Localization of Ethnic Groups in the Regions as a Factor in Cross-Regional Variations in Voting for United Russia

Minaeva, Eleonora; Panov, Petr

doi:10.30965/24518921-00502001

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Согласно данной точки зрения, именно поэтому этнические республики с высокой долей концентрации таких традиционалистских сообществ предоставляют возможность для региональных властей осуществлять электоральную мобилизацию населения. При этом доказывается, что гомогенность этносов и их сегрегированная географическая локализация являются дополнительными факторами, упрощающими выполнение этой задачи (Minaeva and Panov, 2020).…”

Section: сетиunclassified

Chained by one chain: Mechanisms of electoral mobilization at the local level in the Russian ethnic republics

Shkel¹

2021

Ars Administrandi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: researchers of the Russian elections have long noticed that in a number of ethnic republics the level of electoral mobilization and political conformism of voters is higher than the average in Russia. Despite the fairly numerous statistical evidence of the existence of this political phenomenon, we still know relatively little about the specific causal mechanisms for the reproduction of electoral activity in these republics. Objectives: identifying the factors bringing about a high level of electoral mobilization in ethnic republics in Russia. Methods: analysis of qualitative data collected through focus groups method in five regions: Republic of Bashkortostan, Republic of Tatarstan, Komi Republic, Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) and Chuvash Republic. Results: as the result of the study it is concluded that a high level of electoral mobilization is caused by the combination of three factors, each of which affects different categories of voters. The institutional factor in the form of political machines involves into the electoral process those employed in public sector and industrial enterprises. The density of social networks resulting from specificity of rural way of life influences the electoral behavior of entrepreneurs and self-employed people living in the countryside. Finally, the Soviet legacy continues to determine the high political activity of the older generation, acting as a significant cultural factor. At the same time, there has been no empirical proof to a number of explanations whereby religion or ethnic culture of non-Russian ethnic groups is viewed as factors that simplify electoral mobilization. Conclusions: evidence on the role of the solidarity norms in rural areas during elections makes it possible to conclude that the consolidation and high intensity of horizontal relationships do not always promote the reproduction of civil society institutions and grass-roots democratic practices. As it is shown in the experience of the Russian ethnic republics, this element of social consolidation may well be integrated into the design of authoritarian elections. Thus, informal networks of grass-roots solidarity can be used not only by the opposition, but also by local authorities to increase electoral mobilization, which, in the current political context, rather strengthens authoritarian orders and practices than creates threats to them.

show abstract

Section: сетиunclassified

Chained by one chain: Mechanisms of electoral mobilization at the local level in the Russian ethnic republics

Shkel¹

2021

Ars Administrandi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Между тем в России меняются не только избирательное законодательство и «правила игры», но и социальный базис электоральной поддержки власти. С этой точки зрения избиратели в этнических республиках России всегда играли особую роль, являясь стабильными опорами электоральной поддержки власти как федерального, так и регионального уровней (Myagkov et al, 2010;Goodnow et al, 2012;Goodnow et al, 2014;Bader and Van Ham, 2015;Panov and Ross, 2016;White and Saikkonen, 2017;Panov and Ross, 2019;Minaeva and Panov, 2020). Однако в последнее время исследователи фиксируют признаки снижения политической лояльности избирателей в этнических республиках.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Who is to Blame? Centralization and Titular Ethnic Groups’ Electoral Behavior in the Russian Republics

Shkel¹

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: the electoral behavior of voters in many Russian republics is characterized by higher support for incumbents. However, recently some of them have witnessed a decrease in electoral support for the Russian president from representatives of the titular ethnic groups. Objectives: to find the answer to the following research question: why do representatives of the titular ethnic groups reduce electoral support for the Russian president in some ethnic republics, while this does not happen in other republics? Methods: the study uses qualitative data collected by focus groups in four Russian republics: Bashkortostan, Tatarstan, Chuvashia, and Komi. Results: the analysis of the data made it possible to identify the main factors that determine the change in the electoral behavior of titular ethnic groups’ representatives. The results of the study suggest that a decrease in the electoral support for the Russian president among the titular ethnic groups occurs only if they consider both levels of government – federal and regional – to blame for the infringement of their ethno-cultural rights. This, in turn, stems from two factors: (1) the fragmented structure of regional elites and (2) the choice of a loyalty strategy by the head of the region in response to pressure from the center. Conclusions: the latest reforms in ethno-linguistic policy in Russia did not remain unnoticed and influenced the electoral processes in a number of ethnic republics. In some of them, the titular ethnic groups significantly reduced the electoral support of the Russian government and ceased to be a significant link in the mechanics of political machines. In others, their electoral behavior remains stable. This allows us to conclude that the structure of the current the Russian president electoral majority is undergoing changes. Moreover, although these changes are not tectonic and are rather local in nature, ignoring them may lead to the fact that researchers and experts in the future may not notice the onset of more fundamental changes.

show abstract

“…Иными словами, высокая доля титульной этнической группы в составе населения помогает лишь в тех случаях, когда представители титульной группы проживают компактно, т.е. географически локализованы и сконцентрированы на определенной территории, так сказать, выделены (отделены) из / от других этнических групп (Minaeva and Panov, 2020). Наконец, Б. Розенфельд отмечает, что низкие экономические показатели подрывают популярность электоральных авторитарных режимов: избиратели, чьи экономические оценки (основанные на личном опыте и анализе местных условий) были отрицательными, с меньшей вероятностью поддержат доминирующую партию (Rosenfeld, 2018).…”

unclassified

Regional Variations of Voting for «united Russia»: The Role of Regional Heads

Muhametov¹

2021

Bulletin of Perm University. Political Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the results of the 2016 Duma elections, “United Russia” received 54.2% of the vote under the proportional system. In the regional context, the spread of votes was between 35.19% (in the Altai Territory) and 96.29% (in the Chechen Republic). What causes regional disparities in the vote for the United Russia party? This article aims to find an answer to the above question. In this study, the concept of a regional political machine and the thesis about the ability of regional heads to ensure higher electoral results of the "party in power" are tested. Statistical calculations were performed using binary logistic regression. The regression analysis carried out by the author showed that none of the hypotheses was fully confirmed. Of the six regression models, only three were significant. Each new head of the region in the corps of heads of regional branches of the party added 13% to "United Russia" in the Duma elections in 2011 and 2007. In 2016, an increase in the number of governors in the first places of the regional groups of the federal list of candidates of the "party of power" by 1 unit would lead to an increase in the electoral result by 18%.

show abstract

Localization of Ethnic Groups in the Regions as a Factor in Cross-Regional Variations in Voting for United Russia

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Chained by one chain: Mechanisms of electoral mobilization at the local level in the Russian ethnic republics

Chained by one chain: Mechanisms of electoral mobilization at the local level in the Russian ethnic republics

Who is to Blame? Centralization and Titular Ethnic Groups’ Electoral Behavior in the Russian Republics

Regional Variations of Voting for «united Russia»: The Role of Regional Heads

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About