Determinants and Consequences of Institutional Change in Central Asia

Abstract

Over the past decade, institutional change has re-emerged as a defining feature of political development across Central Asia. Following extended periods of relative institutional stability primarily under consolidated authoritarian regimes, the region has entered a new phase marked by leadership transitions, mass unrest, and legitimacy crises. In particular, while displaying differences in prior regime trajectories and socio-economic development, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan have each converged on the same broad outcome of large-scale institutional change elaborated through the political myths of “New Kazakhstan”, “New Kyrgyzstan”, and “New Uzbekistan”. This dissertation thus examines why structurally dissimilar authoritarian regimes in Central Asia simultaneously embark on the path of institutional change, and what explains the variation between cosmetic and substantive change in these reforms. The study adopts a comparative mixed-method qualitative design. It combines three country-level case studies with 62 in-depth semi-structured interviews conducted with political elites and experts, systematic analysis of legislative documents, and a discourse analysis of presidential addresses where the “New X-stan” projects are articulated in detail. The dissertation’s theoretical framework develops an actor-centred punctuated equilibrium model, linking intra-elite conflict, crisis intensity, and the resilience of equilibria to the form and the depth of institutional change. The findings suggest that institutional change is consistently triggered by elite-level threats to regime survival. In Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, institutional change served to consolidate the ruling coalitions and restore stability, without altering the dominant institutional logic. In contrast, Kyrgyzstan’s repeated elite fragmentation and regime collapse produced substantive institutional transformation. Across all three cases, the “New X-stan” myths transform contingent elite bargains and power struggles into morally charged stories of national renewal and social justice, legitimising selective liberalisation. Ultimately, the dissertation complements existing theories of institutional change and authoritarian legitimation by identifying the necessary conditions for institutional change in contemporary authoritarian settings, and by demonstrating how political myths mediate between institutional change and regime continuity.