z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Bureaucratic patronage and patterns of administrative recruitment of regional elites in Russia: a comparative network analysis
Author(s) -
К В Мельников
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
političeskaâ nauka
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1998-1775
DOI - 10.31249/poln/2021.04.09
Subject(s) - bureaucracy , cohesion (chemistry) , variety (cybernetics) , social network analysis , politics , diversity (politics) , promotion (chess) , state (computer science) , political science , sociology , regional science , positive economics , social science , economics , computer science , law , social capital , chemistry , organic chemistry , artificial intelligence , algorithm
The significance of informal practices and institutions in political and economic life in Russia has been largely recognized by a variety of research fields within social sciences. As existing literature shows, informal deformation also affects state bureaucracy including the recruitment process into the highest executive agencies. Patronage ties are more than merely individual deviation. Its systematic nature necessitates considering it as a network structure, which can be done through the theoretical tools provided by Social Network Analysis. Based on existing approaches to the quantification of patronage ties, the author proposes a new perspective, which comprises studying them as a model of a weighted graph. The patronage ties can differ significantly in terms of their stability and power, and researchers might take this diversity into account when analyzing patronage networks. To this end, the author proposes the patronage tie index comprising three parameters, namely the duration of a shared work experience, its frequency, and the fact of promotion. Relying on these assumptions and on the basis of systematic biographical analysis, the author examines the structure of patronage networks within two of Russia’s regions, namely Perm Krai and Chelyabinsk Oblast. The analysis shows that it is difficult to discern the general pattern of the structuring of such networks. These are different in terms of degrees of cohesion and centralization. The matching of the network positions with the types of official positions does not reveal the general pattern either. Presumably, the specific models can be explained by the individual strategies available for particular leaders.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here