UDK 32 Политика
The article introduces the problems of political, institutional, and ethnopolitical processes using the case of the Republic of Tyva. The research featured latent and low-formalized structures that affect the regional political regime and political processes in Russian regions. The research objective was to analyze the influence of such latent structures of power and administration on the regional political regime in the Republic of Tyva. As a general methodological principle, the authors used the polyparadigmatic approach, as well as neo-institutional and poststructuralist methodology. The authors performed a quantitative and qualitative political analysis of five research projects based on questionnaires (2016–2020). The projects belonged to the Department of Applied Sociology and Political Science of the Tyva Institute of Humanitarian and Applied Socio-Economic Research. The analysis also included 23 in-depth expert surveys from 16 focus groups conducted in all areas of the republic. Formal institutions in ethno-national regions of Russia turned out to be incongruous to the modernization processes. They proved to have been replaced by clientele and parantella patterns, where institutional relations are just a by-product of money distribution among the dominant interest groups. However, the authors believe that Sh. V. Kara-ool managed to stabilize internal ethnopolitical processes in the Tyva Republic. The research results can help improve local policy in ethnic regions.
political regionalism, parantella, clientele, ethnopolitology, political process, political technologies, political culture, neo-patrimonialism, political geography
1. Lamazhaa Ch. K. Tuva between the past and the future. Moscow: Voskhod-A, 2008, 497. (In Russ.)
2. Sharafutdinova G., Turovsky R. F. The politics of federal transfers in Putin's Russia: regional competition, lobbying, and federal priorities. Post-Soviet Affairs, 2017, 33(2): 161–175. DOI: 10.1080/1060586X.2016.1163826
3. Sabirova N. S. Model of political culture of modern Russia. Vlast, 2020, 28(6): 146–150. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.31171/vlast.v28i6.7741
4. Turovsky R. F., Dzhavatova K. Yu. Regional disparity in Russia: can centralization become a remedy? Political science (RU), 2019, (2): 48–73. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.31249/poln/2019.02.03
5. Moskalenko N. P. Ethnopolitical history of Tuva in the XX century. Moscow: Nauka, 2004, 221. (In Russ.)
6. Lamazhaa Ch. K. Clannishness in the politics of the regions of Russia. Tuvan rulers. St. Petersburg: Aleteiia, 2010, 206. (In Russ.)
7. Gelman V. Ya. The vicious circle of Post-Soviet neopatrimonialism. Obshchesvennye nauki i sovremennost', 2015, (6): 34–44. (In Russ.)
8. Chirun S. N. Consensus (network) corruption and problems of effectiveness of state policy. Current issues of scientific support for the state anti-corruption policy in the Russian Feredation: Proc. III All-Russian Sci. Conf. with Intern. Participation, Ekaterinburg, 26–27 Oct, 2018. Ekaterinburg, 2019, 91–110. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17506/articles.anticorruption.2018.91110
9. Ochur A. M. Impact of regional mass media on motivation of electoral behavior. Cand. Polit. Sci. Diss. Moscow, 2005, 145. (In Russ.)
10. Antukh G. G., Gukova A. V., Petrenko A. N. The paradox of ego-identity: from person to nation. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya, 2020, (55): 47–58. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17223/1998863X/55/6
11. Balakina G. F., Anaiban Z. V. Modern Tuva: sociocultural and ethnic processes, ed. Kalugina Z. I. Novosibirsk: Nauka. Sib. izd. firma, 1995, 137. (In Russ.)
12. Dorzhu Z. Yu. Public organizations and political parties of modern Tuva. Etnosotsialnye protsessy v Sibiri, 2001, iss. 4, 235–238. (In Russ.)
13. Sardaryan G. T., Alekseyeva T. A. Secularization and religiousness in the optics of constructivism. Polis. Political Studies, 2020, (4): 124–138. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2020.04.09
14. Pain E. A., Fediunin S. Yu. Populism and elitism in contemporary Russia. Polis. Political Studies, 2019, (1): 33–48. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2019.01.04
15. Patrushev S. V. Clickocracy order as an institutional trap of Russian modernization. Polis. Political Studies, 2011, (6): 120–133. (In Russ.)
16. Patrushev S. V. Clickocracy as an institutional problem of Russian modernization. Power and politics: institutional challenges of the XXI century, ed. Solovev A. I. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2012, 279–298. (In Russ.)
17. Turovsky R. F., Gaivoronsky Yu. O. Russia's regions as winners and losers: political motives and outcomes in the distribution of federal government transfers. European Politics and Society, 2017, 18(4): 529–551.
18. Reutov E. V., Zakharov V. M., Polukhin O. N., Reutova M. N., Shavyrina I. V. The territorial factor of the life opportunities inequality in Russian society: the provincial perspective. Vlast, 2020, 28(5): 25–33. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.31171/vlast.v28i5.7563
19. Ross C., Turovsky R. F. Centralized but fragmented: the regional dimension of Russia's "party of power". Demokratizatsiya, 2015, 23(2): 205–223.
20. Turovsky R. F. Regional political regimes in modern Russia: a comparative study. Vestnik RGNF, 2013, (1): 73–82. (In Russ.)
21. Gaman-Golutvina O. V., Smorgunov L. V, Timofeeva L. N. The trajectories of political development of Russia. Vlast, 2020, 28(4), 253–258. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.31171/vlast.v28i4.7472
22. Turovsky R. F. The systemic opposition in authoritarian regimes: a case study of Russia's regions. The systemic and non-systemic opposition in the Russian Federation: national and regional dimensions, ed. C. Ross. London: Ashgate, 2015, 121–137.
23. Chirun S. N. Problems of the functioning of the regional political regime on the example of Kemerovo oblast. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya, 2018, (44): 253–268. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17223/1998863X/44/24
24. Chirun S. N., Nikolaev A. V., Bobrova E. A., Lutsyk A. S., Shmit E. O. Interaction with regional authorities on the example of the Kemerovo region: problems and technologies. Vlast, 2018, 26(7): 33–38. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.31171/vlast.v26i7.5927
25. Belousov A. B. Paradoxes of the power vertical: retrospection, imagination, trauma. Polis. Political Studies, 2020, (6): 173–180. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2020.06.13
26. Seregina T. N Models of intercultural communication. Vlast, 2020, 28(1): 119–124. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.31171/vlast.v28i1.7062
27. Kochetkov A. P., Moiseev V. V. Russian political elite as a subject of socioeconomic policy. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya, 2020, (57): 244–256. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17223/1998863X/57/23
28. Selezneva A. V. Conceptual and methodological foundations of the political-psychological analysis of political values. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya, 2019, (49): 177–192. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17223/1998863X/49/18
29. Melnikov K. V. Neopatrimonialism: classification as a way of overcoming the conceptual stretching. Polis. Political Studies, 2018, (2): 68–81. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2018.02.06
30. Palitay I. S., Danilova A. S. Regional leaders of the new generation: results of a political-psychological analysis. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya, 2020, (54): 252–262. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17223/1998863X/54/23