The apparent success of state‐managed market economies has challenged the conventional wisdom that liberal democracy is the norm around which all capitalist countries tend to converge. If the link between democracy and development is more tenuous than we often think, the authoritarian variety of capitalism is not without its own problems, especially with respect to political legitimacy, innovation and regional development. This article explores these issues through the prism of ‘authoritarian modernization’ in Russia. We argue that this strategy is unlikely to succeed, even in its own terms, because (1) the political system fails to create favourable institutional conditions for modernization; (2) the economic system is beset by deeply embedded structural problems; and (3) the regional policy apparatus is torn between the goals of spatial equalization and spatial agglomeration. The article focuses on the Skolkovo Innovation Centre, the main symbol of Russian modernization, to demonstrate the territorial repertoire of the mega‐project, a state‐sponsored development strategy to create innovation clusters from above because they cannot emerge from below.
The development of non-core regions has attracted growing interest within the current debates of economic geography, regional studies and spatial planning. The divergence between economically successful core regions and less privileged non-core regions continues despite policy interventions aimed at tackling spatial disparities and income inequalities. While traditional growth-oriented policies raise concerns over their effectiveness and relevance beyond large cities and metropolitan regions, there is growing interest in exploring new research paths and policy options that are better able to address development challenges in non-core regions. Contributors to this special issue engage with these debates by reflecting on planning policies and practices in five European countries, paying special attention to identifying planning strategies for non-core regions. This paper argues that alternatives to growth-oriented models require additional conceptualization and analysis to translate values into policies and institutions.
The preparation of a nationwide framework for Russian regional planning policy has been impeded by an ongoing conflict between two competing logics of teixitorial organization: that of "polarized" or "equalized" development. This paper analyzes the preparation of the nationwide framework for regional planning within the context of political authoritarianism and continuing neoliberal reforms. The findings indicate (1) a stalemate in the preparation of regional policy, caused by fundamental contradictions between authoritarian centralization and the need to stimulate growth; (2) that in the absence of coherent regional policy, the govemment and other actors employ ad hoc "unguided" approaches to regional development projects; and (3) that the main result is an increasingly polarized pattem of development.
The Russian state is strengthening its positions in the Arctic in order to exploit its resources, develop transport routes, and reverse depopulation trends in the country's northern regions. The ambitions of the Russian state to ‘recolonise’ the Arctic pose questions about the role of the region in the policy-making process dominated by the central state and the emerging geography of the Arctic. This article analyses these relationships using Murmansk Oblast’ as a case study. It argues that (i) there is a shift in Russia's Arctic policy – from withdrawal to re-engagement via mega-projects in energy and transport infrastructure sectors. Changes in global energy markets suggest that Arctic expansionism driven by energy projects is not sustainable; (ii) the policy framework remains incoherent as the central state revises its priorities; (iii) within the emerging polity, regions are neither ‘transmission belts’ of national policy nor independent players; instead, regions such as Murmansk Oblast’ are produced via multiscalar processes of policy making, institutionalisation, and discursive practices.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.