Reviews

Anders Aslund, How Russia Became a Market Economy. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1995, xviii + 378 pp., £25.75/£9.95.

Boris Kagarlitsky, Restoration in Russia: Why Capitalism Failed. London: Verso, 1995, 172 pp., £39.95/£11.95.

Simon Clarke (ed.), Management and Industry in Russia: Formal and Informal Relations in the Period of Transition. Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 1995, xii + 244 pp. £45.00.

Jan Adam, Why Did the Socialist System Collapse in Central and Eastern European Countries? The Case of Poland, the Former Czechoslovakia and Hungary. London: Macmillan, 1996, xii + 244 pp., £40.00.

? Bogeti? & Arye L. Hillman (eds), Financing Government in the Transition: Bulgaria. The Political Economy of Tax Policies, Tax Bases, and Tax Evasion. Washington, DC: The World Bank, 1995, xv + 254 pp., £19.95.

Vladimir Tismaneanu (ed.), Political Culture and Civil Society in Russia and the New States of Eurasia. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1995, xiii + 384 pp., $22.95.

Alexander Maksimovich Yakovlev, Striving for Law in a Lawless Land—Memoirs of a Russian Reformer. New York: M. E. Sharpe, 1996, xvi + 237 pp., $62.95.

Tuomas Forsberg (ed.), Contested Territory: Border Disputes at the Edge of the Former Soviet Empire. Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 1995, xi + 267 pp., £45.00.

Graham Smith (ed.), The Nationalities Question in the Post‐Soviet States. London: Longman, 1996, xiv + 524 pp.

Aleksandr’ G. Savel'yev & Nikolai N. Detinov, The Big Five: Arms Control Decision‐making in the Soviet Union. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1995, xiv + 204 pp., £47.95.

Keith L. Nelson, The Making of Detente: Soviet‐American Relations in the Shadow of Vietnam, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995, xvii + 217pp., £29.00.

George Ginsburgs, Alvin Z. Rubinstein & Oles M. Smolansky (eds), Russia and America: From Rivalry to Reconciliation, New York: M. Sharpe, 1993, xi + 353 pp.

Diego Cordovez & Selig S. Harrison, Out of Afghanistan: The Inside Story of the Soviet Withdrawal. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995, ix + 450 pp., $35.00.

Andrei S. Grachev, Final Days. The Inside Story of the Collapse of the Soviet Union. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1995, xviii + 222 pp., £22.50.

Ilya Prizel & Andrew A. Michta (eds), Polish Foreign Policy Reconsidered. Challenges of Independence. Basingstoke, Macmillan, 1995, xiii + 174 pp., £25.00.

James Riordan, Christopher Williams & Igor Uynsky (eds), Young People in Post‐Communist Russia and Eastern Europe. Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1995, xvi + 215 pp., £39.50.

James von Geldern & Richard Stites (eds), Mass Culture in Soviet Russia: Tales, Poems, Songs, Movies, Plays and Folklore 1917–1953. Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press, 1995, xxix + 492 pp., £39.50 h/b, £19.50 p/b.

Katerina Clark, Petersburg, Crucible of Cultural Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995, xii + 377 pp., £25.50.

Anna Feldman Leibovich, The Russian Concept of Work: Suffering, Drama, and Tradition in Pre‐ and Post‐Revolutionary Russia. Westport, CT and London: Praeger, xv + 166 pp., £44.95.

R. Antony French. Plans, Pragmatism & People. The Legacy of Soviet Planning for Today's Cities. London: UCL Press, 1995, xi + 233 pp.

Roger Brunet, Denis Eckert & Vladimir Kolossov, Atlas de la Russie et des pays proches. Montpellier‐Paris: Reclus‐La Documentation Franchise, 1995, 208 pp., 220Ff.

Bruce Grant, In the Soviet House of Culture: A Century of Perestroikas. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995, xvii + 225 pp., £12.00.

Michael Bourdeaux (ed.), The Politics of Religion in Russia and the New States of Eurasia, The International Politics of Eurasia, Volume 3. Armonk, NY and London: M.E. Sharpe, 1995, xiv + 321 pp., $49.95 h/b, $19.95p/b.     

The Impact of Converting Categorical into Block Grants: The Lessons from the 314(d) Block Grant in the Partnership for Health Act

Section 314(d) of P. L. 89–749, (1966), the Partnershipfor Health Act, combined nine categorical health grants intoone block grant for health. The impact of section 314(d), according to data gathered forthis study, can be summarized as follows: the block grant increasedthe administrative flexibility of state health officials; statehealth planning agencies generally did not have a major influenceon the block grant; state health planning agencies located ingovernors' offices had less influence over the block grant thanthose located in state health departments; Congress did notsignificantly increase expenditures for the block grant; nationalinfluence was increased by creating health programs that couldpotentially have been made part of the block grant; and theblock grant did not generally result in a reordering of spendingpriorities. The best explanation for the unspectacular effect of combiningseveral categorical grants into one block grant was that, withoutnew resources, the substantial (and welcome) new administrativeflexibility given state officials was insufficient to producean important substantive reordering of program priorities.