The study employs the network approach to the problem of international migration. The international migration is represented as a network (or weighted directed graph) where the nodes correspond to countries and the edges correspond to migration flows. The study reveals a set of critical or central elements in the network. Various existing centrality measures were calculated and several long-range interaction centrality (LRIC) were designed. The results are based on the United Nations International Migration Flows Database (version 2008, 2015) that provides the annual dyadic estimates of migration flows between countries.
Article tries to shed light upon the political theory functional contradiction through the dichotomy of humanistic and post-structuralist tradition. In the nutshell, there is a question about the status and the process of legitimization of the scientific knowledge and its corresponding consequences. Several sections of the articles are dedicated to external and internal aspects of the methodological reflection within political theory domain. Conclusion is drawn on a possible way of political theory development in the future.
How is power and authority distributed in the European Union? What role does state capacity play in the framework of relations between the levels of authority in the EU? In this article, we seek to answer these questions by addressing two key approaches to the analysis of the European Union as a multi-level system of governance: the structural-actor approach and the approach of consociational democracy. While supporters of the structural-actor approach perceive the EU as a hierarchical system, where one of the levels of power is always in a position of dominance and can dictate its rules of the game, the theoreticians of European consociationalism are more interested in the issues related to the decision-making process under the conditions of “grand coalitions”, horizontal and vertical accountability and democratic deficit.
The article analyses various aspects of impact that elections produce on political institutions. In includes “ritual” function of elections which produce a political nation, legitimation of all political institutions and professional political class. Another function is representation of citizens in the political domain by virtue of intermediary political institutions. Yet another, is building a system of checks and balances and conflict management. Besides, the article discusses the problem of accountability of elected officials and the phenomenon of modern populism and other new trends in relations between parties and voters. The concluding chapter briefly touches upon the specific features and effects of elections in the Russian political system.
This article deals both with the problems related to the state, statehood and stateness and to the regime changes, democracy and democratization. The latter aspect nowadays has come to foreground of comparative political studies, especially if we are talking about up-to-date political changes and political development.
This article discusses the phenomenon of state capacity, the different approaches to its conceptualization used by political scientists over the last decades, various ways of measuring this concept, as well as the whole spectrum of the existing theories about the relationship between state capacity and dynamics of regime transformation. In the empirical part of the article, the authors cluster trajectory changes in the characteristics of state capacity and the political regime in the majority of countries in the world for 1992–2011, then match trajectories between themselves and formulate conclusions about the acceptance or rejection of hypotheses about the relationship of the political regime and state capacity. In particular, there are quite a lot of refutations of the hypothesis about the primacy of the state capacity before the democratization and the impossibility of successful development of state capacity under autocratic regimes. However, the hypothesis about the possibility of parallel development of democracy and state capacity, rather, is confirmed.
The article is devoted to analysis of discursive practices of public representation and discussion of the political course of “modernization” announced by president Dmitry Medvedev. It is focused at interpretations of the idea of modernization by the leading Russian politicians as well as at the role of the notions about collective past, present and future in its ideological justification and contestation.
Today in political science we are used to distinguish between methods that are qualitative and quantitative. And while the quantitative techniques are based on the apparatus of mathematics, the qualitative ones don’t seem to have any basic methodological framework of this kind. It is suggested to consider semiotics in this role of the «mathematics» of social sciences. The consideration of general semiotic principles and distinction of semiotic research methods can provide political science with intradisciplinary consistency and transdisciplinary integration.
The paper applies the Duhem-Quine thesis to conventional quantitative methods in political science. As a result, the discussion of methodological problems associated with these methods is implanted into the epistemological issues highlighted by the Duhem-Quine thesis. Special attention is devoted to the widespread research practices, such as 1) null hypothesis significance testing, 2) large-N analysis and 3) dealing with phenomena with a very broad and general character. The paper argues that, partly due to these practices, some epistomological problems are aggravated: a) structural underdetermination of theories is exacerbated; b) the value of new theories tested via old data becomes unclear and doubtful; c) the convention about the boundary between theories and facts is harder to achieve. Some questions about the conditions of the progress in political science are posed.
A major methodological challenge in study of empires and civilizations is the application of both terms to conceptualize highly divergent phenomena from specific facts and practices to general mental constructions like a mission of a civilization of imperial form of government. Conceptual research tools should be ranged according to the levels of generalization. Thus, the most abstract instrument of morphological analysis is imperial form. Imperial formulae are its configurations that apply to various geopolitical and historical conjunctures. Finally, specific orders help to conceptualize the factual tissue of civilizations and empires. Morphology of open and closed systems is also considered as a relevant conceptual tool. Notions of open and limited access orders is critically reappraised.
Reinterpretation of approaches of John Locke, Immanuel Kant and Charles Peirce helps to single out three integral organons of cognition. One is mathematics, or cognition of measure and art of all kind of measurement. Another is morphology or cognition of forms and art of arranging shapes and configurations. One more is semiotics or cognition of meanings and art of their transfer. It is demonstrated that all three organons vary and provide specific fields of knowledge and areas of research. Current versions and varieties of disciplinary manifestations of organons are reviewed. Mathematics is the most developed complex of scientific disciplines. Morphology is a constellation of a number of assorted and fully independent disciplines. Semiotics is rifted by a gap between rough outline of general or «pure» semiotics (Morris) and a nebula of unevenly elaborated semiologies of various sorts – that of languages, literatures, cinema, heraldry, race discrimination or ideological manipulations. Analysis of political discourses and speech acts can contribute to integration of common area of semiotic research.