Search

The topic of this issue is the Russian Regions after the Elections of the Unified Voting Day 2020 (11-13 September). Firstly, Andrei Semenov describes the outcomes of the subnational elections and argues that although the results confirmed the dominance of regime-backed candidates, long-term changes in the electorate’s preferences and tactical innovations employed by the opposition foreshadow a major battle over the parliamentary elections in 2021. Secondly, Mikhail Turchenko posits that the three-day voting scheme helped the Kremlin to maintain control over all gubernatorial offices, as well as over all regional parliaments and a majority of city councils in regional capitals, while Alexei Navalny’s “smart vote” initiative was effective in big cities. Thirdly, Guzel Garifullina argues that technocratic selection is being used for the wrong offices or being applied selectively, rendering it useless or even harmful. Finally, Andrey Yushkov describes changes in regional public finance from 2012 to 2019., Das Thema dieser Ausgabe sind die russischen Regionen nach den Wahlen des «Unified Voting Day 2020» (11.-13. September). Als Erstes beschreibt Andrei Semenov die Ergebnisse der subnationalen Wahlen und argumentiert, dass – obwohl die Ergebnisse die Dominanz der vom Regime unterstützten Kandidaten bestätigt haben – langfristige Veränderungen in den Präferenzen der Wählerschaft und taktische Innovationen, die von der Opposition eingesetzt wurden, einen grösseren Schlagabtausch während den Parlamentswahlen im Jahr 2021 vorhersagen. Als Zweites vertritt Michail Turchenko die These, dass das dreitägige Wahlsystem dem Kreml geholfen hat, die Kontrolle über alle Gouverneursämter sowie über alle Regionalparlamente und die Mehrheit der Stadträte in den Regionalhauptstädten zu behalten, während Alexej Nawalnys "Smart-Vote"-Initiative in den Grossstädten wirksam war. Als Drittes argumentiert Guzel Garifullina, dass die technokratische Auswahl für die falschen Ämter eingesetzt oder selektiv angewendet wird, was sie nutzlos oder sogar schädlich macht. Als Letztes beschreibt Andrey Yushkov die Veränderungen in den regionalen öffentlichen Finanzen von 2012 bis 2019., Russian Analytical Digest (RAD), 262, ISSN:1863-0421

This research project uses public spending to approximate for policy decisions in hybrid regimes. I look at two specific kinds of challenges that may destabilize hybrids - and external economic crisis (in the same way it affects other regimes) and popular elections (which create uncertainty and a dual challenge from masses and elites to the incumbent’s power). Starting from the well-developed research literature on regime survival, I argue that regime stability will depend not only on the severity and nature of challenge to the regime, but also on the response strategy adopted by the incumbent leader. Exploring response strategies through the lens of spending dynamics in the Russian regions in 2001-2014, I build and use a two-dimensional decision space, containing the trade-off between long-term (investment) and short-term (consumption) spending strategies, as well as redistribution between the elites and the mass groups in the short term. I show that the economic crisis is associated with a decrease of spending on supporting the economy and health care (long-term) and an increase of spending on social welfare (short-term). Elections are shown to have a positive effect on spending on the bureaucracy (elite) and a negative effect on mass social welfare programs. That supports the hypotheses that an economic crisis motivates redistribution to immediate needs, and leaders facing elections prefer redistribution to elite groups to ensure their support. Election competitiveness strengthens the latter effect. The proposed theory adds to our understanding of nondemocratic regime functioning and dynamics.