IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v4y2018i1d10.1057_s41599-018-0137-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regional elections in Russia: instruments of authoritarian legitimacy or instability?

Author

Listed:
  • Cameron Ross

    (University of Dundee)

Abstract

This study examines three rounds of regional assembly and gubernatorial elections in Russia that took place in September 2015, 2016 and 2017. In particular, it examines the ways in which the regime has manipulated the elections to guarantee the victory of United Russia. The study shows that the Kremlin has adopted a new electoral strategy. Rather than engaging in the risky business of outright fraud during the vote count, which was an important factor in sparking mass protests against the regime, in the wake of the 2011 elections to the State Duma, the authorities have decided to concentrate their efforts on preventing opposition parties and candidates from registering for the elections. Whilst other forms of electoral malpractice have continued to be practiced, such as coercing or bribing voters to turn out and vote for United Russia, promoting “carousel voting” (multiple voting by groups of mobilised citizens), or ballot stuffing, much more focus has been paid in these elections on manipulating the registration process in favour of United Russia. As is clearly demonstrated, scores of opposition candidates and party lists, have been prevented from competing because of problems with their registration documents. However, whilst this strategy has helped United Russia win large majorities in all of the gubernatorial and assembly elections, it has also created lacklustre and predictable contests, and this in turn has led to a sharp decline in turnout, particularly in the gubernatorial elections. There is a real danger that these low levels of turnout may gradually erode the legitimacy of United Russia, embolden the opposition, and threaten the stability of the regime.

Suggested Citation

  • Cameron Ross, 2018. "Regional elections in Russia: instruments of authoritarian legitimacy or instability?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:4:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-018-0137-1
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-018-0137-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-018-0137-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-018-0137-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simpser,Alberto, 2013. "Why Governments and Parties Manipulate Elections," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107030541.
    2. Daniela Donno, 2013. "Elections and Democratization in Authoritarian Regimes," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(3), pages 703-716, July.
    3. Grigorii V. Golosov, 2014. "Authoritarian Electoral Engineering and its Limits: A Curious Case of the Imperiali Highest Averages Method in Russia," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 66(10), pages 1611-1628, November.
    4. Cameron Ross, 2011. "Regional Elections and Electoral Authoritarianism in Russia," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 63(4), pages 641-661.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vasilyeva, Olga & Libman, Alexander, 2020. "Varieties of authoritarianism matter: Elite fragmentation, natural resources and economic growth," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    2. Tkachenko, Andrey & Esaulov, Daniil, 2020. "Autocratic governors in public procurement," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    3. David Szakonyi, 2020. "Candidate Filtering: The Strategic Use of Electoral Fraud in Russia," Working Papers 2020-23, The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Guriev, Sergei & Treisman, Daniel, 2020. "A theory of informational autocracy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    2. Baghdasaryan, Vardan & Iannantuoni, Giovanna & Maggian, Valeria, 2019. "Electoral fraud and voter turnout: An experimental study," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 203-219.
    3. Sergei Guriev & Daniel Treisman, 2020. "The Popularity of Authoritarian Leaders: A cross-national investigation," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03878626, HAL.
    4. Sonin, Konstantin & Egorov, Georgy, 2014. "Incumbency Advantage in Non-Democracies," CEPR Discussion Papers 10178, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Jonathan Kropko & Robert Kubinec, 2020. "Interpretation and identification of within-unit and cross-sectional variation in panel data models," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-22, April.
    6. Michael Rochlitz & Evgeniya Mitrokhina & Irina Nizovkina, 2020. "Bureaucratic Discrimination in Electoral Authoritarian Regimes: Experimental Evidence from Russia," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2010, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    7. González, Felipe & Prem, Mounu, 2018. "Can television bring down a dictator? Evidence from Chile’s “No” campaign," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 349-361.
    8. Yue, Jiahua & Zhou, Shangsi, 2018. "Democracy’s comparative advantage: Evidence from aggregated trade data, 1962–2010," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 27-40.
    9. Michael Albertus & Victor Gay, 2017. "Unlikely Democrats: Economic Elite Uncertainty under Dictatorship and Support for Democratization," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(3), pages 624-641, July.
    10. Yamlaksira S. Getachew & Roger Fon & Elie Chrysostome, 2023. "On the location choices of African multinational enterprises: Do supranational economic institutions matter?," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(4), pages 453-490, December.
    11. Elena V. Sirotkina, 2014. "Managed Competition And Voting Stability: Evidence From Russian Legislative Elections (2003-2011)," HSE Working papers WP BRP 15/PS/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    12. Ananyev, Maxim & Poyker, Michael, 2022. "Do dictators signal strength with electoral fraud?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    13. Casas, Agustín & Díaz, Guillermo & Trindade, André, 2017. "Who monitors the monitor? Effect of party observers on electoral outcomes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 136-149.
    14. Bowles, Jeremy & Larreguy, Horacio & Woller, Anders, 2020. "Information Versus Control: The Electoral Consequences of Polling Place Creation," TSE Working Papers 20-1154, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    15. Kim, Nam Kyu & Kroeger, Alex, 2017. "Rewarding the introduction of multiparty elections," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 164-181.
    16. Jeremiah O. Arowosegbe, 2020. "Academics and Election Administration in Nigeria," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(7), pages 1009-1032, October.
    17. Vardan, Baghdasaryan & Giovanna, Iannantuoni & Valeria, Maggian, 2015. "Electoral fraud and voter turnout," Working Papers 315, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 25 Nov 2015.
    18. Bittó, Virág, 2017. "Az Imperiali és Macau politikai választókörzet-kiosztási módszerek empirikus vizsgálata [Empirical Analysis of the Imperiali and Macau Apportionment Methods]," MPRA Paper 79554, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Schlumberger, Oliver, 2021. "Puzzles of political change in the Middle East: Political liberalisation, authoritarian resilience and the question of systemic change," IDOS Discussion Papers 5/2021, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    20. Sonin, Konstantin & Egorov, Georgy, 2020. "The Political Economics of Non-democracy," CEPR Discussion Papers 15344, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:4:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-018-0137-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.