«Authorities’ point of view is to keep a silence»: Interaction of initiative groups and local authorities in the urban planning policy

Possessing powers to regulate an urban planning sphere the city government is always an object of initiative groups’ action. However initiative groups’ activities often are targeted to higher authority levels, what witnesses of assumed low quality of cooperation between both sides. In this article we examine what is cooperation bet- ween initiative groups and local authorities on urban planning issues going to be and what are the tools used by initiative group to influence on local authorities in order to solve a problem. Besides we are going to explain why initiative groupes’ activities could be addressed to higher level authorities. An empirical basis of the study are two databases «Contentious Policies of Russian Regions» (CCHPS) and «Perm City Conflicts: Struggle for Space» (CCHPS) as well as a series of semi-structured interviews with representatives of 7 initiative groups acting in urban planning sphere. Timespan of the research is 2000-2016. We find that an interaction between initiative groups and local authorities on urban planning issues often is not often cooperative. Tools used by initiative groups to influence local authorities are intended to be a way to attract public attention and to search a help of higher level authorities.

инициативная группа, городское планирование, социальные движения, политическая мобилизация, городские движения, локальная политика, initiative group, urban planning, social movements, political mobilization, urban movements, local politics

1. Городские движения России в 2009-2012 годах: На пути к политическому / Под редакцией К. Клеман. - М.: Новое литературное обозрение, 2013. - 544 с.

2. Желнина А.А. Относительные победы: Успехи и поражения общественных движений и политических кампаний // Cogita.ru. - М., 2016. - 17 августа. - Режим доступа: http://www.cogita.ru/analitka/otkrytye-diskussi/otnositelnye-pobedy (Дата посещения: 18.12.2016.)

3. Журавлев О. Инерция постсоветской деполитизации и политизации 2011-2012 годов // Политика аполитичных: Гражданские движения в России 2011-2013 годов. - М.: Новое литературное обозрение, 2015. - С. 27-71.

4. Москалева С.М., Тыканова Е.В. Социальные условия деятельности гражданских и экспертных групп по улучшению качества городской среды // Журнал социологии и социальной антропологии. - М., 2016. - Т. 19, № 4. - С. 103-120.

5. Российский неполитический активизм: Наброски к портрету героя / Центр гражданского анализа и независимых исследований ГРАНИ. - Пермь, 2012. - Режим доступа: http://grany-center.org/sites/default/files/files/page/otchet_aktivizm.pdf (Дата посещения: 14.01.2017.)

6. Семенов А.В. От экономического кризиса к политическому? Динамика протестных требований в российских регионах (2008-2012 ) // Журнал исследований социальной политики. - М., 2016. - Т. 14, № 2. - С. 151-166.

7. Amenta E. How to analyze the influence of movements // Contemporary sociology: A journal of reviews. - Pennsylvania, 2014. - Vol. 43, N 1. - P. 16-29.

8. Amenta E. When movements matter: The Townsend plan and the rise of social security. - Princeton: Princeton univ. press, 2006. - 352 р.

9. Amenta E., Young M.P. Making an impact: Conceptual and methodological implications of the collective goods criterion // How social movements matter / M. Giugni,D. McAdam, Ch. Tilly (eds.). - Minneapolis, 1999. - P. 22-41.

10. Andrews K.T. Freedom is a constant struggle: The Mississippi civil rights movement and its legacy. - Chicago: Univ. of Chicago press, 2004. - 232 р.

11. Andrews K.T., Biggs M. The dynamics of protest diffusion: Movement organizations, social networks, and news media in the 1960 sit-ins // American sociological review. - Menasha, Wis., 2006. - Vol. 71, N 5. - P. 752-777.

12. Andrews K.T., Gaby S. Local protest and federal policy: The impact of the civil rights movement on the 1964 Civil Rights Act // Sociological forum. - Hoboken, NJ., 2015. - Vol. 30, N 1. - P. 509-527.

13. Banaszak L.A. Why movements succeed or fail: Opportunity, culture, and the struggle for woman suffrage. - Princeton: Princeton univ. press, 1996. - 296 р.

14. Baumgartner F.R. Social movements, the rise of new issues. - Irvine, 2002. - Режим доступа: https://www.unc.edu/~fbaum/papers/Social_Movements.pdf (Дата посещения: 14.02.2017.)

15. Coll-Planas G., Cruells M. Exploring the social movements institutionalization thesis: The case of feminist, ecologist, and LGTB activism in Catalonia // International journal of civic, political, and community studies. - Illinois, IL, 2017. - Vol. 15, N 1. - P. 25-39.

16. Gamson W.A. The strategy of social protest. - Homewood, IL: Dorsey press, 1975. - 217 p.

17. Gandhi J., Przeworski A. Cooperation, cooptation, and rebellion under dictatorships // Economics&Politics. - N.Y., 2006. - Vol. 18, N 1. - P. 1-26.

18. Krasnopolskaya I., Skokova Y., Pape U. Government-nonprofit relations in Russia’s regions: An exploratory analysis // VOLUNTAS: International journal of voluntary and nonprofit organizations. - N.Y., 2015. - Vol. 26, N 6. - P. 2238-2266.

19. Levy C., Latendresse A., Carle-Marsan M. Gendering the urban social movement and public housing policy in São Paulo // Latin American perspectives. - N.Y., 2017. - Vol. 44, N 3. - P. 9-27.

20. McAdam D., Su Y. The war at home: Antiwar protests and congressional voting, 1965 to 1973 // American sociological review. - Menasha, Wis., 2002. - Vol. 26, N 5. - P. 696-721.

21. Norwich L.C. Protests or parliaments: The politics of deinstitutionalization and the mobilization of the Palestinian citizens of Israel // Research in social movements, conflicts and change. - N.Y., 2017. - Vol. 41, N 3. - P. 173-203.

22. Olzak S., Soule S.A. Cross-cutting influences of environmental protest and legislation // Social forces. - Oxford, 2009. - Vol. 88, N 1. - P. 201-225.

23. Protest events: cause or consequence of state action? The US women's movement and federal Congressional activities, 1956-1979 / Soule S., McAdam D., McCarthy J., Su Y. // Mobilization: An international quarterly. - San Diego, 1999. - Vol. 4, N 2. - P. 239-256.

24. Sager R., Bentele K. Coopting the state: The conservative evangelical movement and state-level institutionalization, passage, and diffusion of faith-based initiatives // Religions. - L., 2016. - Vol. 7, N 6. - P. 71-98.

25. The political consequences of social movements / Amenta E., Caren, E. Chiarello N., Su Y. // Annual review of sociology. - Palo Alto, Calif., 2010. - Vol. 36. - Р. 287-307.