Russian Federalism Research Articles

Opportunities for Decentralization in a Pandemic Year: What Does Budget Analysis Show?

—In the year of the pandemic, assistance to Russian regional budgets increased by more than 1.5 times, which ensured an increase in budget revenues in the vast majority of regions, but led to a significant increase in dependence on federal assistance. In the structure of aid, the share of targeted transfers (subsidies and subventions) increased, so the possibility of maneuvering budget resources for regions has decreased. Regions are forced to spend additional aid mainly on top-prescribed goals, which has led to a further increase in centralization of management. The transparency of allocation of transfers to regions worsened, and the amount of additional aid did not depend on the reduction of own revenues of regional budgets. Before the pandemic, priority “geopolitical” regions had received special support; for 2020, it is much more difficult to explain the distribution of aid due to the uncoordinated allocation of transfers by different federal ministries for different purposes. In the past, budgetary federalism in Russia had manifested itself only in a certain freedom of choice by the regional authorities in spending priorities, but in 2020, this was even less. Health care and, almost everywhere, social security of the population became an overall priority, since transfers were significantly added for these purposes. Regarding other types of expenditures, the priorities of regions differed, but most of them subsidized fees for housing and communal services and increased spending on the national economy to meet the targets of the presidential decree. Hopes for decentralization of the Russian system of government during the pandemic were not realized; in interbudgetary relations, the degree of regional dependence on the federal authorities increased.

Российский этнофедерализм: становление и перспективы развития

Introduction. The authors analyze the peculiarities of the formation, evolution and prospects of Russian ethnofederalism, based on the achievements of Russian and Western researchers. Methods and materials. Along with classical approaches to the nature of ethnofederalism, the authors proceed from the concept that relations between the elites of the center and the regions in the Russian Federation are based on the so-called “incomplete contract”, which is characterized by the absence of guarantees for its implementation. Analysis. This political practice comes as a source of the elites desire to change the distribution of power and resources in their favor while the Constitution remains unchanged, the “pendulum” nature of relations along the “federal center – regions” line. In modern Russia federalism does not have a value dimension, both for the elites of the center and the elites of most regions, and it remains a purely instrumental concept. The authors build their analysis of interethnic relations and the prospects of ethnic federalism in Russia, proceeding not from any ideal model, but starting from the existing ethnic political reality with its already existing imperfect institutions of ethnic federalism. At the same time, a differentiated approach is used to assess the correlation between federalism and ethnicity. Results. The authors come to the conclusion that, despite the numerous shortcomings of the ethnic model of federalism (organizational complexity, special requirements for political elites, asymmetry with its inherent “injustice”, etc.), there is no real alternative to it in Russia.

Идея Уральской Республики в период государственной трансформации Российской Федерации

Introduction. The phenomenon of the Ural Republic in the context of the Russian Federation federal model of state structure formation in 1993 is studied. The process of the Russian federalism model development at this stage was complicated by a whole complex of problems and contradictions. The movement of the regional authorities in the Sverdlovsk region to create the Ural Republic in the context of the Russian post-Soviet model of the Federal structure is considered. Methods and materials. The archival materials of the Presidential Executive Office of Russia and state authorities of the Sverdlovsk region are the key sources of the research. The main group of materials for the article preparation consists of analytical notes reflecting the views of the current authorities on the nature of the state-territorial structure and fixing the expert and analytical view of the higher state authorities on the developing processes dynamics and the risks associated with them. Analysis. The process of the Ural Republic creation consisting of several stages is analyzed: forming an idea and holding a regional survey on equalizing the powers of the region with the republics; an attempt to offer its views on the federal structure at the Constitutional Assembly and to implement its achievements into the draft Constitution of the Russian Federation; the announcement of the Ural Republic creation by the leadership of the Sverdlovsk region, the establishment and protection of its position; abolition of the Ural Republic. Results. The Ural Republic phenomenon had some influence on the constitutional project development, but its elimination prevented not only the risks of so-called regional separatism, but also a potentially large state transformation, which consisted in the emergence of more independent regions, the formation of a new regional policy.

Features of budgetary federalism in Russia

Features of budgetary federalism in Russia

Regional Disparities and Fiscal Federalism in Russia

Regional Disparities and Fiscal Federalism in Russia

Judicial Federalism in Russia: the Newest Milestone of Constitutional Evolution

Judicial Federalism in Russia: the Newest Milestone of Constitutional Evolution

Non-Spiral Development of Domestic Federalism (to readers)

The establishment of the Russian Federation as a sovereign, democratic, federal state caused a surge of interest in searching ways of transition from a formal model of federal relations of the Soviet type to a real model of such relations. The journal Federalism was created 25 years ago to provide a platform for everyone willing express their opinion on this issue. Discussions on its pages continue to this day, despite the fact that the model of national statehood implemented in the country is far from real-federal. However, the fact that the discussion continues shows that the problem of the development of federal relations and regional policy in a country with such a highly complex socio-economic and ethnocultural space is relevant. In this introduction to the readers, the author do not set the task of a detailed presentation of the position on current problems and prospects of Russian federalism. The aim is to show that regional economies require operational management, which cannot always be carried out from the Center. And therefore, the limitation of the powers of the authorities and administrations of the constituent entities of the Federation in this area accompanied by the impossibility of effective control over what is happening from the Center, inevitably makes large business a key figure in this management. This, given the preservation of the “wild” nature of the domestic market, may become an obstacle to strengthening the unity of the country’s economic space.

Constitutional Changes and a New Stage of Russian Federalism Development

The amendments and additions to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993, approved by popular vote, should be considered as the significant advance in the development of the legal foundations of the Russian state, including a wide range of issues, related to the Russian model of federalism and its implementation in the practice of state and municipal administration. These changes can hardly be regarded as one of the stages of the federal reform, especially since the final goals of this reform were not clearly stated earlier and even now remain very uncertain. Nevertheless, as it’s shown in the article, some of these changes can have a significant impact on the nature and mechanism of functioning of the Russian federal state, in particular, on the activities of state and municipal government bodies. The article suggests that constitutional changes and additions in 2020 can significantly strengthen the democratic and social nature of the state. At the same time, it’s argued that these changes should not be given the status of “finiteness”. It is obvious that the federal reform in the country, no matter how it is regarded, has not exhausted its potential, which in the foreseeable future may give an impetus to the further development of the legal foundations of Russian federalism, including the sphere of its constitutional regulation.

A system of spatially connected federalism based on regional specialization

The relevance of the article is due to the need to develop a model of federalism in Russia in the context of the existing problem of asymmetry of territorial development, which has not yet been eliminated by the current federal policy. The problem of the asymmetry of Russian regions is caused by a variety of natural, industrial, ethnic, social, and geographical conditions. This entails an asymmetry of economic and budgetary indicators: gross regional product, investments, revenues and expenditures of regional budgets. As a reason for the ineffectiveness of the pursued policy of federalism, the authors highlight a single universal approach in relations between the federal center and the regions. The article proposes a transition from a universal model to a model that considers the specialization of regions. This model is based on the principles of "smart specialization", in which each region is assigned a special role in the functioning of the state. The proposed model is called by the authors "spatially binding economic federalism» because it provides for the regulation of federalism relations along the horizontal state structure and allows increasing the spatial connectivity of regions. Thus, the proposed model of federalism is based on a differentiated approach to territories within a single federal state and makes it possible to overcome the significant disintegration of the country's economic space.

Федерализм: ключевые вопросы историко-экономической формулы успеха Российского государства

The author attempts to find a historical and economic formula for the success of Russian federalism, a symbolic record of the statement which would optimize the distribution of power between the center and the regions.

Fiscal federalism in Russia: To be or not to be?

The ratio of the total volume of taxes coming from the territory to the budget system of the country and the expenses of the territorial budget illustrates the fundamental possibility or impossibility of forming intergovernmental relations in the spirit of fiscal federalism. The article tests its initial message: tax and non-tax revenues produced by the territory (given the administrative-territorial division of the country) should be, at minimum, sufficient to balance the budget and solve regional budget problems. It is shown that at present in 40% of Russian regions total revenues are enough to ensure budget surplus, the participation of these regions in solving national problems. In the remaining 60% of the regions, all revenues from the territory to the budget system are not able to balance budget revenues and expenses. The picture of intergovernmental relations was fundamentally changed, because in most regions that had deficit budgets in 2015, revenues in 2018 began to exceed expenses. The paper considers the opportunities to qualitatively change the state of regional budgets.

Institute of federal territories in the Russian Federation (by the case of the federal territory "Sirius")

The aim of this article is to analyze the federal territories which have become an element of Russian federalism in accordance with the latest revision of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.The objectives of the study include an analysis of the territorial nature of the federal state in its geographical and political and territorial relations; study of foreign experience in the functioning of federal te rritories in their species diversity; study of the status of the first federal territory "Sirius", as having the national strategic importance of public legal education, including its goal, the legal basis of activities, the territory, the organization of public authority, the implementation of local self-government. The research methodology includes both the general scientific methods of cognition and private scientific means: a formal legal, comparative legal, systemic, whose combination has allowed to characterize the federal territory as a new and significant phenomenon of Russian federalism. The originality of the study is predetermined by the novelty of the institute of the federal territory, which first received constitutional recognition in Russia. The results of the study include the formulation of scientific and practical proposals for the construction of mechanisms for the formation of federal territories in Russia, taking into account the rights and interests of the subjects of the Russian Federation. The study is accompanied by conclusions arising from the analysis of the Institute of Federal Territories and its implementation in Russia, in particular, the definition of a federal territory as an element of Russian federalism, which characterizes the political and territorial construction of the Russian Federation; determination of the federal territory as a separate and independent part of the territory of the Russian Federation, a special territorial element of the Federal Device of Russia; the need to adopt a model law on federal territories determining the mechanism for the allocation of the federal territory from the subject of the federation, the general principles for the construction and organization of the federal territory, the system of its bodies, interaction with federal and regional authorities; Availability of public authorities in the territory of public-legal education "Sirius" of signs of both government agencies and a local government body, their belonging to the independent type of public authorities.

To the question of the problems of the legal nature of Federalism in Russia

To the question of the problems of the legal nature of Federalism in Russia

ВОЗМОЖНОСТИ ДЕЦЕНТРАЛИЗАЦИИ В ГОД ПАНДЕМИИ: ЧТО ПОКАЗЫВАЕТ БЮДЖЕТНЫЙ АНАЛИЗ?

In the year of the pandemic transfers from the federal to the regional budgets increased by 50 per cent which led to an increase in budget revenues in most regions and made regional budgets more dependent on federal support. The proportion of earmarked transfers (subventions and subsidies) increased, making reassignment of budgetary funds difficult. The regions were forced to spend additional money on designated projects only, which resulted in further centralisation of budget management. The transfer calculation became less transparent, additional transfers were not linked to the decrease in regional budgets’ own revenues. Before the pandemic, «geopolitically» important regions had been prioritised for federal transfers. In 2020 interpretation of transfer distribution became much more difficult due to the lack of coordination between various federal ministries in their transfer calculations. Budget federalism in Russia had been limited to some freedom in choosing expenditure priorities for the regions, but in the year of the pandemic these opportunities dwindled. Health expenditure and social protectionbecame common priorities because a lot of additional transfers were earmarked for these purposes. Other regional priorities differed but most regions subsidised utility tariffs and increased spending on national economy in order to reach targets of the Presidential Decree. Hopes of decentralisation of the Russian budget system during the pandemic did not come true and regional dependence on the federal authorities increased.

Regional Disparities and Fiscal Federalism in Russia

Regional Disparities and Fiscal Federalism in Russia

СЧАСТЛИВЫЙ ВЫБОР НА ВСЮ ОСТАВШУЮСЯ ЖИЗНЬ! ПАМЯТИ ЗАСЛУЖЕННОГО ДЕЯТЕЛЯ НАУКИ РСФСР, ПОЧЕТНОГО ГРАЖДАНИНА ГОРОДА ТОМСКА, ЗАСЛУЖЕННОГО ПРОФЕССОРА ТГУ АЛЕКСАНДРА ПЕТРОВИЧА БЫЧКОВА

The article is dedicated to the memory of Aleksandr Petrovich Bychkov, an Honored Scientist of the RSFSR, Honorary Citizen of Tomsk, Honored Professor of Tomsk State University (TSU). In the first 10 years of service at Tomsk State University, Bychkov made a career from an assistant professor to a university rector, heading TSU in 1967 and leaving this post 16 years later, in 1983. Defending his doctoral dissertation in 1966, Bychkov became the first Doctor of Economics in Tomsk after the Revolution and was elected head of the Department of Political Economy at TSU. Understanding the importance and necessity of developing economic education in Siberia, Bychkov made great efforts to open a new specialty – political economy – at TSU. On Bychkov’s initiative, an economic laboratory was opened at TSU. In 1969, the Academic Council for the defense of candidate and doctoral dissertations in economic, philosophical, and legal sciences was opened at Tomsk State University, and Bychkov became the chairman of the council. In fact, TSU became a basic university in the formation of scientific, methodological, organizational, and informational work in the field of economic education in entire Western and Eastern Siberia. Bychkov’s main areas of research were property relations, the economic foundations of federalism in Russia. In the economic literature at that time there were lively discussions on the effectiveness of management, material incentives and planning in the socialist economy. There were not only discussions, but also numerous reforms and reorganizations in the economic life of the country, which affected the development of the economy, had an impact on the quality of the social life of society, on the development of science and education. The initiated reform was the development of an initiative to improve economic activity at enterprises through the active involvement of scientific and educational institutions. Along with scientific, educational and methodological work, he organized social and educational work to disseminate knowledge, increase economic literacy among the population of the region. In 1974 Bychkov headed the Socioeconomic Problems of the Development of Siberia and the Far East Problem Council of the Ministry of Higher Education of the RSFS. In the 1970s–1980s he headed the West Siberian sector for organizing students’ research work. The article discusses the main milestones in the life of Aleksandr Bychkov. The significance of his methodological and leadership activities related to the formation and development of economic education in Tomsk and in Siberia in general is investigated; the directions of scientific activity are analyzed; the role in the formation of his own scientific school and the relationship of the investigated problems with the contemporary urgent tasks of economic science and education in Russia are shown. The entire period of Bychkov’s work in Tomsk as an associate professor, professor, head of department and rector of Tomsk State University can be considered a period of the formation, growth and qualitative development of economic education and science not only at TSU, but throughout Siberia. Today, a large number of his students and followers head departments of the economic profile and institutes of almost all Siberian universities.

The Difference Place Makes: Regional Legislative Approaches to Territories of Traditional Nature Use in the Russian North

Indigenous northerners’ rights in the Russian Federation are legally protected at a range of levels (federal, regional, municipal), and by a diversity of types of legal acts (laws, decrees, orders, provisions). Within the complex structure of Russian federalism, the country’s regional governments elaborate upon federal laws in diverse ways and at different times. This article explores regional approaches to legislating one law on Indigenous rights, that of “Territory of Traditional Nature-Use” (territoriya traditsionnogo prirodopol’zovaniya) (TTP), identified by Indigenous leaders as the most important legal-territorial designation for protecting Indigenous livelihoods and cultures. While it is well known that legal strategies of the Russian state toward Indigenous territorial rights differ markedly from those of other Circumpolar countries, less appreciated are the ways in which these vary across space within Russia. We assert that the spatial informs the legal, documenting several illustrative approaches that regions have taken in legislating TTPs. In doing so, we demonstrate how a federal law initiative is interpreted and reimagined in place, giving rise to the potential for substantively different spatial outcomes for Indigenous persons and peoples seeking to actualize their rights to territory.

Представительная роль Совета Федерации в политической системе России (на примере Республики Саха (Якутия)

The article examines the functioning of the upper house of the parliament of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation of the Federation Council in the context of federal relations. In the developed federations of the world, the principle of bicameralism is implemented, in which the interests of the regions are represented in the upper house of parliament. The formation mechanisms differ, when in some countries direct elections of senators by the population take place, or the practice of appointment from above is in effect. The main idea of the Senates lies in the principle of regional representation, in the ideas of separation of the branches of power and checks and balances. In Russia in the 1990s during the period of decentralized federalism, there was a strengthening of the regions, including in parliament. Heads of regions and chairmen of regional parliaments received seats in the Federation Council. Centralization of Russian federalism in the 2000s changed the formation mechanism, in which the regions appointed their representatives for the seats of the senators. The representative role was somewhat weakened, in which many senators were not associated with the regions. In recent years, there has been a policy of changing the role of the upper house of parliament, and a new formation system is emerging. The idea of amendments to the Constitution is aimed at strengthening the role of the Federation Council in the system of separation of powers. Representation of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia) in the Federation Council also depends on the development of federal relations. The heads of the subjects who have resigned receive the seats of senators, and the regional parliament appoints its representatives. Such a formation system somewhat weakens the institution of parliament. A system in which direct elections of senators by the population take place looks more effective

ASYMMETRIC ORGANIZATION OF LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT AS A FACTOR OF PARTICIPATION IN IT OF COMMUNITIES OF INDIGENOUS MINORITIES OF RUSSIA

The article summarizes the experience of Russian regions in organizing the participation of communities of indigenous minorities of Russia in local self-government: the phenomenon of national administrative-territorial units and the experience of “ethnic self-government” in the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia); features of the organization of local self-government in autonomous okrugs and special administrative-territorial units in the newly formed constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The proposal on the asymmetric organization of local self-government in connection with the asymmetric nature of Russian federalism and the complex ethnic composition of regional and local communities, as well as the forms of self-organization and forms of autonomy of indigenous minorities has been substantiated as forms of their participation in the implementation of local self-government. The levels of territorial localization of the autonomy of indigenous peoples are highlighted, the conclusion is substantiated about the participation of their communities in local autonomy as an optimal solution to ensure a balance of trends in the integration and isolation of these peoples in modern territorial communities. The need for federal legislative regulation of the peculiarities of the organization of local self-government in the municipalities included in the list of places of traditional residence and traditional economic activity of the few indigenous peoples of the Russian Federation, counts given the compactness criteria of the residence, has been proven, the main content of these characteristics has been determined.

Federalism in Russia: Current State and Emerging Trends

The article considers the phenomenon of federal relations in modern Russia from a theoretical and normative point of view. Studying related categories, such as federalism, federation and federal system, the author comes to the conclusion that it is federal relations, which by their nature are purely legal relations, are the core of any federal system. It is the analysis of the dynamics of development of these relations that shows the viability of a particular federal system. Using the concept of systems theory, the author reveals the structure of federal relations, which includes their subjects, objects and content. In turn, the content of federal relations can be revealed using the principles of both the horizontal and the vertical separation of powers. In this regard, not only normative regulation (the Constitution, federal and regional laws), but also judicial practice are of great importance: namely, decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which handed down a significant number of decisions revealing the essence of federal relations in specific cases and resolving existing problems. The development of the federal system, and, consequently, the actual federal relations can be traced in examples of an institutional and regulatory nature. Vivid examples of this development are structural changes in the federal system associated with the formation of a new constituent entity of the federation and the adoption of a new constituent entity in the federation. Such examples have occurred in modern Russia, although in the case of the adoption of new entities in the current regulatory framework, certain problems are found that should be eliminated by making appropriate amendments to the law governing the procedure for such adoption. The COVID-19 pandemic, unfortunately, has affected virtually every nation in the world. The relationship between the federal center and the constituent entities of the federation in such an extraordinary situation has been affected too and has undergone certain changes. Their analysis cannot but lead to a correction of the normative regulation of federal relations in the event of similar situations in the future. Amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation have affected a large layer of public relations. Federal relations are no exception, since the “Federated Structure” section of the Constitution includes a number of rather interesting changes.