Social Dialogue as an Instrument of Institutional Governance in Social Development

The article discusses the role of social dialogue in Russia as an instrument of institutional governance in social development. The author analyzes the distinctive features of social dialogue as a unique social institution with transformative potential for overcoming societal fragmentation and polarization. The search for adequate forms of social participation becomes particularly acute in light of the growing threat of sociocultural divisions between modernization-oriented and traditionalist analytical frameworks of social development. The study explores two main aspects of the functioning of social dialogue: its role in securing public support for governmental programs and in forming effective mechanisms for social participation within the system of relations between the federal center and the regions. Social dialogue in the “center – regions” system emerges when the negotiation process involves not only governmental (authority) structures but also public representatives. Citizen participation in negotiations represents a specific form of self-determination by population segments either supporting or opposing particular joint project between the center and the region. The absence of comprehensive social dialogue may lead to significant challenges in implementing state programs, while its proper organization enhances their effectiveness. The author provides an example of unifying mechanisms for implementing the principle of social participation through the formation of a poly-subject interaction environment and the “assembly of subjects” (V.E. Lepsky’s term) in regional development. The article concludes that the institutionalization of social dialogue facilitates the transfer of certain rights and resources from the center to the regions in managing socio-economic processes, promotes the development of flexibility and adaptability in dialogical practices while simultaneously abandoning the rigid command-administrative management model, and strengthens partnership interactions among participants in social development.

1. Akhiezer A.S. (1996) Sociocultural Approaches to the Study of Transition Processes (Based on the Material of Russia). Vestnik Rossiyskogo gumanitarnogo nauchnogo fonda. No. 2, pp. 41–47 (in Russian).

2. Akhiezer A.S. (2008) Russia: Critique of Historical Experience (3rd ed.). Moscow: Novyy khronograf (in Russian).

3. Auzan A.A. (2024) Individualism and Collectivism: Two Cultural Cores of Russia. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 11–26 (in Russian).

4. Bogdanov V.S. & Pochestnev A.A. (2024) Remote Social Expertise of National Projects. RUDN Journal of Sociology. Vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 699–714 (in Russian).

5. Bohm D. (2004) On Dialogue. London: Routledge Classics.

6. Cleveland H. & Jacobs G. (1999) Human Choice: The Genetic Code for Social Development. Futures. Vol. 31, no. 9–10, pp. 959–970.

7. Davydov A.P. (2021) Sociocultural Divide in Modern Russia: In Search of the “Middle”. Personality. Culture. Society = Lichnost’. Kul’tura. Obshchestvo. Vol. 23, no. 1–2 (109–110), pp. 64–75 (in Russian).

8. Davydov A.P. (2024) Mediation and Convergent Sociality: Toward a Theory of Social Dialogue. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 135–159 (in Russian).

9. Dridze T.M. (1998) Social Communication in Feedback Management. Sociological Studies = Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia. No. 10, pp. 44–50 (in Russian).

10. Forester J. (2013) On the Theory and Practice of Critical Pragmatism: Deliberative Practice and Creative Negotiations. Planning Theory. Vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 5–22.

11. Gergen K.J., McNamee S., & Barrett F.J. (2001) Toward a Vocabulary of Transformative Dialogue. International Journal of Public Administration. Vol. 24, no. 7–8, pp. 697–707.

12. Innes J.E. & Booher D.E. (2003) Collaborative Policymaking: Governance through Dialogue. In: Hajer M. & Wagenaar H. (Eds.) Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society (pp. 33–59). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

13. Isaacs W. (1999) Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together: A Pioneering Approach to Communicating in Business and in Life. New York: Currency.

14. Lapina N.Yu. (2006) Relations Between the Center and the Regions: A Clash of Concepts. Rossiya i sovremennyy mir. No. 4, pp. 67–85 (in Russian).

15. Lepsky V.E. (2016) Analytics of the Assembly of Development Subjects. Moscow: Kogito-Tsentr (in Russian).

16. Lepsky V.E. (2022) A Solidary Society as a Self-Developing Polysubject Environment (Harmony of Hierarchies, Networks and Environments). Mestnoe pravo. No. 3, pp. 11–20 (in Russian).

17. Merzlykov A.A. (2024) Problems of Interaction Between the Government and the Population in the Implementation of National Projects. In: Gorshkov M.K. (Ed.) Reforming Russia: Yearbook (Vol. 22, pp. 308–338). Moscow: RAS Federal Center for Theoretical and Applied Sociology (in Russian).

18. Savelev I.A. (2024) Polysubjectivity as a Factor of Social Development in the Context of Dialogization and Differentiation of Center–Region Relations in the Federal State. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 97–116 (in Russian).

19. Tikhonov A.V. & Merzlykov A.A. (Eds.) (2021) Reforming the Power-Administrative Vertical in the Context of the Implementation of National Projects and the Activation of Spontaneous Group Formation. Moscow: RAS Federal Center for Theoretical and Applied Sociology (in Russian).

20. Yankelovich D. (1999) The Magic of Dialogue: Transforming Conflict into Cooperation. New York: Simon & Schuster.