Systematic study of politics and society in Belarus and Central and Eastern Europe.
About
Political Sphere Institute is a research and expert institution studying politics and society in Belarus and Central and Eastern Europe.
Goals
Formation of a professional community of political researchers in Belarus, including the infrastructure needed for their professional activity.
Integration of Belarusian researchers into the regional, European, and international academic context, and support for joint research activity.
History
December 2001
Founding of the journal of political studies Political Sphere.
2001 – 2006
Activity of the Political Sphere journal community at Belarusian State University, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law.
2006 – 2009
Activity of the journal community at the European Humanities University in Lithuania, Faculty of Philosophy and Political Science.
September 2009
Establishment of the Political Sphere Institute on the basis of the journal community.
March 2011
Signing of an academic cooperation agreement between the Institute and Vytautas Magnus University.
Main Areas of Activity
Research and Expert Activity
- Political research, with particular emphasis on empirical studies using quantitative methods.
- Sociological research, and research in the fields of history and culture.
- Expert and applied research.
Publishing Activity
- Publication of the journal of political studies Political Sphere.
- Publication of the English-language journal Belarusian Political Science Review.
- Publication of monographs, translations, and anthologies in political science and other social disciplines.
Conferences and Public Events
- Administration of the International Congress of Belarusian Studies.
- Annual thematic academic conference.
- Regular methodological seminar.
Development of the Academic Community and Education
- Administration of the International PhD Program for Belarus.
- Public lectures.
- Special training courses.
- Reviewing academic and expert publications.
Organizational Principles
The Institute is supported through a mix of grants, contracts, philanthropic contributions, and other funding from foundations, public institutions, companies, universities, nonprofit organizations, and individuals. These funds sustain research, strengthen analytical and data capabilities, improve internal operations, develop new initiatives, and make evidence, tools, and practical knowledge available to those able to put them into use.
The four documents below set out the standards that govern this support and the Institute's research work — expand any section to read it in full.
Funding Principles
Financial support is essential to carrying out the Institute's mission, but funding relationships must not compromise professional standards or institutional independence. Work with funders should be collaborative while remaining guided by integrity, fairness, transparency, inclusion, and the Institute's public-purpose mission.
Alignment with mission
Funding should support, rather than reshape, the Institute's purpose. Resources are sought and accepted only for activities compatible with the Institute's mission, areas of expertise, and public-interest objectives.
Public value and stewardship of knowledge
Research should contribute to broader public understanding wherever possible. The Institute aims to communicate findings, evidence, methods, and practical implications beyond the immediate project whenever circumstances allow, treating responsible stewardship of evidence as part of its mission.
Independence from funders
Funders do not control research results, expert judgments, conclusions, or recommendations. The Institute does not accept support that requires endorsement of a policy position, product, service, or predetermined conclusion. Final analytical judgments remain with the Institute's researchers and experts, and leadership is responsible for protecting this independence.
Intellectual property and future use
Where feasible, the Institute retains sufficient intellectual-property rights to continue using and communicating knowledge produced through funded work after a project ends, subject to legitimate restrictions on privacy, confidentiality, or contractual obligations.
Expectations for researchers and experts
The Institute does not adopt institutional positions on contested policy questions. Individual researchers may develop evidence-based interpretations and recommendations, approaching questions objectively and letting evidence, not external preferences, shape their conclusions.
Diversity of perspectives
Strong analysis benefits from teams with different disciplines, backgrounds, and viewpoints. Experts examining related questions may reasonably reach different conclusions, which is acceptable when methods and assumptions are transparent and meet established standards of rigor.
Transparency about funding
The Institute aims to make its sources of support transparent, publicly acknowledging major contributions and disclosing project-specific support. Requests for donor anonymity are considered case by case and remain subject to the same review and independence standards.
Protection of institutional name and reputation
The Institute protects the proper use of its name, logo, and reputation. Outside parties should not present themselves as speaking for the Institute, and use of its name or visual identity requires prior authorization.
Funding and Financial Support
The Institute may receive funding through grants, contracts, charitable contributions, and other lawful forms of support from public agencies, foundations, businesses, universities, nonprofit organizations, and individuals. These resources may finance research, program evaluation, technical assistance, data work, and other mission-related activities. Flexible charitable support can also sustain cross-cutting institutional capacity or advance work in selected issue areas.
Financial transparency and institutional independence are treated as complementary obligations. The Institute maintains reliable financial reporting, clear disclosure of material funding relationships, and procedures that separate financial support from the substance of research findings and expert conclusions.
Researcher and Expert Principles
Researchers and experts are expected to work with independence, methodological rigor, and transparency — standards intended to protect the credibility of research and analysis and to ensure professional judgment stays grounded in the best available information.
Connecting research with real-world practice
Experts may come from academic, public, private, nonprofit, and philanthropic backgrounds. Engagement with practitioners, policymakers, and community organizations improves the relevance of research questions and helps translate evidence into practical knowledge.
Outside affiliations as a source of knowledge
Researchers may take part in external activities — board service, teaching, advisory work — consistent with institutional rules, and the Institute may host visiting scholars or nonresident fellows. Such affiliations should be disclosed internally and managed to preserve independence.
Managing conflicts of interest
Outside activities are permissible only when they do not interfere with the Institute's mission or an employee's ability to do their work, and should not allow personal financial benefit from Institute responsibilities. Potential conflicts should be disclosed and addressed through review or recusal.
Public disclosure of relevant affiliations
Experts should make relevant professional affiliations visible, including in public biographies and, where especially relevant, in publications. Leadership may require additional disclosure, limits on participation, or recusal where impartiality could reasonably be questioned.
Speaking or writing in an institutional capacity
When discussing work conducted through the Institute, researchers should accurately identify their role and ground statements in evidence. Work performed elsewhere or in a personal capacity should be clearly distinguished, avoiding any impression of Institute endorsement.
Knowledge sharing without partisan activity
Institute resources must not be used for prohibited political or partisan activity. Experts may provide evidence-based information to officials or candidates on a nonexclusive basis, and employees remain free to engage in lawful personal political activity on their own time, without implying institutional endorsement.
Principles for Work Related to Elections and Campaigns
During election periods, public demand for policy analysis increases and the risk of perceived partisanship becomes more pronounced. The Institute applies additional care to campaign-related work to remain a reliable source of analysis, comply with applicable rules, and preserve institutional independence.
1. Transparency and consistent treatment
The Institute is prepared to explain its methods, assumptions, criteria, and data sources for published analysis, and applies comparable standards regardless of the political actor or proposal being examined, making corrections when mistakes are identified.
2. Selectivity based on analytical value and capacity
The Institute cannot study every proposal. Decisions about what to analyze rest on public importance, novelty, methodological feasibility, and staff capacity — not on whether researchers agree with the proposal or actor involved.
3. Maintaining normal quality standards under time pressure
Campaign cycles often require rapid analysis, but speed does not justify lower standards. Work is still checked carefully, assumptions made explicit, and explanations written clearly enough for readers to understand both findings and limitations.
4. Nonexclusive advice and clear boundaries
Experts may respond to requests for evidence-based guidance from campaigns when the same assistance would be available to others under comparable circumstances. Staff are not portrayed as campaign advisers on the basis of their affiliation, and prior contact with a campaign is disclosed where materially relevant to later publications.