The Institutional Crisis of Urban Zoning in Russia

   This study focuses on the institutional crisis of zoning in Russia, understood as a legal and administrative institution, which manifests in the gap between its official purpose as a mechanism for regulating construction and its actual law enforcement practice. The theoretical framework of the research is based on the principles of neo-institutional theory, including a discursive approach that explains how zoning — formally established as a regulatory legal act—is transformed in practice into a tool of ad hoc administration. The proposed hypothesis suggests that the absence of a clear narrative on zoning in official discourse contributes to the institutional uncertainty surrounding it. This results in the loss of regulatory autonomy, dependence on the functional zoning of the general plan, and subordination to the bureaucratic logic of administrative simplification. The key research questions include an analysis of institutional communication between different levels of government, the distinction between zoning as an institution and as a tool, and the identification of information asymmetry in law enforcement. The study employs discourse analysis methods, including the examination of legal acts, explanatory notes to draft laws, departmental acts, public reports, and analytical reviews. Empirical discourse is explored through in-depth expert interviews, surveys of local self-government bodies and state authorities of the Russian Federation, judicial practices, an analysis of land use and development rules, their amendments, and individual acts applying special procedures. The analysis is conducted through the lens of key narratives such as the simplification of administrative procedures, the reduction of regulatory barriers, and the centralization of powers in urban planning. The results indicate that zoning is losing its institutional agency, transforming into an instrument of administrative regulation that fails to ensure regulatory certainty and predictability in land use and development.

1. Babeykin R. V. (2024) Evaluation of the effectiveness of regional practices of centralization of management in the sphere of urban development in Russia. Public administration. Electronic Bulletin, 106, рр. 183‒199. doi: 10.24412/4xd54757 (in Russ.)

2. Bandorin L. E. (2011) Permitted use of land plots. PhD dissertation in Law (specialization 12.00.06 — Land law). Moscow, 2011. 227 p. (in Russ.)

3. Bandorin L. E. (2016) On the redistribution of powers of state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments in the field of land relations. Environmental law, 6, рр. 8‒14. EDN: XIQHNR (in Russ.)

4. Bederson V., Minaeva E. (2024) Our people — let’s settle accounts: conditions for the centralization of municipal powers in the urban development sphere. Russian Sociological Review, 2 (23), рр. 67‒89. doi: 10.17323/1728-192x-2024-2-67-89 EDN: AETTRI (in Russ.)

5. Volkova N. (2024) Urban development reform: (non)legal regulation in Russian cities. Russian Sociological Review, 2 (23), рр. 11‒38. doi: 10.17323/1728-192x-2024-2-11-38 EDN: PXSYYJ (in Russ.)

6. Vysokovsky A. A. (2015) Alexander Vysokovsky. Volume 1. THEORY. Gray Matter. (in Russ.)

7. Planning for sprawl. Spatial policy of Russian cities (Text) : research paper / A. V. Golovin, T. V. Gudz’, G. V. Vitkov, I. V. Karasel’nikova, N. A. Kosolapov; R. V. Goncharov, E. A. Kotov, V. A. Molodcova, Yu. V. Kul’chickiy, R. V. Babeykin, D. D. Duzhik, D. V. Parfyonova; Higher School of Economics (HSE). M.: Izd. dom Vysshej shkoly ekonomiki (Editorial House of the Higher School of Economics), 2021. 248 p. EDN: XNXTZF (in Russ.)

8. Gromova D. V. (2015) Redistribution of powers in the field of urban development. Modern Trends in Economics and Management: A New Look, 33, рр. 1‒8. EDN: TWLJNP (in Russ.)

9. Gudz’ T. V., Babeikin R. V., Samolovskikh N. V. (2024) Trends in the redistribution of municipal powers in the field of urban planning. Law, 2, рр. 184‒195. EDN: ZONWND. doi: 10.37239/0869-4400-2024-21-2-184-195 (in Russ.)

10. Gudz’ T. V., Soldatova L. V., Samolovskikh N. V. (2023) Principles of urban zoning in judicial practice. Law enforcement, 3, рр. 105‒115. EDN: JAWMYK. doi: 10.52468/2542-1514.2023.7(3).105-115 (in Russ.)

11. Nanba S. B. (2016) Redistribution of powers: the relationship between federal and regional regulation. Journal of Russian Law, 6, рр. 32‒40. EDN: WDCPVB. (in Russ.)

12. Trutnev E. K. (2019) Urban planning: Legal support for urban planning: alternative models of legislation and a program to correct its errors. Institute of Urban Economics Foundation. (in Russ.)

13. Trutnev E. K., Bandorin L. E. (2010) Commentary on the Urban Planning Code of the Russian Federation. Answers to problematic issues of urban planning. Prospect. EDN: QSMNGJ. (in Russ.)

14. Uvarov A. A. (2022) On the principles of monitoring law enforcement. Monitoring of Law Enforcement, 1 (42), рр. 56‒60. EDN: PHGLYX. (in Russ.)

15. Chavance B. (2008) Formal and Informal Institutional Change: the Experience of Postsocialist Transformation. The European Journal of Comparative Economics, 5 (1), рр. 57‒71.

16. Cima O., Sovova L. (2022) The End of Postsocialism (as We Knew It): Diverse Economies and the East. Progress in Human Geography, 46 (6), рр. 1369‒1390. doi: 10.1177/03091325221127295

17. Ferris J. M., Tang S.-Y. (1993) The New Institutionalism and Public Administration : An Overview. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, J-PART, рр. 4‒10.

18. Fürstenberg K. (2016) Evolutionary Institutionalism. Politics and the Life Sciences, 35 (1), рр. 48‒60. doi: 10.1017/pls.2016.8

19. Hadler M. (2015) Institutionalism and Neo-institutionalism: History of the Concepts. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (2^nd edition), 12, рр. 186‒189.

20. Jenson J., Merand F. (2010) Sociology, Institutionalism and the European Union. Comparative European Politics, 8 (1), рр. 74‒92. doi: 10.1057/cep.2010.5

21. Koning E. A. (2016) The Three Institutionalisms and Institutional Dynamics: Understanding Endogenous and Exogenous Change. Journal of Public Policy, 36 (4), рр. 639‒664. doi: 10.1017/S0143814X15000240

22. Lægreid P. (2020) Public Administration Research in Norway: An Organisational and Institutional Approach to Political Organisations (pр. 421‒438). In: Bouckaert G., Werner J. (eds.). European Perspectives for Public Administration, Leuven University Press. doi: 10.2307/j.ctvv417th.26

23. Müller M. (2019) Goodbye, Postsocialism! Europe-Asia Studies, 71 (4), 533‒550. doi: 10.1080/09668136.2019.1578337

24. Niskanen W. A. (1968) The Peculiar Economics of Bureaucracy. The American Economic Review, 58 (2), Papers and Proceedings of the Eightieth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association, рр. 293‒305.

25. Ostrom E. (1986) An Agenda for the Study of Institutions. Public Choice, 48, рр. 3‒25.

26. Ostrom E. (2004) The Quest for Meaning in Public Choice. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 63 (1), рр. 105‒147. doi: 10.1111/j.1536-7150.2004.00277.x

27. Peters B. G., Pierre J., King D. S. (2005) The Politics of Path Dependency: Political Conflict in Historical Institutionalism. The Journal of Politics, 67 (4), рр. 1275‒1300. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2508.2005.00360.x

28. Rogenhofer J. M. (2024) A Pluralistic Conception of Laws as Social Institutions. In: Jackson, P. T. (ed.). Decisiveness and Fear of Disorder. Political Decision-Making in Times of Crisis. University of Michigan Press.

29. Shad W. (2015) Defining Institutions: Exploring institutional change. The Contribution of Co-production to Shaping Institutions. International Institute for Environment and Development.

30. Thoenig J.-C. (2003) Institutional Theories and Public Institutions: Traditions and Appropriateness (pр. 127‒148). In: Peters G., Pierre J. (eds). Handbook of Public Administration. Sage. doi: 10.4135/9780857020970.n8

31. von Billerbeck S. (2020) Sociological Institutionalism (pр. 91‒110). In: Oksamytna K., Karlsrud J. (eds). United Nations Peace Operations and International Relations Theory. Manchester Hive.

32. Williamson O. E. (1998) The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. Free Press.