Миграционная активность и приживаемость населения регионов России
Russian and foreign studies have established that people with a migration experience easier change their place of residence again, compared with those who never did not. The migrants divided into two main groups - new settlers and old residents, who have lived in the site of invasion for a long time and an intermediate group from newcomers to old-timers. The regions where the settlers adapt best are Moscow, St. Petersburg. In most regions of the Far East and Siberia (except Khanty-Mansi and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrugs) large number of migrants compensated by the large number of who left.
The article assesses the dynamics of migration effectiveness by Russian regions over a long time period. Russian and foreign studies have found that people with migration experience change their place of residence more easily compared with those who have never moved. Migrants are divided into two main groups, namely, newcomers and long-time residents who have lived in a migration destination for a long time, and a transitional group from newcomers to long-time residents. Moscow, St. Petersburg, and their oblasts are subjects where migrants adapt the best. For a long time, in most Far Eastern and Siberian subjects (except for the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug), the large number of migrants who departed a region were compensated by large number of arriving migrants. The collapse of the Soviet Union and subsequent socioeconomic crisis have shown that population outflow occurs primarily in regions with the highest share of new settlers. Attempts to force the development of areas with harsh natural conditions and low adaptation by the population led to a massive return migration. Ensuring the adaptation of new settlers and their transition to long-time residents, rather than a high number of arrivals, is important for regional migration policy. Adaptation largely depends on the level of socioeconomic development of regions and particular localities.
This article is devoted to the development of migration in the Russian Far East over the past centuries. Analyzing census data (from the first census in the Russian Empire in 1897 to the Russian Census 2010), the author investigates temporal and spatial transformations of migration processes in the Russian Far East regions.
Using the concept of lifetime migration, the author reveals, what regions and territories provided the growth of the population of the Russian Far East during the last centuries, where these people were going and what results it produced. This paper also tries to explain, how the Russian Far East modified from the most colonized and actively increasing population region to the most quickly losing it territory in the Russian Federation.
This concept allows to estimate migration over a long period in the absence of other reliable sources of information. The Russian Far East made the transition from the most colonized and actively increasing population to the territory of most losing it.
The results of the Russian Census of 2010 lay on the table several topics requiring further discussion. Prerequisites for this discussion are the change of the administrative-territorial structure of Russia after the reform of municipal government in 2006 and the amendments to the Census Law made prior to Census 2010. During 2002-2010 increase in rural population was almost twice higher than that in urban areas: +11% and +6.3% correspondingly. Rural population increased up to 30-50% in some municipalities, while changes of the urban population were fairly minor or even negative over the intercensal period. This significant rise in the rural population could be related with changes concerning data capture of the population living in collective households. This ‘non-demographic’ factor distorts denominator for demographic rates for municipalities, affects on an allocation budget funds depending on the population in the municipality.
The geographic information system (GIS) is based on the first and only Russian Imperial Census of 1897 and the First All-Union Census of the Soviet Union of 1926. The GIS features vector data (shapefiles) of allprovinces of the two states. For the 1897 census, there is information about linguistic, religious, and social estate groups. The part based on the 1926 census features nationality. Both shapefiles include information on gender, rural and urban population. The GIS allows for producing any necessary maps for individual studies of the period which require the administrative boundaries and demographic information.
In the article attention is paid to the issue of territorial migration of youth. The concepts of migration and mobility, a comparative analysis of the two youth groups: the first group included young people from 17 to 30 years, the second people in the same age category who change their place of residence for professional education of the first level. The analysis is performed on parameters such as residence, marital status, education, work, life satisfaction in general.
Several approaches to the concept of fatherhood present in Western sociological tradition are analyzed and compared: biological determinism, social constructivism and biosocial theory. The problematics of fatherhood and men’s parental practices is marginalized in modern Russian social research devoted to family and this fact makes the traditional inequality in family relations, when the father’s role is considered secondary compared to that of mother, even stronger. However, in Western critical men’s studies several stages can be outlined: the development of “sex roles” paradigm (biological determinism), the emergence of the hegemonic masculinity concept, inter-disciplinary stage (biosocial theory). According to the approach of biological determinism, the role of a father is that of the patriarch, he continues the family line and serves as a model for his ascendants. Social constructivism looks into man’s functions in the family from the point of view of masculine pressure and establishing hegemony over a woman and children. Biosocial theory aims to unite the biological determinacy of fatherhood with social, cultural and personal context. It is shown that these approaches are directly connected with the level of the society development, marriage and family perceptions, the level of egality of gender order.
We address the external effects on public sector efficiency measures acquired using Data Envelopment Analysis. We use the health care system in Russian regions in 2011 to evaluate modern approaches to accounting for external effects. We propose a promising method of correcting DEA efficiency measures. Despite the multiple advantages DEA offers, the usage of this approach carries with it a number of methodological difficulties. Accounting for multiple factors of efficiency calls for more complex methods, among which the most promising are DMU clustering and calculating local production possibility frontiers. Using regression models for estimate correction requires further study due to possible systematic errors during estimation. A mixture of data correction and DMU clustering together with multi-stage DEA seems most promising at the moment. Analyzing several stages of transforming society’s resources into social welfare will allow for picking out the weak points in a state agency’s work.