Оценка управления арктическими городами в контексте обеспечения их жизнестойкости

Арктика и Север. 2022. Т. 48. С. 164–188.

Пилясов А. Н., Molodtsova V.

The purpose of this paper is theoretical comprehension and empirical generalization of the phenomenon of management of the Russian Arctic cities in the context of ensuring their resilience (resistance to shocks and crises). The main tasks to be solved are: 1) search for specific indicators to characterize the administrative and managerial system of a sample of Arctic cities; 2) revealing of the types (groups) of cities in the Arctic according to the selected indicators of the administrative and management system; 3) characterization of the structure of local governance of three cities in the context of the previously carried out typology of Arctic cities in terms of parameters of their administrative and management system. The main results of the work: 1) determination of the range of indicators (six) for assessing the quality of management of the 29 largest Arctic cities in terms of strengthening their resilience: these are indicators of openness to the outside world (“basicity” of the city); efficiency of management, the degree of independence of decisions of city authorities. 2) Identification of five clusters of cities with similar properties of the administrative and managerial subsystem: compact high-quality management, “inexpensive” municipal management, “strong middle cities”, significant reserves for improving management efficiency, anomalous case. 3) Institutional and geographic factors, acting together, determine the appearance of the administrative and managerial subsystem of the Arctic city. Of the geographical factors, it is not latitude that is of primary importance, but longitude, that is, the location of the city in the European or Asian Arctic. 4) For cities in the Arctic, in which frequent natural and social force majeure demands a super-operational response to external threats, the model of power with a strong mayor is in most cases preferable to the “consensus” model of collective leadership with a weak mayor. 5) The ideal administrative and management system of the city, which maximally realizes the imperatives of basicity / openness, efficiency and independence, and guarantees the city's resilience, should have nature-like properties of self-organization, plasticity, flexibility, mobility and diversity. Their strengthening is ensured by the refusal to unification, including the utmost consideration of the specifics of a particular type and phase of operation of the main natural asset closest to the city.

Keywords: система управления, жизнестойкость, арктические города