Public authorities are interdependent on each other in the exercise of their own powers, and especially in the exercise of those that require the direct or indirect participation of other public authorities^[50].

Coordination in public policy is the process of coordinating the actions and decisions of various authorities, aimed at ensuring effective management and achieving set goals.

Interdepartmental interaction is a system of relations between state bodies based on cooperation, information exchange and joint implementation of state programs and strategies.

The problem of interaction, and in some cases coordination, is reflected in the study of E. Durkheim, who noted that «for the existence of organic solidarity, it is not enough that there is a system of organs that are necessary for each other and feel their solidarity in general. It is also necessary that the way in which they should cooperate should be determined in advance, if not for all possible cases, then at least for the most common ones. Otherwise, it would be necessary to constantly resort to an incessant struggle so that the organs could come to an equilibrium, for the conditions of this equilibrium can only be found by disorderly attempts...»^[51].

Today, legal science uses such terms as «interaction» and «coordination» to define cooperation. The category of «interaction»^[52] is defined as the mutual connection of phenomena, mutual support; joint or coordinated in space and time activities of two or more subjects to achieve one or more common goals; a universal system of interdependence of phenomena and processes, i.e. a state of interacting subjects that is characterized by their continuous impact on each other and mutual influence.

Thus, interaction can be defined as a joint, systematic, coordinated activity. In turn, «coordination» is characterized as a relationship, coordination, alignment^[53]. It is considered that coordination is the most promising method of building a system of state power in the state^[54], since it is carried out by the competent body with state authority^[55]. And it also serves as a channel through which the state transmits its «commands» to many spheres of society's life, promotes the connection of the state superstructure with the legal one, combining them into a common state-legal superstructure^[56].

The basic principles of coordination include:

- complexity, which includes taking into account all aspects of the problem and interaction of various departments to solve problems in a comprehensive manner. Includes joint planning, strategy development, and analysis of the impact of decisions on related industries.

- subsidiarity, which means the transfer of authority to the most effective level of management, which allows you to optimize decision-making processes and increase their efficiency. The principle assumes that decisions should be made at the lowest level of management, where possible, and that higher authorities should provide only the necessary support;

- transparency, i.e. ensuring that decisions are open and information is available to all stakeholders. Includes publishing reports, maintaining open databases, and using public control mechanisms.

- responsibility, which means a clear delineation of areas of responsibility between the participants of interaction, which helps to avoid duplication of functions, improve work efficiency and minimize bureaucratic barriers;

- flexibility, i.e. adaptation to changing conditions and challenges, which implies the use of adaptive management methods, regular adjustment of strategies and the development of mechanisms for rapid response to crisis situations.

Interagency interaction can take various forms:

- advisory bodies – councils, commissions) are specialized structures created to coordinate the activities of various departments on strategic issues. They play an important role in coordinating interests, developing recommendations, and making collective decisions.

- interdepartmental working groups are temporary or permanent associations of experts and specialists working on solving specific tasks. Such groups can develop regulatory documents, implement complex projects, and analyze the effectiveness of government programs.

- information exchange, which involves the use of digital platforms, integrated databases, and interagency communication systems for rapid information exchange. It includes electronic document management, creation of joint analytical centers, and use of artificial intelligence technologies for processing large amounts of data.

- local projects and programs, i.e. implementation of interagency initiatives aimed at achieving common goals. Such projects may include the development and implementation of national strategies, infrastructure programs, digital transformation initiatives, and other areas of state development.

- bridge mechanisms, i.e. consolidation of interaction between departments in regulatory acts, cooperation agreements and interdepartmental regulations. This makes it possible to clearly define the powers, interaction procedures and responsibilities of participants for implementing joint decisions.

Despite the importance of coordination and interagency collaboration, there are significant challenges in these phenomena, including:

- disunity of departments and departmental selfishness, as competition between state bodies for resources and influence often hinders effective interaction;

- duplication of functions and inefficient use of resources, i.e. the lack of a clear distribution of powers between departments leads to parallel work on similar tasks, which reduces the effectiveness of public administration;

- lack of digital tools for data integration, as fragmented information systems and insufficient automation of processes limit the efficiency of data exchange between departments;

- limited competence of personnel in matters of interdepartmental interaction, i.e. the lack of special training programs for state officials on coordination issues reduces the quality of interaction between different structures;

- insufficient political will to strengthen coordination, namely, the lack of mandatory mechanisms for interagency cooperation and weak control over their implementation hinder the introduction of effective interaction tools.

To improve interagency cooperation, the following measures should be implemented:

- strengthening the legal regulation of coordination mechanisms, including the development of regulations that establish mandatory interaction mechanisms, data exchange standards and responsibility for their compliance;

- development of digital platforms and integrated databases, including the creation of unified information systems that provide automated data exchange and coordination of actions between departments;

- improving the qualifications of civil servants, introducing educational programs and trainings on coordination, digitalization and effective management of interdepartmental projects;

- in charge of mechanisms for evaluating the effectiveness of interdepartmental interaction, i.e. developing a system of key performance indicators (KPIs) that allows you to assess the level of coordination between departments and adjust public policy;

- expanding the practice of public consultation and civil society participation, i.e. involving experts, non-governmental organizations and the civil sector in the decision-making process, will improve the quality of public administration and ensure its transparency.

Thus, coordination and interagency interaction are the most important elements of public policy that affect its effectiveness and sustainability. Solving existing problems and introducing modern mechanisms of interaction between departments will improve the quality of management, improve the implementation of state programs and ensure the effective achievement of strategic development goals.

---

^[50] Cherkasov K. V. Interaction as a Principle of Activity of State Authorities of a Constituent Entity of the Russian Federation // «Black Holes» in Russian Legislation. – 2008. – No. 2. – P. 63.

^[51] Durkheim É. On the Division of Social Labor. The Method of Sociology. – Moscow, 1991. – P. 131.

^[52] Soviet Encyclopedic Dictionary / Chief Editor A. M. Prokhorov. 3rd ed. – Moscow, 1985. – P. 216.

^[53] Same source. – С. 626.

^[54] Maksurov A. A. Coordination as the Most Promising Method of Building the System of State Power in the Russian Federation // State Power and Local Self-Government. – 2007. – No.9.

^[55] Problems of the General Theory of State and Law / Edited by V. S. Nersesyants. – Moscow, 1999. – P. 567.

^[56] Fatkullin F. N. Problems of the General Theory of the Socialist Legal Superstructure. – Kazan, 1980. – P. 89.