The Relevance of the Neo-Institutional Method in the Analysis of Formalized Activities in Russian Modern Domestic Politics


如何引用文章

全文:

开放存取 开放存取
受限制的访问 ##reader.subscriptionAccessGranted##
受限制的访问 订阅或者付费存取

详细

The main task in the article is to describe the conditions for an effective domestic policy of the Russian Federation. The authors justified the neo-institutional method as the most effective for analysis. Several institutional practices of domestic policy are described based on this method. The trends in the development of Russia’s domestic policy are proved with the help of neo-institutionalism. The authors conclude that neo-institutionalism can explain the interdependence between public trust, opportunistic behavior, and the incorrect operation of political institutions. Transaction costs can be reduced by improving institutional practices. The authors proposed a model of social behavior. This model will facilitate the reproduction of institutional relations by political actors.

全文:

受限制的访问

作者简介

Irina Orlova

Institute of Public Administration and Civil Service of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Email: iv.orlova@igsu.ru
Dr. Sci. (Philos.), Professor; Professor at the Department of UNESCO Moscow, Russian Federation

Alexey Borisenkov

Institute of Public Administration and Civil Service of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Email: borisenkov-aa@ranepa.ru
Deputy Dean at the Faculty of Public and Municipal Administration Moscow, Russian Federation

Pavel Ulyankin

Institute of Public Administration and Civil Service of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Email: pavel.not2012@mail.ru
Master’s degree Moscow, Russian Federation

参考

  1. Buchanan J. The constitution of economic policy. Voprosy economici. 1994. No. 6. (In Rus.)
  2. Gulbina N.I. D. North’s theory of institutional changes. Bulletin of Tomsk State University. 2004. No. 283. Pp. 123-128. (In Rus.)
  3. Dahlman C.J. The problem of externality. Journal of Law and Economics. 1979. No. 22. Pp. 141-162. (In Rus.)
  4. Irkhin Yu.V. Institutionalism and neo-institutionalism: Directions and possibilities of analysis. Socio-humanitarian Knowledge. 2012. No. 1. Pp. 58-77. (In Rus.)
  5. Kose R. Firm. Market. Pravo. Moscow: Delo, 1993. 192 p.
  6. Levi M. Logic of institutional changes. In: Limits of rationality. K.S. Cook, M. Levy (eds.). Chicago, 1990.
  7. March J., Olsen J. Development of a “New Institutionalism”. Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions. R. Rhodes, S.A. Binder, B. Rockman (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
  8. North D. Institutes, institutional changes and functioning of the economy. Moscow: Foundation of the Economic Book “Beginnings”, 1997. 180 p. (Modern institutional and evolutionary theory). ISBN: 5-88581-006-0.
  9. North D.S. Institutes and economic growth: A historical introduction. World Development. 1989. Vol. 17. Pp. 1319-1332.
  10. Nureyev R.M. Theory of public choice: A course of lectures. Moscow: Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics, 2005. 478 p.
  11. Nureyev R.M. James Buchanan and the theory of public choice. In: Essays. Transl. from English. R.M. Nureyev (ed.). Moscow: Taurus Alpha, 1997. Pp. 445-482.
  12. Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions. R.A.W. Rhodes, S.A. Binder, B.A. Rockman (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. 816 p.
  13. Panov P.V. Institutionalism(s): explanatory models and causality. Polis. Political Studies. 2015. No. 3. Pp. 39-55. doi: 10.17976/jpps/2015.03.09. (In Rus.)
  14. Patrushev S.V., Aivazova S.G., Gvozdeva E.A. et al. Institutional political science: Modern institutionalism and political transformation of Russia. Moscow: Institute of Comparative Political Science, 2006. 586 p. ISBN: 5-89930-100-7.
  15. Skarzhinskaya E.M., Tsurikov V.I. Modeling of collective actions: The significance of cooperative agreements. Russian Journal of Management. 2019. Vol. 17. No. 3. Pp. 337-366. doi: 10.21638/spbu18.2019.303. (In Rus.)
  16. Sukharev O.S. Expanding the positions of new institutionalism in the context of the Coase theorem. Journal of Economic Theory. 2019. Vol. 16. No. 2. Pp. 249-261. doi: 10.31063/2073-6517/2019.16-2.7. In Rus.)
  17. Ulanovsky A.M. Constructivism, radical constructivism, social constructionism: The world as an interpretation. Questions of Psychology. 2009. No. 2. Pp. 35-45. (In Rus.)
  18. Fligstein N. Fields, power and social skills: A critical analysis of new institutionalisms. Journal of Economic Sociology. 2001. Vol. 2. No. 1. Pp. 4-25. (In Rus.)

补充文件

附件文件
动作
1. JATS XML
下载


##common.cookie##