title: Studying the Electoral Governance: a Research Agenda
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Grishin, Nikolai V.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2019-11-27T09:42:20Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2019-11-27T09:42:20Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2019-06
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Grishin N. V. Studying the Electoral Governance: a Research Agenda. Political Expertise: POLITEX, 2019, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 261–274.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu23.2019.207
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/16689
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: The article discusses the features of the formation and current state of the research agenda in
  the study of public policy and management in the field of the electoral process. The differences
  in the choice of research topics between the expert-analytical and academic communities are
  revealed. The theoretical study of the state electoral policy begins only at the end of the 20th
  century; in determining the themes and even the conceptual guidelines in this subject area, the
  priority belongs to the expert-analytical community. Leading international think tanks have a significant
  influence on the formation of a research agenda in the study of electoral governance. The
  effectiveness of the existing division of labor between the expert and academic communities in
  the study of electoral governance can be revised. The dominance of rational choice theory and
  other subjectivist approaches in theoretical studies restricts the research agenda. The exceeding
  specialization and fragmentation of this subject area cause a lack of coordination in defining and
  structuring the problem-thematic field. Large institutions and objects of electoral governance are
  studied only within the framework of expert-analytical works and do not become the subject of the
  necessary theoretical studies. Methodological possibilities of new institutionalism are practically
  not used in setting the directions and questions of research in this field. In Russian science, in
  defining research topics in the consideration of state electoral policy, the predominant attribution
  of this field of knowledge to jurisprudence and the weak degree of inclusion of domestic authors
  in the global scientific discourse are of the greatest importance.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: ru
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Political Expertise: POLITEX;Volume 15; Issue 2
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: electoral governance
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: electoral policy
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: elections
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: electoral management
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: think tanks
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: research agenda
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Studying the Electoral Governance: a Research Agenda
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 261-274.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/16689/1/261-274.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 677,61 kB