Modernization of government management in empires of new time: comparative political analysis

The article deals with the issues related to the modernization of public administration in the imperial states of modern times. Russian, British and Ottoman empires as states implementing various strategies of modernization and improvement of public administration were chosen as examples. The success of modernization reforms of the administration is one of the essential conditions for maintaining stability and development of the imperial political system, formalizing the domination of the center in relation to the periphery. The Ottoman Empire failed to implement the policy of modernization of public administration in a timely and consistent manner. The British Empire was combined the strategies of centralization and decentralization of state management of its overseas colonies. The Russian Empire - a special imperial system -implemented, within the framework of the unitary state, the principle of centralization of the system of management, but its implementation in the development of the central bureaucratic apparatus of the empire was limited by the autocratic monarchy. At the same time, the Russian Empire was flexible in terms of differentiation of the management approaches. The article substantiates the conclusion that the imperial administration was an expression of centripetal political processes in the imperial system provided them and was an expression of the political power of the center which has an autocratic character in relation to the periphery. The processes associated with the administration of the Empire are concentrated in its center and implemented in addition to the will of the periphery. In institutional terms, the center of the empire is represented by general imperial authorities and management, in functional terms, the imperial power has exclusive administrative prerogatives associated with the concentration of resources of power and their distribution over the imperial hierarchy. The differentiation of administrative approaches shows the administrative and political specificity of the empire-state. In general the modernization of management empire became a significant factor in allowing the empire to most effectively carry out the concentration of political resources.

modernization, public administration, centralization, periphery, Russian Empire, British Empire, colonies

1. Akademicheskij slovar’ teorii i istorii imperij [Academic Dictionary of Theory and History of Empires] Pod red. V.N. Baryshnikov. − SPb.: SPbU, 2012, − p. 728.

2. Veber M. Politika kak prizvanie i professija [Politics as a vocation and profession] // Veber M. Izbrannye proizvedenija. − M.: Progress, 1990, pp. 644−706.

3. Vysokova V.V., Chemjakin E.Ju., Markushina K.A. Britanskaja imperija: stanovlenie, jevoljucija, raspad [The British Empire: formation, evolution, decay] / Pod red. V.V. Vysokovoj. − Ekaterinburg: Volot, 2010. 188 p.

4. Gatagova L.S. Imperija: identifikacija problemy [Empire: identification of the problem] // Istoricheskie issledovanija v Rossii. Tendencii poslednih let / Pod red. G.A. Bordjugova. M.: AIRO-HH, 1996, pp. 332–353.

5. Dulina N.A. Tanzimat i Mustafa Reshid-pasha [Tanzimat and Mustafa Reshid Pasha]. M.: Nauka, GRVL, 1984. 189 p.

6. Kamenskij A. Jelity Rossijskoj imperii i mehanizmy administrativnogo upravlenija [Elites of the Russian Empire and the mechanisms of administrative management] // Rossijskaja imperija v sravnitel’noj perspektive: Sb. statej / Pod red. A.I. Millera. − M.: Novoe izdatel’stvo, 2004, pp. 115−139.

7. Kamenskij A.B. Rossijskie reformy: uroki istorii [Russian Reforms: Lessons from History] // Voprosy filosofii, 2006, I. 6, pp. 21–39.

8. Kiselev A. A. Rozhdenie imperii. Britanskoe gosudarstvo i kolonializm v XVII-XVIII vv. [The birth of the empire. The British state and colonialism in the XVII-XVIII centuries]. − Volgograd: Izd-vo VolGU, 2012. 332 p.

9. Kuprjashin G.L. Modernizacija gosudarstvennogo upravlenija: racionalizm vs tradicionalizm [Modernization of public administration: rationalism vs traditionalism] // Problemnyj analiz i gosudarstvenno-upravlencheskoe proektirovanie. Vypusk 2011, V. 4, I. 4, pp. 70–82.

10. Kuprjashin G.L. Politiko-administrativnye instituty modernizacii gosudarstvennogo upravlenija: avtoreferat disю. doktora politicheskih nauk [Politiko-administrative institutes of modernization of the government: the abstract of the dissertation on Doctor of Political Science.]. − M., 2013. 46 p.

11. Lazorin K.B. Sootnoshenie principov centralizacii i decentralizacii pri postroenii sistemy gosudarstvennogo upravlenija v Rossii v XVIII-XIX vekah [Correlation of the principles of centralization and decentralization in the construction of the system of public administration in in the XVIII-XIX centuries] // Istorija gosudarstva i prava, 2014, I 1, pp. 21−26.

12. Lal D. Pohvala imperii: Globalizacija i porjadok [In Praise of Empires: Globalization and Order]. M.: Novoe izdatel’stvo, 2010. 364 p.

13. Liven D. Imperija na periferii Evropy: sravnenie Rossii i Zapada [Empire on the periphery of Europe: a comparison of Russia and the West] // Rossijskaja imperija v sravnitel’noj perspektive: Sb. statej / Pod red. A.I. Millera. M.: Novoe izdatel’stvo, 2004, pp. 71–93.

14. Plaksin S., Zhulin A. Puti modernizacii gosudarstvennogo apparata: administrativnaja reforma ireforma gosudarstvennoj grazhdanskoj sluzhby [Ways of modernization of the state apparatus: administrative reform and reform of the state civil service] // Voprosy jekonomiki. 2008, I. 2, pp. 73–82.

15. Sanderlend V. Ministerstvo aziatskoj Rossii: nikogda ne sushhestvovavshee, no imevshee dlja jetogo vse shansy kolonial’noe vedomstvo [The Ministry of Asian Russia: never existed, but had the chances of a colonial office]// Imperium inter pares: Rol’ transfertov v rossijskoj imperii / pod red. M.Austa, R. Vil’pius, A. Millera. M.: NLO, 2010, pp. 21–39.

16. Semenov A. Obzor raboty mezhdunarodnoj konferencii «Istorija imperij: sravnitel’nye metody v izuchenii i prepodavanii» [Review of the work of the international conference «History of Empires: Comparative Methods in Study and Teaching»] // Rossijskaja imperija v sravnitel’noj perspektive Sbornik statej / Pod red. A.I. Millera. М.: Novoe izdatel’stvo, 2004, pp. 15–32.

17. Trofimova I.N. Organizacija upravlenija nacional’nymi territorijami vRossii: istoricheskij opyt isovremennye problemy [Organization of the management of national territories in Russia: historical experience and contemporary problems] // Istorija gosudarstva i prava, 2014, I. 1, pp. 27–32.

18. Upravlenie [Management]// Jenciklopedija gosudarstvennogo upravlenija v Rossii: v 2 t. / Pod obshh. red. V.K. Egorova. Otv. red. I.N. Barcic. M.: Izd-vo RAGS, 2008. V. 2, pp. 365–366.

19. Hazanov A. Osobennosti anglijskogo i portugal’skogo kolonializma: sravnitel’nyj analiz [Features of English and Portuguese colonialism: a comparative analysis] // Observer. 2007. I. 4, pp. 121−126.

20. Crises and Sequences in Political Development / Ed. L.Binder, J. S. Colman, J. LaPalombara, L. W. Pye, S. Verba, M.Weiner. Princeton University Press, 1971. 340 p.

21. Doyl M.W. Empires. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1986. 407 p.

22. Pye L.W. Political science and crisis of authoritarianism // American Political Science Review, 1990, V. 84. I. 1, pp. 3–19.

23. Said E.S. Culture and Imperialism. New York: Vintage, 1993. XXVIII. 380 р.

24. Wank S. The Habsburg Empire // K. Barkey and M. von Hagen (eds.), After Empire. Multiethnic Societies and Nation-Building. The Soviet Union and the Russian, Ottoman, and Habsburg Empires. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. 1997, pp. 45−57.