№ 3, 2015
The article continues the series of works by the author devoted to the study of processes of formation of the institution of property in Russia (see Politeia, 2009, № 4; Politeia, 2013, № 4) and attempts to analyze the transformation of the system of property rights in the late Soviet Union from 1985 to 1991. It is those years that witnessed the disintegration of the property institution formed in the USSR and birth of the system of property rights that was established in the post-Soviet Russia.
№ 4, 2013
This article examines the processes of formation and transformation of the property rights institution in the post-Soviet Russia. The analysis conducted by the author shows that the 1990s witnessed a real chance of creating an efficient institution of property. However, neither the “power” nor the “business” that prioritized short-term interests associated with the distribution of state property as opposed to long-term benefits from having a well-specified and well-secured system of property rights, made a request for its formation. The problem of isolating “society” from defining rules of the game on this field was of no less importance. “Business” did not view “society” as a strategic partner, which ultimately left it one on one with the strengthening state and allowed the “power” that relied on the coercive resource to unilaterally change the configuration of the functioning regime of institution of property.
№ 4, 2009
On the basis of the hypothesis that the economic problems in modern Russia are rooted in the specific characteristics of the existing property institution that in their turn are determined by the special features of its political regime, A.Maryin-Ostrovsky offers and substantiates a methodological approach that allows to follow the connection between political and economic spheres. The analysis he conducted demonstrates that although the Russian political regime possesses a rather strong potential for exerting influence over the institutional environment setting up social and economic parameters of the country’s development, this potential is being realized through the interaction between different actors rather than through a specific state policy. According to the author’s conclusion, today Russia has the bureaucratic regime with one dominating actor, but the dynamic of the institutional changes observed throughout the last years is not strictly determined and can be substantially altered if the dominating actor rejects the strategy of single-handed institutional changes and signals its readiness for the public dialogue with the society and business.
Main Page ~ Authors ~ Maryin-Ostrovsky Andrei