Thirty years of post-Soviet research in Russian political science: trends and prospects
https://doi.org/10.31249/poln/2023.04.01
Abstract
The article presents the results of the analysis of the main works of Russian political scientists devoted to the transformation of post-Soviet states’ political regimes from the point of view of their contribution to political theory and methodology. The main debatable problems that are in the focus of attention of Russian researchers of political processes in the post-Soviet space are considered, the evolution of the theoretical foundations and of research on the transformation of political regimes of post-Soviet states methodology is analyzed.
The author analyzes the «structural» and «procedural» approaches to the study of post-Soviet transformations, the problem of trajectories and outcomes of post-Soviet transformations, research concepts of color revolutions and succession.
The author concludes that the results of post-Soviet research not only led to an increase in knowledge about politics, but also enriched political theory as a whole. The non-linearity (or cyclicity) of political processes in the post-Soviet space is fixed.
There has been a transition to a deeper study and classification of nondemocratic regimes in the post-Soviet space and the study of these regimes not as transitional, but as quite stable. Institutional transformations as factors of the political process are being rethought.
A promising direction is to continue the comparative analysis of political processes in post-Soviet states based on the correlation between the level of statehood in dynamics and the level of institutionalization of political institutions and the institutional foundations of democracy, as well as embedding the study of post-Soviet cases in the general context of post-socialist transformations.
Keywords
Supporting agencies: The reported study was funded by RFBR, project number 20–111–50027.
About the Author
N. A. Borisov
Russian State University for the Humanities
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Borisov Nikolay
Moscow
References
1. Achkasov V.A. Transitology – scientific theory or ideological construct? Polis. Political Studies. 2015, N 1, P. 30–37. (In Russ.)
2. Akhremenko A.S., Gorelskiy I.E., Melville A. Yu. How and why should we measure and compare state capacity of different countries? theoretical and methodological foundations. Polis. Political Studies. 2019, N 2, P. 8–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.02.02 (In Russ.)
3. Blyakher L.E. Whether post-imperial project is possible: from mutual claims to common future. Politeia. 2008, N 1, P. 6–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2008-48-1-6-16 (In Russ.)
4. Borisov N.A. Presidency institution institutionalization and consolidation prospects of post-Soviet political regimes. Politeia. 2011, N 4, P. 93–103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2011-63-4-93-103 (In Russ.)
5. Borisov N.A. Presidency in the post-Soviet space. Genesis and transformations processes. Moscow: RSUH Publ., 2018, 537 p. (In Russ.)
6. Borisova N.V., Sulimov K.A. Power succession in contemporary Russia: preemnichestvo as an invariant? Political science. 2012, N 3, P. 105–124. (In Russ.)
7. Brodovskaya E.V., Korolev P.A. Democratic transit on postcommunist space: definition, models, stages. Proceedings of the Tula State University. Humanities. 2013, N 2, P. 10–16. (In Russ.)
8. Czachor R. Postradzieckie reżimy polityczne w perspektywie neopatrymonialnej: wstęp do badań. Wrocław : Fundacja Instytut Polsko-Rosyjski, 2015, 304 s. (In Polish)
9. Democratic transits: variants of the ways and uncertainty of the results. Polis. Political studies. 1999, N 3, P. 30–51. (In Russ.)
10. Easter G. Preference for presidentialism: postcommunist regime change in Russia and the NIS. World politics. 1997, N 2, P. 184–211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.1997.0002
11. Efremenko D.V., Dolgov A. Yu., Evseeva Ya.V. Russia between system catastrophes and evolutionary transformations: aspects of political ontology. Polis. Political studies. 2017, N 5, P. 24–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2017.05.03 (In Russ.)
12. Eliseev S.M. To break out of the “Bermudas triangle”: on methodology of the research of post-communist transformations. Polis. Political Studies. 2002, N 6, P. 71–82. (In Russ.)
13. Elizarov V.P. The elitist theory of democracy and the contemporary Russian political process. Polis. Political studies. 1999, N 1, P. 72–78. (In Russ.)
14. Feldman D.M. Political interaction of the CIS countries’ elites. Polis. Political studies. 2005, N 4, P. 89–98. (In Russ.)
15. Fisun A.A. Towards rethinking post-Soviet politics: a neopatrimonial interpretation. Political Conceptology. 2010, N 4, P. 158–187. (In Russ.)
16. Gareeva N.E., Shkel S.N. Dynamics of political regime transformation in post-Soviet space: evolution of political thought. The Bashkir university bulletin. 2011, N 3, P. 803–806. (In Russ.)
17. Gelman V.Ya. “Transition” in Russian: concepts of the transition period and political transformation in Russia (1989–1996). Social sciences and modernity. 1997, N 4, P. 64–81. (In Russ.)
18. Gelman V.Ya. Post-Soviet regime transformations: toward a theory building. Polis. Political Studies. 2001 a, N 1, P. 15–29. (In Russ.)
19. Gelman V.Ya. “Encounter with an iceberg”: concept formation and misformation in the study of Russian politics. Polis. Political Studies. 2001 b, N 6, P. 6–17. (In Russ.)
20. Gelman V.Ya. Preface. Russian politics in theoretical and comparative contexts: new perspectives of analysis. Political science (RU). 2003, N 1, P. 4–12. (In Russ.)
21. Gelman V.Ya. Out of the frying pan into the fire? (Post-Soviet regime dynamics in comparative perspective. Polis. Political studies. 2007, N 2, P. 81–108. (In Russ.)
22. Gelman V.Ya. Political science and contemporary research on Russian politics: changes and challenges. Political science. 2012 a, N 1, P. 8–23. (In Russ.)
23. Gelman V.Ya. The rise and decline of electoral authoritarianism in Russia. Politeia. 2012 b, N 4, P. 65–88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2012-67-4-65-88 (In Russ.)
24. Gelman V.Ya. The political foundations of “bad governance” in post-Soviet Eurasia: rethinking the research agenda. Politeia. 2016, N 3, P. 90–115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2016-82-3-90-115 (In Russ.)
25. Gelman V.Ya. The politics of bad governance in contemporary Russia. Saint-Petersburg: European University publishing house, 2019, 254 p. (In Russ.)
26. Gilev A.V. Dynamics of transformations in the post-Soviet space in a comparative perspective: stability and prerequisites for the diversity of political regimes. PhD thesis. Perm: Perm State University, 2010 a, 256 p. (In Russ.)
27. Gilev A.V. Political transformations in the post-Soviet space: do “color revolutions” matter? Politeia. 2010 b, N 2, P. 107–121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2010-57-2-107-121 (In Russ.)
28. Hale H. Regime cycles: democracy, autocracy, and revolution in post-soviet Eurasia. World politics. 2005, N 1, P. 133–165. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.2006.0019
29. Huntington S. The Third Wave. Moscow: RОSSPEN, 2003. 368 p. (In Russ.)
30. Ivanov E.A., Isaev L.M. On methods of estimating current condition and of forecasting social instability in Central Asia. Polis. Political studies. 2019, N 2, P. 59–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.02.05 (In Russ.)
31. Kapustin B.G. The End of “transitology “? (Reflecting on the first post-communist decade as subject of theoretical interpretation). Polis. Political studies. 2001, N 4, P. 6–26. (In Russ.)
32. Karpovich O.G., Manoylo A.V. Color revolutions: theory and practice of dismantling modern political regimes. Moscow: Uniti-Dana, 2015, 111 р. (In Russ.)
33. Kharitonova O.G. Post-soviet constitutions: do only institutions matter? Political science (RU). 2014 a, N 1, P. 69–93. (In Russ.)
34. Kharitonova O.G. Color revolutions in the context of democratization theories. Political science (RU). 2014 b, N 3, P. 184–210. (In Russ.)
35. Klyamkin I.M. Post-communist democracy and its historically specific features in Russia. Polis. Political studies. 1993, N 2, P. 6–24. (In Russ.)
36. Kuvaldin V.B. Presidential and parliamentary republics as forms of democratic transit (Russian and Ukrainian experience in the global context). Polis. Political studies. 1998, N 5, P. 134–138. (In Russ.)
37. Makarenko B.I. Twenty seven years later: are there post-communist states? Politeia. 2019, N 1, P. 97–113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2019-92-1-97-113 (In Russ.)
38. Makarenko B.I., Melville A. Yu. How do transitions to democracy get stuck and where? Lessons from post-communism. Political science (RU). 2014, N 3, P. 9–39. (In Russ.)
39. Manoylo A.V. Color revolutions and technologies for dismantling political regimes. World politics. 2015, N 1, P. 1–19. (In Russ.)
40. Marganiya O.L. (ed). USSR after collapse. Saint-Petersburg: Economic School HSE, 2007, 542 p. (In Russ.)
41. Markedonov S.M. The post-Soviet space: farewell to the definition. In: The evolution of the post-Soviet space: past, present, future: a textbook. Moscow: RSMD Publ., 2017, P. 374–381. (In Russ.)
42. Medushevsky A.N. Trends of post-Soviet political regimes in the light of the latest wave of constitutional amendments. Social sciences and modernity. 2018, N 2, P. 49–66. (In Russ.)
43. Meleshkina E.Yu. The “funnel of causality” in electoral studies. Polis. Political studies. 2002, N 5, P. 47–53. (In Russ.)
44. Melville A.Yu. An essay of theoretical and methodological synthesis of the structural and the procedural approaches to democratic transits. Polis. Political studies. 1998, N 2, P. 6–38. (In Russ.)
45. Melville A.Yu. The “funnel of causality” methodology as intermediary synthesis of “structure and agency” in the analysis of democratic transitions. Polis. Political studies. 2002, N 5, P. 54–59. (In Russ.)
46. Melville A.Yu. Delayed and / or failed democratizations: why and how? Polis. Political studies. 2010, N 4, P. 73–76. (In Russ.)
47. Melville A.Yu. Does the “Tsar of the mountain” need good institutes? Political science. 2013, N 3, P. 151–169. (In Russ.)
48. Melville A.Yu. “Out of the ghetto”: on the contribution of post-Soviet/Russian Studies to contemporary political science. Polis. Political studies. 2020, N 1, P. 22–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2020.01.03 (In Russ.)
49. Melville A.Yu., Stukal D.K., Mironyuk M.G. “The King of the mountain”, or Why post-communist autocracies have bad institutions. Polis. Political studies. 2013, N 2, P. 125–142. (In Russ.)
50. Melville A.Yu. Five unfulfilled hopes: political and theoretical expectations of the “epoch – 1989”. In: Dismantling Communism: thirty years later. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie Publ., 2021, P. 66–92. (In Russ.)
51. New democracies and / or new autocracies? (Materials of the round table). Polis. Political studies. 2004, N 1, P. 169–177. (In Russ.)
52. Nisnevich Yu.A. Post-Soviet Russia: twenty years later. Polis. Political studies. 2013, N 1, P. 100–111. (In Russ.)
53. Nisnevich Yu.A., Ryabov A.V. Post-Soviet authoritarianism. Social sciences and modernity. 2017, N 4, P. 84–97. (In Russ.)
54. Panov P.V. Transformations of political institutions in Russia: cross-temporal comparative analysis. Polis. Political Studies. 2002, N 6, P. 58–70. (In Russ.)
55. Panov P.V., Sulimov K.A. Succession as a way of reproduction of power: problems of conceptualization. The Perm University Bulletin. Series “Political Science”. 2011, N 4, P. 31–42. (In Russ.)
56. Panov P.V., Sulimov K.A. Leadership succession and limits of personalist presidentialism: the perspectives of “preemniks” in the Caucasus and Central Asia. Political science. 2014, N 1, P. 134–158. (In Russ.)
57. Pastukhov V.B. The end of postcommunism. Polis. Political Studies. 1997, N 4, P. 33–43. (In Russ.)
58. Petukhov V.V. Democratization of the Russian society: is second attempt possible? Polis. Political studies. 2017, N 5, P. 8–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2017.05.02 (In Russ.)
59. Pivovarov Yu.S. Russian power and public policy (A historian’s notes about the reasons of unsuccess of the democratic transit). Polis. Political studies. 2006, N 1, P. 12–32. (In Russ.)
60. Pivovarov Yu.S. “…And a century in ruins”. Polis. Political studies. 2011, N 6, P. 52–77. (In Russ.)
61. Pivovarov Yu.S. About the “Soviet” and ways to overcome it (article two). What to do? Polis. Political studies. 2014, N 2, P. 31–60. (In Russ.)
62. Polokhalo V. Political science of post-communism in Ukraine and Russia (To the methodology of political analysis). Polis. Political studies. 1998, N 3, P. 7–15. (In Russ.)
63. Polyakov L.V. Electoral authoritarianism and Russian case. Politeia. 2015, N 2, P. 6–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2015-77-2-6-20 (In Russ.)
64. Post-Soviet states: 25 years of independent development. In 2 vol. Moscow: IMEMO RAN Publ., 2017. (In Russ.)
65. Rozov N.S. Neopatrimonial regimes: diversity, dynamics, and prospects for democratization. Polis. Political studies. 2016, N 1, P. 139–156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2016.01.10. (In Russ.)
66. Rozov N.S. Dynamics of hybrid regimes and sustainability/fragility of neototalitarianism. Politeia. 2018, N 1, P. 30–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2018-88-1-30-46 (In Russ.)
67. Sakva R. The dual state in Russia: paraconstitutionalism and parapolitics. Polis. Political studies. 2010, N 1, P. 8–26. (In Russ.)
68. Shevtsova L.F. Dilemmas of post-communist society. Polis. Political studies. 1996, N 5, P. 80–91. (In Russ.)
69. Shevtsova L.F. How Russia failed to cope with democracy: the logic of political rollback. Pro et Contra. 2004, N 3, P. 36–55. (In Russ.)
70. Shkel S.N. New wave: authoritarianism’s multiformity in reflection of modern political science. PolitBook. 2013, N 4, P. 120–139. (In Russ.)
71. Shkel S.N. Political reshaping in the post-soviet time reflected by the contemporary political thought. Historical and socio-educational thought. 2014 a, N 6–2, P. 287– 291. (In Russ.)
72. Shkel S.N. Post-Soviet authoritarianism in a comparative perspective. Ufa: Gilem Publ., 2014 b, 349 p. (In Russ.)
73. Shkel S.N. Regime changes of post-soviet states of Central Asia and the Caucasus. The Perm University Bulletin. Series “Political Science”. 2015, N 1, P. 5–23. (In Russ.) Shkel S.N. Neopatrimonial practices and stability of authoritarian regimes in Eurasia. Politeia. 2016, N 4, P. 94–107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2016-83-4-94-107 (In Russ.)
74. Shvyrkov A.I. Ukraine: patterns of collapse. Politeia. 2014, N 2, P. 34–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2014-73-2-34-47 (In Russ.)
75. The evolution of the post-Soviet space: past, present, future: an anthology. Moscow: RSMD Publ., 384 p. (In Russ.)
76. The political atlas of modernity: the experience of multidimensional statistical analysis of the political systems of modern states. Moscow: MGIMO-University Publ., 2007, 272 p. (In Russ.)
77. Tokarev A.A. Comparative analysis of the post-communist secessions: the prognostic attempt of quantification of the factors’ impact on secession. Polis. Political studies. 2017, N 4, P. 106–117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2017.04.08 (In Russ.)
78. Truevtsev K.M. “Colour revolutions” and terrorist threat in Central Asia. Politeia. 2005, N 2, P. 5–21. DOI: 10.30570/2078–5089–2005–37–2-5–21 (In Russ.)
79. Valitova N.E. The evolution of theoretical and methodological models for the study of political regime transformations in post-Soviet countries: Ph.D. thesis. Ufa: Bashkir State University, 2012, 168 p. (In Russ.)
80. Way L., Levitsky S. The Dynamics of Autocratic Coercion after the Cold War. Communist and post-communist studies. 2006, Vol. 39, N 3, P. 387–410. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2006.07.001
81. Zaznaev O.I. Index analysis of semi-presidential states of Europe and of post-Soviet expanse. Polis. Political studies. 2007, N 2, P. 146–164. (In Russ.)
82. Zaznaev O.I. Superpresidential Systems in the Central Asia Republics: on the example of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. Russia and the Muslim world. 2009, N 10, P. 145–154. (In Russ.)
83. Zaznaev O.I. Constitutional amendments as a factor of strengthening presidential power in post-Soviet countries. The spiritual sphere of society. 2012, N 9, P. 88–91. (In Russ.)
84. Zorin M.A., Kuzmin A.S. Political mirages and sociological reality (Ukraine 2000–2006: the nets of ordinariness, unstable informal institutions and colored revolutions. Politeia. 2006, N 1, P. 51–65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2006-40-1-51-65 (In Russ.)
Review
Views:
460
Email this article 
Post a Comment 