The impact of perestroika on the soviet planned economy: Results of a survey of Moscow economic officials

IN OCTOBER 1989 the author arranged with the Institute of Sociology of the USSR Academy of Sciences for a structured survey of Soviet economic bureaucrats. In so far as my interest focused on the central administrative apparatus, interviews were restricted to economic administrators employed in Moscow. To be included in the sample, potential respondents had to occupy positions equal to or higher than deputy department head (of a state committee) or deputy main administration head (of a ministry). Also eligible were individuals occupying responsible positions in central institutes attached to ministries and state committees, as well as individuals occupying responsible positions in industrial associations that had previously been ministry main administrations. There is not sufficient information on the demographic and other characteristics of Soviet economic bureaucrats to select a stratified sample that would mirror the characteristics of their parent population. Hence, any and all economic officials who met the above selection criteria were eligible for selection. The selection of respondents was accomplished through the network of the Institute of Sociology. The questionnaire, entitled 'Your Opinion About Planning' (Vashe mnenie o planirovanii), was developed by the author with the assistance of experts from the Institute of Sociology and was pre-tested in February and March 1990. The questionnaire consisted of 106 questions concerning the following topic areas: the respondent's function in the planning process; the work of a planning organisation; the interrelationships among planning organisations; material-technical supply; the planning of quality; perestroika; demographic characteristics. The questionnaire required an average of slightly more than one hour to complete. Field work began in April 1990 and was completed in early June 1990. The total number of valid completed cases was 552. Sample selection yielded the first result of the survey. Despite standard efforts to 'convert' reluctant respondents, the refusal rate was in the neighbourhood of two-thirds-a rejection rate that is considered unusually high by Soviet survey research standards. Reasons cited for refusal included lack of time, a general lack of interest, and a failure to see how the questionnaire would be of benefit; but a large number of respondents refused to participate on the grounds that the results might be used to evaluate their work in the administrative apparatus. Despite