Difference between revisions of "Znaki Vnimaniya (Russia and FSU)"

| definition = Favours and gifts employed to facilitate good relations and show sentimentality, often used in the education and health sectors.

| clusters = [[:Category: Motivational ambivalence|Motivational ambivalence]]  

| authorwebsite = https://www.linkedin.com/in/conor-murray-6ab20820a/

[[Category: Motivational ambivalence]]

 

''Znaki vnimaniya'', like many types of informality, display high levels of ‘predictability and standardisation’ (Steenberg, 2016, p.296). In Russia, formal rules state that a gift to a civil servant must not be worth more than 3000 roubles or be used in furtherance of the giver’s interests (Bikiyev, 2013). Even within these regulations it may still be unclear how noble the intentions of the giver are. The most common znaki vnimaniya take forms of chocolate, flowers, cognac, or other expensive alcoholic beverages (Patico, 2002; Wanner, 2005; Polese, 2008). Although some studies have found that recipients of these gifts have used them for personal gain by selling them back to the shops they came from (Wanner, 2005), to avoid being ascribed to bribery, ''znaki vnimaniya''' typically take the form of frivolous, perishable things that one ‘would not normally buy for oneself’ (Patico, 2002: 357).  

Agapov, K. 2018. ‘Prizhimal k polovomu organu”. V Moldaviy professora obvinili v domogatel’stvakh’, Life.Ru, 8 August, life.ru/p/1141989.

Bikiyev, I. 2013. ‘Problemy Otgranicheniya Vzyatki ot Podarka v Rossii i za rubezhom: Praktika I Tendentsii’ Aktualniye Problemy Ekonomiki i Prava, 1: 245-249

Denisova-Schmidt, E.; Prytula, Y. & Rumyantseva, N. 2019. ‘Beg, borrow, or steal: determinants of student academic misconduct in Ukrainian higher education’ Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 3(1): 4-27.

Grødeland, Å. 2007. ‘‘Red Mobs’, ‘Yuppies’, ‘Lamb Heads’ and Others: Contacts, Informal Networks and Politics in the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Bulgaria and Romania’, Europe-Asia Studies, 59: 217-252

Novikova, A. 2019. ‘Chto Podarit Vrachu V Blagodarnost’’ Ideyi Podarok, 24 April, xn----8sbgfbetcv1bdhq.xn--p1ai/%D1%87%D1%82%D0%BE-%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8C-%D0%B2%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%87%D1%83-%D0%B2-%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%8C/  

Osipian, A. 2008. ‘Corruption and Coercion: University Automnomy Versus state control’, European Education, 40(3): 27-48

Patico, J. 2002. ‘Chocolate and Cognac: Gifts and the Recognition of Social Worlds in Post-Soviet Russia’, Ethnos, 67(3): 345-368

Pesmen, D. 2000. Russia and Soul: An Exploration. Cornell University Press.

PHDRU 2014. ’Domagatelstvo K Aspirantkam V SSSR’ phdru.com/domogatelstvo/sexualharassment/

Polese, A. 2008. ‘‘If I receive it, it is a gift; if I demand it, it is a bribe’: On the Local meaning of Economic Transactions in Post-Soviet Ukraine’, Anthropology in Action, 15: 47-60

Shaw, P; Katsaiti, M. & Pecorado, B. 2015. ‘On the determinants of educational corruption: The case of Ukraine’ Contemporary Economic Policy, 33(4): 698-713

Smith, A. & Stenning, A. 2006. ‘Beyond household economies: articulations and spaces of economic practice in postsocialism’, Progress in Human Georgraphy, 30: 190-213

Steenberg, R. 2016. ‘The art of not seeing like a state. On the ideology of “informality”’, Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe, 24(3): 293-306

Vkontakte 2010. ‘Podarok Nauchnomy Rukovoditeliu’ 4 February. vk.com/topic-503_22418958

Wanner, C. 2005. ‘Money, morality and new forms of exchange in post-socialist Ukraine’ Ethnos, 70(4): 515-537

Werner, C. 2000. ‘Gifts, Bribes and Development in Kazakhstan’, Human Organisation, 59(1): 11-22