версия для печати

Выйти из “гетто”:
о вкладе постсоветских исследований/Russian Studies в современную политическую науку

Мельвиль А. Ю.,

Доктор философских наук, декан факультета социальных наук, Национальный исследовательский университет “Высшая школа экономики”, amelville@hse.ru

elibrary_id: 251142 | ORCID: 0000-0002-1414-5783 | RESEARCHER_ID: B-1152-2014

DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2020.01.03

Рубрика: Тема номера: горизонты политической науки

Правильная ссылка на статью:

Мельвиль А. Ю. Выйти из “гетто”: о вкладе постсоветских исследований/Russian Studies в современную политическую науку. – Полис. Политические исследования. 2020. № 1. С. 22-43. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2020.01.03

В основе этой статьи – доклад автора на международной конференции Regime Evolution, Institutional Change and Social Transformation in Russia: Lessons for Political Science (Yale University, April 27-28, 2018). Автор выражает искреннюю благодарность за замечания и советы М. Ильину, И. Локшину, Б. Макаренко, О. Малиновой, М. Миронюку, Н. Петрову, Д. Слайдеру, С. Фишу, Л. Уэю и другим коллегам, с которыми обсуждалась рукопись этой статьи, в том числе в ходе неформальных семинаров в департаменте политической науки НИУ ВШЭ. Благодарность также анонимным рецензентам, чьи критические замечания я постарался, насколько возможно, учесть при доработке текста.

Аннотация

Статья посвящена анализу взаимовлияний между постсоветскими/российскими исследованиями (Russian Studies) последних трех десятилетий, с одной стороны, и динамикой современной политической науки в целом и сравнительной политологии, в частности, — с другой. На материале аналитического обзора публикаций по проблематике (1) предпосылок демократии и демократизации, (2) авторитарной модернизации без демократических реформ, (3) возможностей и ограничений институционального подхода, (4) роли государства и государственной состоятельности, (5) разновидностей постсоветского авторитаризма и (6) субнациональных измерений постсоветской политики обосновывается вывод о конструктивном использовании в постсоветских исследованиях общих политологических теоретико-методологических новаций,а также обсуждается вклад этих исследований в развитие современной политической компаративистики и политической науки в целом.  

Ключевые слова

постсоветские исследования, Russian Studies, политическая наука, сравнительная политология, демократизация, авторитаризм, модернизация, политические институты, государственная состоятельность, субнациональные политические процессы.

 Текст статьи 

A Quarter Century of Post-communism Assessed. 2017. Ed. by M.S. Fish, G. Gill, M. Petrovic. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43437-7

Back H., Hadenius A. 2008. Democracy and State Capacity: Exploring a J-Shaped Relationship. – Governance; An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions. Vol. 21. No. 1. P. 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2007.00383.x

Bratton M., Chang E. 2006. State Building and Democratization in Sub-Saharan Africa: Forwards, Backwards, or Together? – Comparative Political Studies. Vol. 39. No. 9. P. 1059-1083. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414005280853

Bunce V., Wolchik S. 2011. Defeating Authoritarian Leaders in Post-communist Countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511977404

Burkhardt F. 2017. The Institutionalization of Relative Advantage: Formal Institutions, Subconstitutional Powers, and the Rise of Authoritarian Politics in Russia, 1994-2012. – Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 33. No. 6. P. 472-495. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2017.1388471

Busygina I. 2016. Putin’s Russia: The State-Building Strategy. – Russian Politics. Vol. 1. No. 1. P. 70-94. https://doi.org/10.1163/24518921-00101004

Busygina I. 2017. How Does Russian Federalism Work: Looking at the Internal Borders in the Russian Federation. – Journal of Borderlands Studies. Vol. 32. No. 1. P. 105-119. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2016.1197790

Busygina I. 2018. Russian Federalism. – Russia: Strategy, Policy and Administration. Ed. by I. Studin. London: Palgrave Macmillan. P. 57-64. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-56671-3

Colton T. 2017. Paradoxes of Putinism. – Daedalus. Vol. 146. No. 2. P. 8-18. https://doi.org/10.1162/DAED_a_00430

Colton T., Hale H. 2009. The Putin Vote: Presidential Electorates in a Hybrid Regime. – Slavic Review. Vol. 68. No. 3. P. 473-503. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0037677900019690

Diamond L. 2002. Thinking About Hybrid Regimes. – Journal of Democracy. Vol. 13. No. 2. P. 21-35. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2002.0025

Easter G. 2008. The Russian State in the Time of Putin. – Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 24. No. 3. P. 199-230. https://doi.org/10.2747/1060-586X.24.3.199

Electoral Authoritarianism. The Dynamics of Unfree Competition. 2006. Ed. by A. Schedler. Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Fish M.S. 2005. Democracy Derailed in Russia: The Failure of Open Politics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791062

Fish M.S. 2017. What is Putinism? – Journal of Democracy. Vol. 28. No. 4. P. 61-75. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2017.0066

Fish M.S. 2018. What Has Russia Become? – Comparative Politics. Vol. 50. No. 3. P. 327-346. https://doi.org/10.5129/001041518822704872

Foa R. 2018. Modernization and Authoritarianism. – Journal of Democracy. Vol. 20. No. 3. P. 129-140. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2018.0050

Frye T.A. 1997. Politics of Institutional Choice: Postcommunist Presidents. – Comparative Political Studies. Vol. 30. No. 5. P. 523-552. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414097030005001

Frye T. 2010. Building States and Markets After Communism. The Perils of Polarized Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511779718

Frye T. 2012. In From the Cold: Institutions and Causal Inference in Postcommunist Studies. – The Annual Review of Political Science. Vol.15. P. 243-263. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-043010-095817

Frye T. 2017. Russian Studies is Thriving, Not Dying. – National Interest. No. 151. URL: https://nationalinterest.org/feature/russian-studies-thriving-not-dying-22547 (accessed 15.11.2019).

Frye T. 2018. Bringing Kitshelt Back In: A Comment on “Rethinking Structure and Agency in Post-Soviet Regime Dynamics”. – Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 34. No. 5. P. 348-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2018.1518203

Geddes B.A. 1995. Comparative Perspective on the Leninist Legacy in Eastern Europe. – Comparative Political Studies. Vol. 28. P. 239-274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414095028002003

Gel’man V. 2015. Authoritarian Russia: Analyzing Post-Soviet Regime Changes. Pittsburg: University of Pittsburg Press. 208 p. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt155jmv1

Gel’man V. 2017. Political Foundations of Bad Governance in Post-Soviet Eurasia: Towards a Research Agenda. – East European Politics. Vol. 33. No. 4. P. 496-516. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2017.1348350

Gel’man V. 2018. Bringing Actors Back In: Political Choices and Sources of Post-Soviet Regime Dynamics. – Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 34. No. 5. P. 282-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2018.1493785

Gel’man V., Starodubtsev A. 2016. Opportunities and Constraints of Authoritarian Modernization: Russian Policy Reforms in the 2000s. – Europe-Asia Studies. Vol. 68. No. 1. P. 97-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2015.1113232

Golosov G. 2004. Political Parties in the Regions of Russia: Democracy Unclaimed. Boulder: Lynne Reiner. 307 p.

Gontmaher E., Ross C. 2015. The Middle Class and Democratization in Russia. – Europe – Asia Studies. Vol. 67. No. 2. P. 269-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2014.1001578

Goodin R.E. 2011. The State of the Discipline, the Discipline of the State. – The Oxford Handbook of Political Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199604456.013.0001

Greene S. 2015. The End of Ambiguity in Russia. – Current History. Vol. 114. No. 774. P. 251-258. http://www.currenthistory.com/Greene_CurrentHistory.pdf

Greenе S. 2018. Running to Stand Still: Aggressive Immobility and the Limits of Power in Russia. – Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 34. No. 5. P. 333-347. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2018.1500095

Grindle M. 2004. Good Enough Governance: Poverty Reduction and Reform in Developing Countries. – Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions. Vol. 17. No. 4. P. 525-548. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0952-1895.2004.00256.x

Guriev S. 2017. How Transitional Institutions Could Transform Russia’s Economy. – Carnegie Moscow Center. URL: http://carnegie.ru/commentary/74790 (accessed 15.11.2019).

Guriev S., Zhuravskaya E. 2010. Why Russia is Not South Korea. – Journal of International Affairs. Vol. 63. No. 3. P. 125-139. https://jia.sipa.columbia.edu/why-russia-not-south-korea (accessed 15.11.2019)

Hale H.E. 2015. Patronal Politics. Eurasian Regime Change Dynamics in Comparative Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139683524

Hanson S. 2017. The Evolution of Regimes: What Can Twenty-Five Years of Post-Soviet Change Teach Us? – Perspectives on Politics. Vol. 15. No. 2. P. 328-341. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592717000044

Hanson S. 2007. Rationality, Structure, and Agency in Post-Soviet Russian Democratization. – Perspectives on Politics. Vol. 5. No. 4. P. 793-802. https://doi.org/10.1017/S153759270707226X

Hellman J. 1998. Winners Take All: The Politics of Partial Reform in Postcommunist Transitions. – World Politics. Vol. 50. No. 2. P. 203-234. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100008091

Huntington S. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman and London: University of Oklahoma Press.

Kitschelt H. 1995. Formation of Party Cleavages in Post-Communist Democracies: Theoretical Propositions. – Party Politics. Vol. 1. No. 4. P. 447-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068895001004002

Kuran T. 1991. Now Out or Never: The Elements of Surprise in the East European Revolutions of 1989. – World Politics. Vol. 44. No. 1. P. 7-48. https://doi.org/10.2307/2010422

Laitin D. 2000. Post-Soviet Politics. – Annual Review of Political Science. Vol. 3. P. 117-148. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.117

LaPorte J., Lussier D. 2011. What Is the Leninist Legacy? Assessing Twenty Years of Scholarship. – Slavic Review. Vol. 70. No. 3. P. 637-654. https://doi.org/10.5612/slavicreview.70.3.0637

Ledeneva A. 2013. Can Russia Modernize? Sistema, Power Networks and Informal Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511978494

Levitsky S., Way L.A. 2010. Competitive Authoritarianism: Competitive Authoritarianism After the Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 517 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511781353

Linz J.J., Stepan A. 1996. Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press. 479 p.

Lipset S.M. 1959. Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy. – American Political Science Review. Vol. 53. No. 1. P. 69-105. https://doi.org/10.2307/1951731

Makarenko B. 2012. The Post-Soviet Party of Power. – Russian Politics and Law. Vol. 50. No. 1. P. 54-83. https://doi.org/10.2753/RUP1061-1940500103

Makarenko B. 2015. The Role of Elections in Democracy. – Democracy in a Russian Mirror. Ed. by A. Przeworski. New York: Cambridge University Press. P. 130-146. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107282070

Makarenko B., Melville A. 2015. How Do Transitions to Democracy Get Stuck and Where? – Democracy in a Russian Mirror. Ed. by A. Przeworski. New York: Cambridge University Press. P. 268-297. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107282070

McFaul M. 2018. Choosing Autocracy: Actors, Institutions, and Revolution in the Erosion of Russian Democracy. – Comparative Politics. Vol. 50. No. 3. P. 305-325. https://doi.org/10.5129/001041518822704971

McMann K., Petrov N. 2000. A Survey of Democracy in Russian’s Regions. – Post-Soviet Geography and Economics. Vol. 41. No. 3. P. 155-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/10889388.2000.10641137

Melville A. 2019. The Illiberal World Order and Russian Liberals. – Dimensions and Challenges of Russian Liberalism: Historical Drama and New Prospects. Ed. by R. Cucciolla. Springer. P. 205-221. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05784-8

Melville A., Mironyuk M. 2016. “Bad Enough Governance”: State Capacity and Quality of Institutions in Post-Soviet Autocracies. – Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 32. No. 2. P. 132-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2015.1052215

Moller J., Skaaning S.-E. 2009. “Stateness First?” – Democratization. Vol. 18. No. 1. P. 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2011.532607

Petrov N. 2011. The Political Mechanics of the Russian Regime: Substitutes versus Institutions. – Russian Politics and Law. Vol. 49. No. 2. P. 34-69. https://doi.org/10.2753/RUP1061-1940490202

Petrov N. 2013. From a Federation of Corporations to a Federation of Regions. – Russia 2025: Scenarios for the Future. Ed. by M. Lipman and N. Petrov. London: Palgrave Macmillan. P. 181-201. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137336910

Petrov N., Lipman M., Hale H. 2014. Three Dilemmas of Hybrid Regime Governance. – Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 30. No. 1. P. 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2013.825140

Reisinger W. 2013. Studying Russia’s Regions to Advance Comparative Political Science. – Russia’s Regions and Comparative Subnational Politics. Ed. by W. Reisinger. London and New York: Routledge. P. 1-24. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203075869

Reisinger W., Moraski B. 2017. The Regional Roots of Russia’s Political Regime. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. 268 p. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9281269

Reuter O.J. 2013. Regional Patrons and Hegemonic Party Electoral Performance in Russia. – Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 29. No. 2. P. 101-135. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2013.780410

Reuter O.J. 2017. The Origins of Dominant Parties: Building Authoritarian Institutions in Post-Soviet Russia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 336 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316761649

Reuter O.J., Remington T. 2009. Dominant Party Regimes and the Commitment Problem. The Case of United Russia. – Comparative Political Studies. Vol. 42. No. 4. P. 501-526. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414008327426

Roeder P.G. 1994. Varieties of Post-Soviet Authoritarian Regimes. – Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 10. No. 1. P. 61-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.1994.10641378

Ross C. 2011. Regional Elections and Electoral Authoritarianism in Russia. – Europe – Asia Studies. Vol. 63. No. 4. P. 641-661. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2011.566428

Russia: Strategy, Policy, and Administration. 2018. Palgrave Macmillan. Ed. by I. Studin. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-56671-3

Simpser A., Slater D., Wittenberg J. 2018. Dead but Not Gone: Contemporary Legacies of Communism, Imperialism, and Authoritarianism. – Annual Review of Political Science. Vol. 21. P. 419-439. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-062615-020900

Smith R. 2006. Candidate Strategies and Electoral Competition in the Russian Federation: Democracy without Foundation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511510397

Starodubtsev A. 2018. Federalism and Regional Policy in Contemporary Russia. Abingdon: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

The New Autocracy. Information, Politics, and Policy in Putin’s Russia. 2018. Ed. by D. Treisman. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Treisman D. 1996. The Politics of Intergovernmental Transfers in Post-Soviet Russia. – British Journal of Political Science. Vol. 26. No. 3. P. 299-335. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400007481

Treisman D. 2017. Democracy by Mistake. Working paper 23944. NBER Working Paper Series. https://doi.org/10.3386/w23944

Turovsky R. 2015. The Systemic Opposition in Authoritarian Regimes: A Case Study of Russia’s Regions. – Civil Society Awakens? The Systemic and Non-Systemic Opposition in the Russian Federation: National and Regional Dimensions. Ed. by C. Ross. London: Ashgate.

Turovsky R., Gaivoronsky Y. 2017. Russia’s Regions as Winners and Losers: Political Reasons and Outcomes in the Distribution of Federal Transfers. – European Politics and Society. Vol. 18. No. 4. P. 529-551.

https://doi.org/10.1080/23745118.2017.1286312

Way L.A. 2015. Pluralism by Default: Weak Autocrats and the Rise of Competitive Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Way L., Casey A. 2018. The Structural Sources of Postcommunist Regime Trajectories. – Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 34. No. 5. P. 317-332. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2018.1494959

Way L., Levitsky S. 2006. The Dynamics of Autocratic Coercion after the Cold War. – Communist and Post-Communist Studies. Vol. 39. No. 3. P. 388-410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2006.07.001

\White D. 2018. State Capacity and Regime Resilience in Putin’s Russia. – International Political Science Review. Vol. 39. No. 1. P. 130-143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512117694481 

Возможно, Вас заинтересуют: