The main purpose of the work is to substantiate post-Soviet neopatrimonial research as a special field in political comparative studies, which began to be actively formed in the first decades of the 21st century. Using the method of historical retrospect, the author examines the main stages of the formation of this field in foreign and Russian political science, characterizes its current state and prospects for further development. The author hypothesizes that the neopatrimonial approach has now become a real alternative to Western «transitology», being an effective means of research and comparative analysis of the political systems of post-communist states. To prove this hypothesis, the author conducted a critical analysis of the scientific literature characterizing the content of the neo-patrimonial approach and the concepts of political development of post-Soviet states developed on its basis. There are great differences in the views of researchers on the nature of neopatrimonialism, the effectiveness of neopatrimonial practices, and the criteria for classifying neopatrimonial systems. All this actualizes the discussion about neopatrimonialism and contributes to the enrichment of scientific knowledge in this field. At the same time, the author draws attention to the need to institutionalize this scientific field in Russia and create the research infrastructure necessary for conducting neopatrimonial research. In conclusion, the main objectives of post-Soviet neo-patrimonial research are formulated, which should contribute to the development of effective political development strategies needed by many post-communist states today.

The main purpose of the work is to substantiate post-Soviet neopatrimonial research as a special field in political comparative studies, which began to be actively formed in the first decades of the 21st century. Using the method of historical retrospect, the author examines the main stages of the formation of this field in foreign and Russian political science, characterizes its current state and prospects for further development. The author hypothesizes that the neopatrimonial approach has now become a real alternative to Western «transitology», being an effective means of research and comparative analysis of the political systems of post-communist states. To prove this hypothesis, the author conducted a critical analysis of the scientific literature characterizing the content of the neo-patrimonial approach and the concepts of political development of post-Soviet states developed on its basis. There are great differences in the views of researchers on the nature of neopatrimonialism, the effectiveness of neopatrimonial practices, and the criteria for classifying neopatrimonial systems. All this actualizes the discussion about neopatrimonialism and contributes to the enrichment of scientific knowledge in this field. At the same time, the author draws attention to the need to institutionalize this scientific field in Russia and create the research infrastructure necessary for conducting neopatrimonial research. In conclusion, the main objectives of post-Soviet neo-patrimonial research are formulated, which should contribute to the development of effective political development strategies needed by many post-communist states today.