Engaging the Russian Elite: Approaches, Methods and Ethics

Abstract

This article discusses the strategies and country‐specific challenges of conducting elite interviews overseas. Drawing on examples from fieldwork undertaken in the Russian Federation, it explores the ways in which the knowledge produced from such interviews is contingent on the analytical approaches selected; the researcher's time‐specific entry into the field; issues of ethics; the contemporary political environment; and notions of insider/outsider. Undertaking elite interviews overseas places the researcher in a particularly intense and unique set of power relations with his or her research subjects. This provides both opportunities and challenges, which ultimately have the potential to elicit insights into the personal convictions and beliefs of the political and intellectual elite, as well as the contexts within which they operate.

Challenges and Best‐practice Recommendations for Designing and Conducting Interviews with Elite Informants

“…When comparing elites in Norway and France, she was forced to adjust her approach in conducting interviews to match the culture of the local elite. Other researchers have described the advantages and challenges foreign researchers face when trying to interview local elites in emerging countries such as Russia (Richardson, 2014; White et al, 1996), Eastern Europe (Mikecz, 2012), Hong Kong (Yeung, 1995) and Cameroon (Morse, 2018). Moreover, researchers found that elites responded differently to fellow compatriots than to foreign researchers.…”

The Local Dynamics of Nation Building: Identity Politics and Constructions of the Russian Nation in Kazan and Ekaterinburg

“…Similarly, in Ekaterinburg, interviewees avoided criticizing the political structures behind conditions that they hinted were unfavorable for advancing positive collective identities. This caution presented certain challenges to the research, as observed elsewhere in authoritarian contexts, particularly concerning interviewee vulnerability, performance in responses, and the potential for sensitive questions to close down a conversation (Yusupova 2019; Richardson 2014; Goode 2010). Monitoring comfort levels and maintaining spontaneity therefore became important elements of the interview approach, and abilities I honed during the process.…”

Transparency and quality assessment of research data in post-Soviet area studies: The potential of an interactive online platform

“…Second, in the snowball approach, respondents will most likely suggest like-minded people for interviews. In addition, in hybrid and authoritarian regimes, specific respondents may be discouraged from talking to academic researchers or may self-censor their answers (Beisembayeva, Papoutsaki, Kolesova, & Kulikova, 2013; Goode, 2010; Richardson, 2014; Roberts, 2013; Shih, 2015).…”

“…Thus, the increased visibility and surveillance of opinions shared on social media has made it easier for the Azerbaijani government to swiftly and severely punish online activities (Alexanyan et al, 2012; Pearce, 2015; Pearce & Guliyev, 2016). As Roberts (2013, p. 344) points out, “there can be no limit on the provision of anonymity and care in handling data; even in cases when the respondent does not ask for that provision” (see also Richardson, 2014, p. 185).…”