State-building : a comparative study of Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus, and Russia

Collection:
Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Document Type:
Knyga / Book
Language:
Anglų kalba / English
Title:
State-building: a comparative study of Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus, and Russia
Authors:
Fritz, Verena
Publication Data:
Budapest ; Central European University Press, 2007.
Pages:
xiv, 384 p
Notes:
Bibliografija ir rodyklė.
Contents:
Abbreviations — List of Tables and graphs — Acknowledgements — Introduction — State- and institution-building – a framework for analysis — The state and state-building definitions and debates — Fiscal perspectives on the state — Regimes and states: the missing link in the transition debate — Potential contributions of post-Soviet cases to general theories of state-building — A framework for assessing states: size, capacity, and quality — The three aspects of the state — States as problems and solutions under various regimes — The size of the state — State capacity: decision-making, implementation, and control — The dynamic of change: state-building as institution-building — State-building as institutional change – deterioration and rebuilding — The costs and risks of institutional change — Types of institutional change — The importance of formal-informal discrepancies — A model of post-Soviet state-building trajectories — The causal model — Individual causal factors — Four state-building trajectories — Summary — State-building in the post-Soviet region — The Soviet state and its fiscal system — Institutional deterioration: perestroika and the break-up of the Soviet Union — State-building in the post-Soviet ‘universe’ — Exploring some quantitative relationships: level of development and political consolidation — Summary — Ukraine – from Soviet breakdown to disordered independence — From Soviet republic to independent Ukraine — The great depression: economic crisis after independence — The challenge of nation-building — Struggles for power and institutional weakness — A fiscal system in crisis — The first steps of state-building — A new trajectory taking shape — Economic stabilization and virtualization — The bid for presidential consolidation — State-society relations – the rise of political-business groups and weak democratic accountability —External factors — Stabilizing the fiscal system — Shaping and distorting the new state — The second transition in Ukraine — From hybrid regime to unconsolidated democracy — Economic recovery and socio-economic policies of the new government — The power of civil society and the continuing importance of opaque groups — External influences on the rise — Fiscal developments: reforms and revelations — From Kuchma to Yushchenko: re-tooling the state — Summary: the state-building process in Ukraine as reflected in the fiscal sphere — Averting institutional change: the case of Belarus — Political developments: from liberalization to autocracy — Economic developments: preserving the command economy — Belarus’ international situation — State-society relations in Belarus — Fiscal policies — Belarus: the strong state that does not want to be a state — Lithuania: moving towards Western models — Political developments: early elite reconfiguration and after — Economic developments: the great leap from communism to capitalism — State-society relations in Lithuania — Fiscal and budgetary system — State capacity and its determinants in Lithuania — The ‘authoritarianizing’ route to recovery: the case of Russian tax reform — The stage: political power and oligarchic groups — The economic background to reform — State-society relations — Fiscal crisis and tax reform: surveying explanations — From drag to leap: the gestation and eventual success of tax reform — From prolonged deterioration to unfinished recovery: the Russian path of state-building — Conclusion — States as problems and solution — Institutional deterioration and the importance of the political regime — Setting the background: legacies, international integration, and the level of development —Wider implications: conceptualizing institutional change, regime change, and state-building — Appendix — Bibliography — Index.
Keywords:
LT
Baltarusija (Belarus); Ukraina (Ukraine); Lietuva (Lithuania); Rusija (Россия; Russia; Russia; Rossija; Rusijos Federacija; Rossijskaja Federacija).
Summary / Abstract:

LTPastarąjį dešimtmetį posovietinės transformacijos tyrimuose dažnai keliamas naujųjų demokratijų kokybės klausimas, tačiau daug rečiau diskutuojama apie infrastruktūrinį šių valstybių pajėgumą. Šios studijos tikslas – pasitelkus lyginamąją analizę, suprasti, kaip posovietinėje erdvėje kūrėsi (atsikūrė) valstybės, ar galima jas laikyti stipriomis. Studijoje konstruojamas valstybės pajėgumų vertinimo modelis, kuriame numatyti svarbiausi skirtingas valstybių kūrimo(si) trajektorijas sąlygojantys veiksniai. Laikomasi dviejų prielaidų: pirma, valstybės stiprumo sąvoka nėra vienadimensė, ji apima ir valstybės institucijų kokybę; antra, valstybės pajėgumą įkūnija trys elementai – pajėgumas priimti sprendimus, pajėgumas juos įgyvendinti (valstybės efektyvumo matas) bei kontrolės ir atskaitomybės santykių pobūdis (apsaugos nuo prasto valdymo matas). Keturios valstybės – Ukraina, Lietuva, Baltarusija ir Rusija – tyrimui pasirinktos pagal panašiausių sistemų logiką. Atskleidžiant valstybės kūrimo(si) procesus posovietinėje erdvėje, dėmesio centre atsiduria fiskalinės sistemos – mokesčių sistemos, biudžeto lėšų paskirstymo, fiskalinės atskaitomybės – formavimo(si) procesai ir pobūdis. Analizuojama eilė veiksnių, teigiamai ar neigiamai paveikusių valstybių kūrimą(si) regione. Tyrimas parodė, kad valstybės kūrimo(si) trajektorijų skirtumus posovietinėje erdvėje labiausiai lėmė tai, koks buvo kiekvienos šalies institucinės erozijos lygis Sovietų Sąjungos žlugimo momentu, kaip ir kada nepriklausomybės laikotarpio pradžioje kiekvienai pavyko įtvirtinti naują politinį režimą.Reikšminiai žodžiai: Komparatyvistika; Posovietinės valstybės kurimas; Institucijų kaitos dinamika; Posovietinė erdvė; Dynamic of institutions change: Post-soviet state-building; Comparativism; Post-soviet area.

ENThe last decade’s research of the post-Soviet transformation often focuses on the issue of the quality of new democracies. Still, it rarely discusses the infrastructural potential of these states. The aim of this study is, through a comparative analysis, to perceive the way states were established (recovered) in the post-Soviet area and whether they can be considered as strong states. The study constructs an assessment model of a state’s potential, which provides for key factors influencing the formation paths of different states. The study is based on two assumptions. First, the concept of strength of a state is not unidimensional – it covers the quality of state institutions. Second, the potential of a state is based on three elements – decision making capacity, decision implementation capacity (state efficiency indicator) and control, and the nature of reporting relations (protection from poor management indicator). Four states – Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus and Russia, have been selected for the research since their systems are very similar. When revealing the processes of state-building in the post-Soviet area, fiscal systems, i.e. formation processes and nature of tax systems, budget appropriation and fiscal liability have attracted the key attention. A number of factors with positive or negative effect on the state building in the region have been analysed. The research has shown that the differences in state-building paths in the post-Soviet area were primarily caused by each state’s level of institutional erosion at the moment the Soviet Union collapsed, and how and when each state managed to anchor its new political regime at the outset of its independence.

ISBN:
9789637326905
Subject:
Politikos mokslai / Political sciences
Related Publications:
Permalink:
https://www.lituanistika.lt/content/29279
Updated:
2021-02-02 22:23:25
Metrics:
Views: 29
Export:
Download