| Summary/Abstract |
The essay explores why some socio-economic reforms are successful and others are not and why and how the political regime and its institutions affect policy outcomes and the implementation of a ‘narrow’ programme of authoritarian modernisation, characterised by the achievement of socio-economic growth without full-scale democratisation. It reconsiders the Russian experience of policy reforms in the 2000s as a case of authoritarian modernisation in the context of post-Communist policy changes where less than half of the proposals have been implemented, and only a few have been successful. The essay attempts to explain the factors and mechanisms of the successes and failures of policy reforms, focusing on the one hand, on the impact of electoral authoritarianism and the poor quality of the state on opportunities and constraints for policy changes, and, on the other hand, on the institutional factors which affect the vertical and horizontal fragmentation of the Russian government and the efficiency or inefficiency of its policies.
|