Выборы в трудные времена: факторы поражения инкумбентов на субнациональном уровне
Научная статья
Для цитирования
Шкель С. Н. Выборы в трудные времена: факторы поражения инкумбентов на субнациональном уровне // Власть и элиты. 2025. Том 12. № 1. С. 93-118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31119/pe.2025.12.1.3 EDN: NDSXVR
Аннотация
Результаты выборов депутатов Госдумы Российской Федерации 2021 г. в целом подтвердили электоральное доминирование партии «Единая Россия». Вместе с тем в отличие от предыдущей избирательной кампании 2016 г. они продемонстрировали поражение «партии власти» в четырех российских регионах. В статье изучаются причины данных электоральных неудач партии-инкумбента на субнациональном уровне с помощью парного сравнительного анализа политической ситуации в республиках Саха (Якутия) и Башкортостан (Башкирия). Делается вывод, что одной из возможных причин снижения электоральной поддержки «партии власти» на региональном уровне является институциональный фактор, а именно прямые выборы глав муниципалитетов. Наличие этого института в Якутии не позволило новому главе республики установить эффективный контроль над главными политическими игроками. Напротив, новый глава Башкортостана, не имея подобного ограничения, смог быстро консолидировать региональную элиту, ликвидировать оппозицию и повысить электоральную поддержку «партии власти» даже в условиях эпидемиологического и экономического кризисов.
Ключевые слова:
выборы, политические институты, электоральные процессы, политические машины, российская политика, этнополитика
Литература
1. Гилев А.В., Семенов А.В., Шевцова И.К. «Политические машины» и их «водители»: электоральное администрирование на местном уровне // Полития: Анализ. Хроника. Прогноз (Журнал политической философии и социологии политики). 2017. № 3(46). С. 62–80. https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2017-86-3-62-80. EDN: XTXFXF
2. Сироткина Е.В., Карандашова С.А. Лояльность элит и выборы глав регионов: роль предвыборных конфликтов в исходе голосования // Полис. Политические исследования. 2017. № 6. C. 76–91. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2017.06.06. EDN: ZVMOLB
3. Шкель С.Н. Скованные одной цепью: механизмы электоральной мобилизации на локальном уровне в этнических республиках России // Ars Administrandi (Искусство управления). 2021. № 3(13). С. 381–405. https://doi.org/10.17072/2218-9173-2021-3-381-405. EDN: IIYDWR
4. Acemoglu D., Robinson J.A. Economic origins of dictatorship and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 432 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511510809.
5. Boix C. Political parties, growth and equality: conservative and social democratic economic strategies in the world economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. 280 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174947.
6. Bunce V., Wolchik L. Defeating authoritarian leaders in post-communist countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 373 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511977404.
7. Fiorina M. Economic retrospective voting in American national elections: A micro-analysis. American journal of political science. 1978. Vol. 22. No. 2. P. 426–443. https://doi.org/10.2307/2110623.
8. Gervasoni С. A Rentier theory of subnational regimes. World Politics. 2010. Vol. 62. No. 2. P. 302–340. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887110000067.
9. Golosov G. Machine politics: the concept and its implications for post-soviet studies. Demokratizatsiya: journal of post-soviet democratization. 2013. Vol. 21. No. 4. P. 459–480.
10. Golosov G. Voter volatility in electoral authoritarian regimes: testing the «Tragic Brilliance» thesis. Comparative sociology. 2016. Vol. 15. No. 5. P. 535–559. https://doi.org/10.1163/15691330-12341399.
11. Goodnow R., Moser R., Smith T. Layers of Ethnicity: The Effects of Ethnic Federalism, Majority-Minority Districts, and Minority Concentration on the Electoral Success of Ethnic Minorities in Russia. Comparative Political Studies. 2012. Vol. 45. No. 2. P. 167–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414011421310.
12. Hale H. Explaining machine politics in Russia’s regions: economy, ethnicity, and legacy. Post-Soviet Affairs. 2003. Vol. 19. No. 3. P. 228–263. https://doi.org/10.2747/1060-586X.19.3.228
13. Hale H. Patronal Politics. Eurasian regime dynamic in comparative perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. 542 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139683524
14. Huntington S. The third wave: democratization in the late twentieth century. Norman; London: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991. 366 p.
15. Kitschelt H., Wilkinson S. A research agenda for the study of citizen–politician linkages and democratic accountability. Patrons, clients, and policies. Ed. by H. Kitschelt, S. Wilkinson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. P. 322–343. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511585869.014
16. Lazarev Y.A., Sobolev A.S., Soboleva I.V., Sokolov B. Trial by fire: a natural disaster’s impact on support for the authorities in rural Russia. World Politics. 2014. Vol. 66. No. 4. P. 641–668. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887114000215
17. Lijphart A. Comparative politics and the comparative method. The American political science review. 1971. Vol. 65. No. 3. P. 682–693. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955513.
18. Magaloni B. Voting for autocracy. hegemonic party survival and its demise in Mexico. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. 296 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511510274.
19. Matsuzato K. From ethno-bonapartism to centralized caciquismo: characteristics and origins of the Tatarstan political regime, 1900–2000. Journal of communist studies and transition politics. 2001. Vol. 17. No. 4. P. 43–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/714003590.
20. McFaul M. The Orange Revolution in a comparative perspective. Revolution in orange: The origins of Ukraine’s democratic breakthrough. Ed. by A. Aslund, M. McFaul. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2006. P. 165−197.
21. Minaeva E., Panov P. Dense networks, ethnic minorities, and electoral mobilization in contemporary Russia. Problems of post-communism. 2023. Vol. 70. No. 4. P. 376–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/10758216.2021.1974885
22. Mueller J.E. Presidential popularity from Truman to Johnson. American political science review. 1970. Vol. 64. No. 1. P. 18–34. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955610
23. Nichter S. Vote buying or turnout buying? Machine politics and the secret ballot. American political science review. 2008. Vol. 102. No. 1. P. 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055408080106
24. Pepinsky T.B. Economic crises and the breakdown of authoritarian regimes: Indonesia and Malaysia in comparative perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 326 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609954
25. Ravanilla N., Haim D., Hicken A. Brokers, social networks, reciprocity and strategies of clientelism. American journal of political science. 2022. Vol. 66. No. 4. P. 795–812. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12604
26. Saikkonen I. Electoral mobilization and authoritarian elections: evidence from post-soviet Russia. Government and opposition. 2017. Vol. 52. No. 1. P. 51–74. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2015.20
27. Scott J. Corruption, machine politics, and political change. The American political science review. 1969. Vol. 63. No. 4. P. 1142–1158. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955076
28. Shkel S. Bastions of tradition: the ethnic factor and political machines in Russian regions. Russian politics. 2019. Vol. 4. No. 1. P. 76–111. https://doi.org/10.1163/2451-8921-00401004
29. Shkel S. Why political machines fail: evidence from Bashkortostan. Demokratizatsiya: the journal of post-soviet democratization. 2021. Vol. 29. No. 1. P. 31–62.
30. Stokes S. Perverse accountability: a formal model of machine politics with evidence from Argentina. American political science review. 2005. Vol. 99. No. 3. P. 315–325. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055405051683
31. White A., Saikkonen I. More than a name? Variation in electoral mobilisation of titular and non-titular ethnic minorities in Russian national elections. Ethnopolitics. 2017. Vol. 16. No. 5. P. 450–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2016.1221186
32. White A. A chink in the autocrat’s armour: demographic change and voter turnout in Putin’s Russia. Ethnopolitic. 2022. Vol. 21. No. 4. P. 381–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2021.1901187
33. Zavadskaya M., Welzel C. Subverting autocracy: emancipative mass values in competitive authoritarian regimes, Democratization. 2015. Vol. 22. No. 6. P. 1105–1130. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2014.914500
2. Сироткина Е.В., Карандашова С.А. Лояльность элит и выборы глав регионов: роль предвыборных конфликтов в исходе голосования // Полис. Политические исследования. 2017. № 6. C. 76–91. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2017.06.06. EDN: ZVMOLB
3. Шкель С.Н. Скованные одной цепью: механизмы электоральной мобилизации на локальном уровне в этнических республиках России // Ars Administrandi (Искусство управления). 2021. № 3(13). С. 381–405. https://doi.org/10.17072/2218-9173-2021-3-381-405. EDN: IIYDWR
4. Acemoglu D., Robinson J.A. Economic origins of dictatorship and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 432 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511510809.
5. Boix C. Political parties, growth and equality: conservative and social democratic economic strategies in the world economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. 280 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174947.
6. Bunce V., Wolchik L. Defeating authoritarian leaders in post-communist countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 373 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511977404.
7. Fiorina M. Economic retrospective voting in American national elections: A micro-analysis. American journal of political science. 1978. Vol. 22. No. 2. P. 426–443. https://doi.org/10.2307/2110623.
8. Gervasoni С. A Rentier theory of subnational regimes. World Politics. 2010. Vol. 62. No. 2. P. 302–340. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887110000067.
9. Golosov G. Machine politics: the concept and its implications for post-soviet studies. Demokratizatsiya: journal of post-soviet democratization. 2013. Vol. 21. No. 4. P. 459–480.
10. Golosov G. Voter volatility in electoral authoritarian regimes: testing the «Tragic Brilliance» thesis. Comparative sociology. 2016. Vol. 15. No. 5. P. 535–559. https://doi.org/10.1163/15691330-12341399.
11. Goodnow R., Moser R., Smith T. Layers of Ethnicity: The Effects of Ethnic Federalism, Majority-Minority Districts, and Minority Concentration on the Electoral Success of Ethnic Minorities in Russia. Comparative Political Studies. 2012. Vol. 45. No. 2. P. 167–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414011421310.
12. Hale H. Explaining machine politics in Russia’s regions: economy, ethnicity, and legacy. Post-Soviet Affairs. 2003. Vol. 19. No. 3. P. 228–263. https://doi.org/10.2747/1060-586X.19.3.228
13. Hale H. Patronal Politics. Eurasian regime dynamic in comparative perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. 542 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139683524
14. Huntington S. The third wave: democratization in the late twentieth century. Norman; London: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991. 366 p.
15. Kitschelt H., Wilkinson S. A research agenda for the study of citizen–politician linkages and democratic accountability. Patrons, clients, and policies. Ed. by H. Kitschelt, S. Wilkinson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. P. 322–343. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511585869.014
16. Lazarev Y.A., Sobolev A.S., Soboleva I.V., Sokolov B. Trial by fire: a natural disaster’s impact on support for the authorities in rural Russia. World Politics. 2014. Vol. 66. No. 4. P. 641–668. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887114000215
17. Lijphart A. Comparative politics and the comparative method. The American political science review. 1971. Vol. 65. No. 3. P. 682–693. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955513.
18. Magaloni B. Voting for autocracy. hegemonic party survival and its demise in Mexico. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. 296 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511510274.
19. Matsuzato K. From ethno-bonapartism to centralized caciquismo: characteristics and origins of the Tatarstan political regime, 1900–2000. Journal of communist studies and transition politics. 2001. Vol. 17. No. 4. P. 43–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/714003590.
20. McFaul M. The Orange Revolution in a comparative perspective. Revolution in orange: The origins of Ukraine’s democratic breakthrough. Ed. by A. Aslund, M. McFaul. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2006. P. 165−197.
21. Minaeva E., Panov P. Dense networks, ethnic minorities, and electoral mobilization in contemporary Russia. Problems of post-communism. 2023. Vol. 70. No. 4. P. 376–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/10758216.2021.1974885
22. Mueller J.E. Presidential popularity from Truman to Johnson. American political science review. 1970. Vol. 64. No. 1. P. 18–34. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955610
23. Nichter S. Vote buying or turnout buying? Machine politics and the secret ballot. American political science review. 2008. Vol. 102. No. 1. P. 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055408080106
24. Pepinsky T.B. Economic crises and the breakdown of authoritarian regimes: Indonesia and Malaysia in comparative perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 326 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609954
25. Ravanilla N., Haim D., Hicken A. Brokers, social networks, reciprocity and strategies of clientelism. American journal of political science. 2022. Vol. 66. No. 4. P. 795–812. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12604
26. Saikkonen I. Electoral mobilization and authoritarian elections: evidence from post-soviet Russia. Government and opposition. 2017. Vol. 52. No. 1. P. 51–74. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2015.20
27. Scott J. Corruption, machine politics, and political change. The American political science review. 1969. Vol. 63. No. 4. P. 1142–1158. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955076
28. Shkel S. Bastions of tradition: the ethnic factor and political machines in Russian regions. Russian politics. 2019. Vol. 4. No. 1. P. 76–111. https://doi.org/10.1163/2451-8921-00401004
29. Shkel S. Why political machines fail: evidence from Bashkortostan. Demokratizatsiya: the journal of post-soviet democratization. 2021. Vol. 29. No. 1. P. 31–62.
30. Stokes S. Perverse accountability: a formal model of machine politics with evidence from Argentina. American political science review. 2005. Vol. 99. No. 3. P. 315–325. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055405051683
31. White A., Saikkonen I. More than a name? Variation in electoral mobilisation of titular and non-titular ethnic minorities in Russian national elections. Ethnopolitics. 2017. Vol. 16. No. 5. P. 450–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2016.1221186
32. White A. A chink in the autocrat’s armour: demographic change and voter turnout in Putin’s Russia. Ethnopolitic. 2022. Vol. 21. No. 4. P. 381–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2021.1901187
33. Zavadskaya M., Welzel C. Subverting autocracy: emancipative mass values in competitive authoritarian regimes, Democratization. 2015. Vol. 22. No. 6. P. 1105–1130. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2014.914500
Статья
Поступила: 09.06.2025
Опубликована: 28.08.2025
Форматы цитирования
Другие форматы цитирования:
ACM
[1]
Шкель, С.Н. 2025. Выборы в трудные времена: факторы поражения инкумбентов на субнациональном уровне. Власть и элиты. 12, 1 (авг. 2025), 93-118. DOI:https://doi.org/10.31119/pe.2025.12.1.3.
Раздел
Региональные элиты России
