On the results of the conference “Consolidation of Russian society in the new geopolitical realities” in the framework of the First Lapin readings

This proposal was supported by all participants of the program. The purpose of the conference is to consider the problems of population consolidation in the all-Russian and regional context in the new situation of international sanctions and changes in geopolitical realities in which modern Russia is included.

The conference was attended by representatives of 17 Russian regions, including Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Perm Krai, the Bryansk, Vologda, Irkutsk, Kursk, Nizhny Novgorod, Smolensk, Tyumen, Sverdlovsk, Tula, Ulyanovsk oblasts, the republics of Bashkortostan, Karelia, Chuvashia, Chechnya, as well as the Republic of South Ossetia. In addition to reputable scientists, it was attended by university students from Moscow, Saint Petersburg, the Kursk, Vologda, Ulyanovsk, Tyumen oblasts, the Republic of Bashkortostan and the Chuvash Republic. In total, two plenary sessions and five sections were held. Opening greeting speeches in front of the participants of the First Lapin Readings were delivered by A.A. Guseinov, Doc Sci. (Philosophy), RAS Academician, IPh RAS acting director, M.F. Chernysh, Doc Sci. (Sociology), RAS Corresponding Member, FCTAS RAS director, and V.A. Ilyin, Doc Sci. (Economics), Professor, RAS Corresponding Member, VolRC RAS scientific director. All of them spoke with gratitude about Nikolai Ivanovich Lapin, who had made a huge contribution to Russian science.

The conference participants shared the results of historical and current sociological research, findings of their studies, and methodological and philosophical reflections. The conference has become interdisciplinary in terms of ways of searching for new knowledge, generalizing the results and analyzing specific historical realities regarding the development of Russian society, as well as in terms of methodological foundations and methodological tools for obtaining the materials involved and ways of forming scientific discourse.

During the first plenary session , scientists turned to the legacy of N.I. Lapin. L.A. Belyaeva, Doc. Sci.

(Sociology), Professor, acting head of CSSCC IPh RAS, spoke about the joint work with N.I. Lapin, how the project “Socio-Cultural Portraits of Russia’s Regions” had been created. This project brought together the efforts of philosophers, sociologists, economists from Russian regions that are most diverse in their socio-cultural, modernization and other characteristics. Analyzing the deep modernization differences between RF constituent entities, N.I. Lapin was one of the first to raise the question of what is behind these differences. Ms Belyaeva continued to study the heterogeneity of Russian society, including noting the possible risks that heterogeneity carries, and proposed new ways to explain modernization differences between Russian regions. This helped to reveal some new ideas, formulate new problems that require further consideration.

I.V. Katerny, Doc. Sci. (Sociology), professor at MGIMO University of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, made a report “From Crisis Society to Crisis Sociality: To the 30th anniversary of N.I. Lapin’s Work ‘The Hard Years of Russia’” . Based on the All-Russian study “Our Values Today”, the author conducted a deep analysis of the possibilities of humanization as a starting process of social reformation in Russia. This humanistic idea can also be proposed to overcome the current crisis, transition to post-conflict reconstruction in a new Russia.

Scientists from the Institute for Demographic Research FCTAS RAS: G.I. Osadchaya, Doc. Sci. (Sociology), Professor, and T.N. Yudina, Doc. Sci. (Sociology), Professor, presented a joint report “Values, Interests, Group Solidarity and Social Management” , dedicated to the sociological school under the leadership of N.I. Lapin and V.A. Yadov. They spoke about the experience of teaching sociologists through participation in research, in-depth study of theory and modern methods in practice, in live and creative communication. The school has educated a whole galaxy of outstanding scientists and has made an invaluable contribution to the development of Russian sociology.

M.M. Yusupov, Cand. Sci. (Sociology), associate professor at the Chechen State University, in his report “Methodology and Method of Studying Values in N.I. Lapin’s Research” , highlighted some aspects of the theoretical and methodological approach and method of studying socio-cultural values, developed together with like-minded colleagues. The speaker gave an example of implementation of a methodological approach in the monitoring “Socio-Cultural Portrait of Russia’s Regions”, interregional comparison of research findings. An important conclusion was made: with all the inevitable regional specifics, all RF constituent entities are in the same civilizational or socio-cultural space.

Another aspect of N.I. Lapin’s scientific heritage, concerning trust in institutions, was revealed by V.A. Podolsky, Cand. Sci. (Politics), associate professor at the State Academic University for the Humanities. Mr Podolsky noted that N.I. Lapin had considered the social state to be the most important institutional embodiment of justice, necessary to justify trust, relying both on the sociological theories of the 20th century and on classical political and philosophical works.

The final report of the first plenary session was delivered by A.A. Shabunova, Doc. Sci. (Economics), VolRC RAS director. Ms Shabunova spoke about the most important results and prospects of conducting research under the program “Problems of Socio-Cultural Evolution of Russia and Its Regions”, and also shared the immediate plans of the program coordinators. The development of scientific research requires joint intellectual and organizational efforts of scientists – representatives of all regions participating in the program. The conference participants made important proposals aimed at implementing the initiatives. In particular, it was proposed to update the methodology for studying sociocultural evolution in order to organize an AllRussian sociological study of the civilizational heterogeneity of Russian society.

The second plenary session discussed the development of consolidation potential in modern Russia. The session was opened by V.A. Kozlovsky, Doc. Sci. (Philosophy), Professor, director of the Sociological Institute of the RAS – Branch of FCTAS RAS in Saint Petersburg, with the report “Transformation of the Civilizational Identity of Russian Society in the Context of Multiple Modernization” . He gave an understanding of civilizational identity as a set of social forms of modernity, which includes methods (rules, values and norms) of socio-cultural construction, understanding, interpretation and actions of established social groups. The speaker paid special attention to various dimensions of the civilizational identity of Russians in the context of modernization processes: forms and degrees of social and cultural integration; economic, social and cultural dominants that determine the meaning and spirit of the modern era; unique types of differentiation of modern societies; forms of socio-cultural interaction of transforming modern societies in the context of globalization; changing models of environmental management and consumption; key parameters of life paths and models of social action of a modern person; semantic structures of everyday experience and standards of life set by science and technology; a collective view of innovation, anomie, as well as anomalies of modern society.

The transformations of Russian federalism in the new geopolitical realities were analyzed in the report of Yu.D. Granin, Doc. Sci. (Philosophy), IPh RAS leading researcher. The scientist noted that in 1990–2022 the country has evolved from the model of “cooperative federalism” to the model of “centralized federation”. The latter model can be fully integrated into the imperial development paradigm characteristic of Russia. Mr Granin’s report caused a lively discussion about the fate of Russian federalism, relationship between the concepts of locality and civilization, possibilities for and barriers to maintaining the balance of federal centralism and regional diversity.

The report “Civic Participation Practices of Residents of the Central Chernozem Region” delivered by E.A. Kogay, Doc. Sci. (Philosophy), Professor, department head at Kursk State University, represented civic participation as an indicator of civic culture. Based on the analysis of the results of field sociological studies conducted in the Voronezh, Kursk and Lipetsk oblasts in 2020–2021, the speaker came to the conclusion about the potential readiness of residents to interact with the authorities in addressing social issues and the significant potential of civic participation. However, practical implementation of this potential requires the creation of adequate conditions and development of more effective tools and mechanisms.

The final report “Center – Periphery in the Perception of Rural Residents” was delivered by G.F. Romashkina, Doc. Sci. (Sociology), professor at the University of Tyumen. The report was based on the analysis of the results of quantitative and qualitative research – mass sociological surveys, in-depth interviews of residents of rural areas, experts of various levels from the Tyumen Oblast. The speaker systematized the ideas about the center-peripheral features, on the basis of which their mental, socio-economic and economic-geographical connotations were revealed; the structure of regional identities was revealed in the context of the influence of factors such as education, income level and employment. A lower degree of life satisfaction, greater dependence and weaker consolidation of residents of small peripheral cities compared to rural residents and residents of large cities were found.

Section 1 “Civilizational Challenges of Russia’s Development in New Socio-Political Circumstances” brought to the fore the problems concerning the impact of modern modernization processes on various spheres of life of Russian society. A report “On the Civilizational Meanings of the Modern Stage of Modernization” by I.N. Sizemskaya, Doc. Sci. (Philosophy), chief researcher at IPh RAS, focused on the importance of addressing the universal, humanistic meanings of modernization processes. Ms Sizemskaya emphasized the methodological consistency of the concept of step-by-step integrated modernization developed by the staff of CSSCC IPh RAS, pointed out the need to consider an important parameter of modern modernization processes – the formation of “knowledge in the status of people’s understanding of each other and the natural and social space surrounding them”. In addition, she outlined the topical issue of modernization regulation models, noting that the movement along the “authoritarian mode” creates difficult situations.

Yu.M. Reznik, Doc. Sci. (Philosophy), Professor, chief researcher at IPh RAS, in his report “Domestic Philosophy in Search of Answers to the Civilizational Challenges of Russia” pointed out the importance of referring to the Russian philosophical heritage. One of the fundamental ideas of this heritage can be considered the idea of ecocentrism, which can become a fruitful worldview for future social development. V.P Veryaskina, Cand. Sci. (Philosophy), Associate Professor, senior researcher at IPh RAS, in her report “Challenges of Russia’s Civilizational Development in the 21st Century: Forecasts, Trends and the Image of the Future” pointed out the need to forecast possible changes in the modern geopolitical context. Based on the generalization of a number of scientific forecasts, she emphasized that at present the ideas of pan-subjectivity and consolidation of human potential are of fundamental importance. The development of spiritual culture, historical traditions and historical memory should be directed at strengthening this potential.

M.N. Yakovleva, researcher at the Institute of Sociology FCTAS RAS, in her report “Problems of Cultural and Civilizational Identity of Russia in the Context of Globalization” also raised issues of the revival of spiritual values of Russian society. She linked the split of Russian society with the contradiction of traditional Russian identity and mindless borrowing of Western mental stereotypes and behavior standards. Emphasizing the importance of modern reinterpretation of the cultural and civilizational identity of Russian society, especially youth, through the introduction of new patterns of mental stereotypes and behavior, Ms Yakovleva noted that reinterpretation must necessarily take into account the traditional Russian identity and, in particular, the fundamental principles of morality and religion of the peoples of Russia.

During the work of section 2 “Socio-Cultural Development of Russia’s Regions”, a detailed analysis of the results of field sociological research conducted within the framework of the program was carried out, as well as questions about the reflection of the results of these studies in educational practice were considered. Thus, within the framework of the report “Socio-Economic Vulnerability of the Development of Russian Regions in Modern Conditions” , Yu.M. Pasovets, Cand. Sci. (Sociology), associate professor at Kursk State University, focused on the conditions of instability and risks of modern socio-cultural processes. As a key factor promoting vulnerability of regional development, Ms Pasovets presented a contrasting profile of socio-economic stratification on the example of Central Chernozem Region areas. A.V. Vinokurov, Cand. Sci. (Psychology), associate professor at Smolensk State Institute of Arts, in his report “The Formation of the Digital Economy and Culture Industry in the Smolensk Oblast” spoke about the leading directions of the digital transformation program of the region, approved in December 2021. He addressed the issue of changing the communicative culture of the youth of the Smolensk Oblast under the influence of the electronic environment, stressed the importance of analyzing the neural network effects of the digital economy and culture of the Western Border region of Russia.

E.B. Plotnikov, Cand. Sci. (History), Associate Professor, department head at Perm State University, and Yu.S. Markova, Cand. Sci. (Sociology), associate professor at Perm State University, in their report “Social Design as a Technology for Overcoming Socio-Cultural Risks in Municipalities” focused on the importance of improving technologies for overcoming existing threats arising in the boundaries of the zones of municipalities of the Perm Oblast. They considered various ways of overcoming sociocultural risks, which were embodied in social projects of industrial enterprises. The scientists also pointed out a number of risks that require relevant projects to be developed so as to reduce the following risks: low standard of living, lack of support for socially vulnerable categories of citizens, availability of information, the need to preserve the historical memory of a small homeland, etc. They also shared their experience of introducing materials obtained during the implementation of the program “Problems of Socio-Cultural Evolution of Russia and Its Regions” into the educational process at Perm State University.

M.A. Gruzdeva, Cand. Sci. (Economics), senior researcher at VolRC RAS, in her report “SocioCultural Characteristics of the Region through the Prism of Crisis Transformations” presented an analysis of data obtained during seven waves of sociological surveys in the Vologda Oblast. This allowed her to recreate the dynamics of the region’s socio-cultural development, identify the leading transformations of the territorial identity and value structure of the population, carried out under the influence of economic crises and external challenges.

N.M. Lavrenyuk-Isaeva, Cand. Sci. (Sociology), deputy director of the Ufa University of Science and Technology, in her report “Socio-Constructive Activism in Noncentral Areas of Russian Cities” considered one of the solutions to the problem of consolidation of Russian regions. She noted that it is advisable to begin the consolidation of Russians through their involvement in constructive “close” practices concerning everyday pastime. Accordingly, Ms Lavrenyuk-Isaeva called the development of socio-constructive activism of local urban communities an effective way to solve the problem.

V.S. Bogdanov and A.A. Pochestnev, both Cand. Sci. (Sociology) and senior researchers at the Institute of Sociology FCTAS RAS, based their report “The Problem of Expert Group Formation in Regions with Different Levels of Socio-Cultural Development” on expert surveys. They consistently revealed the influence of the existing regional management systems on regions’ modernization processes. The speakers came to the conclusion that it is necessary to typologize regions not only by technical, technological, socio-economic, sociocultural components of socio-cultural modernization, but also by the degree of development of the institutional and regulatory component.

M.V. Moroshkina, Cand. Sci. (Economics), senior researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Karelian Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, in her report “Central and Peripheral Regions of the Northwestern Federal District” touched upon the problem of geographical accessibility of NWFD regions, while noting the ambivalence of the influence of the border situation on the development of the region. She proposed the calculation of the peripheral level of the region based on the assessment of geographical location and the volume of regional market. With the help of this calculation, the classification of regions can be carried out, as well as their ranking depending on the level of availability of the regional market. L.I. Rozanova, Cand. Sci. (Economics), senior researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Karelian Research Center of RAS, in her report “The Impact of Investments on Social Sustainability in the Region” noted the importance of state investment support for the development of Northwestern Federal District territories. This support can help to attract private investors, develop small and medium-sized businesses, as well as depopulation processes, and ultimately increase the level of social stability in the regions of the federal district under consideration.

The work of the section 3 “Identity in the Context of Consolidation of Russian Society” was built around the issues of overcoming the malfunctions in traditional components of identity in modern Russia. Thus, K.S. Mokin, Doc. Sci. (Sociology), leading researcher at the Institute of Sociology FCTAS RAS, in his report “Territorial Identity: Forms and Mechanisms of [Re]configuration (Comparative Analysis of the Saratov Oblast and the Republic of Kabardino-Balkaria)” presented an analysis of factors influencing the transformation of the territorial identity of Russian citizens, and also proposed conditions for the formation of an identification matrix. The speaker stressed that territorial identity is one of the leading types of social capital of regions’ residents, performing both mobilization and socio-cultural presentation functions of territorial communities. V.G. Kharitonova, Cand. Sci. (History), associate professor at Chuvash State Institute of Humanities, prepared her report “The All-Russian Civil, Regional and Ethnic Identity of the Population of Chuvashia” in collaboration with I.I. Boyko, Doc. Sci. (History), Professor; the report was based on the materials of a number of sociological surveys. This made it possible to recreate the state and dynamics of various levels of identity of the population of Chuvashia. It is noted that the hierarchical combination of different types of identity does not indicate the presence of confrontations of representatives of different nationalities in the republic. It should be understood that identities are not rigid constructions; they can be changeable and even situational.

R.M. Valiakhmetov, Cand. Sci. (Sociology), Associate Professor, dean of Bashkir State University, in his report “Specifics of the Formation and Manifestation of Ethnic, Regional and Civic Identities in the Republic of Bashkortostan”, continued to study the above topic. He emphasized that the basis of any identity is made up of deep socio-cultural values and factors. When considering certain types (forms) of identities, researchers sometimes artificially “enclose” them in a certain framework. The speaker noted that it is also necessary to take into account and, accordingly, more carefully and closely study multi-component, cross-border identities, subregional sub-ethnic identities, etc. K.G. Dzugaev, Cand. Sci. (Philosophy), associate professor at the South Ossetian State University named after A.A. Tibilov, presented his report “The Republic of South Ossetia: Alternative Identity” in which he pointed out the variability of the choice of identity for South Ossetians. He noticed the emergence of a new political and cultural reality in the Republic of South Ossetia following the results of the 2022 presidential election. And this new reality has led to numerous active discussions among the region’s residents, carried out at various levels, covering social networks, labor collectives, neighboring communities and related groups.

Yu.V. Latov, Doc. Sci. (Sociology), Associate Professor, chief researcher at the Institute of Sociology FCTAS RAS, prepared the report “Modernization of the Mental and Cultural Values of Russians and Urbanization: An Inverted U-Shaped Dependence” jointly with N.V. Latova, Cand. Sci. (Sociolody), leading researcher at the Institute of Sociology FCTAS RAS. The report noted the ambiguous nature of socio-cultural modernization in Russia at the beginning of the 21st century. Based on the analysis of the results of all-Russian sociological surveys conducted in the 2000s–2020s by the Institute of Sociology FCTAS RAS, the speaker traced the patterns of the current state of the mental and cultural characteristics of residents of various types of Russian cities. At the same time, he drew attention to the reduced commitment of residents of metropolitan megacities to modernization characteristics, compared with residents of smaller cities. He presented an inverted U-shaped model of differences, which is manifested among residents of different cities in requests for information and cultural content, in adherence to cultural and modernization values, as well as in the prevalence of various types of social participation. I.I. Sulima, Dr. Sci. (Philosophy), Associate Professor, department head at Minin Nizhny Novgorod State Pedagogical University, in her report “Ways of Forming Linguistic Unity: Methodology of Attitude toward Language” considered linguistic identity in the context of consolidation processes. The speaker came to the conclusion that the basis for the consolidation of Russian society should be the native language, the languages of art, as well as the languages of science. Accordingly, the education system faces the task of minimizing foreign-language borrowing, since it is the language that is the basic element that determines national identity.

Section 4 “Youth in the Face of Modern Challenges” , in accordance with its name, brought together established scientists, students and postgraduates. V.T. Tarasov in the report “Elements of Historical Consciousness in Young People” compared the historical consciousness of youth on the example of Russia and university students of Chuvashia in different periods of the USSR and Russia. On the basis of a conditional comparison of representatives of youth from different historical periods, the process of formation of their historical consciousness in dynamics was studied. Mr Tarasov presented the age cohorts as the youth of the corresponding periods, whose consciousness was formed under various models of political relations. The aim was to find out the impact of specific social practices and ideological influences on the younger generation in various historical periods. The results of longitudinal studies were processed using factor analysis, the most significant discrepancies in the conditional values of factors were shown. In particular, significant differences were observed in the prerequisites for and level of religious consciousness and social optimism in the youth of the USSR and modern youth.

L.S. Ruban, Doc. Sci. (Sociology), Professor, department head at the Institute of Socio-Political

Research, presented the report “Studying National and Civic Identity of Students in the Framework of the Three Generations of Russian Youth” . Over 30 years of sociological surveys of Soviet and, later, Russian schoolchildren, three generations of young people were studied: the last Soviet generation, the generation of the transitional period and the first post-Soviet generation. As Ms Ruban showed, in 1990–1991 and 1995–1998, 75–80% of students defined their Homeland as a small homeland. Later, in 2001–2007, a new trend began to take shape, expressed in the awareness of the Homeland as a strong country protecting its citizens. During this period, 44% of respondents thought so, and 34% characterized the Fatherland as a small homeland.

E.V. Kargapolova, Doc. Sci. (Sociology), professor at Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, prepared a joint report with D.N. Matreshkina and A.D. Chubarova, students of the said university. Their report “HealthPreservation Practices of Russian Youth: Correlates of Differentiation” discussed the results of a specific sociological study conducted via questionnaire method in February 2020 among students of universities in Moscow and the Moscow Oblast (N = 2600). The co-authors presented the main correlates of health-preservation practices, primarily family, part-time work experience, financial situation of students.

E.V. Andrianova and M.V. Khudyakova, both Cand. Sci. (Sociology), associate professors at the University of Tyumen, delivered a report “The Image of the Future as Perceived by Rural Youth: The Possibility of Consolidation”. Preserving the traditions of rural field sociology, the research group collected 152 expert and in-depth interviews, photo and video information on the territory of 14 districts of the Tyumen Oblast (summer 2020). To identify the image of the future of rural settlements, a subsample of 59 interviews was formed. Conducting in-depth face-to-face interviews made it possible to determine the life experience of the informant, their attitude toward the current state of the village and the vision of prospects for the development of the territory. In 2021, nine focus groups were organized and conducted with visits to the districts of the Tyumen Oblast. The authors confirmed that there is no single “image of the future”, but there are some common fragments that form the main types of ideas about the future, demonstrating the axes of distinction among rural and urban youth: economic activity, social activity, intergenerational transition, territorial identity, socio-cultural identity, youth activity.

Yu.A. Davydova, Cand. Sci. (History), associate professor at Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, together with students of the same university A.D. Sokolov and D.I. Piskarev, prepared a report “The Image of the Motherland as Perceived by Students ”. In the course of the study, students of Moscow universities were asked about associations related to the concept of “homeland”; 4,276 response words were received. The study showed that the largest number of responses was given by the group “Place/territory” (40%), the most common words were “home” (37% of references) and “Russia” (17%). The second group in terms of the number of responses was “Cultural/historical heritage”, which included 13% of respondents’ answers, the priority words were “fatherland” (28% of references) and “patriotism” (27%). The third group “Family” (12%) correlates with the associations “family” (44%) and “mother” (32%). Thus, the small homeland, the place where they live; the country as a whole, cultural and historical heritage, family, parents symbolize the concept of “homeland” for the overwhelming number of respondents.

G.F. Romashkina and V.A. Davydenko, both Doc. Sci. (Sociology), professors at the University of Tyumen, presented an interdisciplinary concept of human capital. The speakers coordinated various theoretical ideas about the origin of the advantages of developed human capital, its connection with the social context, human characteristics and a variety of ideas about human capital as such, psychological characteristics, human behavior in the labor market.

Further, a report of a theoretical and methodological nature “The Research Potential of the Cognitive Mapping Method in the Social Sciences” was made by K.V. Rakova, junior researcher at IPh RAS. The content analysis of domestic scientific research published in the period from 2010 to 2021 allowed the author to assess the research potential of the cognitive mapping method. The weaknesses of the method included high time costs, limitations in the application of the results and conclusions obtained in the study of other problems in the social sciences, limitations in the classification and grouping of responses. The advantages of the method include the ability to see the latent mental attitudes of an individual in relation to a particular event, phenomenon, individual or social group, a low level of formalization, original empirical material, opportunities to identify “social mood” of an individual or a group.

Methodological issues were also discussed during the conference. The participants noted that currently many scientists, using traditional sociological methods, face difficult to resolve issues of accessibility, relevance and representativeness of data. For example, it is necessary to take into account the limitations of various empirical research technologies in modern social sciences, such as longitudinal studies, snowball studies, involving online techniques, and critically approach various methods of obtaining qualitative and quantitative data in their interrelation.

In conclusion, the conference participants and members of the coordinating council discussed major results and prospects for the development of the program “Problems of Socio-Cultural Evolution of Russia and Its Regions”. First of all, they pointed out the need to update the methodology, to include the most important modern aspects in it, such as the formation and development of local civilizations, assessment of identities, formation of the core culture of Russian society, its diversity, complementarity and contrast in territorial, ethnic, religious and modernization characteristics, threats to the consolidation of society. In addition, it is necessary to continue studying digitalization in regional communities, the processes of selforganization and/or disorganization of public life, as well as the development of an institutional-subjective (integrating the capabilities of regional management institutions and individual subjects) mechanism for regulating socio-cultural processes in territorial communities. The conference participants recognized the need to conduct Lapin Readings in various regions of Russia in order to continue the unique traditions of the program, interregional coordination, generalization of the experience of socio-cultural, traditional sociological and socio-economic research. The development of traditions is associated with a deep historical, cultural and philosophical level of comprehension, comparison and generalization of knowledge, reaching a new level, including the study of civilizational heterogeneities and the search for new interdisciplinary forms.