Демографический баланс России 1927-1959 годов
Мир России: Социология, этнология. 1999. Т. 8. № 4. С. 81-91.
Added: Oct 5, 2012
М.: Энциклопедия, 2013.
Added: Nov 25, 2013
Рамонов А. В. Социологические исследования. 2012. Т. 335. № 3. С. 104-116.
Added: Aug 30, 2012
Гапонова О. С., Сидоренко Е. П. В кн.: Современная Россия: проблемы социально-экономического, экологического и духовно-политического развития. Всероссийская научно-практическая конференция (Волгоград. 2009 г.). Волгоград; М.: ООО «Глобус», 2009. С. 27-29.
Added: May 24, 2012
Does Milk Matter? Genetic Adaptation to Environment: The Effect of Lactase Persistence on Cultural Change
Scherbak A. N. Sociology. SOC. Высшая школа экономики, 2015
Considering diet as often a product of adaptation to geographic environment, this paper suggests that not only amount of food (food abundance) is important, but what kind of foods people eat may also affect social change. One of the reasons for variation in diet is food intolerances as a result of adaptation to the environment. This paper investigates one case – lactase persistence. This trait is associated with different genotypes of LCT gene. Lactase persistence is mostly spread among northern Europeans, and is also found among some African and Asian nomadic populations. Such unique trait is usually explained in the gene-culture coevolution framework: selective pressure for it had to be followed by expansion of dairying and herding. Empirical analysis based on 78 populations reveals strong and positive association between share of lactase persistent population and distribution of emancipative values. Two causal mechanisms are suggested: a) demographic trends (lower fertility and lower child mortality in lactose tolerant societies) and b) specific type of agriculture based on integration of crop growing and cattle husbandry (higher urban population rate in lactose tolerant societies).
Added: Sep 17, 2015
Эм П. П. Издательство Дальневосточного университета, 2018.
Added: Oct 15, 2019
Нежина Л. А. М.: АПК и ППРО, 2009.
Added: Jul 9, 2012
Alyona Artamonova, Mitrofanova E. Social Science Research Network. Social Science Research Network. SSRN, 2014
Declining marriage rates and increasing cohabitation rates in modern Russia have become a trend that many scholars have observed and tried to explain through the perspective of the Second Demographic Transition. Our research is another attempt to understand these changes and to answer the question on the nature of cohabitation in Russia. We aimed to find the difference between some patterns of matrimonial events and to define the nature of cohabitations in Russia. For these purposes, we applied descriptive statistics and Event History Analysis. We also suggested a logical scheme of the ways of development of the first cohabitations. We observed the opposite trends of matrimonial behavior: the younger Russian people are, the higher their probability of starting of the first cohabitation and the lower their risk to have the first marriage. Our analysis showed that a cohabitation is not yet a complete alternative to marriage, but it has a possibility of becoming it for younger generations.
Added: Oct 22, 2014
Как происходит изначальный выбор институтов? Критика концепции «случайности развития» и структурный подход
Щербак А. Н. Центр исследований модернизации. Серия препринтов. Европейский университет в Санкт-Петербурге, 2017. № M-54/17.
Added: Jan 27, 2017
Гапонова О. С., Сидоренко Е. П. В кн.: Макро- и микроэкономика: теория и практика. Сборник тезисов Международной научно-практической конференции (г. Караганда, 2 сентября 2009 г.). Караганда: Центр гуманитарных исследований, 2009. С. 41-44.
Added: May 24, 2012
Мкртчян Н. В., Сарыгулов Б. А. В кн.: Население Кыргызстана в начале XXI века. Бишкек: Фонд ООН в области народонаселения, 2011. Гл. 10. С. 214-245.
Added: Sep 15, 2013
Вып. 1. М.: Издательский дом ГУ-ВШЭ, 2009.
Added: Oct 27, 2012
Aistov A. Education. EDU. Высшая школа экономики, 2012. No. 5.
This research focuses on estimating the signalling role of education on the Russian labour market. Two well-known screening hypotheses are initially considered. According to first of these, education is an ideal filter of persons with low productivity: education does not increase the productivity of a person, but it does give him the possibility to signal about his innate productivity via an educational certicate. The second of these hypotheses admits that productivity actually does increase during the period of study, but nevertheless the main objective of getting an education is to acquire a signal about one's productivity. Information theory suggests that employees use education signals during the hiring processes whereby employers screen potential employees. Employers and other categories of self-employed workers are usually not screened by the labour market via their educational attainments. Comparison of the returns to education of employees vs. self-employed workers could show the difference between the returns to signals and the returns to human capital. Yet another way to understand the signals is to consider the time dynamics of the returns to education for employees staying in the same firm. This helps us to answer the question about whether the signals are valuable only during the hiring process, or whether they remain valuable during the whole experience with the firm. This research is based on the Mincerian-type earnings functions, estimated on RLMS-HSE and NOBUS data. On the basis of the available information, we cannot say that the returns to signals and human capital differ significantly in Russia. Nevertheless we can say that, for the majority of men, the return to educational signals decreases with time spent in the same firm, while we observe the opposite for women.
Added: May 15, 2012
Черных А. И. Политическая теория и политический анализ. WP14. Высшая школа экономики, 2012. № 03.
Added: May 3, 2012
Горный М. Б. Телескоп: журнал социологических и маркетинговых исследований. 2011. № 2. С. 14-24.
Added: Feb 7, 2013
Вып. 1. М.: Некоммерческая исследовательская служба «Среда», 2011.
Added: Feb 7, 2013
Edited by: А. Михайлов Вып. 14. М.: Социологический факультет МГУ, 2012.
Added: Mar 14, 2013
Added: Aug 23, 2012
Казун А. Д., Байтимерова С. И., Богомазова Л. В. и др. Медиаальманах. 2018. Т. 88. № 5. С. 82-91.
Added: Dec 14, 2018
Аистов А. В., Леонова Л. А. ÐÐ°ÑÑÐ½ÑÐµ Ð´Ð¾ÐºÐ»Ð°Ð´Ñ Ð»Ð°Ð±Ð¾ÑÐ°ÑÐ¾ÑÐ¸Ð¸ ÐºÐ¾Ð»Ð¸ÑÐµÑÑÐ²ÐµÐ½Ð½Ð¾Ð³Ð¾ Ð°Ð½Ð°Ð»Ð¸Ð·Ð° Ð¸ Ð¼Ð¾Ð´ÐµÐ»Ð¸ÑÐ¾Ð²Ð°Ð½Ð¸Ñ ÑÐºÐ¾Ð½Ð¾Ð¼Ð¸ÐºÐ¸. P1. ÐÐ¸Ð¶ÐµÐ³Ð¾ÑÐ¾Ð´ÑÐºÐ¸Ð¹ ÑÐ¸Ð»Ð¸Ð°Ð» ÐÐÐ£ ÐÐ¨Ð, 2010. â Р1/2010/04.
Added: May 21, 2012