the disruption of established economic ties, there are real prerequisites for the aggravation of crisis phenomena, both in macroeconomic processes and at the level of regional economies. This situation makes it extremely relevant to research in the field of the level and quality of life through the prism of achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Governments of different countries are trying to reduce the impact of aggravated political and economic factors on people's lives. However, in our opinion, the previous approaches to the study of sustainable development processes based on a monoscientific analysis from the point of view of the operation of an economic mechanism alone are no longer viable. The article substantiates a radically different approach to solving the problem of sustainable development based on an integrated approach involving four demo components. This approach, in our opinion, is viable especially in the conditions of regions for which today indicators of the level and quality of life are fundamental. The research uses methods of scientific abstraction, analysis and synthesis. As a result of the research, the authors propose the concept of an integrated approach to achieving sustainable development goals based on the economy of four “D”.

References

Batey, P. W. J., & Hewings, G. J. D. (2021). Demo-economic Modeling: Review and Prospects. International Regional Science Review, 44(3–4), 328–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160017621994638
Bajmuratov, U. (2014) Opening of laws of social harmony – result of synthesis spiritual and scientific knowledge Doklady NAN RK., 1, 123–128
Humboldt, W. (1985). Language and philosophy of culture [Iazyk I filosofiia kultury]. Moscow.
Kemmis, S., & Mutton, R. (2012). Education for sustainability (EfS): practice and practice architectures. Environmental Education Research, 18(2), 187–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2011.596929
Mughal, N., Arif, A., Jain, V., Chupradit, S., Shabbir, M. S., Ramos-Meza, C. S., & Zhanbayev, R. (2022) The role of technological innovation in environmental pollution, energy consumption and sustainable economic growth: Evidence from South Asian economies. Energy Strategy Reviews, 39, 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2021.100745
Niebuhr, R. (1944) The children of light and the children of darkness. New York: Charles Scribners Sons.
Obolonskiy, A. V. (2007). Political ethics, power, law [Politicheskaia etika vlast pravo]. Public Administration Issues, 1(1), 79–106
Sachs, J. D., Schmidt-Traub, G., Mazzucato, M., Messner, D., Nakicenovic, N., & Rockstrom, J. (2019) Six transformations to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Nature Sustainability, 2, 805–814. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0352-9
Yarnal, K., Olson, M., Santiago, I., & Zelizer, C. (2021) Peace engineering as a pathway to the sustainable development goals. Technical Forecasting and Social Change, 168, 120753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120753
Zhanbayev, R., & Irfan, (2022) M. Industrial-Innovative Paradigm of Social Sustainability: Modeling the Assessment of Demoethical, Demographic, Democratic, and Demoeconomic Factors. Sustainability, 14, 7280. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127280
Zhanbayev, R.A, Maksimov, D.G., & Tansykbayeva, G.O. (2022) Demoeconomics: sustainable development goals and implementation of national projects in the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan. Bulletin of Udmurt University. Series Economics and Law, 32(6), 987–992. https://doi.org/10.35634/2412-9593-2022-32-6-987-992
Published
2022-12-12
How to Cite
Zhanbaev, R., Maksimov, D., Gakku Tansykbayeva, G., Nurkenova, M., Abdykadyrkyzy, R., Tomanov, M., Kozhakanova, M., & SadykovaМ. (2022). Features of the Relationship 4D = “D + 3D”: Demoetic – Demographic – Democratic – Demoeconomic and Environmental Components in the Assessment of Sustainable Development of Regions. International Journal of Pedagogical Advances in Technology-Mediated Education, 2(5), 01 - 09. Retrieved from http://patme-journal.iatels.com/index.php/patme/article/view/51