俄罗斯鼓励生育政策为何影响有限社 (Why Russia's policy to stimulate childbearing has limited impact)
The idea of an extraordinary growth in fertility in Russia is widespread in the Russian expert community and media space. This increase is believed to be indicative of the positive results of the special financial measures taken by the government after 2006 to stimulate fertility. The author’s viewpoint is more reserved. There are some positive developments, but their significance is quite insufficient to view the future of Russian fertility through rose-colored glasses.
With this article, we continue our previous long-term research in the field of in-depth demographic analysis of Russian fertility. We provide an overview of the trends of key fertility indicators over a few decades, as well as developing some approaches to cohort fertility analysis in order to obtain more reliable projections. In the first part, we examine period fertility indicators (for calendar years), taking into account the latest changes in the structural characteristics of the Russian model of fertility that have occurred over the past several decades. In the second part of the article, we analyse cohort fertility indicators of generations of women whose actual and expected reproductive activity has been occurring in the second half of the twentieth and the first decades of the twenty-first centuries.
Russia’s declining birth rate is linked to a delay in a family’s decision to have children and to uncertainty about the place of children in a couple’s relationship. Despite the rise of individualism and the importance of career and self-realization, however, the family retains a very important place in Russian society.
In the article authors use the vital birh and death registration data on 10 regions exctracted from the Rosstat database to evaluate an input of international migrant into Russian fertility and mortality levels.
The authors discuss social and demographic processes in the rural regions of the Russian Near North and, first of all, in the Kostroma region – one of the socially problematic regions in the Russian Federation. In the article, the attention is focused on the analysis of mechanisms and assessment of scales of the depopulation: high mortality, migration of youth and middle aged people to the cities, deformations in age and gender structure with prevalence of the elderly population and a small share of children. The authors state essential distinctions of demographic indicators between municipalities in the Kostroma region and emphasize importance of social and demographic research on a basic municipal level. Indicators of the low life expectancy, high mortality caused by external reasons (alcoholism, murders, suicides, etc.), and high migration of youth are seen as the objective indicators of social problems in the local communities. It demands special attention on the part of the government authorities that plan social programs and take administrative decisions.
This chapter discusses the features of the development of the Russian population and the results of population projections to 2025
The article gives a developed criticism of representations that in advanced countries there were steady changes in dynamics of birth rate. This contradicts theories of demographic transition. The author polemizes with the arguments of M. Kluptas article published in same number.
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.