У статті розглянуто процеси інституціоналізації неформальних практик,
які пронизують всі без винятку форми економічної реальності. Часто
неформальні практики вкорінені в зазорі законів і неписаних норм поведінки.
Показано, що чим глибше цей зазор, чим слабший механізм примусу до
виконання закону, тим більш поширені неформальні практики. Показано, що
поширення неформальних соціальних практик є природною відповіддю на
значне відставання розвитку легальних інститутів державної влади від
розвитку реальних суспільних відносин, потреб та інтересів.
The article describes the process of institutionalization of informal practices that
penetrate every single form of economic reality -this is a compromise of formal rules
and social norms. That is to say informal practices are rooted in the gap of the laws
and unwritten norms of behavior. It is shown that the deeper the gap, as well as the
weaker the mechanism of enforcement for obeying the law, since more abundant
informal practices are. Similarly, informal practices do not just rooted in the laws
and social norms, but being massive, inevitably lead to the "destruction of the
supports", namely inducing the conscious correction of laws and unintentional
modification of social norms of society. Formal rules themselves are solely applied
under the impact of informal practices. They are inseparable. It is more noticeable in
Ukraine than elsewhere. Designations of Ukrainian reality in the Western studies - a hybrid economy, organized disorganization, competitive authoritarianism – reflect
the complexity of the given object.
It is proved that the relation of formal and informal regulation has at least three
grades. Informal practices may: displace the formal rules, replacing them; occupy
space free of formal regulation; break "not the letter but the spirit of the law", using
a legal instrument as a tool to achieve informal arrangements.
We have come to the conclusion that the Formal and Informal exist separately,
while using the term "sector". But as soon as we enter into a discussion about the
bureaucratic and non-bureaucratic management, then we notice the continuity of
formal and informal orders. Since in the given article the general vector of studies of
the informal economy is shifting from the structural to the institutional direction.
