Трактовки и способы измерения продовольственной безопасности в современной России дискурсивные и реальные противоречия
This article considers the reasons and consequences of the increased attention from politicians and scholars to the challenges of national and global food security. First, the authors focus on the contradictory definitions of food security in intellectual and ideological debates which determine the development of national and global doctrines of food security (and ‘food sovereignty’ as its critical alternative). Secondly, the authors consider past and present attempts to ensure food security and identify the historical zigzags of food policies in Russia (from the Soviet autarchic policy of food self-sufficiency to attempts to liberalize food security definitions in the 1990s, and the new protectionist and autarchic food security doctrine of the 2000s). The authors also present a range of common indicators of food security, and emphasize that the gross growth in the production of various types of food is insufficient to assess the quality of national food policies. The key indicators of food security include the effectiveness of agricultural production, access to quality food for all social groups, and the potential of consumers to control the issues of national food security. Finally, the authors consider the sociological approach to the study of food security and present data from a series of sociological monitoring developed and conducted by the Center for Agrarian Studies of RANEPA 2015-2017. The analysis identified the ‘double autarchy’ in the responses of respondents: on the one hand, they support the general political course on food protectionism and nationalism (state autarchy), while, on the other, they strive to implement a micro-policy of autonomous food sovereignty (family autarchy) by intensifying household efforts to ensure natural self-sufficiency.
- Offers engaging debate surrounding leadership as a profession
- Includes contributions from a diverse number of experts
- Comprehensively illustrates the arguments for and against presenting leadership as a profession
This book presents a lively debate surrounding the professionalization of leadership. With contributions from both sides of the argument, it considers the historical overview of leadership and management as a profession, questions what constitutes a profession, and critically addresses the practicality of professionalizing leadership. With a range of perspectives including political philosophy, behavioral professionalism and management history, the book intends to facilitate further discussion on the issues at stake. With a number of education programs beginning to focus on the art and practice of leading people, this debate is particularly timely.
The period of the 1990s is relatively poorly studied and is in a situation of media and ideological stereotypes. This article is devoted to return the discourse of the “nineties” in the analytical channel. It is devoted to the analysis of biographical trajectories and the worldview of “teenagers of perestroika”, those who were 14–16 years old during the period of historical change in 1989–1991 with an emphasis on the transition to individualistic thinking and a focus on personal and business success. All participants in the qualitative research were graduates of the Penza school of young managers. This school was engaged in teaching knowledge and ideologies of a market economy, marketing and business of Soviet schoolchildren of the early 1990s. The article discusses the history of the Penza school of young managers, analyzes its curriculum and the concept of working with students in conjunction with the task of educating “business people” for the new Russia and the ideology of “carnegieism”. Special attention is paid to the reception by students of the school of young managers of Dale Carnegie’s ideas and the ideology of “carnegieism”, who were in the center of the training programs not only of this, but of other schools of young managers of the early 1990s. The article has a reflection on the worldview evolution of students of the school of young managers under the influence of Carnegie’s works. Special attention is paid to reflections on the place of the “teenagers of perestroika” in modern Russia, taking into account the research of this group, in which it is called the “lost generation” or the “failed generation”. The article is based on empirical research materials — the study of thematic sources and interviews with students of the school of young managers in the early 1990s
The paper focuses on the russian poor. Based on the fact revealed in previous studies that severe chronic poverty is characterized by concomitant psycho-emotional deprivation, the author focuses not only on monetary poverty (using the relative income-based approach to group allocation for this purpose), but also subjective one (distinguished through non-monetary indicators). Based on the research database of the The Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences (2018), the author comes to the conclusion that the most negative perception of the position in society is not a characteristic of the financially poorest Russians, i.e. the focus of social tension is not concentrated in the zone of deep monetary poverty. While objective (monetary) deep poverty is formed as a result of high dependent burdens and failures of local labor markets, deep subjective poverty is dictated by different reasons - the inaccessibility of the necessary medical support for pensioners with serious health problems, the presence of relatives in the household who are addicted to bad habits, precarious nature of the occupied employment positions. The delimitation of groups and the varying nature of the factors of their formation leads the author to the conclusion that identifying the recipients of social policy solely on the basis of information about the financial situation of households does not allow reaching the part of the poor population where a hotbed of social tension is forming. Based on the identified characteristics of groups, as well as the requests of their representatives for certain measures of social policy, the article proposes a number of measures to reduce the severity of objective and subjective poverty
Positive emotions regarding the late Soviet period are at the center of the nostalgic sentiments of the Russian population. Stagnation Time and the period of the reign of Leonid Brezhnev plays an important role. Nostalgia takes on various forms, including commercialization, museumification and emotional affect. In this article, various aspects of nostalgia for the late Soviet past are analyzed. The article is based on the results of an online survey of residents of Russia of various ages, as well as a comparison of these results with available data from large companies specializing in public opinion polls. The results of the study show that the majority of respondents regret the collapse of the Soviet Union, many believe that this collapse could have been avoided, and also consider Leonid Brezhnev to be the leader of the country in the historical period when the people in the country lived best. Many respondents do not have positive associations associated with the Soviet, and these respondents do not want to go back to the past, even hypothetically. The study also showed that nostalgic reminiscences encompass representatives of different generations, and the very perception of the late Soviet past crystallized in the mass consciousness.