Article
Inequality and historical legacies: evidence from post-communist regions
Egalitarianism is one of the key elements of the communist ideology, yet some of the former communist countries are among the most unequal in the world in terms of income distribution. How does the communist legacy affect income inequality in the long run? The goal of this article is to investigate this question by looking at a sample of subnational regions of Russia. To be able to single out the mechanisms of the communist legacy effects more carefully, we look at a particular aspect of the communist legacy – the legacy of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). We demonstrate that the sub-national regions of Russia, which had higher CPSU membership rates in the
past, are characterised by lower income inequality. This, however, appears to be unrelated to the governmental redistribution policies; we link lower inequality to the prevalence of informal networks.
The sector of knowledgeintensive business services (KIBS) not only contributes to its own dynamic and innovative development but also to the development of the external environment through the creation, accumulation, and dissemination of knowledge. Therefore, it is considered one of the key pillars of the knowledgebased economy. This article addresses the problem of its spatial distribution in Russia. The basis of the study is uniquely empirical, obtained through a series of largescale surveys among Russian pro ducers and consumers of KIBS. The collected data provide quantitative evidence for the spatial dimension of the sector. Comparative analysis of the production and consumption of KIBS in Russia’s federal districts makes it possible to classify the latter in terms of the exchange of related services and mapping of the intensity of their interregional supply and demand across federal districts. It is established that companies offering KIBS in Russia are largely concentrated in big cities. The demand for KIBS is more distributed, but not spa tially neutral. This paper may be of interest to researchers focusing on the spatial distribution of elements of the innovationbased economy in Russia. It is also relevant for regional authorities, because it can help them assess the development capacity of their regions.
Economic inequality is increasing both within and across countries. Growing inequality has negative economic, social and political consequences, it constrains economic growth, undermines social cohesion and political stability. Eradicating causes of inequality and turning structural barriers to equality into opportunities is fundamental for generating strong, sustainable, balanced and inclusive growth. Transition to this growth model will depend on G20 coherent policy actions globally and nationally.
In the run up to the St. Petersburg G20 summit the Civil 20 initiated preparing a report and recommendations to G20 focused on surmounting the risks originating from growing income inequality. A special Task Force, bringing together experts from G20 member countries has been established to draft the report. Presented and discussed within the Russian G20 Presidency Civil Society Track (www.g20civil.com), the report provides an independent analysis and proposals for a dialogue between a wide range of stakeholders and the G20 governors on the G20 concerted policies and actions to improve economic equality within their countries and beyond.
This set of policy recommendations on how G20 can address inequality takes full account of the existing authoritative, best available, consensus, analysis and evidence of the IMF, OECD, UNDP, other international organizations and relevant scholarly, civil society and policy communities, as summarized above. It builds directly upon the extensive evidence and analysis of the causes and practical policy cures for income inequality in the G20 member countries, as identified in the country reports prepared by and for members of the Civil 20 Task Force on Equity (currently including Australia, Canada, China, France, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Korea, Russia, Turkey and the US).
The Civil 20 propose that G20 leaders at their St. Petersburg summit can act together to improve income and economic equality within their countries and beyond by agreeing the Saint Petersburg Initiative for Strong, Sustainable, Balanced and Inclusive Growth affirming the value of equality and inclusion along with economic growth and efficiency.
Economic inequality is increasing both within and across countries. Growing inequality has negative economic, social and political consequences, it constrains economic growth, undermines social cohesion and political stability.
Eradicating causes of inequality and turning structural barriers to equality into opportunities is fundamental for generating strong, sustainable, balanced and inclusive growth. Transition to this growth model will depend on G20 coherent policy actions globally and nationally.
In the run up to the St. Petersburg G20 summit the Civil 20 initiated preparing a report and recommendations to G20 focused on surmounting the risks originating from growing income inequality. A special Task Force, bringing together experts from G20 member countries has been established to draft the report. Presented and discussed within the Russian G20 Presidency Civil Society Track (www.g20civil.com), the report provides an independent analysis and proposals for a dialogue between a wide range of stakeholders and the G20 governors on the G20 concerted policies and actions to improve economic equality within their countries and beyond.
This set of policy recommendations on how G20 can address inequality takes full account of the existing authoritative, best available, consensus, analysis and evidence of the IMF, OECD, UNDP, other international organizations and relevant scholarly, civil society and policy communities, as summarized above. It builds directly upon the extensive evidence and analysis of the causes and practical policy cures for income inequality in the G20 member countries, as identified in the country reports prepared by and for members of the Civil 20 Task Force on Equity (currently including Australia, Canada, China, France, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Korea, Russia, Turkey and the US).
The Civil 20 propose that G20 leaders at their St. Petersburg summit can act together to improve income and economic equality within their countries and beyond by agreeing the Saint Petersburg Initiative for Strong, Sustainable, Balanced and Inclusive Growth affirming the value of equality and inclusion along with economic growth and efficiency.
We describe the method of pattern analysis and the results of its application to the problem of analyzing the development of science, education and the success of innovative activity in the regions of the Russian Federation. We examine characteristics of the regions of Russia such as the level of socio-economic conditions and the potential and efficiency of science, education and innovative activity from 2007 to 2010. Also we obtain a classification of regions by the similarity of the internal structure of these indicators, construct trajectories of regional development over time, and find groups of regions carrying out similar strategies.
Using the data from the Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS), this paper investigates income mobility in Russia during the period of rapid economic growth (2000–2005). Employing a broad set of mobility indices, we show that there is much mobility in household incomes from one year to the next and over longer periods in Russia. Both relative and absolute mobility in Russia are significantly higher than in Western countries. We demonstrate that income growth in Russia was strongly pro-poor in 2000–2005. Incomes of the relatively poor were growing faster than incomes of the relatively rich. However, this inequality-reducing effect was almost exactly offset by changes in the relative positions of individuals and the overall reduction in cross-sectional inequality was merely modest.
The paper examines trends of internal migration in Russia in the last two decades. Particular attention is paid to the areas of migration and its regional features.
Ethnic structure of the Russia's population is considered taking into account the results of the 2015 population microcensus, distribution of ethnicities by regions of Russia, indicators for ethnically mixed families and inter-ethnic distancies.
The article deals with the processes of building the information society and security in the CIS in accordance with modern conditions. The main objective is to review existing mechanisms for the formation of a common information space in the Eurasian region, regarded as one of the essential aspects of international integration. The theoretical significance of the work is to determine the main controls of the regional information infrastructure, improved by the development of communication features in a rapid process.The practical component consists in determining the future policies of the region under consideration in building the information society. The study authors used historical-descriptive approach and factual analysis of events having to do with drawing the contours of today's global information society in the regional refraction.
The main result is the fact that the development of information and communication technologies, and network resources leads to increased threats of destabilization of the socio-political situation in view of the emergence of multiple centers that generate the ideological and psychological background. Keeping focused information policy can not be conceived without the collective participation of States in the first place, members of the group leaders of integration - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Currently, only produced a comprehensive approach to security in the information field in the Eurasian region, but the events in the world, largely thanks to modern technology, make the search for an exit strategy with a much higher speed. The article contributes to the science of international relations, engaging in interdisciplinary thinking that is associated with a transition period in the development of society. A study of current conditions in their relation to the current socio-political patterns of the authors leads to conclusions about the need for cooperation with the network centers of power in the modern information environment, the formation of alternative models of networking, especially in innovation and scientific and technical areas of information policy, and expanding the integration of the field in this region on the information content.