The Novgorod region of Russia is a sparsely populated area about the size of Ireland better known for its medieval archaeology and folklore than for anything else. Although Novgorod began the post-Soviet period with no unusual endowment of natural or human resources, it has attracted a large amount of foreign investment. Its dramatic economic success and political innovation have impressed observers. Local governments deliver benefits and services reliably, and the regional government responds quickly to citizens’ needs and demands. Something noteworthy is happening in Novgorod that does not square with familiar headlines about contemporary Russia: oligarchs and oil, ethnic tensions and corruption.
Nicolai N. Petro attempts to explain the Novgorod phenomenon by seeking answers at the regional level. Novgorod is, he finds, a model of effective democratic consolidation. Petro suggests that the region owes its unexpected recent success to its political elites, who have identified key cultural symbols and used those symbols to promote democratic development. Drawing on comparisons with other regions and countries, Petro finds that these cultural tactics often yield better results than do Western-style institutions and educational training programs.
“Current efforts to promote democracy focus too much on structural changes and not enough on the conditions needed to sustain them,” Petro writes. “For the rule of law, free markets, and free and fair elections to gain broad public support, they must first make sense within the local cultural tradition.” The unexpected success of regional democratic development in a country not known for its democratic traditions suggests that local governments can transform the burden of the past into an ally of change, a finding with implications for democratic development initiatives in other areas of the world.
Reviews
"Petro offers a fresh template for the future, suggesting that, at a time when the exportation of democracy is being debated for its efficacy, new ways to make democracy work—even in the darkest corners of the world—are not only necessary, but possible."—Publishers Weekly Annex, November 15, 2004
"Nicolai Petro has crafted a book of great merit, starting with its subject—democratization on a regional scale, as opposed [to] that of an entire country. In addition to painting a vivid picture of Novgorod, he examines different approaches toward explaining the phenomenon of its democracy, enlisting numerous works on democracy building . . . . a book of great value that can be considered an important landmark in both democratization and regional studies."—Political Science Quarterly
"Petro's is a doubly innovative contribution. To the copious, contentious literature on 'democratization,' he introduces the novel (though not entirely original) notion that the process should be studied at the local as well as the national level. One needs to explain why a region such as Novgorod, where he has spent considerable time, has done so well on this path, while other Russian regions with comparable characteristics have not. Second, he argues that the answer lies not where most political scientists look--that is, in institutions and the incentive structure of actors--but in culture. Culture, in the form of symbols drawn from history, not only can serve as context in turbulent times, but can also 'cause' change, and with surprising speed. Although Petro has a tendency to make culture the agent, he is in the end arguing that it comes down to how players make use of symbols--if they are lucky enough to have useful ones."—Robert Legvold, Foreign Affairs, March/April 2005
“Petro extols the virtues of the political model that has evolved in Novgorod province in northwestern Russia. He criticizes mainstream authors for concentrating on democracy at the national level while ignoring positive examples in the regions.”—Choice, May 2005
"[The publication of this book is] an event for those who study the legacy of Novgorod the Great in the establishment of the structures of civil society in Russia . . . one of the few studies of contemporary Russian reality that applies historical facts and theoretical political concepts professionally in order to make sense of the democratic reforms of the past decades. . . . [Petro’s approach] opens fundamentally new horizons for understanding the prospects for the democratic transition of Russian (and not only Russian) society, by viewing the country as a landscape of varied symbols, each having the potential to be utilized for effective, democratic social reforms." —Professor Konstantin Zavershinsky, Chelo, #3, 2004
“Petro’s case for Novgorod’s success is compelling and his theoretical discussion is challenging and valuable.”— Jeffrey W. Hahn, Russian Review, January 2006
“Petro is more cognizant than most of the high cost on local people of Putinís move to a more authoritarian state. But what this fascinating book clearly shows is that when there is political will at the top, there are many regions of Russia with a proud tradition of democracy, an indigenous Russian tradition upon which a lawbased state could be built.” —Karen Dawisha, Perspectives on Politics, March 2006.
“This is a most useful work for comparativists. Petro compares Novgorod with
regions such as Pskov, Orenburg, and the Pomor region around Arkhangelsk. Only the Pomor elites selected a strategy similar to Novgorodís, presenting democracy as a rebirth of their regionís democratic heritage, and only they achieved democratic change. . . . Petro also discusses analogous examples, such as Poland, where culture, symbols, and myth facilitated democratic transition. In many political transitions, from Turkey to Spain to Switzerland, cultural symbols and myth have been used by elites to promote change and produce stability. . . . Twenty years ago, Theda Skocpol issued an appeal to ‘bring the state back’ into social science research. Petroís appeal is similar. He proposes a culturally
focused method of evaluating transitions that broadens the research lens and
calls attention to a neglected variable. His work makes a valuable contribution to the analysis of political transitions.”—Barbara McCrea, Comparative Political Studies, December 2005.
“This is a truly unique book, addressed to readers in both Russia and abroad. Its author is not just another scholar and writer interested, as others have been, in the processes of transformation in the Russian provinces. From the outset he pursued a specific goal—to use the Novgorod region as a mirror to reflect on political reforms in Russia . . . . Nicolai N. Petro has spent a considerable amount of time in Novgorod, observing how average people lived, and how they became active participants in a new social system.”—Nikolai Grazhdankin, Mayor of Novgorod the Great
“Through a subtle, revealing examination of Russian regional politics, Nicolai N. Petro makes a compelling case that Western aid providers should give much greater attention to local cultural values and traditions when seeking to build democracy abroad.”—Thomas Carothers, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
“When it comes to Novgorod, Nicolai N. Petro is clearly in a league of his own. His nuanced and important book is based on extensive field work in the region and close access to many key individuals. Petro brings his research to bear on existing theoretical approaches, mounting a critique while generating an original theory.”—Richard Sakwa, University of Kent at Canterbury and author of Putin: Russia’s Choice and Russian Politics and Society
“Challenging the conventional wisdom of ‘how Russia went wrong,’ Nicolai N. Petro’s work on Novgorod explains how one Russian region got reform right. Culture and institutions do matter—and Petro’s lessons apply not only to Russia but any country in the midst of political transitions.”—Nikolas K. Gvosdev, executive editor of The National Interest and senior fellow at The Nixon Center, coeditor of Civil Society and the Search for Justice in Russia
“In approaching the Russian response to the Soviet collapse from a regional perspective, Nicolai N. Petro adds an important dimension to our understanding of political, economic, and social processes in that country. Novgorod, representing an unusual case even within the Russian context, deserves attention and investigation in its own right. Petro has managed to integrate complex sources and arguments into a coherent and provocative presentation.”—Blair Ruble, Director, Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies
