Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-qdpjg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-16T11:33:09.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Civic Participation in a Hybrid Regime: Limited Pluralism in Policymaking and Delivery in Contemporary Russia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 June 2017

Catherine Owen  and
Eleanor Bindman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article asks why the Russian government has developed new avenues for public participation in policymaking and delivery and assesses the extent to which these avenues introduce pluralism into these processes. Drawing on 50 interviews with individuals and citizens’ groups involved in either public consultative bodies or socially oriented NGOs, the article demonstrates the government’s desire to harness the knowledge and abilities of citizens and civic groups in place of state departments perceived to be bureaucratic and inefficient, while controlling and curtailing their participation. Arguing that these countervailing tendencies can be conceptualized as limited pluralism, a category elaborated by Juan Linz and Alfred Stepan, we show that citizens and civic groups are able to influence policy outcomes to varying extents using these mechanisms.

Keywords

RussiaNew Public Managementcivic participationpublic sector reformauthoritarianism
Type
Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 54 , Issue 1 , January 2019 , pp. 98 - 120
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published by Government and Opposition Limited and Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Catherine Owen is Lecturer in International Relations at the University of Exeter. Contact email: [email protected].

Eleanor Bindman is Leverhulme Early Career Fellow at Queen Mary University of London. Contact email: [email protected].

References

Aasland, A., Berg-Nordlie, M. and Bogdanova, E. (2016), ‘Encouraged but Controlled: Governance Networks in Russian Regions’, East European Politics, 32(2): 148–169.Google Scholar
Adams, J. (1978), Citizen Inspectors in the Soviet Union (New York: Praeger).Google Scholar
Beck, U. (1999), The Reinvention of Politics (Cambridge: Polity Press).Google Scholar
Bell, D. (2015), The China Model: Political Meritocracy and the Limits of Democracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Belokurova, E. (2010), ‘NGOs and Politics in the Russian Regions’, in V. Gel’man and C. Ross (eds), Politics of Subnational Authoritarianism in Russia (Farnham: Ashgate): 107–122.Google Scholar
Benevolenski, V. (2014), ‘Tools of Government for Support of SONPOs in Russia: In Search of Cross-Sector Cooperation in the Delivery of Social Services’, National Research University Higher School of Economics Basic Research Program Working Papers, 17.Google Scholar
Bindman, E. (2015), ‘The State, Civil Society and Social Rights in Contemporary Russia’, East European Politics, 31(3): 342–360.Google Scholar
Bogdanova, E. and Bindman, E. (2016), ‘NGOs, Policy Entrepreneurship and Child Protection in Russia: Pitfalls and Prospects for Civil Society’, Democratizatsiya, 24(2): 143–171.Google Scholar
Brooker, P. (2009), Non-Democratic Regimes, 2nd edn (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
Brownlee, J. (2007), Authoritarianism in an Age of Democratization (New York: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Christensen, T. and Lægreid, P. (2007) (eds), Transcending New Public Management: The Transformation of Public Sector Reforms (Farnham: Ashgate).Google Scholar
Clarke, J., Newman, N., Smith, E., Vidler, L. and Westmarland, L. (2007), Creating Citizen Consumers: Changing Public and Changing Public Services (London: Sage).Google Scholar
Cohen, J. and Arato, A. (1992), Civil Society and Political Theory (New York: MIT Press).Google Scholar
Colton, T.J. and Hale, H.E. (2009), ‘The Putin Vote: Presidential Electorates in a Hybrid Regime’, Slavic Review, 68(3): 473–503.Google Scholar
Cook, L. (2007), ‘Negotiating Welfare in Postcommunist States’, Comparative Politics, 40(1): 41–62.Google Scholar
Cook, L. (2013), Postcommunist Welfare States: Reform Politics in Russia and Eastern Europe (New York: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar
Cooley, A. and Heathershaw, J. (2017), Dictators Beyond Borders (New Haven: Yale University Press).Google Scholar
Denters, B. and Rose, L. (2005), Comparing Local Governance: Trends and Developments (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
Diamond, L. (2002), ‘Thinking about Hybrid Regimes’, Journal of Democracy, 13(2): 21–35.Google Scholar
Dmitrieva, N. and Styrin, E. (2014), ‘The Formation of a System of Open Government in Russia: Experience and Prospects’, Public Administration Issues, 5: 57–75.Google Scholar
Duckett, J. and Wang, H. (2013), ‘Extending Political Participation in China: New Opportunities for Citizens in the Policy Process’, Journal of Asian Public Policy, 6(3): 263–276.Google Scholar
Earle, J. (2013), ‘Bill to Limit Gubernatorial Elections Approved’, Moscow Times, 23 January, www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/bill-to-limit-gubernatorial-elections-approved/474464.html.Google Scholar
Englund, W. and Lally, K. (2011), ‘Medvedev Confirms he Will Step Aside for Putin to Return to Russia’s Presidency’, Washington Post, 24 September, www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/dmitry-medvedev-asks-putin-to-run-for-president-of-russia/2011/09/24/gIQAXGwpsK_story.html.Google Scholar
Evans, A. (2008), ‘The First Steps of Russia’s Public Chamber: Representation or Coordination?’, Demokratizatsiya, 16(4): 345–362.Google Scholar
Evans, A. (2010), ‘The Public Chamber and Social Conflicts in Russia’, conference paper delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Western Political Science Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Finnemore, M. and Sikkink, K. (1998), ‘International Norm Dynamics and Political Change’, International Organization, 52(3): 889–917.Google Scholar
Flynn, N. (2007), Public Sector Management, 5th edn (London: Sage).Google Scholar
Friedgut, T. (1979), Political Participation in the USSR (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Fukuyama, F. (1989), ‘The End of History?’, National Interest, 16: 3–18.Google Scholar
Gandhi, J. (2010), Political Institutions under Dictatorships (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Geddes, M. (2005), ‘Neoliberalism and Local Governance: Cross-National Perspectives and Speculations’, Policy Studies, 26(3–4): 439–458.Google Scholar
Gel’man, V. (2015), ‘Political Opposition in Russia: A Troubled Transformation’, Europe-Asia Studies, 67(2): 177–191.Google Scholar
Gel’man, V. and Ryzhenkov, S. (2011), ‘Local Regimes, Subnational Governance and the “Power Vertical” in Contemporary Russia’, Europe-Asia Studies, 63(3): 449–465.Google Scholar
Hahn, J. (1988), Soviet Grassroots: Citizen Participation in Local Soviet Government (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
He, B. and Warren, M. (2011), ‘Authoritarian Deliberation: The Deliberative Turn in Chinese Political Development’, Perspectives on Politics, 9(2): 269–289.Google Scholar
Hedberg, M. (2016), ‘Top-Down Self-Organization: State Logics, Substitutional Delegation, and Private Governance in Russia’, Governance, 29(1): 67–83.Google Scholar
Hemment, J. (2009), ‘Soviet-Style Neoliberalism? Nashi, Youth Voluntarism and the Restructuring of Social Welfare in Russia’, Problems of Post-Communism, 56(6): 36–50.Google Scholar
Hood, C. (1995), ‘The “New Public Management” in the 1980s: Variations on a Theme’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2–3): 93–109.Google Scholar
Howard, M. (2003), The Weakness of Civil Society in Post-Communist Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Javeline, D. and Lindemann-Komarova, S. (2010), ‘A Balanced Assessment of Russian Civil Society’, Journal of International Affairs, 63(2): 171–188.Google Scholar
Jayasuriya, K. and Rodan, G. (2007), ‘Beyond Hybrid Regimes: More Participation, Less Contestation in South-East Asia’, Democratization, 14(5): 773–794.Google Scholar
Kaldor, M. (2003), Global Civil Society: An Answer to War (Bristol: Polity Press).Google Scholar
Keane, J. (2009), The Life and Death of Democracy (London: Simon and Schuster).Google Scholar
‘Kontseptsiya administrativnoi reformy v Rossiiskoi Federatsii v 2006–2010 godakh’, 25 October 2005, www.arhcity.ru/data/564/1%20conc.pdf.Google Scholar
Krasnopolskaya, I., Skokova, Y. and Pape, U. (2015), ‘Government–Nonprofit Relations in Russia’s Regions: An Exploratory Analysis’, Voluntas, 6(6): 2238–2266.Google Scholar
Kulmala, M. (2016), ‘Post-Soviet “Political”? “Social” and “Political” in the Work of Russian Socially Oriented CSOs’, Demokratizatsiya, 24(2): 199–224.Google Scholar
Levitsky, S. and Way, L. (2010), Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Linz, J. (2000), Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner).Google Scholar
Linz, J. and Stepan, A. (1996), Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press).Google Scholar
Maksimov, S. (2013), Kak TSZh zarabatyvaet na obmane zhil’tsov mnogokvartirnykh domov’, Ekho Moskvy, 19 May, http://echo.msk.ru/blog/rumincheg/1077242-echo/.Google Scholar
March, L. (2009), ‘Managing Opposition in a Hybrid Regime: Just Russia and Parastatal Opposition’, Slavic Review, 68(3): 504–527.Google Scholar
Markus, S. (2007), ‘Capitalists of All Russia, Unite! Business Mobilization under Debilitated Dirigisme’, Polity, 39(3): 277–304.Google Scholar
McMann, K. (2006), Economic Autonomy and Democracy: Hybrid Regimes in Russia and Kyrgyzstan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Medvedev, D. (2010), ‘Poslanie Prezidenta Federal’nomu Sobraniyu’, 30 November, www.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/messages/9637.Google Scholar
Memorial (2009), ‘Polozhenie ob Obshchestvennom sovete pri prokurore g. Moskvy’, Memo.ru, 29 May, http://old.memo.ru/d/8667.html.Google Scholar
Mertha, A. (2009), ‘“Fragmented Authoritarianism 2.0”: Political Pluralization in the Chinese Policy Process’, China Quarterly, 200: 995–1012.Google Scholar
Moses, J. (2010), ‘Russian Local Politics in the Putin-Medvedev Era’, Europe–Asia Studies, 62(9): 1427–1452.Google Scholar
Myhre, M. and Berg-Nordlie, M. (2016), ‘“The State Cannot Help them All”: Russian Media Discourse on the Inclusion of Non-State Actors in Governance’, East European Politics, 32(2): 192–214.Google Scholar
Newsru.com (2012), ‘V Moskve nachalas’ likvidatsiya okolo 2 tysyach “lipovyk” TSZh’, Newsru.com, 11 April, http://realty.newsru.com/article/11apr2012/tsg.Google Scholar
Obshchestvennaya Palata Rossiiskoi Federatsii (2011), ‘Doklad o sostoyanii grazhdanskogo obshchestva Rossiiskoi Federatsii za 2011 god’, www.oprf.ru/documents/1151/1568.Google Scholar
Obshchestvennaya Palata Rossiiskoi Federatsii (2015), ‘Doklad o sostoyanii grazhdanskogo obshchestva Rossiiskoi Federatsii za 2015 god’, www.oprf.ru/documents/1151/2291.Google Scholar
Olisova, O. (2015), ‘The Role of Consultative Bodies in Policy-Making in the Social Sphere in the Samara Region’, Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional Research Working Paper.Google Scholar
Ong, A. (2006), Neoliberalism as Exception: Mutations in Citizenship and Sovereignty (Durham, NC: Duke University Press).Google Scholar
Osbourne, S. (2010) (ed.), The New Public Governance? (Oxford: Routledge).Google Scholar
Owen, C. (2015), ‘“Consentful Contention” in a Corporate State: Human Rights Activists and Public Monitoring Commissions in Russia’, East European Politics, 31(3): 274–293.Google Scholar
Owen, C. (2016), ‘A Genealogy of Kontrol’ in Russia: From Leninist to Neoliberal Governance’, Slavic Review, 75(2): 331–353.Google Scholar
Owen, C. (2017), ‘The Struggle for Meaning of Obshchestvennyi Kontrol’ in Contemporary Russia: Civic Participation Between Resistance and Compliance after the 2011–2012 Elections’, Europe–Asia Studies, 69(3): doi: 10.1080/09668136.2017.1301882.Google Scholar
Peck, J. (2010), Constructions of Neoliberal Reason (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Pepinski, T. (2014), ‘The Institutional Turn in Comparative Authoritarianism’, British Journal of Political Science, 44(3): 631–653.Google Scholar
Petrov, N., Lipman, M. and Hale, H.E. (2014), ‘Three Dilemmas of Hybrid Regime Governance: Russia from Putin to Putin’, Post-Soviet Affairs, 30(1): 1–26.Google Scholar
Pierre, J. and Peters, B.G. (2000), Governance, Politics and the State (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
Putin, V. (2012a), ‘Rossiya Sosredotachivayetsya: Vyzovy, Na Kotoryye My Dolzhny Otvetit”, Izvestiya, 16 January, http://izvestia.ru/news/511884.Google Scholar
Putin, V. (2012b), ‘Demokratiya i Kachestvo Gosudarstva’, Kommersant, 6 February, www.kommersant.ru/doc/1866753.Google Scholar
RIA Novosti (2013), ‘Putin Orders Allocating $75 Mln for Socially-Oriented NGOs’, RIA Novosti, 30 March, http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130330/180346679/Putin-Orders-Allocating-75-Mln-for-Socially-Oriented-NGOs.html.Google Scholar
Richter, J. (2009a), ‘Putin and the Public Chamber’, Post-Soviet Affairs, 25(1): 39–65.Google Scholar
Richter, J. (2009b), ‘The Ministry of Civil Society? The Public Chambers in the Regions’, Problems of Post-Communism, 56(6): 7–20.Google Scholar
Risse, T., Ropp, S. and Sikkink, K. (1999) (eds), The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Robertson, G. (2010), The Politics of Protest in Hybrid Regimes: Managing Dissent in Post-Communist Russia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Robertson, R. (1995), ‘Glocalization: Time-Space and Homogeneity and Heterogeneity’, in M. Featherstone, S. Lash and R. Robertson (eds), Global Modernities (London: Sage): 25–44.Google Scholar
Romanov, P. (2008), ‘Quality Evaluation in the Social Services: Challenges for New Public Management in Russia’, in B.G. Peters (ed.), Mixes, Matches and Mistakes: New Public Management in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics (Budapest: Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Open Society Institute): 9–53.Google Scholar
Rossiiskaya Gazeta (2005), ‘Federal’nyi Zakon Rossiiskoi Federatsii ot 4 aprelya g. N 32 F3 Ob Obshchestvennoi Palate Rossiiskoi Federatsii’, Rossiiskaya Gazeta, 7 April, www.rg.ru/2005/04/07/obshestv-palata-dok.html.Google Scholar
Rossiiskaya Gazeta (2010), ‘Federal’nyi Zakon Rossiiskoi Federatsii ot 5 aprelya 2010g No. 40 F2: O vnesenii izmenenii v otdel’nyye zakonodatel’nyye akty Rossiiskoi Federatsii po voprosu podderzhki sotsial’no oriyentirovannykh nekommercheskikh organizatsii’, Rossiiskaya Gazeta, 7 April, www.rg.ru/2010/04/07/nko-dok.html.Google Scholar
Rossiiskaya Gazeta (2011), ‘Ukaz Prezidenta Rossiiskoi Federatsii ot 23 maya 2011 g. N 668’, Rossiiskaya Gazeta, 27 May, www.rg.ru/2011/05/27/ukaz-dok.html.Google Scholar
Rossiiskaya Gazeta (2014), ‘Federal’nyi zakon Rossiiskoi Federatsii ot 21 Iyulya 2014g. N 212-F3 “Ob Osnovakh obshchestvennogo kontrolya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii”’, Rossiiskaya Gazeta, 23 July, www.rg.ru/2014/07/23/zakon-dok.html.Google Scholar
Ryzhkov, V. (2011), ‘The Dirtiest Elections in Post-Soviet History’, Moscow Times, 2 December, www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/the-dirtiest-elections-in-post-soviet-history/449079.html.Google Scholar
Sakwa, R. (2011), The Crisis of Russian Democracy: The Dual State, Factionalism and the Medvedev Seccession (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Schlumberger, O. (2007) (ed.), Debating Arab Authoritarianism: Dynamics and Durability in Non-Democratic Regimes (Stanford: Stanford University Press).Google Scholar
Seligman, A. (1992), The Idea of Civil Society (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Skilling, H and Griffiths, F. (1973) (eds), Interest Groups in Soviet Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Stepan, A. (1978), The State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Stepan, A. (2001), Arguing Comparative Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Stuvøy, K. (2014), ‘Power and Public Chambers in the Development of Civil Society in Russia’, Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 47: 409–419.Google Scholar
Svolik, M. (2009), ‘Power Sharing and Leadership Dynamics in Authoritarian Regimes’, American Journal of Political Science, 53(2): 477–494.Google Scholar
Swyngedouw, E. (2004), ‘Globalisation or “Glocalisation”? Networks, Territories and Rescaling’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 17(1): 25–48.Google Scholar
Swyngedouw, E. (2005), ‘Governance Innovation and the Citizen: The Janus Face of Governance-Beyond-the-State’, Urban Studies, 42(11): 1991–2006.Google Scholar
Tarasenko, A. (2013), ‘Analiz praktik podderzhki SO NKO po dannym reestra poluchatelei gosudarstvennoi poedderzhki’, Negosudarstvennye nekommercheskie organizatsii v Sankt-Peterburge (St Petersburg: TsRNO): 16.Google Scholar
Tarasenko, A. (2015), ‘Russian Welfare Reform and Social NGOs: Strategies for Claim-Making and Service Provision in the Case of Saint Petersburg’, East European Politics, 31(3): 294–313.Google Scholar
Treisman, D. (2011), ‘Presidential Popularity in a Hybrid Regime: Russia under Yeltsin and Putin’, American Journal of Political Science, 55(3): 590–609.Google Scholar
Uhlin, A. (2006), Post-Soviet Civil Society: Democratization in Russia and the Baltic States (Abingdon: Routledge).Google Scholar
Verheijen, T. and Dobrolyubova, Y. (2007), ‘Performance Management in the Baltic States and Russia: Success against the Odds?’, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73(2): 205–215.Google Scholar
Vibert, F. (2007), The Rise of the Unelected: Democracy and the New Separation of Powers (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Wengle, S. and Rasell, M. (2008), ‘The Monetisation of L’goty: Changing Patterns of Welfare Politics and Provision in Russia’, Europe–Asia Studies, 60(5): 739–756.Google Scholar
Yurchak, A. (2006), Everything Was Forever Until it Was No More (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Zhu, X. (2008), ‘Strategy of Chinese Policy Entrepreneurs in the Third Sector: Challenges of “Technical Infeasibility’”, Policy Sciences, 41(1): 315–334.Google Scholar