Determinants of the Policy Impact of Analytical Communities in Russian Regions: Cases of Karelia, Tatarstan and Saratov

Dmitry Zaytsev,Nina Belyaeva

doi:10.1515/cejpp-2016-0033

Abstract

Abstract This paper evaluates the policy impact of analytical communities in three Russian regions (Karelia, Tatarstan and Saratov). Based on the existing methods to assess the political power of think tanks, the authors develop a method to evaluate this impact. The authors test this method using the empirical data and findings from interviews, workshops with representatives of analytical communities of the three regions, and from observations and assessments of experts in regional politics. In conclusion, the authors argue that the capacity of analytical communities to impact policy change in a region depends on the level of political competition and pluralism and democratic institutions in the region; the level of consolidation of the analytical community, its autonomous political status and authority.

Highlights

The consideration of policy making as a top-down process, as an activity exclusively or primarily of state and municipal authorities, overlooks the effect of non-state actors on the policy making process such as NGO’s, associations of business, and think tanks
We argue that the policy impact of analytical communities is determined by the level of their consolidation, the autonomy of members of the analytical community, and by the broad contextual factors
The opinions collected during the workshops and the findings discussed above allow us to conclude that analysts of Tatarstan participate more in the work of consultative and advisory structures at regional authority level, while the Karelian analytical community prefer to participate in discussion events

Summary

INTRODUCTION

The consideration of policy making as a top-down process, as an activity exclusively or primarily of state and municipal authorities, overlooks the effect of non-state actors on the policy making process such as NGO’s, associations of business, and think tanks. Policy specialists exist in other types of political regime but not necessarily represented by such kinds of organizations as think tanks and communities as ‘boundary workers’ or ‘knowledge brokers’ Because of these, both in regions and municipalities, and in non-western societies, the same person or community, depending on the situation, can fulfil different roles (produce knowledge, brokerage, boundary work, expertise in particular policy domain or of special policy issue, etc.). The following types of subject of evaluation (what to assess) can be figured out: the position, reputation, influence including the activity in mass-media and parliament, and the impact on strategic planning and policy making (policy impact) Those types are associated with three approaches in political theory to define political leaders, who can govern, have power, and can influence. Because such research design would be too costly, we claim for the researcher to choose at least two out of three above mentioned types of information

Frequency of appearance at parliamentary hearings and testimonies

Research coordinators in the regions

See link 3

Findings

Conclusion