ILPC 2027

This paper analyses at the factors that shape the formation and development of professional associations in the new economy of post-socialist Russia. Professional bodies are a crucial force in the development of professions. However, under the socialist regime they were virtually absent because most professional matters were controlled by the state. It has been suggested (Jones and Krause 1991) that the demise of the Soviet Union will lead to an increase in specialists’ capacity to claim authority over professional matters and the establishment of strong professional associations, however, there has been virtually no scholarly analysis of this processes. Using the example of the newly emerging profession of psychological counselling, this paper explores why the formation of professional bodies is still slow and problematic in Russia and why applying the Anglo-American model of professional representation cannot at the moment achieve the desired results. Based on the analysis of professional legislation and 26 qualitative interviews with practising psychologists, I argue that the challenges for the development of professional associations exist on three levels: the state, the profession and the individual. First, the under-development of professional bodies is still largely determined by the persistent state control over professions (e.g. education, title). Second, the low level of organising is shaped by the insufficiency of professional infrastructure and the instability of the transitional economy. Finally, the specialists’ attitudes towards organising (apathy towards collective action, ambivalent attitudes towards state regulations and the general disbelief in change) also obstruct the expansion of professional organizations. I explain how the challenges to the process of professionalisation at all three levels are mutually influential, intrinsically linked to the Soviet past and impede professional development through causing difficulties in the daily practices of specialists. This paper seeks to situate the Russian case within the existing literature on the development of professional associations and expand our understanding of the development of new professions and professional representation in transitional economies. In doing it also seeks to redress the Anglo-American bias in the study of the process of professionalisation.