Putin’s Rule Path Analysis Of The Administrative Reform (from2000to2008) In Russia

After the Soviet Union was collapsed, Yeltsin hastily adopted shock therapy topromote economic reforms, trying to step into capitalist countries overnight. theeconomic reform did not bring social stability and economic prosperity, On the contrary,it lead to a decade of chaos in Russia, rendering political, economic and social crash.After Putin took office in2000, he immediately commenced administrative reform:mainly in stablizing regime and institutional reform. Unlike Yeltsin, Putin chose agradual and systematic reform.Institutionally, he strove for political stability and strengthened the centralization ofauthority. By rationalizing the relationship between central and local governments, hebuild a vertical power system, which strengthened the federal central authority andcentral government’s control, and effectively curbed the scattered forces; withrationalized relationship between the president and the parliament," regime party "was set up; almighty government transformed into limited government. By building "department "," department"," bureau " of the three federal executive authority system,he optimized the government functions and improved its efficiency; through thesimplification of administrative approval system, government interfere on economy wasrestricted. Administrative reform had yielded certain success, institutional refor f ellinto a vicious cycle of" Expansion-streamlining-Expansion-streamlining ".Historical factors received administrative reform, the reform of organizational behaviorand interaction of ideas of choice, with a strong path dependence. This pathdependence leads to reoccurrence of administration reform. The study found that "authoritarianism " has helped Putin to maintain the unity of the county, but in a waypushed the administration reform into a vicious circle.