No abstract

PurposeTo compare Russian and Ukrainian central governments' reaction to the pandemic, reflected in extraordinary budgetary allocations and to provide our understanding of how those allocations can be attributed to the two countries’ different social, economic and political contexts.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is built on secondary data analysis over a six-month period, i.e. January–June 2020, during which the real-time events were documented in a research diary. The data sources included budgetary and other relevant legislature, official reports from international agencies, news, press conferences and videos of interviews with key stakeholders.FindingsThe findings showed that uncertainty caused by COVID-19 and the corresponding lockdown policies in Russia and Ukraine have produced two divergent patterns of budgetary allocations: step-by-step budgetary allocations in Russia vs one emergency budget decision in Ukraine.Originality/valueThe paper explains the divergence of the central governments' budgetary decisions based on the same lockdown policy, in light of the different ideological and financial legitimized action spaces that frame governmental decisions.

This paper explores how the smart city idea unfolds in the bureaucratic context. Applying a qualitative approach and the Scandinavian stream of translation theory, we investigate the case of cities’ ‘smartification’ in Russia during 2017–2020. Tracking mechanisms and outcomes of translation, we see the encounter of the smart city idea and bureaucracy as context entanglement, with smartocracy as an epilogue. Context entanglement refers to the mutual co-translation of the smart city idea and bureaucracy by means of formal and informal mechanisms, implying that what happens with bureaucracy or the smart city cannot be fully described without considering what happens with the other. Smart city vagueness and complexity appear to be both strengths and weaknesses that can be compensated for by bureaucracy as the smart city assemblage point. Smartocracy appears as a new way to organize cities whereby bureaucracy deals with smart city creatively: it keeps the core of bureaucracy while simultaneously reinforcing it and isolating some complex idea elements for later translation. This approach helps keep bureaucracy as a rational form of city modernization while maintaining smart cities’ promise to improve urban futures.

PurposeThis study addresses the implications of smart city development paths (techno-centric and human-centric) by investigating the evolution of a city strategy, focusing on how different actors in a dialogue centred on strategic planning documents for Saint Petersburg, Russia, visualised the smart city and then made it calculable.Design/methodology/approachThe authors conducted a case study based on a documentary analysis supported by ethnographic elements relying on the smart city conceptual proposals, the approved city strategy and the artifacts of expert discussions leading to the strategy implementation plan.FindingsThrough the lens of dialogue theory, the authors show how government and non-government actors in different organisational settings devised techno-centric smart city calculations, which arose despite an initial human-centric vision.Research limitations/implicationsWhile the case study allowed the study to illustrate the depth and richness of the context of the authoritarian Russian state where the role of citizens in public decision-making is rather limited, different and even contrasting results could be produced in other contexts.Practical implicationsThere is a gap between a smart city vision and its grounding in calculations. Thus, the human-centric elements require special attention, and the organisation of the dialogue on smart city strategy must enable plurality of voices besides those of government actors.Originality/valueThe case suggests viewing the human-centric and techno-centric perspectives not as dichotomous, but rather emerging consecutively throughout the journey from an initial strategic vision to its implementation in the city's calculations.