Authors

  • Namazova Nodira Djumaevna
    PhD Bukhara State Medical Institute named after Abu Ali ibn Sino, Uzbekistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37547/ajsshr/Volume03Issue10-05

Keywords:

Economics of knowledge two waves of research Information society

Abstract

The article reveals the chronology of the emergence and development of a set of terms and hypotheses that reveal the branches of the knowledge economy from the very beginning of the research. The findings of the first and second waves of research into the knowledge economy are presented.


background image

Volume 03 Issue 10-2023

24


American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
(ISSN

2771-2141)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

10

P

AGES

:

24-31

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2021:

5.

993

)

(2022:

6.

015

)

(2023:

7.

164

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

ABSTRACT

The article reveals the chronology of the emergence and development of a set of terms and hypotheses that reveal

the branches of the knowledge economy from the very beginning of the research. The findings of the first and second

waves of research into the knowledge economy are presented.

KEYWORDS

Economics of knowledge, two waves of research, Information society, information economy, knowledge

management, Network society, Knowledge-based economy.

INTRODUCTION

The use of the term “knowledge economy” began in

1962, meaning a sector of the economy focused on

“knowledge production” and was coined by the

American economist Fritz Machlup.

The realities of a globalizing world open up new

aspects for us to understand this new type of

economy. Moreover, knowledge in it is presented as a

product, a factor of production, an object or means of

distribution, a means of accumulation, a result of

activity, etc. The competitiveness of national

economies increasingly depends on their ability to

produce and use knowledge, since knowledge,

education and innovation are the main indicators of

economic growth. Many countries have adopted

Research Article

FORMATION OF CONCEPTS AND CONCEPTS OF KNOWLEDGE
ECONOMY ACTING AS A FACTOR IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
REGIONAL ECONOMY

Submission Date:

October 06, 2023,

Accepted Date:

October 11, 2023,

Published Date:

October 16, 2023

Crossref doi:

https://doi.org/10.37547/ajsshr/Volume03Issue10-05


Namazova Nodira Djumaevna

PhD Bukhara State Medical Institute named after Abu Ali ibn Sino, Uzbekistan

Journal

Website:

https://theusajournals.
com/index.php/ajsshr

Copyright:

Original

content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons

attributes

4.0 licence.


background image

Volume 03 Issue 10-2023

25


American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
(ISSN

2771-2141)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

10

P

AGES

:

24-31

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2021:

5.

993

)

(2022:

6.

015

)

(2023:

7.

164

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

policies related to the production of knowledge and its

transformation into wealth, stimulating the growth

and competitiveness of their economies.

As the results of numerous foreign researchers show,

93% of changes in the path of economic growth in

countries are due to dependence on the knowledge

factor in the economy.

In sequence, these studies examine a variety of terms

used to describe similar concepts associated with:

-

the economy of knowledge (Drucker, 1969-1999);

-

knowledge industry (Mahlup, 1962-1970);

-

information economics (Porat, Rubin, 1977);

-

network society (Castells, 1997);

-

knowledge management (Nonaka, Takeuchi, 1995;

Davenport, 2005).

All proposed terms as a whole constitute the structure

of an economy built on knowledge. However, 60 years

after F. Machlup's seminal work on the knowledge

economy, “Knowledge Production and Dissemination

in the United States” [5], we are approaching an

understanding of this new type of economy with

greater visual practical experience.

THE MAIN FINDINGS AND RESULTS

According to the conclusions of the American scientist

B. Godin, the results of KE research can be divided into

two periods of research: 1 - work from 1962 to the end

of the 1970s by F. Machlup, W. Mansfield, R. Drucker,

D. Bell, M. Porat and M. Rubin, and 2 - well-known

works from the mid-1990s. to this day I. Nonaka, H.

Takeuchi, Von Krogh, T. H. Davenport, L. Prusak and S.

E. Volpel, Van Dyck, M. Castells and other researchers.

The findings of the second stage of work revived the

research of the first stage in accordance with the

changes in emphasis in the structure of the knowledge

economy.

Analytical work on the study of trends in the

component and structural development of the

knowledge economy of the countries of the United

Nations

Educational,

Scientific

and

Cultural

Organization (UNESCO) and the Organization for

Economic Cooperation for Development (OECD) also

has a certain significance.

Conclusions of the first stage of research into the

knowledge economy.

Fritz Machlup, in his work “The Production and

Dissemination of Knowledge in the United States,”

defined knowledge and defined the category of the

usefulness of knowledge not only for use in production

in creating the knowledge industry, but also in the

multidimensional perspective of the development of

society. In 1970, he, together with W. Mansfield,

proposed the conclusion that it is education that

provides an important impetus in organizing a society

that relies on information and knowledge to create

new jobs and contributes to economic growth, while


background image

Volume 03 Issue 10-2023

26


American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
(ISSN

2771-2141)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

10

P

AGES

:

24-31

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2021:

5.

993

)

(2022:

6.

015

)

(2023:

7.

164

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

the importance of the knowledge sector is

increasing.[4, 7]

Peter Drucker, an Austrian economist, coined the term

“knowledge worker” in 1959. Based on the findings of

F. Machlup and W. Mansfield, he published his work

“The Age of Gap,” where the term “knowledge

workers who mainly work with their heads and

produce ideas, knowledge and information” was first

used [4], describing changes in the US economy in the

1930s, when R&D departments were just blossoming in

organizations. American sociologist Daniel Bell, in turn,

put forward a hypothesis about the “information

society” (IS

- Information society) and the importance

of information and education in the creation of

knowledge. [2]

In 1977, Mark Uri Porat and Michael Rubin coined the

term “information economy” (IE), identifying that the

creation, processing and dissemination of information

was rapidly becoming a major economic activity.

Moreover, they revealed the acceptability of this

definition for all countries of the world, regardless of

the level of development. [16].

Conclusions of the second stage of research into the

knowledge economy.

I. Nonaki and his colleagues presented knowledge as

valuable products produced by knowledge workers.

They, based on the philosophical and methodological

concept of the British philosopher Michael Polanyi,

divided human knowledge into “explicit knowledge

and implicit knowledge”. Where "explicit knowledge"

is coded knowledge that can be transferred. And “tacit

knowledge” is acq

uired only on the basis of experience

and is transmitted only indirectly, through analogies.

Von Krogh later hypothesized that successful

knowledge creation activities are supported by the

Nonaka

Takeuchi SECI (Socialization, Externalization,

Combination and Internalization) model, an acronym

for socialization, externalization, combination, and

internalization. The works of I. Nonaka, Takeuchi and

Von Krogh serve as the basis for the branch of science

“knowledge management” (KM

- Knowledge

Management) [14].

“Socialization” is the exchange of

tacit knowledge. “Externalization”

- tacit knowledge is

converted into explicit knowledge by giving it a form

that is understandable to other people. “Combination”

- clearly expressed knowledge takes on even more

complex forms, becomes part of an even larger

system. “Internalization” –

explicit knowledge is

accepted by individuals in addition to the tacit

knowledge they have. Thus, the authors of the SECI

model consider knowledge generation to be a social

process.

Expanding on the research data, T.H. Davenport and L.

Prusak noted that knowledge workers play a more

important role in contributing to business strategy

than to management.


background image

Volume 03 Issue 10-2023

27


American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
(ISSN

2771-2141)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

10

P

AGES

:

24-31

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2021:

5.

993

)

(2022:

6.

015

)

(2023:

7.

164

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

Dutch information sociologist Jan van Dijk introduced

the term “network society” (NS

- Network society) as

“a social formation with an infrastructure of social and

media networks, providing its primary mode of

organization at all levels (individual, group, public),”

arguing that society is in the process of becoming a

network society. His colleague Manuel Castells argued

that the spread of network logic significantly changes

operations and outcomes in the processes of

production, experience, power and culture" [3]

UNESCO gives preference to the concept of

“knowledge societies” (KS

- Knowledge societies). The

OECD

coined

the

term

“Knowledge

-based

economies”, defining KBE as “an economy that is

directly based on the production, distribution and use

of knowledge and information”, representing the

emergence of a “super” economy based on

knowledge. [18]

The European Bank for Reconstruction and

Development (EBRD), in turn, promotes the concept of

the knowledge economy as part of economic

development. The key elements here are the Internet

of Things (IoT - Internet of Things) or digitalization. And

to measure the development of the knowledge

economy, the Bank has compiled the EBRD Knowledge

Economy Index, covering 46 countries, divided into

four main components: long-term knowledge

activities: (1) innovation institutions, (2) skills for

innovation, (3) innovation system and (4) ICT

infrastructure.

For example, in 2019 the EBRD published a knowledge

economy index, which assessed 38 countries with

which it cooperates. Among the EBRD's regions of

operations, Estonia has the highest scores - 6.82 out of

10, Russia - 4.93, Turkey - 4.6, Belarus - 5.21, Kazakhstan

- 4.85, Uzbekistan - 3.82 , and the lowest in

Turkmenistan

2.26.

The methods were developed by two international

organizations, the OECD and the World Bank. The

World Bank uses a method that includes 148 indicators

for 148 countries. Based on these methods, The KAM

Knowledge Index (KI) and The Knowledge Economy

Index (KEI) were created.

Thus, terms were gradually introduced and continue to

develop to describe the knowledge economy and

society or a variant of such an economy and society:

knowledge industry; knowledge economy; post-

industrial society; information worker, information

society; information industry, information economy;

knowledge management; knowledge-based economy;

network society; knowledge society.

According to L. Brown (2008), the theoretical basis of

the social economy, which includes the knowledge

economy, should be considered as follows:


background image

Volume 03 Issue 10-2023

28


American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
(ISSN

2771-2141)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

10

P

AGES

:

24-31

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2021:

5.

993

)

(2022:

6.

015

)

(2023:

7.

164

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

- is a branch of economics that deals with the

relationship between social behavior, human well-

being and the economy;

is not a heterodox school of economics (such as

classical or neoclassical theories), and it often takes

into account subjects outside the scope of orthodox

economic theories. [1]

Thus, social economics encourages people and society

to use resources to meet human and social needs,

including humanity, changes in educational and

economic development, and the promotion of thinking

and innovation. I. Nasiulasa and N. Marisb join this

opinion.[12]

However, it is believed that a critical aspect has been

missed by both the first and second waves of

knowledge economy research. This is a matter of the

health of the country's population: in order to build a

strong and progressive economy, there must be a

good health care system that needs to be taken care

of, not only for knowledge workers, but also for the

population as a whole. Investing in health is not only

desirable; this is an important priority for most

societies. The Covid-19 pandemic has proven this. The

effectiveness of healthcare depends heavily not only

on the economy, but also on the healthcare systems

themselves. The knowledge economy is generally

considered to be a social economy.

Researchers Kwee Keong Chung, Patricka W. Leung, P.

Aghion, R. Blundell, R. Griffith, P. Howitt and S. Prantl

argue that growing interest in the knowledge economy

means economists are challenged to move beyond

labor and capital as central factors of production.[5]

It follows that the knowledge economy is a branch of

the social economy that is associated with social

innovation, support in knowledge and technology and

the use of new types of production of knowledge

products or the use of new markets that transfer them

to the sphere of economic innovation. In today's

complex, competitive and turbulent environment, the

need for product and process innovation is widely

recognized, and organizations are required to embrace

new technologies and implement timely innovations in

anticipation of changes in the market, rather than in

response to business decline.

CONCLUSION

Thus, activities should be developed to encourage

developing countries to use knowledge, to create and

share knowledge among countries to take advantage

of the benefits that such economies provide.

REFERENCES

1.

Браун, Л. (2008). Университет Маунт

-

Сент

-

Винсент,

исследовательская

сеть

по

социальной экономике и устойчивому


background image

Volume 03 Issue 10-2023

29


American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
(ISSN

2771-2141)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

10

P

AGES

:

24-31

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2021:

5.

993

)

(2022:

6.

015

)

(2023:

7.

164

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

развитию

.

http://www.msvu.ca/socialeconomyatlantic .

2.

Bell, D. (1979). The social framework of the

information society. In M. L. Dertoozos & J.

Moses (Eds.), The computer age: A 20 year

view (pp. 500

549). Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press.

3.

Choriyeva M. A. THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE AND

RATIONALISM IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF

FIRDAVSI //European International Journal of

Pedagogics.

2023.

Т. 3. –

№. 06. –

С. 104

-108.

4.

Castells, M. (2010). End of millennium, the

information age: Economy, society and culture

Vol.

III.

2nd.

Edition,

Wiley-Blackwell,

Cambridge, MA.

5.

Drucker, P. (1992a). The Age of Discontinuity. N

Y: Guidelines to our changing society. Harper &

Row.

6.

Chorieva M. A. STATE OF STUDY OF THE

PROBLEM AND THE METHODOLOGICAL BASIS

OF THE RESEARCH //The American Journal of

Political Science Law and Criminology.

2023.

Т. 5. –

№. 04. –

С. 82

-92.

7.

Machlup, F. (1962). The production and

distribution of knowledge in the United States.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

8.

Chorieva M. A. STATE OF STUDY OF THE

PROBLEM AND THE METHODOLOGICAL BASIS

OF THE RESEARCH //The American Journal of

Political Science Law and Criminology.

2023.

Т. 5. –

№. 04. –

С. 82

-92.

9.

Machlup, F., & Mansfield, U. (1970). The Study

of information: Interdisciplinary messages. NY:

John Wiley and Sons.

10.

Nasioulasa, I., & Marisb, N. (2011). Toward the

digital social economy: Institutionalizing

collective action in the ever-evolving web.

Sociology Study, 1(5), 340

345.

11.

Нонака И. и Такеучи Х. (2011).

-

Компания

-

Создатель Знания. Зарождение и Развитие

Инноваций

В

Японских

Фирмах.

Издательство: Олимп

-

Бизнес, 2011 г. 384с.

12.

Нонака, И., и фон Крог, Г. (2009).

Перспективно

-

молчаливое

знание

и

преобразование

знаний:

полемика

и

продвижение

в

теории

создания

организационного знания. Организационная

наука, 20 (3), 635–

652.

13.

Porat, M. U., Rubin, M. R. (1977). The

information

economy.

Office

of

Telecommunications Special Publication 77-12,

United States Department of Commerce,

Washington DC.

14.

Dzhumaevna N. N. CHALLENGES OF THE

MARKET IN THE TRANSFORMATION OF

INNOVATIVE AND EDUCATIONAL METHODS

FOR THE FORMATION OF THE LABOR AREA OF

YOUTH //Journal of Social Sciences and


background image

Volume 03 Issue 10-2023

30


American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
(ISSN

2771-2141)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

10

P

AGES

:

24-31

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2021:

5.

993

)

(2022:

6.

015

)

(2023:

7.

164

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

Humanities Research Fundamentals.

2023.

Т. 3. –

№. 05. –

С. 82

-86.

15.

Namazova N. D. Indicative Planning As A Model

For Creating Conditions For Increasing

Interaction Of Economic Subjects In Regional

Management //Journal of Positive School

Psychology.

2022.

Т. 6. –

№. 8. –

С. 7814

-

7818.

16.

Namazova N. D. WAYS TO SATISFY THE NEEDS

OF SMALL BUSINESS IN THE TERRITORIES IN

INNOVATIVE

AND

COMPETITIVE

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LABOR POTENTIAL

OF YOUTH //European International Journal of

Multidisciplinary Research and Management

Studies.

2022.

Т. 2. –

№. 08. –

С. 66

-72.

17.

Nizamov A. B., Namazova N. D. Towards

modernization of market competence of

graduates of secondary specialized, vocational

education //55th Science Conference of Ruse

University, Bulgaria.

2016.

С. 261

-266.

18.

Namazova N. THE ROLE OF THE MODERN

UNIVERSITY IN THE KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

РОЛЬ СОВРЕМЕННОГО ВУЗА В ТРАНСФЕРЕ

ЗНАНИЙ //Proceedings of university of ruse. –

2016.

Т. 55.

19.

Намазова,

Нодира

Джумаевна.

"Пути

повышения качественных составляющих

использования

трудового

потенциала

малого предпринимательства." Journal of

new century innovations 3.2 (2022): 197-206.

20.

Намазова

Н.

Д.

ИНДИКАТОРЫ

В

РЕГИОНАЛЬНОМ

ПЛАНИРОВАНИИ

КАК

ВОЗМОЖНОСТЬ

СОЧЕТАНИЯ

ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОГО РЕГУЛИРОВАНИЯ С

РЫНОЧНЫМ

САМОРЕГУЛИРОВАНИЕМ

//Herald pedagogiki. Nauka i Praktyka.

2022.

Т. 2. –

№. 4.

21.

Намазова Н. Д. Место современного вуза в

развитии

региональной

инновационной

системы //Gospodarka i Innowacje. –

2022.

Т.

24.

С. 916

-925.

22.

Akhmedova Z. A. THE PROBLEM OF HUMAN

EXISTENCE AND THE PROBLEM OF NATURE IN

THE PHILOSOPHY OF AHMAD DONISH

//Oriental Journal of Social Sciences.

2023.

Т. 3. –

№. 03. –

С. 53

-58.

23.

UNESCO.

(2003).

Towards

knowledge

societies. (by Abdul Waheed Khan (General

sub-director of UNESCO for ¬Communication

and Information)). In A World of Science 1(4),

United Nations Educational, Scientific and

Cultural Organizations, Paris.

24.

Akhmedova Z. A. THE CONTRIBUTION OF

AHMAD DONISH TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF

EDUCATION IN THE EMIRATE OF BUKHARA

//The American Journal of Political Science Law

and Criminology.

2023.

Т. 5. –

№. 04. –

С. 64

-

72.

25.

Akhmedova Z. A. PHILOSOPHY IN THE WORK

OF AKHMAD DONISH //Oriental Journal of


background image

Volume 03 Issue 10-2023

31


American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
(ISSN

2771-2141)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

10

P

AGES

:

24-31

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2021:

5.

993

)

(2022:

6.

015

)

(2023:

7.

164

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

History, Politics and Law.

2022.

Т. 2. –

№. 04.

С. 29

-35.

References

Браун, Л. (2008). Университет Маунт-Сент-Винсент, исследовательская сеть по социальной экономике и устойчивому развитию . http://www.msvu.ca/socialeconomyatlantic .

Bell, D. (1979). The social framework of the information society. In M. L. Dertoozos & J. Moses (Eds.), The computer age: A 20 year view (pp. 500–549). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Choriyeva M. A. THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE AND RATIONALISM IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF FIRDAVSI //European International Journal of Pedagogics. – 2023. – Т. 3. – №. 06. – С. 104-108.

Castells, M. (2010). End of millennium, the information age: Economy, society and culture Vol. III. 2nd. Edition, Wiley-Blackwell, Cambridge, MA.

Drucker, P. (1992a). The Age of Discontinuity. N Y: Guidelines to our changing society. Harper & Row.

Chorieva M. A. STATE OF STUDY OF THE PROBLEM AND THE METHODOLOGICAL BASIS OF THE RESEARCH //The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology. – 2023. – Т. 5. – №. 04. – С. 82-92.

Machlup, F. (1962). The production and distribution of knowledge in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Chorieva M. A. STATE OF STUDY OF THE PROBLEM AND THE METHODOLOGICAL BASIS OF THE RESEARCH //The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology. – 2023. – Т. 5. – №. 04. – С. 82-92.

Machlup, F., & Mansfield, U. (1970). The Study of information: Interdisciplinary messages. NY: John Wiley and Sons.

Nasioulasa, I., & Marisb, N. (2011). Toward the digital social economy: Institutionalizing collective action in the ever­evolving web. Sociology Study, 1(5), 340–345.

Нонака И. и Такеучи Х. (2011). - Компания - Создатель Знания. Зарождение и Развитие Инноваций В Японских Фирмах. Издательство: Олимп-Бизнес, 2011 г. 384с.

Нонака, И., и фон Крог, Г. (2009). Перспективно-молчаливое знание и преобразование знаний: полемика и продвижение в теории создания организационного знания. Организационная наука, 20 (3), 635–652.

Porat, M. U., Rubin, M. R. (1977). The information economy. Office of Telecommunications Special Publication 77-12, United States Department of Commerce, Washington DC.

Dzhumaevna N. N. CHALLENGES OF THE MARKET IN THE TRANSFORMATION OF INNOVATIVE AND EDUCATIONAL METHODS FOR THE FORMATION OF THE LABOR AREA OF YOUTH //Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Research Fundamentals. – 2023. – Т. 3. – №. 05. – С. 82-86.

Namazova N. D. Indicative Planning As A Model For Creating Conditions For Increasing Interaction Of Economic Subjects In Regional Management //Journal of Positive School Psychology. – 2022. – Т. 6. – №. 8. – С. 7814-7818.

Namazova N. D. WAYS TO SATISFY THE NEEDS OF SMALL BUSINESS IN THE TERRITORIES IN INNOVATIVE AND COMPETITIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LABOR POTENTIAL OF YOUTH //European International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Management Studies. – 2022. – Т. 2. – №. 08. – С. 66-72.

Nizamov A. B., Namazova N. D. Towards modernization of market competence of graduates of secondary specialized, vocational education //55th Science Conference of Ruse University, Bulgaria. – 2016. – С. 261-266.

Namazova N. THE ROLE OF THE MODERN UNIVERSITY IN THE KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER РОЛЬ СОВРЕМЕННОГО ВУЗА В ТРАНСФЕРЕ ЗНАНИЙ //Proceedings of university of ruse. – 2016. – Т. 55.

Намазова, Нодира Джумаевна. "Пути повышения качественных составляющих использования трудового потенциала малого предпринимательства." Journal of new century innovations 3.2 (2022): 197-206.

Намазова Н. Д. ИНДИКАТОРЫ В РЕГИОНАЛЬНОМ ПЛАНИРОВАНИИ КАК ВОЗМОЖНОСТЬ СОЧЕТАНИЯ ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОГО РЕГУЛИРОВАНИЯ С РЫНОЧНЫМ САМОРЕГУЛИРОВАНИЕМ //Herald pedagogiki. Nauka i Praktyka. – 2022. – Т. 2. – №. 4.

Намазова Н. Д. Место современного вуза в развитии региональной инновационной системы //Gospodarka i Innowacje. – 2022. – Т. 24. – С. 916-925.

Akhmedova Z. A. THE PROBLEM OF HUMAN EXISTENCE AND THE PROBLEM OF NATURE IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF AHMAD DONISH //Oriental Journal of Social Sciences. – 2023. – Т. 3. – №. 03. – С. 53-58.

UNESCO. (2003). Towards knowledge societies. (by Abdul Waheed Khan (General sub-director of UNESCO for ¬Communication and Information)). In A World of Science 1(4), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organizations, Paris.

Akhmedova Z. A. THE CONTRIBUTION OF AHMAD DONISH TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF EDUCATION IN THE EMIRATE OF BUKHARA //The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology. – 2023. – Т. 5. – №. 04. – С. 64-72.

Akhmedova Z. A. PHILOSOPHY IN THE WORK OF AKHMAD DONISH //Oriental Journal of History, Politics and Law. – 2022. – Т. 2. – №. 04. – С. 29-35.