Международный исследовательский семинар «Разнообразие режимов власти и влияния в хозяйственных отношениях»
The international workshop ‘The Varieties of Power in the Economy’ was held from July 3 to 4, 2020 in Moscow, Russia. The seminar was organized by the Laboratory for Studies in Economic Sociology (LSES) at the National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow. The seminar primarily aimed to initiate a discussion on power practices, modes of influence, compliance, and governance structures in the economy.
The keynote speakers of the workshop were Alena Ledeneva, Professor of Politics and Society at the School of Slavonic and East European Studies (University College London, UK) and Valery Yackubovich, Professor at the Management Department (SSEC Business School, France). In their lectures they shared their understanding of the topics and how they can be incorporated in various conceptual frameworks within economic sociology.
Apart from LSES, the seminar engaged researchers from various research institutions, backgrounds, and traditions. Invited speakers included Elena Bogdanova (University of Gothenburg), Tamara Kusimova (Central European University), Aleksei Pobedonostsev (The European University Institute in Florence), Olga Sidenko (Voronezh State University), Daria Shcheglova (HSE University—Institute of Education), Maria Tysiachniouk (University of Wisconsin-Madison), Ulla Paper, Stanislav Klimovich, and Katharina Bluhm (Freie Universität Berlin), and Maya Shmidt (Uppsala University).
The researchers took a closer look at their academic fields and identified the issues of power practices, forms of influence, and control in economic exchange. By examining completely different social spheres and institutional fields, the participants discussed the ambivalence of power and the variety of power relations and practices in the economy.
The achievement of high level of business activity is inseparably connected with the конъектурой market, with the creation of the state and municipal authorities of favorable conditions for the activities of the business elements and the ability of business to form their consolidated position, which is the basic element of the state policy and the formation of civil society. In this connection, the priority directions of research and the objectives, which the authors have set before us in the work of the steel analysis and evaluation, by the example of Nizhny Novgorod region, the regional business associations, models, forms, and the evolution of their relations with the regional authorities, business associations, Federal and municipal level and other aspects of their development.
Upon analyzing the political processes occurring during the nineteenth-twentieth centuries, G.Musikhin posits that the popular idea about the supremacy of professional managers in politics over demagogues speculating with mass’ political aspirations conceals an attempt by the power holders to get rid of the axiological rationale for the political hegemony. He concludes that when the governmental policy is supported by the voters’ will rather than sovereign power per se, the ideological discourse becomes of fundamental importance since support is lent to someone who can present his ideological position as a majority’s goal. The debate within the political space is built around an ability to offer to the society a more attractive political (to be more precise, ideological) prospect rather than detailed mechanisms of how to govern society (that are largely universal).
This paper develops a strategy for investigating the new institutionalism in economic sociology. An analytical scheme is proposed to link institutional arrangements, structure of incentives, and conceptions of control. Questions regarding the legitimacy of claims on resources and profits, contract enforcements, and business networking are discussed on the theoretical level.
In this article the author attempts to explain the events occurring in the country taking into account the specificity of the Ukrainian political culture. From the point of view of the author, a key player in the Ukrainian revolution in 2014 was the Ukrainian society itself, and any attempt to comment the situation of modern Ukraine, first of all, should take into account civil conditions of the society itself. Qualitative state of civil society in Ukraine outrun the quality of the ruling elite, which inevitably provokes new confrontations and conflicts.
The article examines the problems of delegation of public powers of authority to self-regulated organizations: public powers of authority which may be delegated, spheres of state administration, where delegation of powers is not allowed, validity of control over realization of delegated powers in all cases of such delegation and responsibility of the state for the acts of private persons who exercise public powers of authority.
This article is devoted to the Digest of the Laws of the Russian Empire – an embodiment of the operative legal system in late imperial Russia. Even though the Digest contained the law in force, and thus should be studied as a crucial source on Russian (legal) history, its meaning has been often overlooked. The reason for that is a remarkable difference between the original texts of laws adopted by the legislator, and their published form in the Digest. This difference came from the necessary editing procedures when every new piece of legislation was included in the existing system of the Digest. This strange feature of legal procedure when two different versions of a particular law – the original one and the one codified in the Digest – both remained in force should be considered as a part of official autocratic legality in late imperial Russia. Even though it may seem inefficient and irrational, the practice of obligatory codification of laws in the Digest existed for a rather long time – from 1835 until 1917. My research aims to find possible explanations for the Digest’s prolonged existence in the context of political and legal culture of late imperial Russia. What did Russian ‘official legality’ actually mean on the levels of theory and action?
The article describes the structures of autobiographical narration in the novels and essays of the austrian writer E. Canetti.
Several approaches to the concept of fatherhood present in Western sociological tradition are analyzed and compared: biological determinism, social constructivism and biosocial theory. The problematics of fatherhood and men’s parental practices is marginalized in modern Russian social research devoted to family and this fact makes the traditional inequality in family relations, when the father’s role is considered secondary compared to that of mother, even stronger. However, in Western critical men’s studies several stages can be outlined: the development of “sex roles” paradigm (biological determinism), the emergence of the hegemonic masculinity concept, inter-disciplinary stage (biosocial theory). According to the approach of biological determinism, the role of a father is that of the patriarch, he continues the family line and serves as a model for his ascendants. Social constructivism looks into man’s functions in the family from the point of view of masculine pressure and establishing hegemony over a woman and children. Biosocial theory aims to unite the biological determinacy of fatherhood with social, cultural and personal context. It is shown that these approaches are directly connected with the level of the society development, marriage and family perceptions, the level of egality of gender order.