On the results of the round table “30 years of research on the socio-cultural evolution of Russia and its regions: results, prospects”

work is to comprehend the achieved results, and exchange views on realistically constructed prospects. CISI, where the project ideologists started working (N.I. Lapin – RAS Corresponding Member, Head, Doctor of Sciences (Philology), Professor, L.A. Belyaeva – Doctor of Sciences (Sociology), Leading Researcher, I.E. Achatkina – Referent) was organized back in 1988. This small employee group eventually put forward a hypothesis about the qualitative restructuring of the values and interests of population as transformation drivers of Russian society. Realizing this idea, N.I. Lapin has developed a methodological research tool based on a socio-cultural approach. The main form of the toolkit implementation was the All-Russian monitoring, conducted by the method of complex interviews at home with a frequency of 4–5 years. For more convincing specification of the research tasks of this direction1, there was developed the toolkit “Socio-Cultural Portrait of the Regions Russia” which became the basis of the interregional program “Problems of Socio-Cultural Evolution of Russia and Its Regions”. This made it possible to diagnose the main phases of the socio-cultural evolution of post-socialist Russia.

Since 2005, CISI, with the involvement of specialists from the regions, has begun implementing the Program which was modified and updated five years later for the study of new social problems3. Of great importance for the Program development was the holding of 15 annual research and practical conferences which were hosted by different capitals and regional centers of Russia’s regions. They discussed methodological and methodical issues, and new research results. A significant result of the first five years of collective work was a monograph4 that reflected the specifics of socio-cultural development of several regions of the European Russia, the Urals and Western Siberia. L.A. Belyaeva noted the importance of the appearance of another monograph, dedicated to the 85th anniversary of N.I. Lapin “Atlas of Modernization of Russia and Its Regions: Socio-Economic and Socio-Cultural Trends and Problems”5. It set out classification system of the regions and federal districts of Russia by modernization level, justified the need and possibility of a new state strategy that integrated the regions and Russian society into an integral civilization.

The Program has been successfully developing for 30 years; currently, research teams from 27 regions are involved in its implementation. In 2020, the Vologda Research Center of RAS was appointed the curator of the Program with the participation of the Research Committee of the Russian Society of Sociologists “Socio-Cultural Comparative Studies of the Regions of Russia”.

The second section of the Round Table “On the Concept and Methodology of the 10-Volume Library “Regions of New Russia” (moderated by N.I. Lapin) was opened by the Scientific Director of the VolRC RAS, RAS Corresponding Member, Doctor of Sciences (Economics), Professor V.A. Ilyin with a report on “Where Does the Soullessness of the Ruling Elites Lead?” 6. The presentation was based on the results of long-term foreign and Russian sociological measurements, as well as on the data of public opinion monitoring implemented by the Center in the Vologda Oblast since 1996. V.A. Ilyin drew attention to the global nature of the negative consequences of the liberal capitalism ideology which led to disillusionment with it among the broad segments of population in most world countries. According to the speaker, soullessness as a psychological trait of the ruling elites, who gave priority to the achievement of personal interests to the detriment of the national development goals, was one of the reasons for unrealization of national projects. In conclusion of the speech, V. A. Ilyin noted that he agreed with the point of view of N.I. Lapin about the need to create a strong, humanistically active social state in Russia adding that the scientific community should mobilize the available resources to achieve this goal.

According to the idea of N.I. Lapin, a promising direction of the Program was, as mentioned above, the idea of studying interaction culture between citizens and society as one of the actual and poorly studied problems of consolidation of the Russian society. The implementation of this idea will become the subject of regional research and the basis of future fundamental work in the form of a mass library in 10 volumes “Regions of new Russia: to increase the welfare and consolidation of population”. The Director of the VolRC RAS, Doctor of Sciences (Economics) A.A. Shabunova spoke about the structure of one of the volumes of the future library dedicated to the Northwestern Federal District. Her report also showed current trends in modernization of Russian regions, identified on the basis of the updated dynamics of indicators in the IS “Modernization” in 2020, developed using an adapted generalizing methodology for measuring the state of modernization in different world countries which was developed by colleagues from the Chinese Academy of Sciences of the People’s Republic of China. For the participants of the Program, the methodology was used to obtain internationally comparable data on the modernization state of all regions of the country. A.A. Shabunova proved that current trends indicated the preservation of asymmetric development trajectories in the Russian territories which increased the relevance of studying the problem of inequality in the Russian regions.

The socio-cultural guidelines for the development of three regions of the Central Black Earth region – the Voronezh, Kursk and Lipetsk Oblasts – were presented by E.A. Kogai (Doctor of Sciences (Philology), Professor, Kursk State University). According to the author, the main competitive advantages of the regions were related to the nature of economic activity, history and culture. At the same time, such negative trends as depopulation, low potential for public health, paternalism dominance in labor motivation, and low level of per capita income of population were recorded in the regions of the Central Black Earth region. Kogai agreed with the opinion of previous speakers about the weak achievability of the national development goals noting the ambivalent nature of the state of the institutional and regulatory sphere, in which there was an increase in self-awareness and self-organization of citizens and, at the same time, a weak orientation of representatives of political elites for the public good, as well as the alienation of the majority of the regional residents from the political process. Nevertheless, citizens expressed their readiness for active interaction with representatives of the authorities, preferring such forms as personal meetings of political leaders with representatives of population, public reporting of authorities to residents, and conducting opinion polls.

The logical development of the main ideas was the speech of representatives of the Perm State National Research University E.B. Plotnikova (Candidate of Sciences (History), Associate Professor) and Yu.S. Markova (Candidate of Sciences (Sociology). The authors paid special attention to the development and interpretation of the results of a qualitative study of the life world of the municipalities’ population in a risky sociocultural environment. Life worlds were represented by changing, dynamic structures that are in close interaction with social interactions. The risk-taking nature of socio-cultural environment was manifested in “the loss of historical memory, destruction of cultural objects, and “delay” in the culture development which led to inequality in society”. The second type of risks was of an existential nature, as it created a danger for implementation of social practices associated with the lack of necessary conditions. The third type of risks was associated with the destruction of moral values and moral norms, and negative self-organization of population due to the lack of innovative strategy and cultural policy. The authors confirmed that in order to reduce socio-cultural risks, the necessary things were mutual participation of social institutions (different spheres of social development), public organizations, social communities and groups, and individuals. The Perm Oblast peculiarity was manifested in actualization of the role of industrial enterprises that participated in the territory’s development through project activities. This positive experience was revealed through the mechanisms of social construction of life worlds. For example, the project activities of enterprises could create favorable conditions for increasing social activity and creative self-development of residents, forming social capital of territories through networks of joint activities, forming and increasing public trust which was critically lacking in modern Russian society. E.B. Plotnikova and Yu.S. Markova concluded that such activities created opportunities to increase the effectiveness of measures to overcome “existing socio-cultural risks and reduce the emergence of new ones”.

As noted by the following speakers, G.F. Romashkina (Doctor of Sciences (Sociology), Professor) and M.V. Khudyakova (Doctor of Sciences (Sociology), Associate Professor) from the Tyumen State University, on the one hand, regional development was determined by the quality of human capital. On the other hand, an environment, in which social elevators were open, trusting relationships were supported by society, interaction with social institutions motivates people to improve their education and qualifications, selfpreserving behavior, was the main condition for developing high-quality human capital. In such a society, citizens received positive feedback that reflected on their social status and social wellbeing. The empirical materials were based on complex measuring tools of human self-assessment according to the methodology of A. Moses, F. Luthans, R. Ployart and co-authors, included in the Program methodology as an additional logical block. In the Russian-language version, these questionnaires were tested in a mass survey for the first time7. The authors showed structural models of human, social and psychological types of capital in relation to socio-cultural and socio-economic variables. Not all hypotheses were confirmed during the analysis. The authors’ models only partially confirmed the theoretical constructs. For example, the inclusion of labor motives in structural models completely overrode the significance of variation under the influence of other socio-demographic and status parameters. The greatest influence on the variation of human capital on the part of labor motives was exerted by the individual importance of self-realization, real results, interesting, and meaningful work. Further, there was revealed the influence of income (status) or its indicators, selfassessment of health, education and marital status. G.F. Romashkina and M.V. Khudyakova were developing ideas about Russia’s regions through the human capital concept which complemented the Program methodology8. The findings showed that the weakness of achievement motivation, noted by all the regional teams of the Program, was directly related to socio-economic inequality; currently, it creates the main risk for a positive development scenario in Russian regions.

The presentation of V.A. Davydenko (Doctor of Sciences (Sociology), Professor, Head of Research Center) and E.V. Andrianova (Candidate of Sciences (Sociology), Head of Department, Associate Professor, Tyumen State University) was devoted to the analysis of developing urban and suburban territories in the Tyumen Oblast. The conducted research was based on the approaches of social philosophy of space production, social constructivism, social space production, spatial rotation in general in the humanities, and visual sociology. The authors studied local communities residing in rural and suburban spaces through the life worlds of residents of suburban neighborhood. The report proposed a rethinking of the space reproduction concept both at the symbolic level of local subjectivity and at the level of the life worlds of residents of new territories of spatial development. V.A. Davydenko and E.V. Andrianova concluded that the world was becoming “increasingly suburban”, and urbanization itself found its embodiment mainly in suburbanization associated with the development of peripheral urban territories – “between city and rural area”.

N.M. Lavrenyuk-Isaeva (Candidate of Sciences (Sociology), Bashkir State University, Ufa) presented the draft concept of socio-cultural strategizing of the development of Russia’s regions. The author rightly concluded that the rich material, collected during 30 years of research on sociocultural evolution of Russia and its regions, should be fully and effectively implemented in practice. For instance, within the framework of the NP “Housing and urban environment” in the region, there was taken a serious step toward “awareness by the local population of the importance of public spaces, to the development of socio-constructive competencies of local initiative communities during design, to saturation with meanings”. N.M. Lavrenyuk-Isaeva showed how the potential of development was forming “from within” within the framework of transformation and convergence of culture and economy using the involvement technology in the social construction of public spaces. Such technologies allowed identifying the genome of territories, working with socio-cultural codes of specific spaces, and with public opinion leaders at a new level. Further social construction included the synthesis of the accumulated results of regional and municipal socio-cultural research into a single logical system, presentation of a practical apparatus for effective application in the strategic development of the regions of Russia. According to the author, the final product could be a formalized concept of socio-cultural strategizing of the development of Russian regions based on a forecast, with “a certain mission, priorities, scenarios and strategic projects, with a “roadmap” for monitoring qualitative results in the parameters of target indicators in the unity of the diversity of common and unique heritage, preservation and creation of values”.

The speech of A.V. Tikhonov (Doctor of Sciences (Sociology), Professor, Head of the Center for the Sociology of Management and Social Technologies of the Institute of Sociology of the FCTAS RAS) completed the second part of the round table. As a team-mate and colleague, the author spoke about the contribution of N.I. Lapin to the development of Russian sociology and management practice. Describing the research works of Nikolai Ivanovich, A.V. Tikhonov pointed out that they actually symbolized the appeal of Russian sociology to the methodological foundations of its own historical development. Recent works of N.I. Lapina contained an original concept of “the formation laws of modern Russian society in the new geopolitical conditions and its use for managing the modern processes of our evolution”. They expressively showed the total alienation of a person as the deep foundation of the universal crisis of Russian society, the author proposed the idea of social action in the form of civil self-enlightenment as a way to prevent destructive processes. A.V. Tikhonov described an anthroposocio-cultural approach to the analysis of socio-cultural processes as a fundamental application for the revision of the foundations of both domestic and world sociology. He also noted that the concept of criteria for civilizational development, developed by N.I. Lapin, was fruitfully used in research conducted by the Center for Sociology of Management and Social

Technologies of the FCTAS RAS.

The third section of the Round Table “On New Trends in the Socio-Cultural Evolution of the Regions” (moderator – L.A. Belyaeva) was opened by Yu.M. Pasovets (Candidate of Sciences (Sociology), Associate Professor, Kursk State University). She has recreated the leading trends of changes affecting the spheres of economic activity and labor motivation of population of the Central Black Earth region over the previous twenty years. The speaker pointed to such trends as a reduction in the number of people employed in the economy, general increase in the economic activity level of residents of the macroregion, the dominance of employment in trade, manufacturing and agriculture, and involvement in the private economic sector. A field sociological study conducted in three regions of the Central Black Earth region (Voronezh, Kursk and Lipetsk Oblasts) found paternalism in the structure of labor motivation of population as a desire to work mainly at state and municipal enterprises, a desire to provide social guarantees and stable earnings, even if it is low. At the same time, the study showed regional differentiation within the category of persons with market labor motivation which indicates the uneven regional development in the labor sphere.

Speech by E.V. Kargapolova (Doctor of Sciences (Sociology), Professor, Plekhanov Russian University of Economics) focused on the well-being of the Moscow agglomeration residents in difficult conditions of social restrictions. Based on the data of two waves of sociological research, conducted by the online questionnaire method, the author noted the predominance of positive assessments of life satisfaction, as well as the presence of moderate optimism. The year 2020 was not an easy test for Muscovites, however, by the end of the year (November–December), the share of elections for the answer “we will live much better” slightly increased compared to the results of the first wave (April–May).

I.V. Lashuk (Candidate of Sciences (Sociology), Associate Professor, Belarus State Economic University) told the participants of the round table about the transformation of the value structure of modern Belarusian society. Field sociological studies in 2017 and 2020 demonstrated the stability of such values as life and order in the integrating core of the basic values of the Belarusian society, and this stability is inherent in all age groups. The second study showed a significant increase in the importance of universal values with a decrease in the weight of traditional and modern values. At the same time, terminal values prevail over instrumental ones. The intergenerational axiological analysis also showed that freedom value was in the integrating core in the youth cohort.

The report of A.M. Isupov, S.A. Martyshkin, D.V. Prokhorov and D.M. Shabunin (Samara National Research University) emphasized the importance of studying socio-cultural characteristics of local communities. At the same time, the authors noted the difficulties of such a study: municipalities’ selection, incompleteness or lack of statistical data. Nevertheless, the authors called for a closer examination of the regions’ municipalities, believing that this would lead researchers to the micro-level of studying the regions, where the direct life activity of a person takes place. This, in turn, gave the opportunity to study the region in all its diversity, and above all in the diversity of life practices of population, as well as the state of modernization processes.

The speech of V.I. Mosin (Candidate of Sciences (Philology), Associate Professor, Tula Sociological Center) was devoted to the use of data obtained in specific sociological studies to compile ratings of outstanding people in the region: politicians, businessmen, and public figures. Tula sociologists were actively involved in the development of the “Rating of politicians who have made the greatest contribution to socio-economic development of the Tula Oblast”, in the collection of data for the award of the independent business award in the Tula Oblast “Tula Business”, as well as in the compilation of the “Rating of the 100 most influential natives of Tula”. The obtained data on specific people quite expressively recreated the social, economic and political life of natives of Tula, and allowed getting useful information about the situation in the region.

V.M. Tslaf (Candidate of Sciences (Technology), Associate Professor, Samara National Research University) devoted his speech to rather acute questions about the manifestations of socio-cultural pathology of post-Soviet Russian society. Among the symptoms of socio-cultural pathology, he attributed disorganization, paternalistic attitudes, narcissism, abuse of rights, positions of the victim and the “hero”, as well as the assessment of a person on the principle of “friend – foe”. Historically determined factors, lifestyle, as well as the influence of foreign cultures were identified as the leading factors determining the pathogenesis of sociocultural diseases. The author proposed the ideas of “treatment” of socio-cultural pathology, and also put forward a hypothesis about the autowave principle of spreading socio-cultural norms in society.

The report of V.T. Tarasov (Candidate of Sciences (Economics), Associate Professor, Cheboksary branch of the RANEPA) was devoted to trends in changes in the structure of income weights of population of federal districts and federal cities of Moscow and St. Petersburg in the context of three impersonal macrostrata of the decile distribution of population by per capita income – low-income, affluent and rich population for 2000– 2019. The most intensive changes in the income level were recorded among the population of the capital of Russia. At the same time, by the beginning of the new century, a certain mode of distribution of per capita income was formed in most macroregions of the country which almost did not change during the studied period. Based on the calculations, the author concluded that there was a stable reproduction of economic inequality, the level of which exceeded the socially acceptable one. At the end of the speech, V.T. Tarasov put forward a proposal for a radical reform of distribution relations.

Summing up the results of the round table, N.I. Lapin expressed deep satisfaction with the work. He noted the importance of further development of the tools of “Socio-Cultural Portrait of the Russian Region”, first of all, with regard to the expansion of qualitative methods for obtaining sociological information. He also stressed the importance of strengthening the interaction of the research “portrait” team with scientific foundations and with the country’s citizens in the context of implementation of all-citizen education as an effective channel of socialization.

At the end of the conference, friends and colleagues from different years congratulated N.I. Lapin on his 90th anniversary. Yu.V. Sineokaya (Doctor of Sciences (Philosophy), RAS Corresponding Member, Deputy Director of the IP RAS for Science, Head of the Sector of History of Western Philosophy) made a congratulatory speech; she wished “inspiration and joy from communicating with colleagues of the “Great Philosophical House”, whose borders do not end with Goncharnaya Street”. V.A. Ilyin (RAS Corresponding Member, Doctor of Sciences (Economics), Professor, Scientific Supervisor,

Vologda Research Center of RAS) noted his longterm acquaintance and various scientific and creative contacts with N.I. Lapin that “have been developing for more than 10 years, acquiring new shades of scientific activity”. On behalf of the participants of the Program, A.A. Shabunova, L.A. Belyaeva, E.A. Kogai, G.F. Romashkina, V.A. Davydenko, D.M. Shabunin, E.V. Kargapolova, V.I. Mosin, V.M. Tslaf, R.H. Salakhut-dinova, V.T. Tarasov made congratulations.

A.V. Smirnov (Doctor of Sciences (Philosophy), Professor, RAS Academician, Head of the Section “Logical and Semantic Research, History of Arab-Muslim Philosophy” of the Institute of Philosophy of RAS) expressed his impressions of how worthy and impressive the anniversary celebration was. The discussions that took place at the conference allowed concluding: “Nikolai Ivanovich, you are one of the pillars of our institute, this is absolutely true. You are actually the founder of a very serious, overgrown school of sociology, social philosophy, which conducts, on the one hand, field research, and on the other hand, brings you to the level of good philosophical understanding”. E.Yu. Solovyov (Doctor of Sciences (Philosophy), Chief Researcher of the Institute of Philosophy of RAS), and B.V. Sazonov (Candidate of Sciences (Philosophy), Sociologist) joined the participants of the conference with their sincere and warm congratulations.