Olena Mykolenko

The aim of the study is to investigate substantial bases and mechanisms for institutional changes that facilitate the adjustment of an economic system to abrupt changes. To achieve this objective, comparative analysis is carried out in order to disclose different approaches to crisis management and resolution regimes following the financial imbalances in Denmark, Sweden, and the USA that represent three different models of institutional adaptation. Thus, the paper reflects on the multifaceted phenomenon of institutional change, evaluating the theoretical background, which is further adjusted to the concept of institutional adaptation. In turn, the concept of institutional adaptation is developed from crisis management and post-crisis financial policies’ perspective. Built on various resolution procedures, the main mechanisms behind institutional adaptation are highlighted: extension (extended authorities of traditional institutions that have been empowered with additional functions); limited creation (newly-created institutions with restricted opportunity to exercise their discretion); redeployment (utilized and redeployed traditional effective institutions in order to implement new resolution schemes); modified formation (newly-formed institutions that have been modified and adjusted); grafting (grafting the new appropriate elements onto statutory institutional frameworks); transfer (transfer of practices from other domains and markets), and rebuilding (rebuilding functional competences). It is proved that even though policy-makers draw on institutions and logic of actions originally established and developed before the need to respond to new circumstances, they adjust and redesign them to fit and produce a renewed action plan.

Type of the article: Research Article

The propagandistic instrumentalization of science occurs not only through academic text content but also through institutional authority, territorial affiliations, bibliographic metadata, and publishing infrastructure. These practices may confer signals of academic legitimacy on politically oriented claims and increase their potential international visibility; infrastructural presence alone is not treated as evidence of legitimation. However, this infrastructural dimension of propaganda has received considerably less scholarly attention than message content. This study identifies and systematizes the methods through which scholarly communication is instrumentalized for propaganda, using contemporary Russian practice as an empirical case. Designed as a qualitative documentary multiple-case study, its empirical basis comprises a purposively constructed corpus of 2024–2026 monitoring materials, primary documents, prior studies, institutional web resources, and bibliographic records. Inductive-abductive analysis, thematic document coding, and cross-case comparison yielded a preliminary analytical typology of three methods: content-based construction of politically useful knowledge; authority- and institution-based legitimation; and affiliation-based territorial normalization of annexation. These methods are implemented through material, organizational, and digital forms, including scholarly texts, editorial boards, institutional statuses, affiliations, metadata, DOIs, scientometric databases, and publishing partnerships. At the theoretical level, the three methods are interpreted through four proposed analytical mechanisms: producing politically useful knowledge or ignorance; leveraging the cultural authority of science; politicizing classifications and standards; and organizing visibility and international circulation. The resulting configurational model demonstrates that these methods, forms, and proposed analytical mechanisms combine dynamically rather than forming a rigid sequence. The findings provide evidence-based reference points for auditing academic journals, university affiliations, metadata, indexing databases, and publishing partnerships.

Acknowledgment(s)
This research was conducted within the framework of the Project 0126U003080 NFDU (2026-2028) Science as a tool of propaganda: identification, analysis and counteraction using the example of the russian scientific system