MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754783613

Defining federalism in Russia: The emergence of bilateralism in intergovernmental fiscal relations.

2000· dissertation· en· W2754783613 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth Pascal

Bibliographic record

VenueDeep Blue (University of Michigan) · 2000
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRussia and Soviet political economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBilateralismFederalismPolitical scienceFiscal federalismMultilateralismPoliticsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dissertation examines the negotiation of the rules of federalism between the center and the regions in post-communist Russia. I argue that defining federalism---delineating areas of jurisdiction and authority between institutions at the national, regional, and local levels---encompasses a complex bargaining process among elites over federal authority as well as federal resources. Whereas much of the literature on federalism focuses on creating a blueprint for the sustainability of federalism, I contend that federal institutions represent the outcomes of often combative negotiations over the rules of the game. To explore this process, the dissertation focuses on the delineation of fiscal authority between the center and regions in the Russian Federation during the period from 1992 to 1998. I argue that the uncertain environment of Russia's transition and the widespread demands for fiscal reform led the central government to pursue bilateralism---direct negotiations and treaties between the executive branches of the central and regional governments---to resolve the country's fiscal and intergovernmental problems. Economically and politically stable regions benefited from the center's bilateral strategy, negotiating greater subnational control over local policy and resources, while poorer and fragmented regions continued to depend on a volatile center. Despite the short-term benefits of bilateralism to the center in terms of stability and political support, the resulting asymmetrical rulebook has emerged as a defining feature of Russia's system of federalism. The final chapter of the study addresses the ramifications of a bilateral system of federalism and its resultant asymmetries. I contrast the Russian case with two countries that rely primarily on multilateral intergovernmental institutions to define and reform federalism: Germany, following the incorporation of the eastern territories in 1990 and Canada during the federal debates of the 1980s and early 1990s. Within the confines of multilateral and consensual negotiations, regional elites must rely on intra-regional cooperation and compromise to resolve intergovernmental tensions. Whereas Russia's bilateral system possesses the potential for more rapid and extensive reform to the structure of federalism than the multilateral systems in Germany and Canada, it also contains the seeds for continuing conflict and challenges to federal arrangements.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDeep Blue (University of Michigan)Same topicRussia and Soviet political economyFrench-language works237,207