How the Regime is Created:
Power Coalitions in Siberian Cities


Pustovoit Yu.A.,

Associate Professor, Department of Political Science and Technology, Siberian Institute of Management – the branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, pustovoit1963@gmail.com

elibrary_id: 416812 | ORCID: 0000-0002-0934-2723 | RESEARCHER_ID: T-2766-2019


DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2019.04.08
Rubric: Russia Today

For citation:

Pustovoit Yu.A. How the Regime is Created: Power Coalitions in Siberian Cities. – Polis. Political Studies. 2019. No. 4. P. 104-118. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.04.08


The publication was carried out the within the research project “Who is the owner?” supported by Russian Foundation for Humanities and the Government of Novosibirsk region. Formation and development of models of power in the areas of the Siberian metropolis” (№16-13-54003)


Abstract

Why, and under what conditions, are regimes formed where, in one case, the focus is on the dominance of one actor, capable of changing the “rules of the game”, whilst in another, the possibilities of political actors are limited? The study is aimed at studying power groups in the urban community, considered within the framework of the concept of urban political regimes, which are a composite of formal and informal norms of interaction that develop between actors having access to institutionalized resources and forming a coalition for management of community. Initially, the focus was on the formation of a regime in a large industrial center, where a monopoly on power and personality were the main characteristics. Next, the hypothesis was formulated about the external (scale of the city, the projection of business interests and the specialization of enterprises) and internal (leadership strategy) factors in the formation of various regimes. The method of testing the hypothesis is a comparison of opposite cases: the regime in the industrial center was compared with the regime of the Siberian megalopolis. Further comparison was carried out in two areas of the same city with opposite socio-economic characteristics with the subsequent analysis of power in Siberian cities. A common characteristic of urban regimes is the limitations and motivation of participants. The independence of the actors depends on the requirements of the federal (in both cases) and regional (to a lesser extent for the metropolis) centers. The system of existing informal rules largely coincides with the characteristics of the “political machine” and is based on the personal interests of the coalition participants, and not on the dominance of political principles and ideologies. The differences in the strategies of the actors are the following: traditional leadership with an explicit program, concentration of resources, and an invasion of coalition members for the realization of declared goals in monopolistic, personified regions, and in “polyarchic” regions “sustainable action”, built on maximum secret and uncertainty of the goals of leadership and conclusion of a lot of alliances with different forces. 

Keywords
urban political regime, elitism, pluralism, the political elite, city, district, megalopolis, Siberia.


References

Bychkova O., Gelman V. 2010. Economic Actors and Local Regimes in Large Cities of Russia. – NZ: Debates on Politics and Culture. No. 2. P. 73-82. (In Russ.)

Chirikova A.E., Ledyaev V.G. 2017. Vlast’ v malom rossiiskom gorode [Power in a Small Russian City]. Moscow: The Higher School of Economics Publishing House. 414 p. (In Russ.)

Gelman V., Ryzhenkov S. 2010. Local Regimes in Large Russian Cities: Introduction to the Topic. – NZ: Debates on Politics and Culture. No. 2. P. 49-52. (In Russ.)

Gel’man V., Ryzhenkov S., Belokurova E., Borisova N. 2008. Reforma mestnoi vlasti v gorodakh Rossii, 1991-2006 [Reform of Local Power in the Cities of Russia, 1991-2006]. Saint Petersburg: Norma. 368 p. (In Russ.)

Golosov G. 2012. Demokratiya v Rossii: instruktsiya po sborke [Democracy in Russia: Assembly Instructions]. Saint Petersburg: BHV-Peterburg. 208 p. (In Russ.)

Kovalev E., Shteinberg I. 2009. Kachestvennye metody v sotsiologicheskikh issledovaniyakh [Qualitative Methods in Sociological Research]. Saint Petersburg: Aletheia. 356 p. (In Russ.)

Ledyaev V. 2012. Sotsiologiya vlasti: teoriya i opyt empiricheskogo issledovaniya vlasti v gorodskikh soobshchestvakh [Sociology of Power: Theory and Experience of Empirical Research of Power in Urban Communities]. Moscow: The Higher School of Economics Publishing House. 472 p. (In Russ.)

Mann M. 2014. Power in the 21st Century: Conversations with John Hall. (Russ. ed.: Mann M. Vlast’ v XXI stoletii. Besedy s Dzhonom A. Khollom. Moscow: The Higher School of Economics Publishing House. 208 p.)

North D.C., Wallis J.J., Weingast B.R. 2011. Violence and Social Orders. A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Recorded Human History. (Russ. ed. North D.C., Wallis J.J., Weingast B.R. Nasilie i sotsial’nye poryadki. Kontseptual’nye ramki dlya interpretatsii pis’mennoi istorii chelovechestva. Moscow: Institut Gaydara Publ. 480 p.)

Oleinik A. 2011. Vlast’ i rynok: sistema sotsial’no-ekonomicheskogo gospodstva v Rossii “nulevykh” godov [Power and Market: The System of Social and Economic Domination in 2000’s Russia]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. 441 p. (In Russ.)

Padgett J.F., Ansell Ch.K. 2016. Robust Action and the Rise of the Medici, 1400-1434. (Russ. ed.: Padgett J.F., Ansell Ch.K. Ustoichivoe deistvie i pod”em Medichi. – Patron-klientskie otnosheniya v istorii i sovremennosti: khrestomatiya. Moscow: ROSSPEN. P. 41-115).

Pustovoit Yu., Martynenko A., Antidze T. 2016. The Formation, Development and Decay of the Local Political Regime (The Experience of Revealing the Structure of Power in the Large Industrial Centers). – Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy Sociology and Political Science. Vol. 35. No. 3. P. 200-209. (In Russ.) www.doi.org/10.17223/1998863X/35/21

Rozov N.S. 2011. Koleya i pereval: makrosotsiologicheskie osnovaniya strategii Rossii v XXI veke [Rut and Pass: Macro-Sociological Bases of Russian Strategies in the Xxi Century]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. 735 p. (In Russ.)

Scott J.C. Corruption, Machine Politics, and Political Change. (Russ. ed.: Scott J.C. Korruptsiya, politicheskie mashiny i politicheskie izmeneniya. – Patron-klientskie otnosheniya v istorii i sovremennosti: khrestomatiya. Moscow: ROSSPEN. P. 242-278).

Sennett R. 2002. The Fall of Public Man. (Russ. ed. Sennett R. Padenie publichnogo cheloveka. Moscow: Logos. 424 p.) 

Content No. 4, 2019

See also:


Selezneva A.V., Rogozar-Kolpakova I.I., Filistovich Ye.S., Trofimova V.V., Dobrynina Ye.P., Streletz I.E.,
Russian political elite: analysis from the perspective of the human capital concept. – Polis. Political Studies. 2010. No4

Peregudov S.P.,
Pluralism and corporatism in the USSR and in Russia (what is common and what is particular). – Polis. Political Studies. 2010. No5

Polyakov L.V.,
Theory of nation-building by Svyatoslav Kaspe. – Polis. Political Studies. 2012. No2

Fesenko V.V.,
The Ukraine's Political Elite: Contradictions of Its Formation and Evolution. – Polis. Political Studies. 1995. No6

Farukshin M.Kh.,
Political Elite of Tatarstan: Challenges of the Time and Difficulties of Adaptation. – Polis. Political Studies. 1994. No6

 
 

Archive

   2020      2019      2018      2017      2016   
   2015      2014      2013      2012      2011   
   2010      2009      2008      2007      2006   
   2005      2004      2003      2002      2001   
   2000      1999      1998      1997      1996   
   1995      1994      1993      1992      1991