Public Chambers as Institutions for Implementing the Paternalistic Model of Interaction Between Authority and Society: Experience of the Tver Region and St. Petersburg

Public Chambers as Institutions for Implementing the Paternalistic Model of Interaction Between Authority and Society:
Experience of the Tver Region and St. Petersburg


Sungurov A.Yu.,

Professor, Head of Department of Applied Political Science, National Research University Higher School of Economics in St. Petersburg, asungurov@mail.ru


elibrary_id: 615464 |

Kozlova N.N.,

Head of Department of Political Science, Tver State University, tver-rapn@mail.ru


elibrary_id: 346665 |

Mamagulashvili D.I.,

Head of Institute of Economics and Management, Tver State University, Mamagulashvili.DI@tversu.ru


elibrary_id: 644947 |


DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2020.03.07
Rubric: Russia Today

For citation:

Sungurov A.Yu., Kozlova N.N., Mamagulashvili D.I. Public Chambers as Institutions for Implementing the Paternalistic Model of Interaction Between Authority and Society: Experience of the Tver Region and St. Petersburg. – Polis. Political Studies. 2020. No. 3. P. 93-109. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2020.03.07


This article was prepared with the support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project No. 17-03-00328 “Institutions and Practices of Interaction between the Government, the Expert Community and Public Organizations in Russian Regions”.


Abstract

The article analyzes the logic of transforming public chambers from the point of view of: a) the principles of organization and selection of staff, b) the functionality laid down in the regulatory framework, c) the measures taken reflecting the content and focus of the work, d) the information policy, e) building relationships with public organizations, state authorities and local self-government, and f) the influence on the socio-political situation in the region. The main research methods used were an analysis of the regulatory framework, content from the Public Chamber of the Tver Region and St. Petersburg, and semi-structured interviews with chamber members, experts, government officials and deputies of regional parliaments with experience in interacting with public chambers. An analysis of the principles of organization and the functionality of public chambers shows that the potential for their influence on public policy in the law is limited. The authors highlight the general and specific features of the evolution of the public chambers of the Tver region and St. Petersburg. If the Public Chamber of the Tver Region was initially created as a real institute of regional policy, with the levers of influence prescribed in law on the process of making power decisions (the right of legislative initiative, the possibility of sending representatives to the qualification collegium of judges), the Public Chamber of St. Petersburg was created as a kind of elite club under the governor with which the governor could consult if desired. General changes regarding public chambers are moving towards adjusting the principles of their recruitment, numerical strength, the study of individual powers, and the unification of the system of regional public chambers. An analysis of the activities of the public chambers allows the authors to conclude that they correlate with changes in the domestic policy of the Russian Federation. According to the authors, this public-state institution contributes to the activation of those social forces that are ready to integrate into communication to promote socially oriented projects. The authors believe that the genesis and evolution of public chambers in Russia throughout the 2000s indicates a change in the mechanisms of interaction between civil society structures and the state, as well as the design of a paternalistic model of mediation of power and society. 

Keywords
models of interaction between power and society, public chambers, mediating institutions, public policy, public control, civil society, regional policy institutions.


References

Owen C., Bindman E. 2019. Civic Participation in a Hybrid Regime: Limited Pluralism in Policymaking and Delivery in Contemporary Russia. – Government and Opposition. Vol. 54. No. 1. P. 98-120. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2017.13

 

Abakumov S.A. 2005. Ot Grazhdanskogo Foruma do sozdaniya Obshchestvennoj palaty RF (2001-2005 gg.) [From the Civil Forum to the creation of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation (2001-2005)]. Moscow: Galeriya. (In Russ.)

Auzan A.A. 2006. Tri publichnye lekcii o grazhdanskom obshchestve [Three Public Lectures on Civil Society]. Moscow: O.G.I. (In Russ.)

Babincev V.P. 2012. Simulation Practices in State and Municipal Government. – Vlast’. No. 5. P. 24-29. (In Russ.)

Babintsev V.P., Ushamirskaya G.F. 2014. Subculture of Bureaucracy in the Regional Chronotope. – Regionology. No. 1. P. 87-98. (In Russ.)

Bryantsev I.I. 2017. The Specifics of the Integration of Public Policy Actors in the System of Interaction Between the Government and Society. – Central Russian Bulletin of Social Sciences. Vol. 12. No. 3. P. 137-149. (In Russ.)

Chernyshov Yu.G. 2008. Obshchestvennaya palata: “simulyakr” ili institut grazhdanskogo obshchestva v Rossii? [Public Chamber: “Simulacrum” or Civil Society Institute in Russia?]. – Publichnoe prostranstvo, grazhdanskoe obshchestvo i vlast’: opyt razvitiya i vzaimodeistviya [Public Space, Civil Society and Government:

Experience of Development and Interaction]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. P. 33-43. (In Russ.)

Evstifeev R.V. 2018. Public Chambers of the Subjects of the Russian Federation in the Regional System of Government: the Main Problems of Functioning and Evaluation of the Efficiency of Work. – Research Result. Sociology and Management. Vol. 4. No. 4. P. 87-100. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18413/2408-9338-2018-4-4-0-8

Gnusareva Yu. 2008. The Public Chamber of the Russian Federation as a New Civil Society Institution. – Vlast’. No. 8. P. 19-23. (In Russ.)

Grib V.V. 2009. Forms and Mechanisms of Interaction between the Public Chambers of the Constituent Entities of the Russian Federation and Public Authorities. – Constitutional and Municipal law. No. 15. P. 13-17. (In Russ.)

Grib V.V. 2010. The Public Chamber of the Russian Federation as Public Authority. – The Legal World. No. 3. P. 32-40. (In Russ.)

Nezdyurov A.L., Sungurov A.Yu. 2008. Interaction of Authorities and Civil Society Structures: Possible Models and their Implementation in the Socio-Political Life of Modern Russia. – Factors of Development of Civil Society and Mechanisms of Its Interaction with the State. Ed. by L.I. Jacobson. Moscow: Vershina. P. 209-236. (In Russ.)

Petrov N.V. 2006. Public Chamber: for the Government or for the Public? – Pro et Contra. Vol. 10. No. 1. P. 40-58. (In Russ.)

Schmitter F. 1997. Neocorporatism. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 2. P. 14-22.

Sergeev S.G. 2010. Obshchestvennaya palata: opyt strukturirovaniya vnekonstitutsionnogo politicheskogo instituta [Public Chamber: the Experience of Structuring an Extra-Constitutional Political Institution]. – Politicheskie mekhanizmy upravleniya natsional’noi periferiei: otechestvennyi i zarubezhnyi opyt [Political Mechanisms of Managing the National Periphery: Domestic and Foreign Experience]. Saransk: Mordovian State University. P. 191-203. (In Russ.)

Sungurov A.Yu., Zakharova O.S., Petrova L.A., Raspopov N.P. 2012. Mediator Institutions and Their Development in Contemporary Russia. 1. Public Chambers and Consultative Councils: Federal and Regional Experience. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 1. P. 165-178. (In Russ.) URL: https://www.politstudies.ru/article/4523 (accessed 24.03.2020).

Tarasenko A.V. 2010. The Activities of Public Chambers in the Regions of Russia: Efficiency vs Fictitiousness. – Politeia. No. 1. S. 80-88. (In Russ.)

Volkov V. 1997. Public: Forgotten Practice of Civil Society. – Pro at Contra. Vol. 2. No. 4. P. 77-91. (In Russ.)

Zelensky P.A. 2019. Some Features of the Legal Regulation of Public Control in Russia. – Modernization of State and Municipal Government: Concepts, Technologies, Practices. Saratov: Povolzhsky Institute of Management named after P.A. Stolypin. P. 181-184. (In Russ.) 

Content No. 3, 2020

See also:


Sungurov A.Yu., Zakharova O.S., Petrova L.A., Raspopov N.P.,
Mediator institutions and their development in contemporary Russia. 1. Public chambers and consultative councils: federal and regional experience. – Polis. Political Studies. 2012. No1

Sungurov A.Yu., Raspopov N.P., Belyayev A.Yu.,
Mediatory institutions and their development in contemporary Russia. Part II. Think tanks and public policy centers. – Polis. Political Studies. 2012. No4

Nikovskaya L.I., Yakimets V.N.,
Estimation of effectiveness of public policy institutions in Russia. – Polis. Political Studies. 2013. No5

Sungurov A.Yu., Raspopov N.P., Glukhova E.A.,
Mediator institutes and their development in contemporary Russia. III. Ombudsman institute. – Polis. Political Studies. 2013. No2

Nikovskaya L.I., Yakimets V.N.,
Institutional Development of Cross-sectoral Partnership in Russia. – Polis. Political Studies. 2016. No5

 
 

Archive

   2022      2021   
   2020      2019      2018      2017      2016   
   2015      2014      2013      2012      2011   
   2010      2009      2008      2007      2006   
   2005      2004      2003      2002      2001   
   2000      1999      1998      1997      1996   
   1995      1994      1993      1992      1991