Russian Expert Community and Government: Main Forms of Interaction

Russian Expert Community and Government: Main Forms of Interaction

Sungurov A.Yu.,

Dr. Sci. (Pol. Sci.), Professor, Head of Department of Applied Political Science, National Research University Higher School of Economics, St. Petersburg,

elibrary_id: 615464 |

Karyagin M.E.,

doctoral student, Department of Applied Political Science, National Research University Higher School of Economics, St. Petersburg.,

elibrary_id: 864979 |

DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2017.03.10
Rubric: Russia Today

For citation:

Sungurov A.Yu., Karyagin M.E. Russian Expert Community and Government: Main Forms of Interaction. – Polis. Political Studies. 2017. No. 3. P. 144-159. (In Russ.).


The main forms of interaction of the power institutions and the representatives of the expert community are considered in the article, namely the three models of interaction: a linearly-autonomous model, a model of virtuous reason, and a “model of the prepaid result” developed by the authors. The research included ten expert trips to different Russian regions and about 40 expert interviews with respondents from the expert community, governmental structures, NGOs and mass-media. Four focus-groups were organized in Ekaterinburg, Kazan, Nizhniy Novgorod and Saratov, formed from the same categories as respondents of expert interviews. It is shown that in the contemporary Russia, the activities of numerous expert councils established at governmental agencies of different levels mostly implement the symbolic function of expert knowledge. We explain this by inclusion to this expert council of so called ‘status’ experts with high positions in the hierarchy of ruling bodies of academician institutes or universities. When acting publically, most members of such councils are ready to “play the same game” as the representatives of the regional authorities, hereby confirming the effectiveness of their power and absence of serious unsolved problems in the region. The instrumental function, in turn, is implemented mainly in the form of individual orders for experts placed by the authorities in the framework of the linear autonomous model: firstly, experts autonomously prepare their conclusions and recommendations; secondly, representatives of authorities take their decisions taking into account the received information (also autonomously from the experts). 

expert community; policy-making; instrumental and symbolic functions of expert knowledge; regimes power-knowledge; Russian regions.


Analiticheskie soobschestva v publichnoy politike. Otv. red. N.Yu. Belyaeva [Analytical Communities in Public Policy. Ed. by N.Yu. Belyaeva]. Moscow: RAPN, ROSSPEN. 2012. 253 p. (In Russ.)

Ashkerov A.Yu. Expertokratiya. Upravleniye znaniyami: proizvodstvo i obraschenie informatsii v epokhu ultrakapitalizma [Expertocration. Management of Knowledge: Production and Exchange of Information in the Time of Ultra-Capitalism]. Moscow: Europe. 2009. 170 p. (In Russ.)

Boswell С. The Political Functions of Expert Knowledge: Knowledge and Legitimation in European Union Immigration Policy. – Journal of European Public Policy. 2008. Vol. 15. No. 4. P. 4721-4788.

Brown M.B. The Politics of Representation on Government Advisory Committees. – Political Research Quarterly. 2008. Vol. 61. No. 4. P. 547-560. DOI:

Christiano T. Rational Deliberation among Experts and Citizens. – Deliberative Systems. Ed. by J. Parkinson, J. Mansbridge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2012. P. 27-51.

Collins H., Evans R. Rethinking Expertise. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press. 2007. 159 p. DOI:

Grundmann R., Shter N. Vlast’ nauchnogo znaniya [Power of Scientific Knowledge]. Saint Petersburg: Aleteya. 2015. 324 p. (In Russ.)

Guston D.H. Boundary Organizations in Environmental Policy and Science: An introduction. – Science, Technology, & Human Values. 2001. Vol. 26. No. 4. P. 399-408. DOI:

Hunter A., Boswell C. Comparing the Political Functions of Independent Commissions: the Case of UK Migrant Integration Policy. – Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice. 2015. Vol. 17. No. 1. P. 10-25.

Jasanoff S. Quality Control and Peer Review in Advisory Science. – The Politics of Scientific Advice: Institutional Design for Quality Assurance. Ed. by J. Lentsch, P. Weingart. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2011. P.19-35.

Kozhanov A.A., Polyakova V.V. Analiz vliyania sotsialnykh izmeneniy na transformatsiyu instituta expertizy: rol’ experta v epokhu globalizatsii [Analysis of Influence of Social Changes at the Transformation of Institute of Expertise: Role of Expert in the Time of Globalization]. – Globalizatsiya i sotsialnye instituty: sotsiologicheskiy podhod [Globalization and Social Institutions: Sociological Approach]. Moscow: Nauka. 2010. P. 241-260. (In Russ.)

Kosolapov N. Politics, Expertise, Society: the Nodes of Mutual Dependence. – Pro et Contra. 2003. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 18-31. (In Russ.)

Makarychev A.S. Projective Networks, Transfer of Knowledge and Idea of ‘Learning Region’. – Pro et Contra. 2003. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 32-48. (In Russ.)

Makarychev A.S. States, Expert Communities and Regimes of Knowledge-Power. – Political Science. 2015. No. 3. P. 9-26. (In Russ.)

Medvetz T. Murky Power: ‘‘Think Tanks’’ as Boundary Organizations. – Rethinking Power in Organizations, Institutions, and Markets Research in the Sociology of Organizations. 2012. Vol. 34. P. 113-133. DOI:

Merlingen M. Foucault and World Politics: Promises and Challenges of Extending Governmentality Theory to the European and Beyond. – Millenium: Journal of international studies. 2006. Vol. 36. No. 1. P. 181-196.

Mitroshenkov O.A. Political Management and Expertise. – Upravlenie megapolisom. 2009. No. 1. P. 100-126. (In Russ.)

Patzelt W.J. Metody politicheskoj nauki [Methods of Political Science]. – Shubert K., Konegen N. Metodicheskie podhody politologicheskogo issledovaniya i metateoreticheskie osnovy politicheskoj teorii. Kommentirovannoe vvedenie [Shubert K., Konegen N. Methodical Approaches of a Political Study and Metatheoretical Bases of the Political Theory. Introduction]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. 2004. P. 133-165. (In Russ.)

The Politics of Scientific Advice: Institutional Design for Quality Assurance. Ed. by J. Lentsch, P. Weingart. 2011. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 381 p.

Sungurov A.Yu. Kak vosnikayut politicheskie innovatsii: fabriki mysly i drugiye instituty-mediatory [How Political Innovations are Emerge: Think Tanks and other Mediator Institutes]. Moscow: Political Entsiclopedia. 2015. 383 p. (In Russ.)

Sungurov A.Yu. Expert Communities and Political Authority: Interaction Models, Main Functions and Conditions of their Realization. – Political Science (RU). 2015. No. 3. P. 53-70. (In Russ.)

Volynkina L.A. Politicheskaya expertiza kak factor politicheskogo processa. Avtoreferat diss. kand. polit. nauk: 23.00.02 [Political Expertise as a Factor of Political Process. Thesis of PhD Dissertation]. Saratov. 2011. 23 p. (In Russ.) 

Content No. 3, 2017

See also:

Sungurov A.Yu.,
Expert Community and Power: Models of Interaction and Problems of Civil Responsibility. – Polis. Political Studies. 2018. No4

Round Table of the «Polis» Journal, Gaman-Golutvina O.V., Avdonin V.S., Sergeyev S.A., Chernikova V.V., Sidenko O.A., Sokolov A.V., Evdokimov N.A., Tupaev A.V., Slatinov V.B., Zhukov I.K., Kozlova N.N., Rassadin S.V., Chugrov S.V.,
Regional political processes: how «subjective» are subjects of the RF. – Polis. Political Studies. 2013. No5

Sungurov A.Yu.,
Expert community, think tanks and power: experience of three regions. – Polis. Political Studies. 2014. No2

Karyagin M.E., Sungurov A.Yu.,
Contemporary Russian Political Science Community – the First Steps to the Analysis. – Polis. Political Studies. 2016. No2

Smorgunov L.V., Pavroz A.V.,
Political Decision Making: Theory and Methodology. – Polis. Political Studies. 2005. No4

Screen version