New Moscow: An Exploratory Assessment

Argenbright, Robert

doi:10.2747/1539-7216.52.6.857

Cited by 22 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, the location of government offices in the city center creates excessive pressure on the transport system; therefore, it would be logical to relocate government offices to the suburbs. Cash generated from the sale of old buildings would be used to construct new purpose-buiU government blocks (Argenbright 2011).…”

Section: The "New Moscow"mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such governing regimes at the city level have been well documented in the literature, and their elements include western techniques and strategies of urban development, such as mega-projects (Argenbright 2011;Dixon 2010a) and global city branding (Golubchikov 2010). Using their powers in an authoritarian way, the authorities suspend local plans in order to introduce pro-growth regimes (Dixon 2010b, 809;Trumbull 2010, 794).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stuck in transition: Russian regional planning policy between spatial polarization and equalization

Kinossian

2013

Eurasian Geography and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The preparation of a nationwide framework for Russian regional planning policy has been impeded by an ongoing conflict between two competing logics of teixitorial organization: that of "polarized" or "equalized" development. This paper analyzes the preparation of the nationwide framework for regional planning within the context of political authoritarianism and continuing neoliberal reforms. The findings indicate (1) a stalemate in the preparation of regional policy, caused by fundamental contradictions between authoritarian centralization and the need to stimulate growth; (2) that in the absence of coherent regional policy, the govemment and other actors employ ad hoc "unguided" approaches to regional development projects; and (3) that the main result is an increasingly polarized pattem of development.

show abstract

Section: The "New Moscow"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stuck in transition: Russian regional planning policy between spatial polarization and equalization

Kinossian

2013

Eurasian Geography and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the one hand, there is the strong role of the federal state in regional development, which in the socalled vertical of power allocates resources to the development of regions, often through large "national projects" or federal target programs (Argenbright 2011;Dixon 2010;Kinossian and Morgan 2014;Orttung and Zhemukhov 2014;Remington 2015). In the absence of a functional regional development policy, these ad hoc approaches have led to an increasingly polarized form of regional development and have been unable to alleviate the persistence of regional inequalities (Gel'man and Ryzhenkov 2011;Kinossian 2013;Lankina 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

After Sochi 2014: costs and impacts of Russia’s Olympic Games

Müller

2014

Eurasian Geography and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper assesses the outcomes of the 2014 Winter Olympic Games in Sochi, Russia, examining the costs and economic impacts of the event, the prospects for the long-term use of venues and infrastructure, and the attitudes of the global and the Russian population. Total costs were $55 billion, having increased 4.5 times from $12 billion at the time of the bid. Of this total, about $16 billion were sports-related costs. After accounting for inflation, this makes Sochi the second-most expensive Olympics ever in terms of sports-related costs and the most expensive Olympics in terms of cost per event. With a public share of 96.5 percent of funding, the Sochi Games had the highest proportion of public money for any Olympic Games on record. The benefit from this high cost, however, is limited. Extensive construction led to hotel overcapacities, investors defaulted on state-backed loans, and there is no coherent plan for the after use of venues and some of the largest infrastructure projects. As a consequence, the Sochi Olympics will continue to be a burden for the Russian state, with expenses for operation, maintenance, and foregone interest and tax revenue in the order of $1.2 billion per year. The event also did not manage to improve the image of Russia in the world. Among the domestic population, support dropped over the seven years of its implementation, most notably among the local population.

show abstract

“…Moscow is the capital of Russia and one of the most densely urbanized areas in Europe (Argenbright, 2011). Moscow locates in the center of the East European Plain on the Moscow river in the interfluve of Oka and Volga.…”

Section: Research Areamentioning

confidence: 99%