WHEN ARE AUTHORITARIAN ELECTIONS COMPETITIVE? THE CASE OF ST. PETERSBURG'S LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS

Abstract

Elections in authoritarian regimes are commonly defined as “unfair and uncompetitive,” but is it always true? The author argues that in the case of the heterogeneity of elite groups in the region and the emergence of a conflict among them, regional elections become an "arena for confrontation" for competing actors of the political system. To test this assertion, data on the results of elections and the characteristics of election campaigns in 25 single-member districts in the elections to the Legislative Assembly of St. Petersburg in 2021 are used. With the method of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), the hypothesis of the existing conflict among elite groups is confirmed. In case the city administration "approved" a candidate from the opposition party instead of the ruling one, and also if the previous deputy in the district is not re-elected in the same district, the elections are competitive, and the victory of a particular candidate is unpredictable. As a result of the analysis, such factors of election competitiveness as the number of candidates on the ballot and high turnout are also identified. Thus, in the event of a conflict between regional elites, authoritarian elections fulfill their original function: serve as platforms for the competitive struggle of various political groups.