The Security–Development Dilemma in the Public Governance of Digital Platforms

Abstract

Public governance of digital platforms is characterized by a growing tension between security imperatives, such as blocking, throttling, and restricting the activities of foreign platforms, and development imperatives, including the digital economy, innovation, and users’ rights. The article conceptualizes this contradiction as a security—development dilemma: a structural problem of governance that cannot be reduced to a deficit of political will. Drawing on the concept of the security dilemma, securitization theory, and the model of adaptive governance, the article demonstrates that linear strategies, such as tightening sanctions and expanding blocking measures, produce side effects that exacerbate the original problem. The empirical base includes a chronology of regulatory measures adopted by the Russian Federation between 2020 and 2026, case studies of YouTube throttling, the ban on the activities of Meta Platforms Inc., blocking and unblocking Roblox, a comparative analysis of regulatory models in the European Union, the United States, and China, and a counterfactual analysis based on Nepal, Australia, and the EU. The article finds that the Russian model is in the process of moving from a reactive, sanctions-based paradigm to a proactive, infrastructure-based one. The author concludes that a key condition for such a transition is recognition of the dilemma as a systemic problem that does not necessitate a choice between security and development, but requires institutional design that makes them compatible. A path toward such compatibility is offered by a model of adaptive governance that includes differentiated regulatory regimes, an infrastructure admission mechanism, institutional coordination, normative formalization, and built-in feedback mechanisms.