The social composition of the population and migration on Arkhangelsk North according to the census materials

Relevance of the topic is not doubable due to the sharp surge in global migration activity at the moment. The results of the census, starting from the first population census (1926), represent a rich source for the study of socio-economic life of the country under the conditions of the New Economic Policy (NEP), collectivization, industrialization and subsequent development. Analysis of census materials allows us to recreate the social, demographic and ethnographic portrait of the population in the whole country and its territorial units and to analyze the level of literacy and other indicators. Archival documents of the censuses are stored in the State archive of the Ar- khangelsk region and have been used in the present study of transformations and changes in the territorial structure of the northern settlements between censuses 1920 and 2010 [12]. However, great research interest to the social composition of the population is caused by the results of the population census, characterizing migratory population movements within Archangelsk North, and regional exchange of population with the other areas of our country. This article contains comparative analysis of the impact of migration in Soviet and post-Soviet period on the migratory behavior of the population of the studied northern region.

Territorial changes in the Arkhangelsk North

The study of the social composition of the population and migration processes in the Arkhangelsk North, in Arkhangelsk County and in the Arkhangelsk Region takes into account the transformational changes in the territorial organization of the northern region in the first third of the 20th century. We are talking about the formation of a new administrative boundaries in the European North of the country and the changes in administrative territorial devision within the region itself. After the transfer of Finland in 1918, a part of the Alexander County and the remaining territory of the Murmansk County in 1921, the total area of the Arkhangelsk County decreased by 159,725 km2 [3]. In 1920-1923 the territory of the Karelian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic got some areas of the Arkhangelsk County — Kem area with its total area of 40,600.2 km2 1. In 1921 — the Komi Autonomous Region got a total area of 207 453.7 km2 from Arkhangelsk County2 . According to the General Staff, Lieutenant-General I.A. Strelbitsky, on the 1st of January 1914 the territory of the Arkhangelsk County was 742,050 square versts3. In total the County lost 407,779 km2 or 47.5% of its total area in 1917, and according to the Central Statistical Office, on the 15th of May 1923 its areas was 450,781 km2. Resolution of the USSR Central Executive Committee issues on the 23rd of September 1937 led to the establishment of the Arkhangelsk Region. In 1939 its area amounted to 498 thousand km2 (with the islands of the Arctic Ocean — 609,800 km2). On the 1st of January 1984 the Arkhangelsk region had an area of 587,4 thousand km2 [3, p. 128]. However, in the 21st century modern Arkhangelsk region is noticeably inferior in size compared to the Arkhangelsk County of the early 20th century.

In the first third of the 20th century there have been significant changes in the structure administration in the Arkhangelsk North. On the 1st of January 1917 the Arkhangelsk County consisted nine areas: Alexander, Kem, Onega, Arkhangelsk, Kholmogory, Pinega, Mezen, Pechora and Shenkursk. Two of them, Alexander Kem, had been ealier transferred to the other territories. Two more, mentioned above, have been included in the Arkhangelsk County. In 1920, a part of Mezen-sky area had become Ustvashsky area and a year later it became a municipality of the Mezensky County. In 1926, the Arkhangelsk County was part of the Northern Region. Its total area was 450,775 km2.

Table 1

Territory of Arkhangelsk Country districts

	Districts	01.05.1922	Km2	VPN-19264
Arkhangelsk		26,350		85,628
Mezensky		111,332		124,491

1 Gosudarstvennyj arhiv Arкhangelskoj oblasti (hereinafter GAAO). F. 187. Op.1. D. 843, l.18

2 GAAO. F. 187. Op.1. D. 843, ll.18—19

3 1 square versta = 1,13804 km²; 1 km² = 0,88 square versta. URL:

4Vsesoyuznaya perepis naseleniya 1926 URL: Всесоюзная перепись_населения_1926_г. (Ac- cesed: 14 September 2012)

Onegzsky Pechorsky Pinegzsky Kholmogorsky Shenkursky Islands in the White Sean and the Arctic Ocean

28,909                23,651 No data               94,456 48,210                    - 16,674                    - 24,923                22,544 98,816               100,005

The White Sea and the Arctic Ocean islands accounted for 22.2% territory of the Arkhangelsk County in 1926. It took nearly a fifth of Mezen County — 27.6% of the total area of the County. Area of the Onega County decreased by 18.2%, while its share in the total area of the region amounted to 5.2%. The same figure had the Shenkursky districts, which also "lost" almost a tenth of its territory. Pechersky district occupied the fifth part of the Arkhangelsk County in 1926. [4]

In 1926, in the County, there were 13 urban settlements, including the ones in the Arkhangelsk district — 9, in other districts — one in each. Among 3022 rural settlements, the Arkhangelsk district had 1,341 or 44.4% of the total, the Shenkursk district — 1126 (37.3%), the Onega district — 215 (7.1%), Mezen district — 180 (6.0%), the Pechora district — 145 (4.0%). The island territory had 15 rural settlements (0.1%).

Table 2

Territory and settlements of the Arkhangelsk County ⁵

Territory                                      Amount of settlements

01.05.1922              VPN-1926

	Urban	Rural	Urban	Rural
Total	6	2,897	13	3,022
Arkhangelsky	1	382	9	1,341
Emetsky	2	535	-	-
Mezensky	1	182	1	180
Onegzsky	1	329	1	215
Pechorsky	-	147	1	145
Pinegzsky	1	263
Shenkursky	1	1,037	1	1,126
Islands in the White Sea nad the Arctic ocean	-	22	-	15

As a result of the administrative-territorial transformations in the Arkhangelsk North, initially the number of population decreased. According to the Regional Statistics Committee, on the 1st of January 1917 the population was 441,886 people of both sexes. According to specified data of the Central Statistical Office (CSO) in 1917 in the Arkhangelsk County there were 465,547 people. As a result of the administrative reformations in 1918—1921, the population decreased by 88,194 people. In 1921, there were 377,353 people in the Arkhangelsk Region. So, the population decreased by 19%6 . As it can be seen, every fifth of its former resident, after allocation of certain areas of the Arkhangelsk Region of the country had actually turned out to be a forced migrant, as lived in on his place of permanent residence but on the territory of another administrative-territorial formation in Soviet Russia. However, in the period between census 1926 and 1989 the population of the Arkhangelsk Region had increased by 3.7 times, as a result of the industrial development of the region and due to external migration.

The average density of the total population in 1926 was 1.0 person per 1 km2. This rate was 5.1 times lower than the nationwide and 2.1 times less than in the Northern Region. If we look at the figure for the rural population, it amounted to 0.7 people per 1 km2 on the Arkhangelsk County, in the RSFSR — 4.2 people per 1 km2, in the Northern District — 1.9 people per 1 km2. In terms of districts of the Arkhangelsk County the lowest density, the total population and the rural population was observed in the Pechora district — 0.2 people per 1 km2. The Mezen district had rural population density was 7.4 people per 1 km2, Shenkursk district — 4.7 people, Arkhangelsk and Onega districts had 1.7 and 1,4 people per 1 km2 respectively. If we consider the total population density per 1 km2, in the Shenkursk district it exceeded the County level by 4.4 times, in the Archangel district — 2.7 times, in the Onega district — 1.6 times. In other counties, the figure was lower than the average for the Arkhangelsk County and ranged from 0.2 people per 1 km2 (Pechora) and 0.3 people per 1 km2 (Mezensky)7.

Social composition of the population on the regional level by employment, place of birth and residence

Analysis of census allows us to trace the quantitative and qualitative changes in the social composition of the population at the regional level. In 1926 The branches of the national economy 18,508 workers were employed, or only 4.3% of the population Arkhangelsk County; 7.1% of all employees. In the manufacturing industry 59.4% of workers were employed, in the transport — 13,7%, in agriculture — 12.8%, in handicraft industry — 4.5%, in construction — 1.6%, in other sectors of the economy — 8.0%. 12,415 (68,2%) of workers lived in urban areas; 5,775 (31.8%) — in the countryside. Among the workers employed in the enterprises, 80.3% were residents of urban settlements. At the same time, three quarters of them have indicated their place of birth the other rural areas. This tendency is typical for workers in other sectors of the economy of the Arkhangelsk County. Census 1926 also recorded 18,345 employees, 31% of which were born in the urban areas of the Arkhangelsk County.

However, the Census 1926 recorded an unique situation when among the people employed in the local economy the bigger share was represented by the single householders who were helped by the members of their families. According to the Census 1926 group of self-employed people was 261,779 people or 61% of the total population living in the Arkhangelsk Region, not self-employed — 167,405 people (31.0%). This part of the active population has been the most numerous group, which included the hosts, singles, helpers or family members. This group accounted for 48.0% of the County population and 78.0% of all employed in the economy. Among 206,098 people, 201,421 people (or 98% members of this group) worked in agriculture, in the handicraft industry — 2,637 people (1.3%), in trade — 927 employees (0.4%), in transport — 525 people (0.2%).

The structure of households involved in the various sectors of industrial activity in the County is presented in Table 38. It should be noted that the data of the table does not contain the number of households and people employed in agriculture.

Table 3 Prevalence of commercial and craft establishments and their income in 1924 — 1925
				County
Establishment	Households	People	Household	Gross profit	Total income	Total gross
			income	of a house-	(rubles)	income
				hold
Forestry	18,695	25,722	169	182	3,160,176	3,416,519
Hunting	6,815	7,793	81	89	575,218	611,499
Fishing	6,986	13,522	144	202	1,007,993	1,412,356
Mammal hunting from boats	659	867	97	109	65,711	73,264
mammal hunting from icebreakers	400	400	366	366	177,342	177,342
Tar extraction	2,155	4,254	82	101	178,525	217,842
Tar	120	241	61	77	7,398	9,315
Delivery	3,467	3,592	67	72	234,686	252,378
Dressing of leather and sheepskins	422	603	145	211	61,420	88,999
Footwear	1,346	1,448	120	151	161,591	203,933
Fooling wool	847	992	74	81	62,865	68,840
Sewing	673	833	89	101	60,517	68,200
Blacksmith and locksmith business	673	795	102	131	68,734	88,256
Carpenters	3,404	3,657	113	138	387,182	471,035
Bondage	803	898	75	91	60,692	73,560
Сarriages	665	697	84	99	55,956	66,475
Ceramists	308	356	71	88	22,103	27,153
Brick making	401	825	120	139	48,068	55,710
Backet making Making ships and sail-	266	266	44	49	9,566	10,703
boats	335	411	95	116	32,005	38,798
Windmills	586	635	53	95	31,492	55,805
Watermills	403	502	106	165	42,730	66,616
Other types of crafts	868	1,206	75	104	65,100	90,619

According to rough estimates of the provincial Bureau of Statistics in 1924—1925, craft establishments had 51,297 households with 70,515 people. 36.4% were employed in the Forestry and fisheries — 13.6%, in hunting — 13.3%, in delivery — 6.8%, in carpentry — 6.6%, in the tar production — 4.2%. In other spheres of commercial and handicraft activities the number of households ranged from 0.2% to 2.6%. All conditional net income of the studied households for 1924—1925 was estimated at more than 6,5 million rubles, the entire gross income — more than 7.6 million rubles. In the structure of gross income 44.7% were farms engaged in harvesting, 18.5% - in the fishery, in hunting — 8.0%, in carpentry — 6.2%, in delivery — 3.3%, in the extraction of tar — 2.9%, in mammal hunting on icebreakers — 2.3%, in the dressing of sheepskins — 1.2%. The minimum share of the tar production and busket making in the total gross income is 0.1%.

The most numerous group of the working population - individual householders: 96% lived in rural areas, 4% — in urban areas. Among 261,779 people: 23,528 people (9.1%) were born in urban areas, the rest — in the countryside. At the same time among 46,386 residents of urban settlements 28,452 (61.3%) were born in rural areas, so, they were internal migrants.

It should be noted that the production activities of commercial farms and the working population employed there proceeded when “Russia had an unique opportunity to go to the farmer's options for the development of agriculture through its self-developing system of cooperation” [5, p. 63]. This transition had allowed to recover the country's economy by 1926. We can agree with the opinion of O. Ovchinnikov about the cause of economic recovery, which consisted in the fact that “the power of human labor potential revealed, gave full play to the implementation of the personal interest — it was organically tied to the nation-wide interest. We construct, we manufacture products, we sell, we manage, we pay the price for our mistakes. In short, it was not on orders from above, but we made our own life” [5, p. 63—64]. However, in the 1930s the USSR experienced collectivization. It marked the failure of the party and governmental course on the formation of the country's “effective owner, self-regulating system of agriculture”. As a result of the total nationalization policy, the physical destruction of the owners and the dispossession of millions of people had formed a new, Soviet way of life of the rural worker on the ground: “no property and freedom” [5, p. 65]. We can also add: “no responsibility”.

By the early 1940s the formation of new workers of the socialist agricultural production in the Arkhangelsk Region had almost been completed. In 1940, in the Arkhangelsk Region (without Nenets Autonomous District) the countryside, there were 143,371 peasant and individual peasant farms; farms — 141,230 (98.5%) and individual peasant farms — 2,141 (1.5%). As part of the agricultural cooperatives or land cultivation partnerships, there were 134,401 farms or 95.2% of the total. Commercial farms, fishing and hunting cooperatives collective cooperatives had socialized rural economy and labour: 6,829 farms (4.8%)9 in total . On the 1st of January 1940 the five state farms employed 1,260 workers.

On the 1st of January 1950 statistical records of the rural population of the Arkhangelsk Region recorded 167,668 farms, including those whew nobody lived or worked. The proportion of state farmers was 61.5%, households (families) of workers and employees or cooperatives — 29.5%, individual farms and craftsmen — 0.1% (177 households), other households – 0.6% (1,073 farms)10. As you can see, in 1940—1950 the number of farms in all forms of cooperative, compared with the number of households farmers, fell by 17%. The number of individual households and craftsmen decreased from 1,783 to 177, or 90.1%. Moreover, the basic form of socialized economy was collective. According to the statistical data, as of January 1, 1950, a part of the rural population was represented two-thirds of the farmers. As a result of the Census 1959 in Arkhangelsk Region a part of the employed population were 117,129 people: farmers and cooperative workers — 5,891, craftsmen — 650, individual farmers — 156 11. These look like the final results of collectivization in agriculture of the Arkhangelsk Region.

In subsequent decades of the Soviet rule according to the Census 1959, 1979 and 1989, official statistics recorded changes, especially in the three main social groups of the employed population: workers, employees and farmers ¹². The number of farmers had decreased dramatically over the years 1959—1989, and workers and employees increased. The analysis of census data revealed several significant moments. First , it emphasizes that after the formation of the Arkhangelsk Region in September 1937 the number of its population increased. Secondly , the economy of the northern region got an increased proportion of workers in the leading sectors of the economy. Third , as noted above, in agriculture a new type of the employee — the collective farmer revealed as a result of collectivization. Fourthly , it is necessary to make some comments to the analysis of the results of the population census 1979. The problem was the different amount of farmers. In general, the region had 14,424 people but in the rural areas their amount was 13,162. The difference was 1,262 people, who were accounted as workers of the collective state farmers. In my opinion, it is more logical to refer these people to other groups of the employed population not reflected in the results of the 1979 census ( Table 4 ).

Table 4

Employed people of the Arkhangelsk County

Year	Employed	Including:
		Workers	Clercks	Farmers	Other groups of population*
1926	261,779	18,508	18,345	-	206,098
1959	669,648	392,251	146,580	117,129	6,808
1979	806,490	550,263	241,722	13,162	1,262
1989	834,155	542,112	277,743	13,817	843
*1926 г. — employed	single owners who were helped by family members; 1959			- craftsmens, farmers, etc.; 1989 - self-

The number of employed people in the Arkhangelsk region in 1926—1989 increased by 3.2 times, workers — 29.3 times, employees — 15.1 times. The number of employed population in a given period of time in the other groups decreased from 206 098 to 843 people, or 244.5 times. There was a trend to reduction in number of farmers directly engaged in agricultural production. In 1950 there were 307,948 farmers (without accounting of missing), in 1989 — 13,817, i.e. it decreased by 22.3 times. It should be noted that during this time a significant part of collective farms were created, they received the status of state-owned agricultural enterprises. Former farmers become workers and employees of business organizations. The processes of transformation that occurred in the Soviet period in the socio-economic development of the Arkhangelsk Region (the former province), direct impact on the formation of the its working population structure. Population census data allows identification of the main trends of this process and its results, which had its positive and negative consequences in the life of the Arkhangelsk Region and its population.

Migration in the Arkhangelsk Region

On the basis of census 1926—1989 we will analyze the changes that have occurred over this time period in the population composition of the Arkhangelsk region13. We are talking about two groups of people. The first consists of people living permanently in the place of residence since birth, the second — not since birth. In 1926 the Arkhangelsk County had a population of 429,184 people. 70.6% lived in place of permanent residence since birth and not since birth — 29.2%. The correlations between the residents, continuously living in the place of permanent residence since birth and not since birth, was 2.4 to 1. In 1989, the population of the Arkhangelsk region was 1,569,679 people. 53.1% of people were not natives in the place of permanent residence at the time of the census. 46.9% continuously lived in the place of permanent residence since birth. In general, during the monitoring period, the proportion of the population living at the place of his birth, decreased by 23.7% and at the same time increased by 23.9% in the group of persons who continuous- ly resided in the place of their permanent residence since birth. Among the urban population there was a slight increase of 5.6% in the number of natives of urban settlements, while reducing of residents of ther settlements by 5.3%. In 1926, in rural areas every fifth citizen was not a native at the place of residence. In 1989 this ratio was almost equal: 49.9% and 50.1%. If we compare Census 1926 data and the results of the census of 1989, in a group of individuals born and living at the place of birth, this figure fell to 29.5%, and increased by 29.7% in the group “not since birth”.

A comparative analysis of the population continuously living in the place of permanent residence, shows that workers were divided into four groups by the time of residence. Time periods for the 1926 census were not quite coincide with the temporary grouping of length of residence in 1989. In 1926 in Arkhangelsk County people who continuously resided in the place of residence from three to nine years were 30.5% of non-natives; from one year and up to two years — 26.9%; ten to nineteen years — 18.1%; from twenty years and more — every fifth worker. Census of 1989 revealed different results. Every third non-local resident could found himself in a temporary group “from 20 years or more”. Almost every fourth migrant continuously resided in the place of permanent residence for 10—19 or 3—9 years. In the group of “1 year to 2 years”, the figure was 18.5%. In the period between the censuses 1926 and 1989 we observed an increase in the proportion of migrants living in a group of “20 or more years” by 11.6 points, in the group “10—19 years” — by 4.9 points. In the other two temporary groups the reduction ranged between 8.2 and 8.4%. Pro- cessed census data is shown in the Table 5.

Table 5

Not local population by time of residence in the Arkhangelsk Region (sensus 1926 and 1989)14

Population         Year                                      Not local residents including:

Constantly living in the area

		Total %	1- 2 years      3	9 years	10—19 years	20 years and more
			Urban and rural population
	1926	100.0	26.9	30.5	18.1	24.6
Total	1989	100.0	18.5	22.3	23.0	36.2
	1926	100.0	37.4	35.7	15.5	11.4
Men	1989	100.0	23.1	23.5	22.5	30.9
	1926	100.0	21.6	27.9	19.4	31.1
Women	1989	100.0	14.5	21.2	23.4	40.9
			Urban population
	1926	100.0	35.9	35.7	16.4	11.9
Total	1989	100.0	16.9	20.8	23.6	38.7
	1926	100.0	37.0	36.7	15.2	11.0
Men	1989	100.0	21.5	22.1	23.1	33.4
	1926	100.0	35.0	34.7	17.7	12.8
Women	1989	100.0	13.0	19.7	24.0	43.3

14 GAAO. F.187. Op.1. D.854, ll.22ob., 23ob. F.1892. Op.27. D.40, l.21,22,23,27,28,29,33.34. Accounted by the author

Rural population

	1926	100.0	18.1	25.6	19.8	36.5
Total	1989	100.0	23.2	26.8	21.1	29
	1926	100.0	38.1	33.1	16.4	12.4
Men	1989	100.0	27.6	27.7	20.7	23.9
	1926	100.0	13.6	23.9	20.6	41.9
Women	1989	100.0	19.0	25.9	21.5	33.6

Among male migrants in the Arkhangelsk County in 1926, 37.4% continuously lived at the place of residence for 1—2 years. Almost the same figure was typical for groups of migrants living there for 3—9 years (35.7%). In the other two groups, 15.5% of non-native-born permanent residents lived there for 10-19 years, 11.4% — more than 20 years. In 1926, almost three-quarters of male migrants were a part of the first two groups and lived in the county for 1—9 years and one quarter — more than 10 years. It is possible to pre-assume that this ratio indicates the intensity of the migration of the male population of the Arkhangelsk County. Census 1989 had identified three practically equivalent temporary male migrant groups in the Arkhangelsk Region. Each group had a share of migrants of apprx. 23.0%. At the same time there was a decrease of this index compare to 1926 by 14.3% in the group of residents living there “1—2 years”; and in the temporary group “3—9 years” the decrease was 12.2%. At the same time in a group of male migrants, who were part of a group of permanent residence for 20 years or more, there was an increase from 11.4% in 1926 to 30.9% in 1989. Accordingly, the group of 10—19 years residents increased by 7%.

Among women migrants in 1926 two groups “1—2 years” and “10—19 years” every fifth of non-native-born persons had been continuously living at the place of permanent residence. 31.1% of non-native-born females indicated the duration of their continuous residence as 20 years or more. According to the 1989 census, 40.9% of migrant women responded that the length of their residence at the place of permanent residence was 20 years and more; 23.4% — 10—19 years, 14.5% — 1—2 years. Every fifth non-local person continuously lived in the Arkhangelsk County for 3—9 years at the place of permanent residence. Comparative analysis of census 1926 and 1989 shows the increase in the number of female migrants with a duration of stay for 20 years and more by 9.8%; 10—19 years by 4%, while the groups of people who were staying there for 1—2 year and 3—9 years reduced.

In 1926, among the migrants of both sexes 35.9% resided in the urban settlements with a duration of stay of 1—2 years, almost the same number is in the groups of 3—9 years. 16,4% had a permanent residence within 10—19 years and 11.9% — 20 and more years. There were no significant differences among non-native-born urban population of both sexes there.

Census 1989 data reveals the trend of gradual increase in the proportion of migrants depending on the length of life in urban settlements. It is typical for non-native residents, both male and female. For example, 16.9% — with a duration of stay of 1—2 year and 20 years or more — 38.7%. The proportion of male migrants to the duration of continuous residence time in the first three groups ranged from 21.5—23.1%. Every third male migrant worker was residing in the place of permanent residence for 20 years and more. Among the female migrants in urban settlements the duration of residence was 1—2 years — 13.0%, 3—9 years — 19.5%, 10—19 years — 24.0% and 20 years or more — 43.3%.

Migrants in rural areas with a duration of residence of 1—2 years accounted for 18.1% in 1926. Men, non-native residents, — 38.1%, women — 13.6%. Among all rural migrants every fourth was living at places of permanent residence for 3—9 years. There were no significant differences in the temporary group of men and women. Every fifth non-local native represented a temporary group of residence with a duration of 10—19 years. Every third worker had lived for the duration of 20 years and more. Among non-native-born females, this group was the most numerous — 41.9%, whereas amoung men it was about 12.4% of the migrant population. Thus, 71.2% of non-native-born male migrants lived at the same place for 1—9 year. 62.5% of women workers were members of the two groups with the duration of temporary residence of 10 years or more.

Analysis of the results of the population census 1989 revealed no significant differences in the group of non-natives living in rural areas by the duration of their stay. The largest share of immigrants was represented in the group with a duration of stay of 20 years and more — 29.0%, the lowest (21.1%) — in the time group 10-19 years. In the other two groups this figure was within the boundaries of 23.2—26.8%. Male migrants with duration of stay from one to two years and 3—9 years, there were 27.6% and 27.7% respectively, ie almost equal. Note that these two groups were leading in 1926. But, compared with the census of 1926 data, men who were not natives in their place of residence, in 1989 increased their share. It almost doubled in the group with a duration of stay 20 years or more. In the group 10—19 years, the growth was insignificant — by 4.3 points. Every third non-local female resident was in a group with a duration of stay 20 years or more. Compared to 1926, this group decreased by 8.3%. However, there was a minimal increase in the number of migrant women in the other groups from 0.9% to 5.4%.

Inter-regional migrant exchange in the Arkhangelsk North

It is time to refer to the content of population censuses, characterizing the results of migration exchange in the Arkhangelsk North (county, region) and the other territories of the USSR (Russian Federation). The first group consists of migrants who were born in other territories of the USSR (Russian Federation), but were constantly living in the Arkhangelsk county region. The second group included former residents of the Arkhangelsk region, constantly living in other regions of the Soviet Union (Russian Federation). For a comparative analysis of the results of the census we took the population cencus 1926 and 2002. They are presented in Table 6 15.

Analyzing the data in the table, you need to make a few preliminary comments. Firstly , the materials of censuses 1939—1989, kept in GAAO and the territorial body of the Federal State Statistics Service in the Arkhangelsk Region (Arhangelskstat) lack the data on the migration of population within the region, as well as inter-regional exchange with other territories of the USSR. Therefore, a comparative analysis is possible if we use indirect indicators characterizing transformation of territories and settlements in the Arkhangelsk region and its impact on the migratory behavior of the population¹⁶. Secondly , the choice of the census of 2002 was made due to the fact that it had been held in the Russian Federation after the collapse of the USSR. Comparative analysis was done with the regard to timing. In case of the census 1926 it covered the time before and after the census 1896, then in case of the census 2002 — the time before the census 1989 and after it.

Population of the Arkhangelsk Region by place of birth and residence on the territory of the Russian Federation (VPN-1926, 2002)

Table 6

Area	Living on the territory of the Arkhangelsk Region VPN-           VPN- 1926     %     2002     %	Born in the Arkhangelsk Region VPN-           VPN- 1926    %     2002     %
	Including the place of birth:	Including the place of residence

USSR-1926, RF-2002	112,519	100.0	1,265,328	100.0	106,068	100.0	1,400,302	100.0
Arkhangelsk (county) region	77,004	68.4	1,055,083	83.4	77,004	72.6	1,055,083	75.3
North-West area	26,319	23.4	79,605	6.3	17,895	16.9	129,504	9.2
Vologda (county) region	8,124	7.2	46,929	3.7	2,603	2,5	24,493	1.7
Komi Republic (Zyryanskaya AO)	1,876	1.7	7,389	0.6	538	0,5	19,987	1.4
Republic of Karelia	1,295	1.2	4,438	0.4	4,082	3.8	8,951	0.6
Severo-Dvinskaya county	9,135	8.1	-	-	1,671	1.6	-	-
Leningrad (county) region	781	0.7	4,890	0.4	1,512	1.4	16,000	1.1
Murmansk (county) region	441	0.4	6,144	0.5	1,277	1.2	21,082	1.5
Novgorod (губерния) область	304	0.3	2,347	0.2	256	0,2	3,979	0.3
Pskov (county) region	307	0.3	2,796	0.2	192	0,2	3,635	0.3
Cherepovets (county)	628	0.6	-	-	236	0,2	-	-
St.-Petersburg (Leningrad)	3,428	3.0	4,672	0.4	5,528	5.2	31,377	2.2
Moscow	377	0,3	2,067	0.2	1,106	1.0	21,845	1.6
Kirov Region (Vyatka county)	504	0.4	11,004	0.9	240	0.2	5,311	0.4
Moscow (county) region	210	0.2	3,317	0.3	398	0.4	17,246	1.2
Nigzegorodskaya (county) region	372	0.3	6,301	0.5	312	0.3	5,812	0.4
Tverskaya (county) region	439	0.4	4,228	0.3	214	0.2	4,647	0.3
Yaroslavskaya (county) region	838	0.7	5,042	0.4	1 145	1.1	8,647	0.6
Republic of Tatarstan	771	0.7	2,649	0.2	135	0.1	3,459	0.2

Third , the published data from censuses can detect trends in migration of the population, by place of birth and place of permanent residence on the territory of the former Arkhangelsk County (1926) and the Arkhangelsk Region (2002), as well as in other areas of the USSR and the Russian Federation. Fourth , the study focuses on the territories of the former USSR and the Russian Federation where the exchange of migrants made a comparative analysis possible.

Comparative analysis of the results of the migration movements of the population in the Arkhangelsk Region according to the Census 1926 and 2002 reveals the following trends: in the Arkhangelsk County in 1926 there were permanently resettled 23.4% of migrants, representing the North-West region and in 2002 — 6.3%, respectively. In general, there is a decrease in the intensity of migration flows from other areas except for Murmansk, Kirov and Nizhny Novgorod. In the Vologda region, this figure decreased from 7.2% to 3.7%, in St. Petersburg — from 3.0% to 0.4%, in the Komi Republic — from 1.7% to 0.6%, in Karelia — from 1.2% to 0.4%.

In 1926 72.6% of residents were born in the Arkhangelsk region, lived on its territory, in 2002 — 75.3%. As you can see, there are no significant differences in this indicator. Almost three-quarters of the Arkhangelsk North natives were living there at the time of the census. Reduced share of natives from the Arkhangelsk region is observed in Karelia, St. Petersburg and in three more regions (Vologda, Leningrad and Yaroslavl). At the same time the rest of the territory had a tendency of slight increase in the outflow of the Northerners as a percentage of corelation in the study period.

Migration processes in 1921—1939 led not only to a change in the socio-demographic situation, but also had an impact on industrial and cultura development of the northern areas and urban settlements. Thousands of people moved from place to place, from city to city, and from village to town and back in search of employment. As it was noted by V.V. Smirnov in his dissertation: “Gradually, the new “citizens” broke their connections with the rural areas, in the cities a number of marginalized population increased, but at the same time we had an increase in the amount of workers, a group of workers-intellectuals appeared combined with the expansion of urban infrastructure and increase in the number of educated people. The village was “flooding the city”, but with its help it had become possible to fulfill the great plans for the industrial development of the region” [6, p. 119]. Along with the growth of urban population and the increasing number of migrants there was a falling general level of culture of northerners, and greater amount of deviant behavior among citizens.

Conclusion

• 1.    The study of migration processes that took place in the Arkhangelsk region in the Soviet period of its history requires to take into account changes of the administrative and territorial entities in the USSR. In 1926 the Arkhangelsk County was reduced in comparison with 1917 by 1.9 times. The formation of the Arkhangelsk Region increased its area from 498 thousand km² in 1939 to 587.4 thousand km² in 1984, but it was less than the area of the former Arkhangelsk County in the early 20^th century.

• 2.    Administrative changes associated with the formation of the Arkhangelsk region and the accession of the Vologda and the Northern Dvina County, can be regarded as one of the factors increasing the population. It had increased from 429 thousand people in 1926 to 1.5 million in 1989, ie, 3.7 times. Significant changes had occurred in the composition of the employed (selfemployed) population. In 1926, the most numerous group was individual farmers helped by family members. It accounts for 48.0% of the population and 78.0% of all employed in the farming. The workers were 4.3% of the population and 7.1% of all employees. The same figures were typical for clerks. In 1989, the number of workers compared to 1926 increased by 29.3 times, and clerks — 15.1 times. The largest group of the working population or “independent owners” fell from 206 thousand to 843 people or 244.5 times.

• 3.    Analysis of the results of census of the Arkhangelsk region in 1926 and 1989 reveals the following trends in the migration. In 1926, 70.6% continuously lived at the place of permanent residence since birth, in 1989 — 53.1%. The proportion of the population living at the place of their birth decreased by 23.7% and at the same time increased by 23.9% in the group of persons who continuously resided in the place of their permanent residence since birth.

• 4.    In the period between the censuses 1926 and 1989 we observed an increase in the proportion migrant group living at the same plave for 20 years or more to 11.6%; in the group of 1019 years residents it was 4.9%. In the other two groups “1—2 years” and “3—9 years” the decline varied between 8.2—8.4%. Census data 1989 revealed a tendency of gradual increase in the share of migrants in urban areas. It characterized the non-native residents, both male and female. Analysis of the results of the population census 1989 revealed no differences in the number of nonnatives living in rural areas by the timing of their residence. The greatest proportion of migrants was represented in the group with a duration of stay of 20 years and more — 29,0%, the lowest (21,1%) was in the group of 10—19 years residents. In the other two groups this figure was within 23.2—26.8%.

• 5.    Among the population living on the territory of the Arkhangelsk region, the proportion of its natives was 68.4% in 1926, while 31.6% of its inhabitants called a territory of birth other regions of the USSR. In 1926 in Arkhangelsk County had 23.4% permanently settled migrants from the North-West, in 2002 — 6.3%.

• 6.    Analysis of census data by population group, whose birthplace was the Arkhangelsk region and area of residence - other regions of the USSR and the Russian Federation, showed that in 1926, 72.6% of residents were born in the Arkhangelsk region and were living on its territory, in 2002 — 75.3%. As you can see, there are no significant differences in this indicator. Almost three-quarters of these people were living there at the time of the census. A reduced share of natives of the Arkhangelsk region was living in Karelia, St. Petersburg and three regions (Vologda, Leningrad and Yaroslavl). At the same time, in other areas there was a tendency slight increase in a percentage of northerners diring the analyzed period.

• 7.    As it was shown by the comparative analysis of population censuses 1926 and 2002, the main outflow of migrants in the Arkhangelsk region was represented by its natives. Therefore, the V.A. Kudryavtsev idea that the population of the European North consisted of migrants from other areas of the USSR [7], can hardly be attributed to the Arkhangelsk Region.

• 14.    Konstantinov A.S. Transformaciya territorialno-poselencheskoj struktury kak faktor izmeneniya chislennosti selskogo naseleniya v Arhangelskoj oblasti. Arktika i Sever. 2013. № 13. pp. 136— 149;

• 15.    Migracionnye processy v usloviyah transformacii territorialno-poselencheskoj struktury v Ar-hangelskoj oblasti (1926—1989 gg.). Arktika i Sever . 2014. № 16. pp. 116—131.

• 16.    Administrativno-territorialnoe delenie Arhangelskoj gubernii i oblasti v XVIII—XX vekakh: Spravochnik. Arhangelsk, 1997. 413p.

• 17.    Dyachkov A.N. Obshhie svedeniya o gubernii. Spisok naselennyh mest Arhangelskoj gubernii na 1 maya 1922 goda . Arhangelsk: Tipografiya Arhgubsoyuza kooperativov, 1922. pp. 3—4.

• 18.    Ovchinnikov O.V. Socialnyj proekt: dialektika formirovaniya sobstvennika v severnoj derevne. Socialnye proekty: monografiya /Eds: A.A. Dregalo i dr. Arkhangelsk, 2015. pp. 61—70.

• 19.    Smirnova V.V. Sovetskaya urbanizaciya i razvitie socialnoj sredy regionalnyh centrov Evrope-jskogo Severa v 1921—1939 godax / diss… kand. istor. nauk. Arkhangelsk, 2015.

• 20.    Kudryavcev V.A. Migracionnye processy v rajonah Evropejskogo Severa Rossii .Avtoreferat diss. na soiskanie uchenoj stepeni kandidata ekonomicheskih nauk. Moskva: ISPI, 2007. 22 p.