Federalism and Regional Policy in Contemporary Russia

Front matter

N a tn

Š A” ~ S S

g& S bai & S 8

Contents

List of figures List of tables Preface

Introduction 1 Tertius gaudens: what is wrong with Russian federalism? 2 Why has regional development in Russia failed?

3 Who, how, when, and how much? Factors of the redistribution of intergovernmental transfers in Russia

Index

Figures

2.1

2.2

2.3 2.4

3.1

3.2

3.3 4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

The dynamics of freedom in the USSR and the Russian Federation

Distribution of incomes between different governmental levels in 2011 in several federations

Federal and regional shares of budgetary incomes in Russia in 1992-1999 and 2003-2011

The number of federal programs

Share of intergovernmental transfers in the federal budget’s expenditures

Average value of transfers from the federal budget to subnational budgets in republics and other types of subnational units

Average value of gross regional product per 10000 residents in republics and other types of subnational units

The number of federal programs in the 2000s and 2010s

Ratio of federal and subnational budget revenues in the Russian Federation in 1992-2011

Number of officials at the national and subnational governmental levels in 2000-2013

Dynamics of allocation of expenses in the field of education in 2000-2015

Dynamics of change in expenses for education in three Russian republics in 2001 and 2015

110 114

Tables

2.1 2:2

Models of intergovernmental financial relations

Decline in industrial production in the regions of Russia in 2008-2009

Sequences of decentralization and their effects on the intergovernmental balance of power

Social expenditures of the Russian consolidated budget in 2005, 2010, and 2015 (in billion rubles)

Descriptive statistics

Results of the regression analysis of annual distribution of intergovernmental budget transfers

Results of the regression analysis of distribution of annual intergovernmental budget transfers grouped in periods List of the governmental programs and subprograms

138 159

161 162

Preface

In his classic book on federalism (1964), William Riker presented a brief twopage analysis of the process of the Soviet Union’s formation as a federal state, setting it alongside not only Yugoslavia, but also West Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. In response to the obvious question from all those who were surprised by the statement that an unfree state, one practicing mass terror and forced displacement of peoples, as a polity, complied with the principles of self-rule and shared rule, Riker noted:

Since 1923 the Soviet Union has been highly centralized and for that reason many scholars have refused to call it a federalism. This refusal is, however, merely the expression of the American-Commonwealth mythology that federalism ought to prevent tyranny. Since the Soviet Union preserved all the features of federalism, the mere fact that its federalism fails to prevent tyranny should not lead to casting it out of the class of federalism. Rather it should lead to a re-evaluation of what federalism means and implies.

Although I completely disagree with the statement that “the Soviet Union preserved all the features of federalism,” I have always interpreted this paragraph as Riker suggesting that we should examine the features of territorial governance in states that are simultaneously complex (with a large territory, plural society, etc.), and not democratic. It is the desire to understand how one should manage a country that, though born to be a federation, has not realized the federal canon, that compelled me to write this work.

This book is focused on Russia, a country that claims a federal structure in its constitution and its full name, but which has not for a single day been consistent with the classic principles of federalism. For many years, Russia has served as an example of the contemporary authoritarian state for the world of political science. The shift in politics research from studying the formation, development, and changes of its political regime to studying how that regime influences the functioning of the state and society has reserved Russia’s position as a “crucial case” for many years to come. For me, the Russian case is important because it clearly shows how the central government forms a territorial governance system

Preface xi as the authoritarian regime grows stronger, how it solves its immediate administrative tasks, and what political constraints it frequently faces.

The book is based on the materials of a number of studies of the political factors of territorial governance in Russia. The first of them, “Tertius gaudens: Circumstances of Formation of a Federal State in Russia,” was conducted in 2002-2005 at the Faculty of Political and Social Sciences, Petrozavodsk State University. The second, “The Political and Socio-Economic Factors of the Implementation of Regional Policy in the Russian Federation,” was carried out at the Faculty of Political Sciences and Sociology, European University at St Petersburg (EUSP) in 2005-2009. Finally, the third project, on the problems of centralization and decentralization of public administration under the conditions of authoritarian institutions, was begun in 2009 with the support of the Center for Modernization Studies EUSP and continued in 2013 at the Aleksanteri Institute, University of Helsinki, within the framework of the “Centre of Excellence ‘Choices of Russian Modernization’ ” project, and of the “Regimes, Institutions, and Change: Politics and Governance in Russia in a Comparative Perspective” project as part of the Finland Distinguished Professor Programme, implemented with the support of the Academy of Finland.

I was fortunate enough to present and discuss the interim results of my work at the great research centers studying Russian politics from a comparative perspective. I am grateful to the encouraging staff of the Aleksanteri Institute, University of Helsinki, for their continued support and excellent organization of research activities, the Center for Modernization Studies, EUSP, for its interesting discussions of development and political changes, and the National Research University Higher School of Economics (St Petersburg) for its wonderful students.

I would like to thank Vladimir Gel’man, professor at the European University at St Petersburg and the University of Helsinki; his advice and support, as well as his articles and books, are regularly of significant help to me in my research activities. I also thank those who provided me with assistance at the various stages of the research and preparation of the manuscript: Maria Nozhenko, Grigorii Golosov, Irina Busygina, Mikhail Filippov, Andrey Zakharov, Markku Kivinen, Oleg Podvintsev, Alexander Sungurov, Anna Tarasenko, Dmitry Travin, Anton Shirikov, and Andrey Yushkov for ideas and comments that have allowed me to develop and specify important points; Natalia Shkaeva, Elizaveta Potapova, Viktoria Poltoratskaya, and Lyubov Altukhova for inspiring joint projects; Ivan Grigoriev and Anna Dekalchuk for their companionship and assistance in data collection; and Alexei Stephenson for his thoughtful and patient linguistic assistance. I thank my parents, Vladimir Starodubtsev and Valentina Starodubtseva, for supporting all my endeavors. Of course, these people are not responsible for my inaccuracies, omissions, or errors. At the same time, I would like to share with them all of the best that the book has to offer.

Taylor & Francis Taylor & Francis Group http://taylorandfrancis.com