Domination, Power and Authority in Russia: Basic Characteristics and Forms

Ledyaev, Valeri

doi:10.1080/13523270701840423

Cited by 16 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This reflects the high level of coercion in the political and administrative practices of modern Russian society. Its source lies in the underdevelopment of the legal sphere, compensated by a wide range of compulsory practices-from hidden threats to open violence (Ledyaev 2008). Of course, threats are not the only source of cooperation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Regimes in Small Russian Towns

Ledyaev

Чирикова

2019

City & Community

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents the outcomes of a research project conducted in five small Russian towns. Different coalitions between local actors take place in all communities. However, coalitions that meet the criteria of the urban regime (in Stone's classical interpretation) have been discovered, with certain reservations, only in two towns. For a number of characteristics, these coalitions differed from regimes in American and European towns: often not quite voluntary nature of coalitions, prevalence of egoistic motives in the coalition‐building, strong dependence of the regimes on the personal factor (personal qualities and resources of local administrators, their experience, relations with regional elites, etc.), absence of formal organizations able to coordinate the interests of coalition members, etc. In the three other local communities, urban regimes have not been built due to personal factors, frequent changes in the local government leadership, or the role of external factors (the nature of the relationship of local elites with regional and federal authorities, methods of influence of regional authorities on local politics). In the public agenda of the regimes (quasi‐regimes), the elements of the status quo and, to a lesser extent, growth, prevail. The outcomes of study allow us to conclude that despite the authoritarian nature of the Russian politics and the differences between Russian and American contexts, urban regimes analysis is quite applicable for the study of power in Russian local communities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Regimes in Small Russian Towns

Ledyaev

Чирикова

2019

City & Community

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the same time, presidential governance is weak and inefficient as the president frequently proves unable to monitor and steer his own agents, a phenomenon which has been aptly called 'debilitated dirigisme' (Markus 2007). This type of patronal presidential power-and, with it, the regime as such-can be safeguarded to a large extent by coercion and reactive control (Ledyaev 2008). Nevertheless, proactive governance with a more balanced relationship between various state actors and increased accountability to the electorate would also mean fostering 'quasi-voluntary compliance' (Levi 1988).…”

Section: Figure 5 Number Of Employees In Selected Federal Authorities (Federal Level Only Civil Servants)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutionalising Authoritarian Presidencies: Polymorphous Power and Russia’s Presidential Administration

Burkhardt¹

2020

Europe-Asia Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article attempts to open up the 'black box' of the Russian Presidential Administration ('the Kremlin'). Borrowing from the literature on institutional presidencies and institutional approaches to authoritarianism, I argue that the administration institutionalised over the years of study, 1994-2012. More stable and predictable procedures enhanced administrative presidential powers but personalism and non-compliance with presidential orders remained. Original data on budget, staff, units, organisational structure and presidential assignments demonstrate that presidential power ought to be conceptualised as a polymorphous phenomenon that varies depending on the level of analysis. Researchers should refrain from over-personalising accounts of authoritarian regimes at the expense of more structural, organisational elements such as 'institutional presidencies'.'THE KREMLIN' HAS BECOME A METAPHOR ATTESTING TO THE alleged omnipotence of Russia's presidents. At the same time, it has remained an impenetrable 'black box' that supposedly prevents systematic, intersubjectively verifiable analysis. Opacity is a general

show abstract

“…'Power over' clearly outweighs 'power to' (Ledyaev 2008). 'Power over' clearly outweighs 'power to' (Ledyaev 2008).…”

Section: Relationships Between Actors and Coalition Buildingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who governs? Power in the local Russian community

Ledyaev

Chirickova

Сельцер

2014

Journal of Political Power

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents the outcomes of a research project conducted in two small towns in the Perm region. The study of power in the two communities focused on two major themes: (1) the composition of influential actors and institutions and the power hierarchy; (2) relationships between them and coalition building. The discovered configuration of actors and relationships between them demonstrate, on the one hand, quite a lot in common with European and North American communities, on the other hand, a number of features that reflect the systemic and institutional properties of Russian politics and society. The social base of the local power structure is very narrow. The local elite composed of the heads of the executive, business leaders, and the most influential representatives of urban and district legislatures actually holds all the power in the local community, having no serious opponents or a real alternative in the foreseeable future. This power structure is supported by informal institutions and personal relationships within the elite and between the elite and those who are forced to accept the existing system of relations; it allows them to successfully protect their personal and/or corporate interests. A wide range of opportunities to use official position and/or relationships with public officials for personal enrichment stimulates the formation of various kinds of coalitions for the furtherment of the personal interests of its members.

show abstract

Domination, Power and Authority in Russia: Basic Characteristics and Forms

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Urban Regimes in Small Russian Towns

Urban Regimes in Small Russian Towns

Institutionalising Authoritarian Presidencies: Polymorphous Power and Russia’s Presidential Administration

Who governs? Power in the local Russian community

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About