Повседневная жизнь в российском пограничье: мотивы и факторы трансграничных практик
This article focuses on the cross-border practices of communities, i.e. practices which constitute the core of everyday life in the Russian border regions. The study is based on surveys and interviews with experts conducted by the authors in 2000–2010 both in the border regions of Russia and neighboring countries. The article analyzes the opportunities and constraints of living in the border regions, and the motives and determinants of corresponding practices in everyday life. Local residents frequently cross the border in search of specific services (e.g. shopping, entertainment, education, health services) or jobs. The authors show that the socio-economic and socio-cultural differences of neighboring states stimulate the emergence of cross-border practices and that these are differentiated according to the properties of the border areas (such as population density, the nature of local economies, connections to large cities and transport networks). The authors conclude that it is more often the case that cross-border interaction is constrained by the lack of corresponding stimuli than emergent obstacles. They also emphasize the constructive role of cross-border practices in maintaining good neighborly relations even in situations of political difficulties
The paper discusses how the russian labor market has been evolving over two decades of the transition. it starts with tracing key labor market indicators such as employment, unemployment, labor force participation, working hours, and real wages. Their dynamics indicate that the labor market tends to operate in a non-conventional fashion and far from the patterns expected initially. The authors argue that the current russian labor market represents a peculiar model that is different from what is observed in the rest of europe outside of the cis. having established this, they look at the institutional foundations that make this unconventional performance possible and proceed with discussing political economy and welfare implications. The findings are compared with the experience of other post-socialist countries.
One of the great successes of the law and economics movement has been the use of economic models to explain the structure and function of broad areas of law. The original contributions to this volume epitomize that tradition, offering state-of-the-art research on the many facets of economic modeling in law. The contributors employ a variety of economic methodologies to explore a wide range of topics, including torts, contracts, property, crime, employment, the environment, and legal procedure. This depth and breadth of scholarship reflect the continuing vitality of the economic approach to law, offering an illuminating look into the future of the field and providing inspiration and guidance for the next generation of theorists. This timely volume will appeal to students, professors and researchers in both law and economics, particularly those with an interest in the theoretical and practical intersections of the two fields.
The article discusses practices of overcoming critical life situations which reflect the duality of the social sphere. Structural limitations as external objective circumstances form a limited set of alternatives, however, an actor, given his (her) own motivation and supporting agents, is able to realize one of the possible scripts of overcoming the crisis. The specific nature of research into the practices of overcoming critical life situations, which are not readily available for everyday observation, predetermines the choice of the biographical (narrative) method as a research strategy focused on subjective interpretations of one's life past events.
In this paper the public-private wage gap is estimated by means both of the OLS and the quantile regression, which will provide a more complex picture of the distribution of the public-private sector wage gap. The author finds the existence of significant public-private wage gap (about 30%) considering both observable and unobservable characteristics of workers and jobs. Using the decomposition based on quantile regression helps to answer the question about the nature of the wage differences. The author comes to the conclusion that the main reason for the gap is the institutional mechanisms of public sector wages in Russia. The analysis is based on the data from Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS-HSE) 2000-2010.
The monograph is devoted to the assessment of population health indicators and comprehensive analysis of the factors influencing on the health of indigenous people of Russian North.
In the article the international experience of management of employment in the public sector is shown, corresponding numerical calculations are given, the thought on possibility of its use in Russia is stated. The author believes that transfer of some functions into outsourcing in frameworks of the policy of the new public management (NPM) can be one of directions of perfection of the management of employment efficiency and payment in the public sector. Simultaneously he expresses his conviction that reduction of the number of the occupied should not be mechanical, but the thought over and gradual process assuming simultaneous increase of efficiency of activity in the sphere of the public management.
The article contains a one-year forecast for developing of Russian cross-border cooperation policy and practice. The author shares her expectations about the inter-regional relations in Russian-European and Russian-Post-Soviet directions. Such an important idea as a definition of the fundamental reason for current speed and quality of cross-border cooperation in Russia is advanced for the discussion of scientific community.
The paper explores the outcomes of Russian Federation G20 Presidency in 2013. The analysis is based on the model of balancing external conditions and national priorities for developing an agenda in informal institutions (supply-demand model). This analytical paradigm allows to reveal to what extent the Presidency has managed to ensure: 1) a high level of response to the key global governance challenges in the agenda and summit decisions; 2) a balance between national and other members’ interests in the Presidency priorities; 3) utilizing the institution’s capabilities; 4) conformity of the role chosen by the Presidency (organizer, mediator, political leader, national representative) to the combination of external and internal conditions.
Russia took over the responsibility for coordinating the G20 work from Mexico, accepting the rotating presidency of this premier forum for economic cooperation on December 1, 2012. The G20 met the fifth year of its work under conditions of a two speed recovery which by March 2013 transformed into a three speed recovery. Unsteady and sluggish growth, persisting imbalances and downside global economy risks demanded that this forum of the world largest economies concentrate the efforts on developing a set of measures aimed at boosting sustainable, inclusive and balanced growth and jobs creation around the world. These priorities constituted the core of the Russian G20 presidency concept, aimed at ensuring sustainable global growth and rebuilding of trust between the world economy different agents in accordance with the G20 mission and capability.
Consolidating efforts on its core economic and financial priorities, the G20 also launched collaboration to overcome such risks as increasing income disparities, chronic underinvestment into development of safe, secure and modern infrastructure, unforeseen consequences of regulation.
The analysis findings reveal that the Russian presidency managed to ensure a good balance of national interests and the partners’ prioritiesin the G20 agenda; utilizing the G20 capabilities to respond to the key global governance challenges. The choice of the presidency role depended on the nature of the issues and was defined by a combination of internal and external conditions. Thus, the acuteness of the problem for all summit participants determined demand for leadership in including into the economic forum agenda the debate on a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Syria. On employment and social policies the Russian presidency combining the roles of an organizer and a political leader helped upgrade the G20 dialogue to a new quality level.
A major success factor in deliberation and adoption of the comprehensive action plan on base erosion and profit shifting was the OECD capability to take responsibility for the plan development. With the OECD leadership, solid experts’ foundation, and a high level of relevance of the problem for all members, the presidency supported the process as the organizer.
On the topic of stimulating long-term investment, a priority for Russia as well as most of the G20 partners, the presidency managed to consolidate the efforts of several international institutions over a short period. On this priority, as well as on the financial regulation reform, the presidency acted as a representative of the national interests and an organizer. In developing the new development strategy the choice in favor of a combination of a mediator and an organizer proved most productive. As a result the G20 agreed a new cooperation for development outlook.
The presidency active collaboration with the international organizations and engagement with social partners was instrumental in harnessing their experts’ potential and enhancing the G20 transparency, legitimacy and effectiveness. The G20 institutions consolidation continued through development of new coordination mechanisms and strengthening accountability.
Under the Russian presidency the G20 reaffirmed its value as the premier economic cooperation forum. Emphasizing restoring strong and inclusive growth and employment while ensuring fiscal sustainability, the leaders for the first time in the history of the G20 stressed that the well-being of individual people should be at the center of the growth agenda. This consequential outcome of the five years collaboration might be a start of a new G20 agenda where inclusiveness is one of the pillars of growth.
Russia’s transition towards a market economy in the early 1990s called for new approaches to the regulation of employment relations in the post-Soviet era in order to strike a balance between employers’ interests and employees’ rights in modern conditions. Adopted in 2001, the Labour Code of the Russian Federation (hereafter: LC RF) contributed to solving the issue only partly, for it was actually passed as a compromise between different political forces. As a result, it consists both of provisions which can be implemented in the new context of the market economy and restrictions inherited from a planned economy.
It soon became apparent that Russian employment legislation was in need of further development to adapt to ever-changing socio-economic conditions and the increasing complexity of the employer-employee relationship resulting from globalization and technological progress.
This state of affairs resulted in extensive amendments to the LC RF, in particular in 2006, when the majority of the provisions were profoundly revised. However, previous experience shows that many aspects concerning the legal regulation of employment relations are far from being addressed, not least compliance with international standards and practical needs at a national level.
In this special issue of the ADAPT Labour Studies BOOK-SERIES the authors try to achieve a twofold objective: rate recent developments of Russian labour law from a practical and a theoretical point of view and reveal its new challenges.
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.