All
 
|
 
 


The Vicious Circle of Post-Soviet Neopatrimonialism
 
PIIS086904990011580-0-1
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Vladimir Gel'man 
Occupation: Professor, Finland distinguished professor
Affiliation:
European University at St. Petersburg
Aleksanteri Institute, University of Helsinki
Address: 3, Gagarinskaya st., Saint-Petersburg, 191187, Russian Federation
Journal nameObshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost
EditionIssue 6
Pages34-44
Abstract

Since the collapse of Communism, Russia and some other post-Soviet states attempted to pursue socio-economic reforms relying upon political institutions of neopatrimonialism. This politicoeconomic order was established to serve interests of ruling groups and set up major features of states, political regimes, and market economies. It provided numerous negative incentives for governing the economy and the state due to unconstrained rent-seeking behavior of major actors. Programs of policy reforms encountered with incompatibility of these institutions with priorities of modernization, and some efforts to resolve these contradictions through a number of partial and compromise solutions often worsened the situation vis-à-vis preservation of the status quo. The ruling groups lack incentives to institutional changes, which can undermine their political and economic dominance. This is a vicious circle: reforms are often minor or caus unintended and undesired consequences. What are the possible domestic and international incentives for the rejection of political institutions of neopatrimonialism in post-Soviet states and their further replacement by inclusive economic and political institutions?

Keywordsneopatrimonialism, political institutions, governance, authoritarianism, post-Communism
Received15.09.2020
Publication date17.12.2015
Number of characters1289
Cite   Download pdf To download PDF you should sign in
Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной

views: 681

Readers community rating: votes 0 

1. Acemoglu D., Robinson J. (2012) Why Nations Fail: the Origins of Power, Prosperity and Poverty. New York: Crown Business.
2. Aslund A. (2007) Russia’s Capitalist Revolution: Why Market Reforms Succeeded and Democracy Failed, Washington (DC): Peterson Institute for International Economics.
3. Aslund A., Guriev S., Kuchins A. (eds.) (2010) Russia after the Global Economic Crisis. Washington (DC): Peterson Institute for International Economics.
4. Bratton M., van der Walle N. (1997) Democratic Experiments in Africa: Regime Transitions in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
5. Bratton M., van der Walle N. (1994) Neopatrimonial Regimes and Political Transitions in Africa. World Politics, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 453–489.
6. Bueno de Mesquita B., Smith A. (2011) The Dictator’s Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics. New York: Public Affairs.
7. Derluguian G. (2005) Bourdieu’s Secret Admirer in the Caucasus: a World-system Biography. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
8. Eisenstadt S.N. (1978) Revolution and the Transformation of Societies: a Comparative Study of Civilizations. New York: Free Press.
9. Erdmann G., Engel U. (2006) Neopatrimonialism Revisited: Beyond a Catch-all Concept. Hamburg: German Institute for Global and Area Studies, GIGA Working Paper no. 16.
10. Fisun O. (2012) Rethinking Post-Soviet Politics from a Neopatrimonial Perspective. Demokratizatsiya: the Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 87–96.
11. Gaaze K. (2015) Reformy po krugu: president vernul elektrihki, kotorye sam otmenil [Cycle of Reforms: the President Returned Commuter Trains, Which He Abolished Himself]. Forbes.ru, February 5 (http://www.forbes.ru/mneniya-column/vertikal/279533-reformy-po-krugu-prezidentvernul-elektrichki-kotorye-sam-otmenil). 
12. Gel’man V. (2015) Authoritarian Russia: Analyzing Post-Soviet Regime Changes. Pittsburgh (PA): Univ. of Pittsburgh Press.
13. Gel’man V. (2014) The Rise and Decline of Electoral Authoritarianism in Russia, Demokratizatsiya: the Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 503–522.
14. Gel’man V. (2012) Subversive Institutions, Informal Governance, and Contemporary Russian Politics, Communist and Post-communist Studies, vol. 45, no. 3–4, p. 295–303.
15. Gel’man V. (2013) Vladimir Yakunin kak global’nyi myslitel’ [Vladimir Yakunin as a Global Thinker]. Slon.ru, September 12 (http://slon.ru/russia/vladimir_yakunin_kak_globalnyy_myslitel-990463.xhtml). 
16. Gel’man V., Ryzhenkov S. (2011) Local Regimes, Sub-national Governance, and the “Power Vertical” in Contemporary Russia. Europe-Asia Studies, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 449–465.
17. Gel’man V., Starodubtsev A. (2014) Vozmozhnosti i ogranicheniya avtoritarnoi modernizatsii: rossiiskie reformy 2000-kh gg. [Opportunities and Constrains of Authoritarian Modernization: Russia’s Reforms in the 2000s]. Politiya, no. 4, pp. 6–30.
18. Gustafson T. (2012) Wheel of Fortune: the Battle for Oil and Power in Russia. Cambridge (MA): Harvard Univ. Press.
19. Hale H. (2014) Patronal Politics: Eurasian Regime Dynamics in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
20. Huskey E. (1999) Presidential Power in Russia, Armonk (NY): M.E. Sharpe.
21. Jowitt K. (1983) Soviet Neotraditionalism: the Political Corruption of a Leninist Regime. Soviet Studies, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 275–297.
22. Khusainov F. (2015) Zheleznye dorogi i rynok [Railroads and the Market]. Moscow: Nauka.
23. Levitsky S., Way L. (2010) Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
24. North D., Wallis J., Weingast B. (2009) Violence and Social Orders: a Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Recorded Human History. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
25. Offe C. (1991) Capitalism by Democratic Design? Democratic Theory Facing the Triple Transition in East Central Europe. Social Research, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 865–892.
26. Pipes R. (1974) Russia under the Old Regime. New York: Scribner.
27. Pittman R. (2013) Blame the Switchman? Russian Railways Restructuring after Ten Years, the Oxford Handbook of the Russian Economy. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, pp. 490–513.
28. Pop-Eleches G. (2007) Historical Legacies and Post-communist Regime Change. Journal of Politics, vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 908–926.
29. Przeworski A. (1991) Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
30. Robinson N. (2014) The Political Origins of Russia’s ‘Culture Wars’. Limerick: Univ. of Limerick, Department of Politics and Public Administration.
31. Robinson N. (2011) Russian Patrimonial Capitalism and the International Financial Crisis. Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, vol. 27, no. 3–4, pp. 434–455.
32. Schlumberger O. (2008) Structural Reform, Economic Order, and Patrimonial Capitalism. Review of International Political Economy, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 622–649.
33. Sharafutdinova G. (2010) Subnational Governance in Russia: How Putin Changed the Contract with His Agents and the Problems It Created for Medvedev. Publius, vol. 40, no. 4, p. 672–696.
34. Snegovaya M. (2013) Neopatrimonializm i perspektivy demokratizatsii [Neopatrominialism and Prospects for Democratization]. Îtechestvennye zapiski, no. 6 (http://www.strana-oz.ru/2013/6/neopatrimonializm-i-perspektivy-demokratizacii). 
35. Sonin K. (2003) Why the Rich May Favor Poor Protection of Property Rights, Journal of Comparative Economics, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 715–731.
36. Svolik M. (2012) The Politics of Authoritarian Rule. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
37. Taylor B. (2014) The Police Reform in Russia: Policy Process in a Hybrid Regime. Post-Soviet Affairs, vol. 30, no. 2–3, pp. 226–255.
38. Treisman D. (2014) Income, Democracy, and Leader Turnover. American Journal of Political Science, early view publication, DOI: 10.1111/ajps12135.
39. van Zon H. (2008) Russia’s Development Problem: the Cult of Power. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
40. Volkov V. (2002) Violent Entrepreneurs: the Role of Force in the Making of Russian Capitalism. Ithaca (NY): Cornell Univ. Press.
41. Worldwide (2014) Worldwide Governance Indicators, 1996–2012. The World Bank. Washington (DC) (http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/worldwide-governance-indicators).  (access 19.04.2015).

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up