Resource-actor analysis in political studies
https://doi.org/10.26794/2226-7867-2022-12-2-45-52
Abstract
The article presents an algorithm for conducting resource-actor analysis in political research. Proposed algorithm is based on the use of SWOT analysis and elements of game theory. The author analyzed political actors, resources, institutions by analogy with companies competing in the market. The internal and external environment of actors is studied, key assets and competencies are identified. The obtained results are entered into the SWOT analysis matrix. The firm’s strengths and capabilities form the basis of the strategy. Weaknesses and threats pose potential risks. Based on the game theory payment matrix, the author presented four possible outcomes of the case actors’ game. Also, the possibility of using the concepts of a minimum winning coalition and veto players to form a strategy is shown.
About the Author
S. V. Rastorguev
Financial University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Doctor of Political Science, Professor of the Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social Sciences and Mass Communications
Moscow
References
1. Gelman V., Ryzhenkov S., Bree M., eds. Russia of regions: transformation of political regimes. Moscow: Ves mir, Berlin: Berliner Debatte; 2000. 374 p. (In Russ.).
2. Turovsky R.F. Political regionalism. Moscow: HSE Publishing House; 2006. (In Russ.).
3. Baranov N. [Personal site]. Analysis of the regional political regime. URL: https://www.nicbar.ru/politology/study/kurs-politicheskaya-regionalistika/189-lektsiya-10-analiz-regionalnogo-politicheskogo-protsessa. (In Russ.).
4. Belokonev S. Yu., Ignatovsky Ya.R., Pechenkin N.M. Dynamics of socio-political sentiments and analysis of the election results in the Republic of Khakassia in 2018. Gumanitarnye Nauki.Vestnik Finasovogo Universiteta = Humanities and Social Sciences. Bulletin of the Financial University. 2019;9(4):19–24. (In Russ.).
5. Avdonin V.S., Semenov A.V., Gilev A.V. Problems and directions of Russian studies of subnational policy. Political science. 2017;(4):18–19. (In Russ.).
6. Skopin A. Yu., Klimov A.I., Zaitsev D.G. Actor approach in modern social sciences: economics, sociology and political science. URL: https://www.hse.ru/data/2012/12/16/1300987726/Skopin%20A.Yu.,%20Klimov%20A.I.,%20Zaitsev%20D.G.%20Ak..in% 20modern%20social%20sciences.pdf. (In Russ.).
7. North D. Institutions, institutional changes and the functioning of the economy. Per from English. Moscow: Foundation of the economic book “Nachala”; 1997. (In Russ.).
8. Dahl R. Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1961.
9. Etzioni A. A Comparative Analysis of Complex Organizations: On Power, Involvement, and Their Correlates. New York: Free Press; 1961.
10. M.F. Instrumental and Infra-resources: The Bases of Power. American Journal of Sociology. 1974;(9):1418–1433.
11. Porter M. Competitive advantage: how to achieve high performance and ensure its sustainability. Transl. from Eng. Moscow: Alpina Publisher; 2019. 716 p. (In Russ.).
12. Aaker D. Business strategy. From studying the market environment to developing win-win strategies. Moscow: Eksmo; 2007. 464 p. (In Russ.).
13. Gamson W. A theory of coalition formation. American Sociological Review. 1961;26(3);373–382;
14. Riker W.H. The theory of political coalitions. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1962. 300 p.
15. Tsebelis G. Veto players and institutional analysis. Governance: An International journal of Policy and Administration. 2000;13(4):441–474.
Review
For citations:
Rastorguev S.V. Resource-actor analysis in political studies. Humanities and Social Sciences. Bulletin of the Financial University. 2022;12(2):45-52. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26794/2226-7867-2022-12-2-45-52
Views:
597
Email this article 