Взаимодействие власти и общества при реализации градостроительных проектов в Москве (правовой аспект)
This paper examines the provisions of Law No. 455-FZ, which was signed by the President of the Russian Federation close to New 2018 Year's Eve along with a package of amendments to the Town Planning Code. The author emphasises the relationship of the provisions governing public consultations with the concept of the ‘right to the city’ and critically assesses the traditional public hearings. It seems right to secure a balance between the “weak” citizen and the “strong” official at any stage of the discussion on urban development projects. The author considers that the electronic form of public consultations will make the procedure even more controversial, and that new progressive tools for civic participation should be implemented into Russian legislation.
This paper examines the concept of the ‘right to the city’ by offering an analysis of the roots of the idea: the writings of the French Marxist and social theorist Henri Lefebvre. While there has been a growing utilization of Henri Lefebvre’s concepts during past two decades all over the world, he is neither translated in Russian nor widely recognized among the national legal scholars. The article explores how his theoretical writings on space and the urban can be used to redefine the existing Moscow district courts’ practice. The author emphasizes the main dimensions of the Russian legal framework governing the right to the city (the right to a healthy environment, the right to take part in public hearings, the right to information, etc.) and some civil procedural problems in the context of Lefebvre’s heritage (public interest lawsuits, the discussion “a right or an interest?”).
This paper is primarily focused on problems of challenging public hearings under the Moscow City Planning Code.
The article explores how such problems are reflected in the latest courts’ practice, especially on the cases based on the chapter 25 “Proceedings in cases on challenging of decisions made, actions (inaction) fulfilled by state authorities” of the Civil Procedural Code of the Russian Federation.
The author critically assesses the “nonbinding” nature of public hearings and emphasizes that public hearings are now seen as giving the phantom of residents’ influence on the resolutions that have already been made by governmental agencies.
The paper examines the structure, governance, and balance sheets of state-controlled banks in Russia, which accounted for over 55 percent of the total assets in the country's banking system in early 2012. The author offers a credible estimate of the size of the country's state banking sector by including banks that are indirectly owned by public organizations. Contrary to some predictions based on the theoretical literature on economic transition, he explains the relatively high profitability and efficiency of Russian state-controlled banks by pointing to their competitive position in such functions as acquisition and disposal of assets on behalf of the government. Also suggested in the paper is a different way of looking at market concentration in Russia (by consolidating the market shares of core state-controlled banks), which produces a picture of a more concentrated market than officially reported. Lastly, one of the author's interesting conclusions is that China provides a better benchmark than the formerly centrally planned economies of Central and Eastern Europe by which to assess the viability of state ownership of banks in Russia and to evaluate the country's banking sector.
The paper examines the principles for the supervision of financial conglomerates proposed by BCBS in the consultative document published in December 2011. Moreover, the article proposes a number of suggestions worked out by the authors within the HSE research team.
We address the external effects on public sector efficiency measures acquired using Data Envelopment Analysis. We use the health care system in Russian regions in 2011 to evaluate modern approaches to accounting for external effects. We propose a promising method of correcting DEA efficiency measures. Despite the multiple advantages DEA offers, the usage of this approach carries with it a number of methodological difficulties. Accounting for multiple factors of efficiency calls for more complex methods, among which the most promising are DMU clustering and calculating local production possibility frontiers. Using regression models for estimate correction requires further study due to possible systematic errors during estimation. A mixture of data correction and DMU clustering together with multi-stage DEA seems most promising at the moment. Analyzing several stages of transforming society’s resources into social welfare will allow for picking out the weak points in a state agency’s work.