Social Identities in the Policy Process of Authoritarian Systems

The integration of the social–psychological social identity approach to policy process research has recently generated new insights on policy-making. Empirical applications for established democracies and multilevel settings such as the European Union have identified five general types of social identities that are relevant for the preferences and behavior of policy actors and their stability and change over time. Social identities are based on joint memberships in social groups, such as organizations, demographic/biographical identities, sectors, locations, and informal opportunities for exchange (which may result in programmatic groups and identities). Some of these social groups, above all pluralistic interest associations and political parties, are directly related to the settings of embedded democracies. This article sheds light on the traveling capacity of the Social Identities in the Policy Process (SIPP) perspective by applying it to the Russian political system. An analysis of policy actors’ social identities in two federal ministries shows that in autocracies, interest intermediation, legitimacy, and influence on policy processes run through professional and informal groups when competing organizations and democratic institutions are absent. The results indicate that the SIPP perspective is adaptable to policy processes in different contexts but that the importance of identity types varies.