Areas of interest:
- evidence-based policy;
- deliberative democracy;
- republican theory;
- theory and history of elections by lot;
- anthropology of bureaucracy.
Junior researcher at the Res Publica research centre of the European University of Saint-Petersburg (EUSPB).
Graduated with a BA in political science from the National Research University Higher School of Economics in 2010. Completed the MA programme in political science at the European University at Saint Petersburg in 2016. Guest researcher at the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard University in 2018. Author of scientific-popular articles for republic.ru and RBC.ru.
Academic publications (selection):
Korshakov V. V. K simvolike chisel v znamenskoy legende [On number symbolism in the Zamensky legend]. In: Drevnyaya Rus'. Voprosy mediyevistiki 2017. No. 3. pp. 59−60.
Korshakov V. V. ‘Svoboda' i ‘volya' drevnerusskogo cheloveka [‘Freedom' and ‘liberty' of the individual in old Russia]. In: Filosofiya. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki 2018. Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 13−28.
Participation in conferences:
International seminar «Notions and Languages of Freedom in Studies of Intellectual History,» Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences (MSSES)
IX International Academic Conference «Complex Approaches to Ancient Russian Studies.» Institute for Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2017
All-Russian Seminar-Colloquium «Realizing Participatory Budgeting Projects in Urban Areas.» Saint-Petersburg Committee of Finance, Financial Research Institute of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation, 2017
I All-Russian Conference «Republicanism. Theory, History, Contemporary Practices.» European University Saint-Petersburg, 2017
IX Sociological Grushin Conference «Social engineering: sociology changing the world,» Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM), 2019
X International Academic Conference «Complex Approaches to Ancient Russian Studies.» Institute for Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2019
Vladimir Korshakov. Imitatsiya uchastiya: zachem Minstroyu sprashivat' grazhdan o blagoustroystve [Imititative participation. Why the Ministry of Construction asks citizens about urban renewal]. RBC,
Vladimir Korshakov. Narod i naseleniye. Pochemu chinovniki ne dolzhny upravlyat' stranoy [The people and the population. Why civil servants should not run the country]. Republic.ru,
Technologies of civic participation and their transformation.
Participatory budgeting in Russia’s regions
Over the last decade, and especially after 2016, participatory budgeting practices have been widely introduced throughout Russia. In contemporary practice, participants in traditional public hearings are often seen as rivals or opponents by government officials organising the hearing. Participatory budgeting is intended as a reform ensuring a greater transparency of power and has been approved at the level of the federal government. But its implementation is up to the same government officials sceptical of the practice. The process of organising participatory budgeting in Russia is thus a large-scale field experiment allowing one to observe the formation and transformation of a new technology of civic participation.
The object of the study is the participatory budgeting process in two regions of Russia, which differ significantly in the amount of funds distributed through participatory budgeting and the technologies used. In region A, hundreds of millions of rubles are distributed using participatory budgeting with the active use of digital technologies. In region B, the amount of distributed funds are much smaller, and new technologies are practically not used at all. The subject of the study is the interaction of various actors in the process of participatory budgeting and the impact of their strategies on the outcome of public discussion.
The blocks of variables affecting the results of public discussion include formal and legal, informational and communicative, and socio-geographical factors. Preliminary results suggest that the nature of budget discussions varies quite significantly, not only from region to region, but even with the same region. At the same time, one of the most important factors influencing the nature of the discussion is, first of all, not the obvious socio-geographical factor, but rather that of information and communication.