Pan-Art Pedagogy. Theory & Practice Philology. Theory & Practice Manuscript

Archive of Scientific Articles

ISSUE:    Historical, Philosophical, Political and Law Sciences, Culturology and Study of Art. Theory & Practice. 2014. Issue 8-2
COLLECTION:    Political Science

All issues

License Agreement on scientific materials use.

TYPOLOGY OF POST-SOVIET POLITICAL REGIMES: SYNTHESIS OF ELECTORAL AND NEO-PATRIMONIAL APPROACHES

Stanislav Nikolaevich Shkel'
Ufa State Petroleum Technological University
Submitted: June 30, 2014
Abstract. In the article the author suggests a typology of political regimes developed on the basis of the synthesis of electoral approach founded in the works by R. Dahl and neo-patrimonial concept originated in the classical propositions by M. Weber and Sh. Eisenstadt. It is ascertained that the measurement of two characteristics such as the level of élites competition and the degree of the influence of informal practices in political process is the most relevant assessment of the regime types of the post-soviet states of the former USSR. This thesis is based on the account taken of the role, which informal institutions still play in the post-soviet countries. Their inclusion in the field of the analysis allows fixing more precisely and in relief the specific regime types of the considered cases. For the suggested criteria of regimes assessment a method of operationalization with the use of the data of electoral statistics and the indices of corruption level is worked out. As a demonstration of the practical use of the developed typology the analysis of the regime dynamics of post-soviet Azerbaijan is presented.
Key words and phrases:
политический режим
типология
демократия
авторитарный режим
неопатримониализм
электоральный процесс
политическая коррупция
political regime
typology
democracy
authoritarian regime
neo-patrimonialism
electoral process
political corruption
Reader Open the whole article in PDF format. Free PDF-files viewer can be downloaded here.
References:
  1. Выборы во всем мире. Электоральная свобода и общественный прогресс / сост. А. А. Танин-Львов. М.: РОССПЭН, 2001. 1112 с.
  2. Даль Р. А. Полиархия: участие и оппозиция / пер. с англ. С. Деникиной, В. Баранова; Гос. ун-т - Высшая школа экономики. М.: Изд. дом Гос. ун-та - Высшей школы экономики, 2010. 288 с.
  3. Добронравии Н. Туркменистан: великое одиночество // СССР после распада / под ред. О. Л. Маргания, Я. Травина. СПб.: Экономическая школа, 2007. С. 455-476.
  4. Лазарев Е. А. Коррупция и политическая стабильность: институциональная перспектива // Полития. 2011. № 1 (60). С. 50-68.
  5. Меркель В., Круассан А. Формальные и неформальные институты в дефектных де​мократиях // Полис. 2002. № 1. С. 6-17.
  6. Миронюк М. Г., Тимофеев И. Н., Ваславский И. Я. Универсальные сравнения с использованием количественных методов анализа (Обзор прецедентов) // Полис. 2006. № 5. С. 39-57.
  7. Нисневич Ю., Стукал Д. Многоликая коррупция и ее измерение в исследованиях международных организаций // Мировая экономика и международные отношения. 2012. № 3. С. 83-90.
  8. Эйзенштадт Ш. Революция и преобразование обществ. Сравнительное изучение цивилизаций. М. Аспект-пресс, 1999. 418 с.
  9. Darden K., Grzymala-Busse A. M. The Great Divide: Literacy, Nationalism, and the Communist Collapse // World Politics. 2006. Vol. 59. № 1. P. 83-115.
  10. Diamond L. Is the Third Wave Over? // Journal of Democracy. 1996. Vol. 7. № 3. P. 20-37.
  11. Grzymala-Busse A., Luong P. Reconceptualizing the State: Lessons from Post-Communism // Politics & Society. 2002. Vol. 30. № 4. P. 529-544.
  12. Hale H. Why Not Parties in Russia? Democracy, Federalism, and the State. Cambridge University Press, 2006. 275 p.
  13. Kaufmann D., Kraay A., Mastruzzi M. The Worldwide Governance Indicators. Methodology and Analytical Issues // The World Bank Development Research Group Macroeconomics and Growth Team. Policy Research Working Paper. 2010. № 5430. 29 p.
  14. Kitschelt H., Smyth R. Programmatic Party Cohesion in Emerging Postcommunist Democracies: Russia in Comparative Context // Comparative Political Studies. 2002. Vol. 35. № 10. P. 1228-1256.
  15. Melville A., Stukal D., Mironyuk M. Trajectories of Regime Transformation and Types of Stateness in Postcommunist Countries [Электронный ресурс] // Perspectives on European Politics and Society. 2013. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15705854.2013.772749 (дата обращения: 25.02.2014).
  16. Montgomery K., Remington T. Regime Transition and the 1990 Soviet Republican Elections // Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics. 1994. Vol. 10. № 1. P. 55-79.
  17. O’Donnell G., Schmitter Ph. Whitehead L. Transition from Authoritarian Rule: Prospects for Democracy. Baltimore, 1986.
  18. Sultanistic Regimes / ed. by H. E. Chehabi and J. Linz. Baltimore - London: The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1998. 710 p.
  19. The Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#home (дата обращения: 13.04.2013).
  20. Transparency International [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://www.transparency.org/ (дата обращения: 11.03.2013).
  21. Transparency International. The Corruption Perceptions Index (1998) [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://archive.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/previous_cpi/1998 (дата обращения: 12.02.2013).
  22. Vanhanen T. The Emergence of Democracy: A Comparative Study of 119 States, 1850-1979. (Commentationes scientiarum socialium). Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 1984. 168 p.
  23. Weber M. Economy and Society. An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978. 1469 p.
All issues


© 2006-2025 GRAMOTA Publishing