Bad Governance under Exogenous Shock: The Case of COVID-19 Pandemic
https://doi.org/10.31249/poln/2022.02.02
Abstract
Although COVID-19 pandemic is far from its ending, and it is too early to draw even tentative conclusions regarding its effects, judging by excessive mortality of Russian citizens, one may argue that Russia responded to pandemic much worse than most of developed countries - by the end of 2021, the number of victims exceeded 1 million persons. This outcome resulted from numerous factors, including insufficient funding of public health and ineffectiveness of health policy in Russia during the entire post-Soviet period. However, pernicious effects of bad governance - a politico-economic order, which is aimed at rent-seeking as the major goal of governing Russia - played a major role in devastating outcomes of pandemic. Bad governance contributed to a poor quality of governance in Russia, according to evaluations of several international agencies. It emerged and consolidated in Russia in the early twenty-first century due to many actions of political leadership. Against this background, the pandemic became an exogenous shock, which aggravated numerous previous vices of bad governance in Russia. The article is focused on the impact of mechanisms of governing the Russian state, their incentives for various actors, and effects of political and policy decisions of Russian authorities from the viewpoint of consequences of pandemic for Russia and its citizens.
About the Author
V. Ya. Gel’man
European University at St. Petersburg; University of Helsinki
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
St. Petersburg
Helsinki
References
1. Arkturk S., Lika I. Varieties of resilience and side effects of disobedience: cross-national patterns of survival during the coronavirus pandemic. Problems of Post-Communism. 2022, Vol. 69, N 1, P. 1-13. DOI: 10.1080/10758216.2021.1894405 EDN: EEQXJU
2. Boin A., McConnell A., Hart P. Governing the pandemic: the politics of navigating a mega-crisis. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021, 130 p.
3. Burawoy M. The state and economic involution: Russia through a Chinese lens. World development. 1996, Vol. 24, N 6, P. 1105-1117. DOI: 10.1016/0305-750x(96)00022-8 EDN: XZTDPB
4. Burawoy M. Transition without transformation: Russia's involutionary road to capitalism. East European politics and societies. 2001, Vol. 15, N 2, P. 269-290. DOI: 10.1177/088832501766276407 EDN: XSPTDB
5. Gaidar Ye. Collapse of an Empire: lessons for modern Russia. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2006, 448 p. (In Russ.).
6. Gel'man V. Bad governance: politics in contemporary Russia. St. Petersburg: European university at St. Petersburg press, 2019, 254 p. (In Russ.). EDN: RLPOEZ
7. Guriev S., Treisman D. Informational autocrats. Journal of economic perspectives. 2019, Vol. 33, N 4, P. 100-127. EDN: MXMGFV
8. Kahneman D. Slovik P., Tversky A. Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Kharkiv: Gumanitarnyi tsentr, 2005, 632 p. (In Russ.).
9. Kuchakov R. Reforming of state control and supervision activities in Russia in 20162019: tentative results. St. Petersburg: Institute for the rule of law, European university at St. Petersburg, 2020, 12 p. (In Russ.).
10. Laruelle M., Alexseev M., Buckley S., Clem R.S., Goode J.P., Gomza I., Hale H.E., Herron S., Makarychev A., McCann M., Omelicheva M., Sharafutdinova G., Smyth R., Sokhey S.W., Troitskiy M., Tucker J., Twigg J., Wishnik E. Pandemic politics in Eurasia: roadmap for a new research subfield. Problems of Post-Communism. 2021, Vol. 68, N 1, P. 1-16. DOI: 10.1080/10758216.2020.1812404 EDN: KXEECO
11. Linkov I., Keenan J.M., Trump B.D. (eds). COVID-19: Systemic risk and resilience. Cham: Springer, 2021, 440 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-71587-8
12. Linz J.J. The breakdown of democratic regimes: crisis, breakdown, and re-equilibration. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins university press, 1978, 144 p.
13. Novkunskaya A. Professionalism, agency, and institutional change: case of maternity services in small-town Russia. PhD dissertation, University of Helsinki, 2020, 182 p.
14. Obrist B., Pfeifer C., Henley R. Multi-layered social resilience: a new approach in mitigation research. Progress in development studies. 2010, Vol. 10, N 4, P. 283-293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F146499340901000402.
15. Paneyakh E. The Overregulated State. Pro et Contra. 2013, Vol. 17, N 1-2, P. 58-92.
16. Plohy S. Chernobyl: the history of a nuclear catastrophe. Moscow: Novoe izdatel'stvo, 2021, 480 p.
17. Rogov K. (ed.). New (il)legitimacy. How rewriting of the Russian constitution occurs and what it brought to Russia. Moscow: Liberal mission foundation, 2020, 82 p. (In Russ.).
18. Rogov K. (ed.). Stagnation-2: consequences, risks, and alternatives for the Russian economy. Moscow: Liberal mission foundation, 2021, 80 p. (In Russ.).
19. Rosenfeld R. Studying crime trends: normal science and exogenous shocks. Criminology.2018, Vol. 56, N 1, P. 5-26. DOI: 10.1111/1745-9125.12170
20. Semenov A. An uneven rhythm: the dynamics of willingness to economic protests in Russia (1996-2019). Economic sociology. 2020, Vol. 21, N 4, P. 107-124 (In Russ.). EDN: FKRBGU
21. Taleb N. Black swan: the impact of highly improbable. Moscow: KoLibri, 2020, 736 p. (In Russ.).
22. Thoren H., Olsson L. Is resilience a normative concept? Resilience: international policies, practices, and discourses. 2018, Vol. 6, N 2, P. 112-128. DOI: 10.1080/21693293.2017.1406842
23. Tolz M. Population trends in the Russian Federation: reflection on the legacy of Soviet Censorship and distortion of demographic statistics. Eurasian geography and economics. 2008, Vol. 49, N 1, P. 87-98. DOI: 10.2747/1539-7216.49.87
24. Ungar M. Systemic resilience: principles and processes for a science of change in context of adversity. Ecology and society. 2018, Vol. 23, N 4. DOI: 10.5751/ES-10385-230434
Review
Views:
151
Email this article 
Post a Comment 