Heft36 1 - SFB 580 - Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena

ABEL POLESE
informal economies tend to deny the role of the
state as social or economic mediator among citizens.
Informal transactions take place directly
between two or more citizens and either leave
no place for the role of the state or occur in a
context in which the state is superfluous.
Currently it might difficult to find a national
territory in which the state is absent, although
there may be cases in which it is partially absent
in spatial or temporal terms. That is, the state
might be absent ‘sometimes’ or ‘in some places’.
I refer here to the possibility that the state, while
attempting to regulate economic life, might fail
to do so in some cases (e.g. for some sectors or
industries or in some regions) or in some time
periods (e.g. during an economic crisis).
Alternatively, the state might be unable to
boost even regional development by neglecting
some regions, thus encouraging engagement
in informal transitions. The more often this
occurs, in temporary and spatial terms, the
more the state might be considered a failure.
This perception may occur despite the fact
that the actual situation likely falls somewhere
between a failed and a perfect state; and
informal economies are present in virtually
every country irrespective of development
status (Williams 2005).
In Ukraine there is a tendency to renegotiate
state policies and informally tailor them to a
local reality in terms of language and identity
policies (Polese 2009). In this context, the
very presence of a state, as well as its work,
generates tensions between habits, structures
and dynamics consolidated over time, which in
a Weberian perspective are the very source of
power. The state attempts to regulate economic
life and the relations between citizens.
However, citizens may feel they are already
able to regulate themselves on their own and
feel unable or unwilling to further participate
in the life of a given state. Those willing to
participate, but at the same time feel somehow
excluded, may provide informal transactions
another meaning, in that they become a way to
participate in the country’s political life (Gupta
1995). Every action aimed at contrasting
what the state imposes on citizens becomes a
weapon (Scott 1984), so that informality may
be seen as a way to reshape political decisions
that were not accurately tailored for a given
context (Polese 2010). To find confirmation
of this statement, we need to look at the way
informal economies function, their genesis
and their perceptions by actors other than the
state.
WHERE WILL ALL THE BABUSHKI BE GOING?
Kiev, a Wednesday afternoon, one of the
hundreds of podzemnyj perekhod (subterranean
passages used to cross wide roads that offer
protection from the weather, especially in
winter) of the city.
Ukrainians, as they often do, are shopping.
Sellers (mainly elderly women, but also
some younger sellers) have arrived from the
countryside or the neighbourhoods
to sell their goods. Some offer a pot
of marinated cucumbers, others have page 205
collected and dried wild mushrooms,
and still others sell apples. The more
organized have a whole stand and a wider
range of products. Some sell clothes, others
biscuits and sweets or several kind of nuts.