The Institutional Crisis of Urban Zoning in Russia

Abstract

This study focuses on the institutional crisis of zoning in Russia, understood as a legal and administrative institution, which manifests in the gap between its official purpose as a mechanism for regulating construction and its actual law enforcement practice. The theoretical framework of the research is based on the principles of neo-institutional theory, including a discursive approach that explains how zoning — formally established as a regulatory legal act—is transformed in practice into a tool of ad hoc administration. The proposed hypothesis suggests that the absence of a clear narrative on zoning in official discourse contributes to the institutional uncertainty surrounding it. This results in the loss of regulatory autonomy, dependence on the functional zoning of the general plan, and subordination to the bureaucratic logic of administrative simplification. The key research questions include an analysis of institutional communication between different levels of government, the distinction between zoning as an institution and as a tool, and the identification of information asymmetry in law enforcement. The study employs discourse analysis methods, including the examination of legal acts, explanatory notes to draft laws, departmental acts, public reports, and analytical reviews. Empirical discourse is explored through in-depth expert interviews, surveys of local self-government bodies and state authorities of the Russian Federation, judicial practices, an analysis of land use and development rules, their amendments, and individual acts applying special procedures. The analysis is conducted through the lens of key narratives such as the simplification of administrative procedures, the reduction of regulatory barriers, and the centralization of powers in urban planning. The results indicate that zoning is losing its institutional agency, transforming into an instrument of administrative regulation that fails to ensure regulatory certainty and predictability in land use and development.