Общественные палаты как институты реализации патерналистской модели взаимодействия власти и общества: опыт Тверской области и Санкт-Петербурга.
The article analyzes the paternalistic model of the interaction of power and society on the example of the functioning of the public chambers of the Tver region and St. Petersburg. The study is based on preliminary results of the scientific project “Institutions and Practices of Interaction between the Government, the Expert Community and Public Organizations in Russian Regions”, conducted in Tver and in St. Petersburg in 2017–2019. The main research methods used were analysis of the regulatory framework, content of the Public Chamber of the Tver Region and St. Petersburg, semi-structured interviews with chamber members, experts, government officials and deputies of regional parliaments with experience in interacting with public chambers. The article analyzes the logic of transformation of public chambers from the point of view of: a) the principles of organization and selection of staff, b) the functionality laid down in the regulatory framework, c) the measures taken reflecting the content and focus of the work, d) the information policy e) building relationships with public organizations, state authorities and local self-government, f) influence on the socio-political situation in the region. An analysis of the principles of organization and functionality of public chambers shows that the potential for their influence on public policy in the law is limited. The authors highlight the general and specific features of the evolution of the public chambers of the Tver region and St. Petersburg. If the Public Chamber of the Tver Region was initially created as a real institute of regional policy, with the levers of influence prescribed in the law on the process of making power decisions (the right of legislative initiative, the possibility of sending representatives to the qualification collegium of judges), the Public Chamber of St. Petersburg was created as a kind of elite club under the governor, with whom the governor could consult if desired. General changes regarding public chambers are moving towards adjusting the principles of their recruitment, numerical strength, the study of individual powers, and the unification of the system of regional public chambers. An analysis of the activities of the public chambers allows the authors to conclude that they correlate with changes in the domestic policy of the Russian Federation. According to the authors, this public-state institution contributes to the activation of those social forces that are ready to integrate into communication to promote socially oriented projects. The authors believe that the genesis and evolution in Russia in the 2000s. public chambers indicate a change in the mechanisms of interaction between civil society structures and the state, the design of a paternalistic model of mediation of power and society.