Network Autocracy and Network Democracy: The GASI Index as a Tool for Measuring and Verifying the Digital Transformation of Political Regimes (Part one: Theoretical Substantiation)
( Pp. 26-35)

The article examines the dichotomy of network transformation of political regimes: network autocracy, where digital and algorithmic mechanisms ensure control over political competition while maintaining formal democratic institutions, and network democracy, where digital infrastructure enhances government transparency and accountability. The objective of the study is to develop a methodology for the quantitative assessment of this transformation. The proposed GASI index (Governance Algorithmic Sovereignty Index) synthesizes three dimensions: resource dependence (RENTA), digital integration (DIGITAL), and algorithmic control (ALGO). The index captures the functional architecture of power, enabling the typologization of regimes according to the degree of digital-resource control concentration and identifying cases where formal democratic institutions mask authoritarian functional architecture. Threshold values have been defined for four types: traditional democracies (0.00–0.39), network democracies (0.40–0.54), proto-network regimes (0.55–0.59), and network autocracies (≥0.60). The methodology excludes subjective expert coding and is applied as an audit tool for global democracy ratings. Comparison with the EIU, Freedom House, and V-Dem indices allows for the verification of expert assessments, the identification of “facade democracy,” and the detection of politicization in the methodology of democracy measurements.

Bocharov, Yu.B. (2026). Network autocracy and network democracy: The GASI index as a tool for measuring and verifying the digital transformation of political regimes (Part one: Theoretical substantiation). Sociopolitical Sciences, 16(2), 26–35. DOI: 10.33693/2223-0092-2026-16-2-26-35. EDN: OUNRHU

Bocharov Yu.B. Facade and algorithm: Post-democratic transition and network autocracy in the politics of the twenty-first century (The case of Israel and the Middle Eastern states). Monograph. Moscow: Znanie-M, 2025. 244 p. DOI: 10.38006/00255-396-9.2025.1.244.
Volkova M.V., Kurbatov A.V. Digital transformation of public authority: Institutions and mechanisms. Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law. 2022. No. 5. Pp. 742–751. (In Rus.). DOI: 10.12737/2073-9731-2022-5-742-751.
Zubarevich N.V., Kurbatov A.V. The digital state: Evolution or revolution of power? Moscow: RANEPA Publishing House, 2021. 208 p. ISBN: 978-5-7428-0771-2.
Kurbatov A.V. Digital sovereignty and legal mechanisms of state control on the Internet. St. Petersburg: European University Press, 2020. 240 p. ISBN: 978-5-94381-247-3.
Savelyev A.I. Biometric identifiers in the system of state supervision: Legal and technological aspects. State and Law. 2021. No. 4. Pp. 85–97. (In Rus.). DOI: 10.31857/S102694520016476-7.
Savelyev A.I. Legal issues of the use of artificial intel­ligence in public administration. Journal of Russian Law. 2022. No. 8. Pp. 5–18. (In Rus.). DOI: 10.12737/jrl.2022.8.1.
Shulika Yu. Survival analysis of authoritarian regimes in rent-based resource economies: Opportunities and limitations of the proportional hazards model. Bulletin of Perm University. Political Science Series. 2018. Vol. 12. No. 4. Pp. 122–139. (In Rus.). DOI: 10.17072/2218-1067-2018-4-122-139.
Castells M. The power of identity. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 2009. 584 p.
Crouch C. Post-democracy after the crises. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2020. 220 p.
Deibert R. Reset: Reclaiming the Internet for civil society. Toronto: House of Anansi, 2020. 360 p.
Diamond L. Ill winds: Saving democracy from Russian rage, Chinese ambition, and American complacency. New York: Penguin, 2019. 352 p.
Haber S., Menaldo V. Do natural resources fuel authoritarianism? A reappraisal of the resource Curse. American Political Science Review. 2011. Vol. 105. No. 1. Pp. 1–26. DOI: 10.1017/S0003055410000584.
Levitsky S., Way L.A. Competitive authoritarianism: Hybrid regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 534 p.
Lührmann A., Lindberg S.I. A Third wave of autocratization is here: What is new about it? Democratization. 2024. Vol. 31. No. 1. Pp. 1–20.
Lührmann A., Mechkova V. Autocratization by stealth: The dynamics of gradual democratic erosion. Demo­cratization. 2020. Vol. 27. No. 6. Pp. 940–960. DOI: 10.1080/13510347.2020.1807517.
Mechkova V., Lührmann A., Lindberg S.I. The comparative study of regimes in the digital age. V-Dem Working Paper. 2021. No. 112. 45 p.
Morozov E. To save everything, click here: Technology, solutionism and the urge to fix problems that don’t exist. London: Penguin, 2013. 432 p.
Norris P. Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the internet worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. 303 p.
Ross M.L. The oil curse: How petroleum wealth shapes the development of nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012. 312 p.
Zuboff S. The age of surveillance capitalism. New York: Public Affairs, 2019. 704 p.

network autocracy, network democracy, GASI index, algorithmization of state sovereignty, digital transformation, political rent, algorithmic governance, verification of democracy indices, facade democracy, politicization of expert assessments.