Shocking Mother Russia: Democratization, Social Rights, and Pension Reform in Russia, 1990-2001 by Andrea s> Chandler (review)

REVIEWS 573 democracy in the region. Equallyimportantis its abilityto deepen awareness of the fact that 'the liberal democratic project itself is as ambitious as it is fraught with difficultiesand inherent tensions whether in the East or the West' (p. 176). Department of Central andEastEuropean Studies DAVID J. SMITH & BalticResearch Unit,University of Glasgow Chandler, Andrea. Shocking MotherRussia:Democratization, SocialRights,and Pension Reform inRussia, I990-200I. University ofTorontoPress,Toronto, Buffalo,NY and London, 2004. xii + 246 pp. Figures.Tables. Appendices . Notes. Bibliography.Indexes. $6o.oo: ?4?.??. THISis a fascinating account of the changing nature and ideology of Soviet and then Russianpension systemssince 1917. The Soviet era detail and analysis is an integral part of the main focus of the book, two thirds of which is devoted to the post-Communistpensions story. After an introductorychapter on the economic and political difficultiesof handling the payment and reformof pensions during the transition,there are chapters on the Soviet pension system, I9I7-56; pensions under perestroika; early post-Communist pensions; the system during 1992-200I; the politics of pensions and the evolution of the Russian parliamentary system, 1994-99; contending understandingsof socialjustice over veterans'rightsand pensions; the course of pensions reform, I995-200I, and a conclusion. Several interlinkedthemes run through the book: the fiscal difficultiesof paying for any and all of the systems;the growing awarenessby pensioners and others that rights as well as needs were involved in the argumentsabout the principles and practice of provision;the use of social expendituresunder Communism as a signal of progress,and the change in that elite view under transition.But the irony behind the appealsto the past as a model for current provision is, as Chandler discovers,that 'the Soviet social welfare systemwas in fact an idealized constructionthat in realitynever lived up to its substantial claims of generous benefits and accessibilityto all' (p. I9). The researchuses a wide range of sources,includingrecordsof the Russian parliament, the USSR Supreme Soviet, and the RFSSR/Russian Federation Supreme Soviet. Press reports and interviews with officials and politicians sometimes include differentemphases,includingthe voices of recipientsof the system.In the last twentyyearsthe latterhave become increasinglyimportant, though policy making seems to have often remained the preserveof a distant and apparently detached elite, whose approach is technocratic rather than engaged. As Soviet and then Russiansocialpolicy is a distinctlyhome-grownanimal, Chandler'sconclusionsare of more than usualinterestin a subjectarea whose comparative aspects can sometimes seem more taxonomic than substantial. Here the storyis brought up to date with a discussionof the most recent 2003 Putin pension system, which, with its use of personal pension statements, a base block, a social insurance-basedsecond tier, and a third tier investment 574 SEER, 84, 3, JULY 2006 part - the latter two based on compulsory lifetime contributions - does seem closer to evolving Western systems. And as in Western systems, the Duma is reluctantto vote for the taxes necessaryto provide a substantialbase block. But veterans have retained some special advantages over non-veteran pensioners, which signals some continuitywith the Soviet past. The key findings are important. The pensions crisis, from Gorbachev to Putin, was not just an economic crisis,but also in part reflected the struggle between the presidency and the parliament that delayed decisive reform. In additionthere was a failureto develop effectiveinstitutionsto manage pension issues and a linked failureby the executive to give the issue the prioritythat arguablyit merited. The funding crisishad become criticalby 2000, and that criticalitypushed the issues up the agenda, and out into the legislativesea. Chandler is concerned to fix the blame for this long-delayed resolution on the key actors, and on the defining problems of Russia in its first postCommunist decade: the Duma - for promoting 'pension legislation that either could not be realized in practice, or that contained contradictionswith existing policies, thus renderingthe system increasinglyconvoluted and incoherent ' (p. I59); and the executive -for failingto give the issue priority,and for failing to create a coherent and effectivedivision of powers and resources across the regions. The lessons she drawsfrom this analysisare worth noting. First,a malfunctioning system can create as much disaffectionas one that radicallyreassigns rightsand resources.Secondly, a well functioningsystemrequireseffectiveand agreed laws and other institutions.Thirdly, an effectivereformrequiresthat it addressesthe electorate'sviews on and attachmentto the old...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.