Ethnodemographic structure of immigration to Russia: possibilities of statistical analysis

Migration is a complex social phenomenon that has a significant variety of processes. Due to the emergence of new forms of ethno-cultural differences, it is necessary to obtain relevant information for effective management within the framework of interethnic interaction (Bublikov, Ermak, 2021). Foreign studies on taking ethnicity into account are revealed in the research on political and social aspects, while evaluating the effectiveness of population policy implementation (Birnir et al., 2015; Zhou, 2019).

Changes in ethno-demographic features can be considered as a result of implementation of the state national and demographic policy, as well as a source of changes occurring in the social, economic and political spheres (Rodrigues-Silveira, 2014). While studying population ethnic features, including interethnic relations, researchers encountered problems that can be divided into subjective and objective or endogenous and exogenous (Barwinski, 2015). Endogenous restrictions are associated with individual beliefs of the researcher and their nationality, while exogenous barriers are largely explained by limited access to reliable statistical data that allow us to assess the nature and dynamics of ethno-demographic processes.

At the beginning of the 21st century, more than 60% of national censuses included some form of ethnic registration (Morning, 2008). W. O’Hare in the work Differential Undercounts in the US Census: Who Is Missed? notes that ethnicity and race are included in the list of five demographic characteristics that contribute to underreporting. At the same time, he concludes that many studies confirm the fact of underestimation of these categories of the population, but there is still no single point of view about its causes (O’Hare, 2019).

The presence of a significant underestimation of recent immigrants and non-permanent residents in the census is noted on the example of Canada. The probability of undercounts of recent immigrants may be more than 17%, non-permanent residents – more than 40%, with an average of about 8%. Underestimation of these categories correlated with knowledge of the official language of the country of arrival, age and marital status (Berard-Chagnon et al., 2019).

According to R. Alba, racial origin and ethnicity differ from demographic characteristics such as gender and age due to the need for individual choice, and are also related to the social circumstances of an individual’s life and the origin of the family, are characterized by shifting boundaries, which is largely due to the formation of interethnic unions (Alba, 2018). This, in turn, will have an impact on forecasting ethno-demographic processes in society, taking them into account when choosing management approaches.

Due to the fact that labor immigrants play a significant role in the Russian economy, the issues of taking into account their ethno-demographic characteristics are relevant. In Russia, the sources of information include population censuses and sample surveys, forms of administrative accounting, as well as data collected at the borders of states (during passport control, processing of migration cards). However, there is still no universal source of information. Despite the existing opinion that the results of the population census do not always objectively reflect the ethno-geographic processes in the region due to the increased informational impact that causes interethnic tension and the escalation of negative stereotypes (Gabdrafikov, 2021), in Russia, the results of the population census provide a more complete description of the demographic structure of the resident population and migrants, including the ethnic component.

The aim of our study is to develop proposals for the registration of immigrants in Russia based on the analysis of the approaches developed in Russian and foreign practice to the study and assessment of the ethno-demographic characteristics of migrants, including citizenship, ethnic and cultural origin.

In contrast to the previous studies (Mishchuk, 2013; Chudinovskikh, 2015; Vorob’eva et al., 2016; Ryazantsev, Pis’mennaya, 2019; Ryvkina, Osmanova, 2021), our work analyzes approaches to assessing ethno-demographic characteristics of the population on the example of Russia and a number of foreign countries; this fact determines the novelty of our research. In accordance with the approach of the possible mobility of ethnic self-identification, on the one hand, and the instability of citizenship, which may change due to the adoption of the citizenship of the country of residence by a migrant, on the other hand, a set of variables to clarify the socio-cultural characteristics of foreign citizens may include several indicators. Taking into account the experience of foreign countries, we propose to include questions about the place of birth of the respondent’s father and mother in the census forms, which will help to get a more accurate idea of the ethnic and cultural roots of foreign citizens and citizens of Russia. In addition, the authors propose to add the “Nationality” entry to the departure sheet and to the migration registration card; this will make it possible to obtain operational information about the ethno-demographic structure of immigrants in the periods between population censuses.

Research methods and methodology

Over the past decades, significant ethnodemographic changes have taken place in Russia as a result of migration processes, as well as the so-called national revival, implying the growth of selfconsciousness of representatives of small and large peoples (Gabdrakhmanova, Sagdieva, 2019), which necessitated the introduction of clarifications in the approach to the study and accounting of the ethnic structure of the population and international migration flows. Obviously, at present it is necessary to pay equal attention to permanent and labor migration.

We consider immigration flows in the Russian Federation as an object of research. The subject is the ethno-demographic structure of immigration in the context of accounting methods and available sources of statistics.

The research methodology includes generalizing and comparing existing approaches to the analysis of the nationality structure of migrants in Russian and foreign practice, and also includes comparative analysis of available statistical and departmental data. The paper analyzes the content of forms of registration of migrants, highlights issues that allow assessing the ethnicity or nationality of migrants. As a result, we propose a comparative table of existing approaches to the registration of immigrants, indicating the presence of separate entries concerning nationality or ethnicity.

Using the materials of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, we compiled two maps reflecting the territorial distribution of immigrants by regions of Russia, including immigrants who have signed an employment contract and those registered at their place of residence.

The study is based on official sources that allow analyzing the ethnic component of migration flows: data from Rosstat forms and reports, sample observations of migrant labor, the Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, as well as sociological surveys regarding the issues of ethnicity and interethnic interaction in Russia and its regions. A brief overview of foreign experience related to taking into account the ethnodemographic characteristics of migrants is based on official sources of population censuses of foreign countries. A cartographic method was used to analyze the territorial distribution of migrants.

The first part of the paper discusses the Russian experience of registering the ethno-demographic structure of immigration flows, including the features of current migration accounting, data from the All-Russian Population Census, sample surveys of migrants, and the results of sociological studies revealing the importance of accounting for the ethno-demographic component in the structure of immigration flows for the host society. The second section examines the distribution of foreign citizens across the territory of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, which allows us to assess the existing territorial features of the placement of immigrants. The third section is devoted to the analysis and the possibility of applying in Russian practice the experience of foreign countries receiving immigrants from countries with similar socio-cultural characteristics. As part of the discussion, we propose possible ways to optimize existing approaches to the system of accounting for the ethno-demographic characteristics of immigrants.

Russian experience of estimating the ethnodemographic structure of immigration

The existing system for collecting information on migration in Russia is represented by current (administrative) and census accounting (conducting the All-Russian Population Census (ARPC) once in ten years). A micro-census may take place between the periods of the ARPC, the content of the census forms of micro-censuses coincides with the questions of the main population census. Besides, an additional source of information is the selective statistical observations on the use of migrant labor, which were conducted in Russia in 2014 and 2019. Let us dwell in more detail on the designated forms of registration of migrants.

Current migration accounting

An important advantage of current (administrative) accounting is the ability to assess the ongoing short-term changes at a certain point in time or their dynamics. Currently, every foreign citizen entering the territory of the Russian Federation must necessarily fill out a migration card, which is issued at the border. The card only indicates the citizenship of the immigrant (the place of birth, as in some documents, is not requested). The manual records should then be transferred to the central database. This form of statistical observation, despite a long practice (in Russia, migration cards for foreigners entering the country were introduced in 2004), has no statistical reflection due to the unorganized procedure for compiling and summarizing information contained in immigration cards (Vorob’eva et al., 2016).

The information within the framework of the current registration of migrants, including international migrants, is collected by the territorial bodies of the Administration of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation (UMVD RF)¹. They provide information to the territorial bodies of the Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat). Summary results are presented in the bulletin Population Size and Migration in the Russian Federation and other federal and regional statistical collections.

Since 2008, Rosstat has stopped processing data and publishing information about the national composition of migrants. After this step, Russian

• ¹    On approval of the forms of federal statistical observation with instructions for filling them out for the organization of federal statistical observation of population migration: Rosstat Order 545, dated September 15, 2020.

statistics completely lost the source of information about the national composition of migration flows (Ryazantsev, Mishchuk, 2020). In order to carry out work or educational activities in Russia, as well as to make other applications, foreign citizens fill out documents containing questions about their citizenship, place of birth and/or nationality2.

All-Russian Population Census (ARPC) and migration

The program of the 2002 All-Russian Population Census, unlike the previous population censuses, included Questionnaire Form “B”: “Census form for persons temporarily residing in Russia and permanently residing abroad”, which was intended for interviewing persons temporarily residing in Russia at the time of the population count, but permanently residing abroad. In previous population censuses, persons temporarily staying in the country were counted on general census forms with a note on temporary residence. However, due to the frequent refusals of foreign citizens to answer certain questions of the program, a shortened list of

• ²    On approval of the application forms submitted in connection with the registration of a patent, its reissue, the issuance of its duplicate or amendments to the information contained in the patent: Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia 635, dated August 14, 2017; On approval of the application form of a foreign citizen (stateless person) to engage them as a highly qualified specialist and the procedure for filling it out, as well as the forms and procedures for notifying the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation or its territorial authority on the implementation of labor activity by foreign citizens (stateless persons) on the territory of the Russian Federation (Appendix 13): Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia 363, dated June 4, 2019; Appendix

  Table 1. List of questions for persons temporarily staying in Russia

  	ARPC-2002		ARPC-2010, 2020*
  1.	Sex	1.	Sex
  2.	Year of birth	2.	Year of birth
  3.	Country of birth	3.	Country of permanent residence
  4.	Country of permanent residence	4.	The purpose of coming to Russia
  5.	Citizenship	5.	Duration of stay in Russia
  6.	Nationality (optional)	6.	Country of residence
  7.	The purpose of coming to Russia	7.	Citizenship (only one citizenship)
  * Questions 5–7 are intended for persons who have indicated the purpose of coming to work or study. Own compilation according to: ARPC data for 2002, 2010, 2020.

  
  

questions was designed3. In subsequent population censuses, this form of questionnaire was retained.

During the 2002 ARPC, first of all, foreign citizens permanently residing in the Russian Federation (i.e. persons with citizenship of a foreign state) and stateless persons at their place of residence were accounted for in a general manner. Second, persons (regardless of their citizenship) who arrived in the Russian Federation to work under contracts of Russian and foreign organizations (except for foreign citizens working in representative offices of foreign states and international organizations) or study for a period of one year or more were counted as permanent residents of Russia at the place of their usual residence in the Russian Federation (regardless of when they arrived). The third category is persons (regardless of their citizenship) who have arrived from foreign countries (including CIS countries) in the Russian Federation for permanent residence or in search of asylum (regardless of whether they have received a residence permit or not)4.

The entry “nationality” could be filled in by self-determination of a citizen according to Article 26 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which states: “Everyone shall have the right to determine and indicate their nationality. No one may be forced to determine and indicate their nationality”5.

During the 2010 All-Russian Population Census the entire population permanently (usually) residing in the Russian Federation, as well as persons temporarily (up to one year) located on the territory of the Russian Federation, whose place of permanent residence was abroad, were subject to accounting⁶. Three forms of census forms were used⁷. In contrast to the resident population of the Russian Federation, migrants were to answer questions about the country of birth and the country of permanent residence. There was no entry regarding nationality in this census form. The list of questions of the ARPC forms 2002, 2010, 2020 is presented in Table 1 .

The results of the population census can be considered as a demographic cross-section for a certain period of time; however, we agree with V.A. Tishkov’s opinion that the accounting of foreign migrants during the census is conducted very approximately (Tishkov, 2011). In addition, the analysis of foreign migrants summarizes data on labor migrants, citizens living in Russia, but having foreign citizenship.

The advantage of the population census over administrative sources of information, the collection of which is based on a particular administrative procedure, is a wide range of coverage of migrant workers, regardless of the legality of their situation. However, despite the obvious advantages (coverage of the entire population and the variety of information collected), the census has a major drawback – the inter-census intervals, which, as a rule, make up a decade (Ryazantsev, Mishchuk, 2020).

Changes in migration legislation, major economic or political changes, which get a quick and sensitive response from migration flows, occur much more often, so the data collected during the census can quickly become outdated. Despite the completeness and accuracy of the data provided by population censuses, they do not allow us to observe constant changes in the migration situation. Specialized sample surveys, which are a more flexible tool for collecting such data than population censuses, partly help to supplement the missing information and correct these shortcomings (Vorob’eva et al., 2014).

Selective observation of migrant labor

An additional survey of foreign labor migrants is carried out as part of a sample statistical observation of the use of migrant labor. Monitoring has been carried out since 2014, once every five years. Currently, the observation materials of 2014 and 2019 are available. Based on the methodological and organizational provisions developed for the observation in 2019, the following terms were used in the study: international migrants, international migrant workers, foreign workers, foreign labor migrants. Let us focus on the meanings of these terms, since they do not fully coincide with the common approach to the notion of “international migrant”.

In this observation, according to the Guidelines concerning statistics of international labour migration approved at the 20th International Conference of Labor Statisticians in October 2018, “international migrants include all those residents of a given country who have ever changed their country of usual residence”8. International migrant workers are also persons aged 15 years and older, permanently residing in Russia, but born abroad.

Our research also considers the category of foreign workers or foreign labor migrants, these are non-residents temporarily located on the territory of Russia, citizens of other states who were employed by households or entrepreneurs and performed paid work in the Russian Federation9.

Information on the citizenship of foreign labor migrants in the context of the regions of the Russian Federation for 2019 is contained in the tables on the number of foreign citizens employed in households (Table 2.13 in the results of the Sample observation of migrant labor10). At the same time, it is impossible to compare the data of 2014 and 2019 in full, since in 2014 information on the citizenship of foreign labor migrants was provided only for the Russian Federation as a whole. In the context of regions, the citizenship of foreign labor migrants is indicated if they are employed by households, but there is no data on the citizenship of foreign labor migrants attracted by entrepreneurs in the context of RF regions.

A comparative analysis of data on the number of foreign labor migrants attracted to work in the Russian Federation from 2014 to 2019 allows us to draw the following conclusions:

– the number of migrants attracted by entrepreneurs and households has decreased, while the share of labor migrants attracted by households is 81%;

– in the context of countries, most of the migrants attracted to work in households in 2014 and 2019 came from Uzbekistan; the number of migrants arriving from all countries decreased, with the exception of Kyrgyzstan and Turkey;

– in 2014, most of the migrants attracted by entrepreneurs came from Ukraine, in 2019 – from Uzbekistan; while the overall reduction in the number of migrants from Belarus has increased in all countries.

The analysis of the distribution of foreign labor migrants employed by entrepreneurs in federal districts of the Russian Federation in 2019 shows that more than 43% of all attracted labor migrants are employed in the Central Federal District. The Central Federal District is the leader in attracting migrants from different countries, while there is also a high proportion of migrants from Kyrgyzstan and China employed in the Far Eastern Federal District. The Nortwestern Federal District ranks second in attracting migrants from Belarus, the Republic of Moldova and Tajikistan.

Sociological research

Sociological research aimed at studying the relations of different ethnic groups in the regions and the relation of the host community toward migrants, allow us to expand the statistical information obtained as a result of current accounting and population censuses.

The materials are collected within the framework of monitoring surveys, public opinion polls conducted by research organizations: the analytical center “Levada-Center”11, the Public Opinion

11 Autonomous non-profit organization Yuri Levada Analytical Center “ANO Levada-Center”*. Available at: (accessed: December 24, 2021).

Foundation (FOM)12, the Russian Public Opinion Research Center13 (VCIOM). In November 2011, the Public Opinion Foundation conducted a survey on the attitude toward the return of the entry “nationality” in the passports of Russians; 26% of respondents reacted positively to this proposal, 48% were indifferent14.

In the spring of 2016, the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs switched to a new system for implementing social monitoring of ethnoconfessional relations. Studies are conducted at the level of constituent entities and municipalities, in addition, ethnic groups (nationality) and confessional groups are studied as an object.

In December 2018, VCIOM presented data from a public opinion poll on the impact of immigration on Russia. According to the results of the poll we can conclude that Russians are more supportive of the idea of attracting Russian and Russian-speaking immigrants from the Republic of Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Germany. The greatest “antipathy” is caused by the probability of entry of citizens of Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine, the U.S. and China15.

In September 2019, Levada-Center* presented the results of monitoring the xenophobic sentiments of the Russian population, reflecting the increased attention of the population to ethnic and migrant issues. However, the authors of the monitoring note that such dynamics may be due to external (political) reasons16.

In the scientific community, among the works of specialists dealing with issues of interethnic interaction at the federal and regional levels, we note the works of L.M. Drobizheva (Drobizheva, 2019) and V.I. Mukomel (Mukomel, 2018). Scientists from RAS Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology have made a great contribution to the study of theoretical and practical directions of interethnic relations17. The issues of ethnic and religious diversity in Russia, ethnic politics and the history of interethnic relations are revealed in the works of RAS Academician V.A. Tishkov (Tishkov, Stepanov, 2017).

Regional studies are conducted using different methods and in different time periods, which makes their results incomparable within the country (Khaykin, Berezhkova, 2016). In addition, in most of them, the goals and objectives depend on the specifics of socio-economic development and the ethnic processes taking place in them, which also does not allow conducing comparisons between regions. Regional studies address issues of interethnic relations in Crimea (Kulbachev-skaya, 2019), the Republic of Tatarstan (Kozlov et al., 2016; Gabdrakhmanova, Sagdieva, 2019), the Republic of Buryatia (Petrova et al., 2019), the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) (Davydova et al., 2015; Maklashova, 2019). The issues of integration of migrants in Moscow are considered by E.A. Varshaver, A.L. Rocheva (Varshaver, Rocheva, 2015), V.M. Peshkova (Peshkova, 2015). The works of O.I. Vendina (Vendina, 2016; Vendina, Pain, 2018) are devoted to the ethno-cultural diversity in Russian cities and specifics of managing cultural diversity in multi-ethnic cities.

Comparative analysis of approaches to taking into account ethno-demographic characteristics of migrants in the Russian Federation

The analysis of approaches to taking into account the ethno-demographic characteristics of migration flows allows us to note that when collecting data by filling out various forms (migration sheets, petitions, applications), applicants can indicate their nationality and religion.

According to Rosstat’s expert assessments, the entry “nationality” was filled out very poorly in the mid-2000s, mostly due to the fact that passport office employees did not pay due attention to the quality of filling out migration registration sheets. Currently, individual departments with access to the relevant forms of documents can estimate the proportion of answers to these questions. According to the results of the ARPC-2010, 96% of the census population indicated their nationality, in 2018 – 82.2%. It should be taken into account that the overwhelming majority of the population participating in the census are permanent residents of the Russian Federation, and the proportion of migrants is low. In 2010, 7.8% of the surveyed population within the ARPC-2010 indicated foreign countries as their place of birth.

Russian population censuses have the following issue: foreign citizens are recorded in the census by their nationality, and Russian citizens by ethnicity, but all these data are summarized by the term “nationality”¹⁸. That is, at the stage of publishing data on the ethno-demographic characteristics of migrants for evaluation by the scientific community, the information is narrowed down to the entry “citizenship”. Other information collected is not analyzed. Table 2 presents an analysis of the

Table 2. The presence of ethno-demographic characteristics of migrants in different forms of accounting

	Citizenship	Nationality	Religion	Native language	Country of birth	Country of permanent residence
ARPC-2002 (sheet В)	+	+	-	-	+	+
ARPC-2010, 2020 (sheet В)	+	-	-	-	+	+
Current accounting	+	+	+	+	+	+
Sample surveys*	+				+
Opinion polls**	+	+
* In sample surveys, depending on the goals and objectives, the given characteristics of migrants may change. The most common questions are about migrants’ citizenship and country of birth. ** In sociological research, the inclusion of a particular characteristic depends on the purpose of the study. Most ethnic studies include questions about the citizenship or nationality of respondents. Source: Ryazantsev S.V., Mishchuk S.N. (2020). Approaches to taking into account the citizenship and ethnicity of migrants in Russia. Nauchnoe obozrenie. Seriya 1: Ekonomika i pravo, 5, 18–31.

presence or absence of certain ethno-demographic characteristics of migrants in the Russian Federation in the application forms.

Territorial distribution of foreign citizens by nationality and citizenship: results of the ARPC and current accounting in Russia

The change in the current consideration of approaches, forms of taking into account migration in the context of nationalities does not contribute to a comparative time analysis of the ongoing processes. In most sources, information is provided by the countries of which migrants are citizens. Additional difficulties arise when analyzing international labor migration in the context of countries. Rosstat’s open sources provide data on the number of foreign citizens who had a valid work permit or a patent for employment; these data are presented in the context of regions of Russia, but do not allow analyzing the distribution by countries from which migrants arrived. According to the Federal Migration Service of Russia, in 1995, in the structure of the foreign labor force (FLF) by country of origin, the first place was occupied by citizens of Ukraine (34% of the number of FLF attracted to Russia). The second and third places are occupied by citizens of Turkey (13%) and China (9%). In 1998, the structure of FLF exporters did not change, Ukraine, Turkey and China remained the leaders.

The information and reference bulletin no. 5, prepared by the Consolidated Analytical Department of the Federal Migration Service of Russia, presents the national composition of international migrants in the Russian Federation for 1997. The results of the analysis of migration growth (loss) by the national composition of migrants reflect the excess of the number of arrivals over the number of departures, which formed the migration growth of the population in 1997. According to the abovementioned bulletin, the peoples and ethnic groups of the Russian Federation accounted for 73% of the migration increase, of which 90.5% were Russians. A significant migration increase was noted in the group of Tatars. A significant excess of the number of migrants who left over the number of arrivals was noted among Jews.

Migration growth was recorded among all indigenous nationalities of the CIS and Baltic countries, with the maximum increase in the number of Ukrainians. They accounted for 39% of the number of peoples and ethnic groups who arrived in the Russian Federation, living mainly outside the Russian Federation. The second place in terms of both the volume of migration growth (23.6%) and the number of arrivals (13.2%) was occupied by Armenians.

In contrast to the positive balance of migration with the CIS and Baltic countries, in 1997 there was a migration decline in the population with other countries, largely formed by the outflow of Germans, whose share amounted to 75% of the total number of the population that left Russia.

In the collections and newsletters issued after 1998, migrants are represented by the countries from which they came, without specifying their nationality. The analysis of the distribution of labor migrants is based on data from several sources: Monitoring of legal (legal) external labor migration issued in 2006–2008 by the Federal Migration Service of Russia, Rosstat collection Labor and Employment in Russia , which has been published since 1995 with a frequency of once every two years¹⁹, the collection Regions of Russia. SocioEconomic Indicators ²⁰.

A detailed analysis with the inclusion of tabular statistics on legal international migration was presented in the collections issued by the Department of External Labor Migration of the Federal Migration Service of Russia in 2004–2007. There are currently no analogues of such materials.

The collection Labor and Employment in Russia includes tables on international labor migration. The total number of foreign citizens who carried out labor activity in Russia is presented in it until 2010; since 2011, data on foreign labor migrants are recorded separately according to the number of citizens who have received patents, have valid patents and have valid work permits.

Changes in legislation and the signing of intergovernmental agreements affect the forms of accounting for labor migration in Russia, including accounting for their citizenship. For example, as a result of the signing of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union (Astana, May 29, 2014), citizens of the EAEU member states engaged in labor activity in Russia are not statistically counted among the foreign citizens who have received permits to work in Russia. Citizens of these countries are counted based on the number of notifications received from employers about the conclusion of an employment contract or a civil contract with foreign citizens and stateless persons.

From 1994 to 2018, the number of foreign citizens with work permits in Russia has been constantly increasing. Despite the lack of data on the number of citizens of the EAEU member states in the number of foreign labor migrants, the share of citizens from the CIS countries by the end of 2020 amounted to about 96% of the total number of foreign citizens engaged in labor activity in Russia21. Since 2007 and up to the present, the number of citizens of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan engaged in labor activity in Russia has been increasing. The share of citizens of these countries in 1994 was 1.1 and 0.4% of the total number of foreign labor migrants, in 2018 – 57.6 and 25.3% respectively. At the end of 2020, due to restrictions in connection with COVID-19, the number of Tajik migrants decreased by 25% compared to the level of 2018, Uzbek – by 33%, Chinese – by 70%22.

Let us take a closer look at the territorial distribution of citizens of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan in the context of Russia’s regions in 2020 based on the data provided by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia.

Figure 1. Distribution of labor migrants from Tajikistan by regions of Russia in 2020, % Source: own compilation on the basis of data from the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation.

Figure 2. Distribution of labor migrants from Uzbekistan by regions of Russia in 2020, % Source: own compilation on the basis of data from the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation.

The largest number of migrant workers from Uzbekistan and Tajikistan were registered in the Leningrad Oblast, Saint Petersburg and Moscow. The territorial distribution of migrants from the above-mentioned countries, initially registered at the place of residence, in the total number of employed population, is different and is characterized by the presence of high values in the western and eastern regions of Russia. The presented cartographic material (Fig. 1, 2) makes it possible to visualize the features of territorial distribution of these categories of migrants across Russian regions.

According to the results of the All-Russian Population Census in 2002 and 2010 Rosstat presents tables on the number of migrants temporarily staying in Russia and permanently residing in other countries23. A comparative analysis of the data of ARPC-2002 and ARPC-2010 revealed a twofold increase in the number of citizens of other countries who were on the territory of Russia at the time of the census. At the same time, the share of foreign citizens who indicated work as the purpose of arrival averaged about 65% in 2002 and 2010. We should note a high proportion of respondents who did not indicate the country of permanent residence. In 2002, the share of this category of migrants was 9.5%, in 2010 – 41.6% (1.1% lower than the number of migrants arriving from CIS countries in 2010). If we consider the distribution of migrants who did not indicate the country of permanent residence by the purpose of their arrival, then the share of labor migrants in 2002 was 59% of the number who indicated the reason for arrival. In 2010, the share of labor migrants who did not indicate the country of permanent residence was 82% of the number of migrants who indicated the purpose of arrival.

The predominant share of migrants came from CIS countries. The share of the total number of migrants arriving from CIS countries in 2002 was 63.9%, in 2010 – 42.7%. The share of labor migrants from CIS countries was below the average for this group of countries: in 2002 – 69.8%, 2010 – 76.8% of the total number of migrants from CIS countries.

In the structure of migrants in 2002, there was the maximum share of labor migrants (who indicated work as the purpose of arrival) in the total number of migrants who arrived in Russia from Kyrgyzstan (81.6%), Tajikistan (87.5%) and Turkey (91.9%). In 2010, in relative terms, the leading place was occupied by Vietnamese citizens, 90.5% of whom indicated the purpose of their arrival as “work”. In addition, high values were noted for citizens of Tajikistan, Turkey, and Uzbekistan.

Let us pay attention to the fact that regardless of the form of accounting used, statistics reflect an increase in the number of migrants arriving from Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan. Of course, data mismatch is likely in absolute values, but the trends have a common direction.

We emphasize that in order to plan socioeconomic development, the formation of migration and national policy of the state, it is necessary to have access to more accurate information. In compliance with the constitutional rights of citizens of the Russian Federation and international rules for taking into account the nationality and ethnicity of the population, it is possible to adopt the experience of foreign countries in taking into account these characteristics (for example, the place of birth of parents). Let us take a closer look at the experience of foreign countries in taking into account the ethnicity and nationality of migrants.

Taking into account the ethno-demographic structure of immigration in foreign countries

In many countries, questions about ethnicity are included in the list of census questions. There are still significant differences in the terminology used and approaches to taking into account the ethnic diversity of the population.

In our study, we selected states that have historically accepted immigrants from countries with similar socio-cultural characteristics, primarily the widespread use of a single language. Immigration flows to Russia during the post-Soviet period mostly come from countries whose population speaks Russian. Thus, foreign experience in the field of taking into account the ethno-demographic characteristics of immigrants may be interesting and relevant for Russia.

In countries with a long experience of attracting migrants, for example, Australia, Canada, etc., consideration of ethnic identity, ethnic roots and nationality is included in the surveys of the population within the framework of population censuses. Currently, the list of cultural and ethnic groups is being expanded in the census forms, and the questions about nationality are being clarified. Ethnicity is determined by respondents through self-identification. In addition, the ethnic roots of the population are investigated in more detail. For example, in Australia, questions were added to the 2016 census lists to clarify the country of birth of the mother, the country of birth of the father, the country of birth of the respondent. Previously, either Australia or other countries without specifying their name were indicated as the country of birth.

In the UK, information about the respondents’ country of birth is also considered more important and objective than citizenship. Ethnicity and nationality are also included in the list of questions in the population census24. The previous UK census took place in 201125. In the spring of 2021, the next population census was held, in which questions about nationality, ethnic group, religion, main language, knowledge of English (ability to speak English), knowledge of the Welsh language were used to collect data26.

In Canada in 2002 a study of ethnic diversity was carried out, where questions about the cultural, linguistic, ethnic, religious, etc. identity of respondents were widely presented. Within the group of questions on socio-cultural information, data on the place of birth of the mother and father were entered. When specifying citizenship, people are asked to clarify how it was obtained (by birth, by naturalization with an indication of the date, specify another country). In addition, taking into account the increasing need to expand information about migrants, a longitudinal survey of immigrants has been conducted in Canada since 199727. This study lasts four years after arrival in the country, since during this time immigrants establish economic, social and cultural ties with Canadian society.

The population census in Canada is conducted every five years. The latest population census was held in March 2021. As a result of a preliminary population survey conducted in 2019 to test the number and new formulations of questions, changes were made in the following five sections: family and demographic concepts and daily activities; immigration, ethnocultural diversity and languages in Canada; indigenous peoples, education, labor, commuting and veterans; income and expenses; housing.

The section “Immigration, ethno-cultural diversity and languages in Canada” addressed issues of immigration and citizenship, the place of birth of a person and their parents, ethnic or cultural origin, population groups, religion, language, rights to education in a minority language.

In order to reflect the growing ethnic diversity of the Canadian population in the 2021 census, examples of ethnic groups were removed from the questionnaire to exclude their influence on the answers. Instead, in order to help respondents understand the question, a description of the types of origin is provided, as well as a link to an extensive list of examples of ethnic and cultural origin, which, according to the developers, encourages Canadians to identify themselves without offering specific answers, and allows them to better reflect the growing diversity of the Canadian population28.

A brief overview of the approaches existing in foreign countries to the development of questions about citizenship, ethnicity and nationality showed the importance of this aspect in the statistical assessment of the population of the state. The increased intensity of international migration flows only emphasizes the need to take into account these characteristics of the resident population and immigrants. In foreign practice, questions about ethnicity (based on self-identification), the country of birth of the mother and father, the country of birth of the respondent are used.

Discussion

The sources of information about migrants include population censuses and sample surveys, various forms of administrative accounting, as well as data collected at the borders of states (during passport control, processing of migration cards). Due to the complexities of accounting, there is no universal source of information about migration.

Each source is necessary in obtaining generalized and complete information about migrants29. If the results of administrative accounting can be used as an element of routine and even daily management, then the results of the population census can be considered as a source of planning for the future and a means of analyzing the past30.

Returning to the issue of taking into account the ethno-demographic structure of migrants, we agree with O.S. Chudinovskikh’s opinion that Russia is characterized by an accelerated process of naturalization of migrants, which can take no more than three years. After naturalization and acquisition of citizenship of the Russian Federation, many migrants become “invisible” and “blend” with the local population. This situation complicates the assessment of the experience of integration of migrants in the host community, the territorial features of their placement and the structure of economic activity, the unemployment rate (Chudinovskikh, 2015).

The absence of information on the distribution of the resident population and migrants, in the context of their ethnic identity, limits managerial functions in the field of regulation of ethnic and migration processes. In order to plan socioeconomic development, the formation of migration and national policy of the state, it is necessary to be able to access more detailed information by including clarifying questions in various forms of registration within ARPCs, sample surveys of migrants, as well as in administrative forms of registration. Flexible ethnic policy can be based on full-fledged information about the management object for the application of effective practices and management mechanisms, promptly responding to possible and real violations of human rights and groups (Drobizheva, 2019).

In our opinion, in order to expand information that allows taking into account and analyzing the issues of the ethnic situation in Russia and its regions, it is possible to optimize existing approaches to the migrant accounting system as follows:

• 1.    While maintaining the existing list of questions in the census lists of the All-Russian population censuses about socio-demographic characteristics, including the question of nationality, preliminary explanatory work should be carried out on the importance of providing this information to both the permanent population and migrants. It is possible to prepare special memos revealing the need to take into account the national factor when making managerial decisions in the field of migration, analyzing and developing recommendations on the directions of adaptation and integration of migrants in Russian society.

• 2.    According to the approach on the possible variations of ethnic self-identification, a set of variables to clarify the socio-cultural characteristics of foreign citizens may include several indicators. Taking into account the experience of foreign countries, we consider it necessary to include questions about the place of birth of the respondent’s father and mother in the census forms, which will allow us to get a more accurate idea of his ethnic and cultural roots³¹. Nationality on the basis of self-determination is included in the list of issues within the framework of the ARPC; however, we consider it appropriate to include this entry in the departure sheet and in the migration registration card, since current (administrative) accounting does not allow taking into account the changes occurring in the national composition of the country and its individual regions. At the same time, the availability

• 3.    Another variant of questions aimed at deepening information about the migration past of respondents is related to clarifying whether the respondent is a citizen of Russia by birth or as a result of naturalization, as well as about the place of birth and the year of moving to Russia for permanent residence (Chudinovskikh, 2015).

of up-to-date information about the ethnic situation in the country is a necessary condition for the implementation of ethnic policy.

The proposed variants of the questions are aimed at forming a systems approach to obtaining comprehensive information about the ethnodemographic structure and migrants, which will help to get closer to obtaining more accurate knowledge about the ethnic situation in the country and regions.

Conclusion

The most complete information about migrants in Russia is provided by population census data, but it is obvious that the dynamic nature of migration flows requires appropriate accounting measures. In Russian practice, current migration accounting is carried out using various forms, but the information they contain most often remains at the level of authorized organizations, and subsequently is not publicly available for analysis in the context of Russia’s regions and in the context of the countries whose citizens have arrived in Russia. Sample surveys allow us to study in more detail certain aspects of migration processes or certain categories of migrants, but their results may not always be comparable in time.

Regarding the accounting of the indicators under consideration, we note that ethnicity is not considered in the framework of the current accounting of migrants. In all forms to be filled in, the citizenship (allegiance) of a foreign citizen is indicated, often – the place of birth, if desired – nationality and religion in one form. Nationality on the basis of self-determination can be indicated by citizens during a population census. Currently, it is mandatory to indicate citizenship in the statistical forms of migration registration, as well as in other forms used by executive authorities that collect and systematize migration data. Information about the nationality and religion of foreign citizens is provided on request in a number of applications. At the same time, this information is not presented in current statistical forms, which makes it almost impossible to analyze the ethnic composition of labor migrants in Russia.

Taking into account all the difficulties of collecting information about the ethnicity of migrants, we think it is necessary to consider the possibility of including additional data on the place of birth of the respondent’s father and mother in the census sheets. Requesting this information will not contradict constitutional law, but it will help to get a more accurate idea of a person’s ethnic and cultural roots. Often, information about the country of birth is more important and objective than citizenship. In Russia, as well as in other countries, citizenship is an unstable sign, because migrants can take citizenship of the country of residence.