The passing of the Russian NGO Law in mid-2006 set clear parameters for Russian NGO activity and civil society development. In this paper we assess the impact of the NGO Law on both NGOs and Russian civil society. Our findings illustrate that the NGO Law has led to a reduction in NGO activity and curtailment of civil society development. We conclude thatRussian civil society appears to be dominated by groups funded and thus controlled by the state. This has implications for Russia's on-going democratic development.

This article examines the development of civil society in Russia. We argue that cultural and societal norms, which developed during the Soviet period, have continued to shape civil society arrangements in the post-Soviet period. We examine how parallel to recent changes in Russia?s economic, political and legal environment, shifts in Russia?s contemporary civil society arrangements have occurred. We argue that, similar to a Russian-style democracy and market economy, Russian-style civil society arrangements are clearly emerging. These changes are explained by the cultural?historic legacies of both the Soviet Union and the subsequent peculiarities of Russia?s economic, social and political transformations since the collapse of the Soviet Union. In this Russian variant of civil society, its agents have developed and continue to maintain strong and dependent relationships on the state.Peer reviewe

This article examines Russian human service non-profit organisations (NPOs) to investigate the nature of civil society in a managed democracy. Specifically the focus is on emerging vertical ties between NPOs and ruling and governing elites. Drawing on qualitative data collected from health and education NPOs in three industrial regions, we find that in establishing such vertical ties the role of organisations and individuals within is changing – they have moved away from ignored outsiders towards accessing the circles of power and being tasked with managing the boundary between the state and civil society. In exploring these arrangements this article highlights that in the post-Soviet space, NPOs and the state are closely intertwined resembling co-optation. As a result the democratisation potential of human service NPOs is constrained. In discussing these insights we also draw parallels to contexts in which the state has outsourced welfare service to human service NPOs.

To contribute to the debate as to whether volunteering is an outcome of democratization rather than a driver of it, we analyze how divergent democratization pathways in six countries of the former Soviet Union have led to varied levels of voluntary work. Using data from the European Values Study, we find that Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia -which followed a Europeanization path -have high and increasing levels of civil liberties and voluntary work. In Russia and Belarus, following a pre-emption path, civil liberties have remained low and voluntary work has declined. Surprisingly, despite the Orange Revolution and increased civil liberties, voluntary work rates in Ukraine have also declined. The case of Ukraine indicates that the freedom to participate is not always taken up by citizens. Our findings suggest it is not voluntary work that brings civil liberties, but rather that increased civil liberties lead to higher levels of volunteering.

Accessing, securing, and managing resources is a key to any organization's ability to achieve its aims. For non-profit organizations (NPOs) volunteers are such a vital resource. In this paper, we examine how NPOs manage critical organizational resources (i.e. volunteers) in a challenging institutional context. By drawing on a qualitative study of Russian health NPOs, our results highlight how the leaders of NPO leverage personal relationships to acquire organizational resources. We demonstrate how, by relying on personal networks, leaders of NPOs can ensure short-term organizational survival, but also impair longer-term organizational capacity development. Implications for both the Russian NPO sector as well as the management of resources in challenging institutional contexts are discussed.