Suchergebnisse

Centering its study around three explanatory variables - actors, institutions and ideas - this book argues that Russia's hybrid institutional environment reduces the competition of policy ideas, both at the stage of policy elaboration by the community of state and non-state policy experts, and also at the stage of policy adoption by parliament

Russia's 2018 presidential election campaign was accompanied by a new round of strategies of socio-economic development. This article analyses these documents from the perspective of the 'politics of expertise' defining the relations between the political regime and policy experts. The analysis draws on authoritarian politics and public policy literatures. The article argues that a 'hollow paradigm' approach to the politics of expertise has emerged in response to the dilemmas of authoritarian governance. While the substantive, ideational element of this paradigm is vague, its procedural, expert community-binding element is strong. The analysis contributes to the understanding of the politics surrounding the writing of strategic plans, the role of policy ideas and state–society relations in contemporary Russia. ; Peer reviewed

The article focusses on policy ideas as explanatory variables for understanding policymaking and governance in Russia. Following Schmidt's definition of the ideational process as a 'discourse' in which actors promote their preferred policy ideas in competition with their opponents, the article argues that in Russia the character of discourses varies between three state levels: the President, ministerial bureaucracy and the regional & local levels. This variegated landscape of policy discourses involves the intensive communicative discourse of the Russian President, which seeks legitimation of main policy approaches with the public and provides signals for the lower level officials. The middle level of policy bureaucracy is characterised by a vigorous coordinative discourse in which officials and non-state experts defend their ideas and seek agreement on policy details. Finally, at the local level political communication and technical coordination of policy ideas coexist and involve, apart from the officials and experts, members of the public. The benefit of the ideas-based perspective on policy and governance in Russia is that it allows not only tracing the origins and evolution of various policy initiatives, but also seeing the sources of presidential popularity and regime flexibility associated with the accommodation of different ideational positions. The argument is illustrated with examples of policymaking in the social sphere, the Maternity Capital programme and the Moscow programme of housing renovation. ; Non peer reviewed

The article focusses on policy ideas as explanatory variables for understanding policymaking and governance in Russia. Following Schmidt's definition of the ideational process as a 'discourse' in which actors promote their preferred policy ideas in competition with their opponents, the article argues that in Russia the character of discourses varies between three state levels: the President, ministerial bureaucracy and the regional & local levels. This variegated landscape of policy discourses involves the intensive communicative discourse of the Russian President, which seeks legitimation of main policy approaches with the public and provides signals for the lower level officials. The middle level of policy bureaucracy is characterised by a vigorous coordinative discourse in which officials and non-state experts defend their ideas and seek agreement on policy details. Finally, at the local level political communication and technical coordination of policy ideas coexist and involve, apart from the officials and experts, members of the public. The benefit of the ideas-based perspective on policy and governance in Russia is that it allows not only tracing the origins and evolution of various policy initiatives, but also seeing the sources of presidential popularity and regime flexibility associated with the accommodation of different ideational positions. The argument is illustrated with examples of policymaking in the social sphere, the Maternity Capital programme and the Moscow programme of housing renovation.

The chapter examines the process of the development of the Russian budget for the social sphere during 2015-2016. The analysis demonstrates the key contribution of the bureaucratic actors and the competition among different parts of the executive in the process of policy elaboration. ; Peer reviewed

The article analyses the use of policy tools in the Russian housing sector, associated with the government's objective of development, and examines the pattern of complementarity that exists between the policy tools. Building on the insights of historical institutionalist and public policy literatures, it argues that the choices of policy tools are determined by institutional and policy sector specific structural factors and temporal calculations by the policy makers leading them to adopt specific 'bundles' of policy instruments as well as doubling policy arrangements.

The article analyses the use of policy tools in the Russian housing sector, associated with the government's objective of development, and examines the pattern of complementarity that exists between the policy tools. Building on the insights of historical institutionalist and public policy literatures, it argues that the choices of policy tools are determined by institutional and policy sector specific structural factors and temporal calculations by the policy makers leading them to adopt specific 'bundles' of policy instruments as well as doubling policy arrangements. ; Peer reviewed

Policy expertise and policy experts are expected to play an important role in the policy-making process, both around the world and in Russia. However, the patterns of long-term policy shifts involving technical expertise are insufficiently understood. To what extent do experts influence policy in Russia? To date, this question remains unanswered. These issues are considered here in the case of housing policy. ; Non peer reviewed