Transformation changes in the territorial-resedental structure of the Arkhangelsk region in 1939–2010

The territorial organization of the population is considered by me as a spatial form of the population. It includes the existing system of the population distribution with functional relationships territorial settlements and areas of the population concentrations. In a functioning territorial settlement structure of the region under the influence of various factors, there are constant changes. Their transformational nature is particularly evident in Russian society in the most dramatic periods in its history. One is the transition from the Soviet model of the administrative and bureaucratic control of all spheres of social life to the model of a liberal society with the Russian market-transfer economy.

In published previously my article focuses on the problems of the forming municipalterritorial structure of the local government at the regional and the local levels 1Their analysis has led us to a better understanding of the influence of transformation processes in the territorial settlement structure of the region (‘living space’) for administrative-territorial and territorial organization of local self-government of the Arkhangelsk region (‘space power’).

Generalized senior research presented in the paper under the title ‘The transformation of the territorial and settlement structure in the Arkhangelsk region as a factor in the formation of a regional model of the local government’. It includes four articles:

• 1)    ‘Transformational changes in territorial and residential structure of the Arkhangelsk region in 1939–2010 years’.

• 2)    ‘Demographic Change as a factor of transformation of territorial settlement structure in the northern environment (region) in 1939–2010 years’.

• 3)    ‘The development of the territorial organization of local government in the Northern region’.

• 4)    ‘Problems and perspectives of the territorial organization of the local government in the Arctic regions’.

The time frame of our research, based on the population census, covering the period 1939–2010 years2. More in-depth analysis of the developments in the territorial structure of the settlement of the Arkhangelsk region and the rural population, carried out by groups of the rural areas for the time period between the censuses of 1970–2010 years. The sample included villages with their populations.

As known, the operating current models of the territorial organization of the local selfgovernment is a system of the administrative-territorial structure of the Arkhangelsk region, which since its inception in 1937 as the subject of the state power and the administration have been some qualitative changes.

Chronology of these developments in the administrative-territorial structure of the northern region, one can follow the handbook prepared by the specialists of the State Archives of the Arkhangelsk region3. For the experts in the field of the local government, this work is particularly significant because it represented the material allows us to investigate the processes that occur at the local level, that is, in every rural area as a basic administrative unit of the administrative-territorial structure of the region.

No less valuable source for the research of this topic is the statistics of the population censuses in the Arkhangelsk region. As a rule, published statistical compilations census results in generalized form in the whole region, in urban and rural areas. But no less interesting for researchers to submit statistics, census data on population, in the context of each of the village, located in the countryside. First, they allow determining the influence of transformational changes taking place in the territorial and residential structure, the administrative-territorial system in the region, necessitating changes in the ‘space power’ at the local level. Second, the transformation of the territorial settlement structure is considered by us as the most important factor, which has had a sig- nificant impact on the ‘living space’ of the rural population. Third, our results in the application of the comparative statistical analysis of census data necessary for the simulation forecasts of the territorial organization of the local self-government on the local and regional levels.

Population census data describing the state in the territorial structure of the settlement of the Arkhangelsk region in the year of implementation is not possible to objectively evaluate the changes that have taken place in it for the past 70 years. The problem lies in the fact that during the study period in the administrative-territorial Arkhangelsk implemented measures to improve it. Escalation occurs several rural areas through the dissolution of others, within the individual village councils passed from one rural area to another, etc. In light of the circumstances was to analyze census data summarized by two models territorial settlement structure in the region. The first model is a compilation census data on the number of villages with the residents of the administrative boundaries of the rural areas in the census year. In the second model, the results of each census were counted us rural settlements within the present boundaries of municipalities Arkhangelsk region. This will allow, in our opinion, more objectively assess the impact of transformational changes that have occurred in the local territorial entities – rural areas.

In the proposed table below 1 shows the results of the census, which characterize changes in the territorial structure of the settlement in the rural areas of the region. Data on the number of villages within the administrative boundaries of the rural areas in the year of census disclosed in columns of table 2.6, translated by the author, census data on the number of rural communities located in the current administrative boundaries of the municipalities in the region on January 1, 2011 – in 7.11 columns.

Table 1 Dynamics of the changes in the number of the rural settlements in the rural areas of the Arkhangelsk region in (1939–2010.)

According the data of the census

Number of the villages with people living in Number of the villages with people living in them (in the administrative boundaries in the them (within the administrative boundaries census year, except for 1959) of January 1, 2010) years                                        years

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
		19394	1959 5	1970	19896	20107	1939	1959	1970	1989	2010
region*		8234	6921	5249	3651	3108	8234	6921	5249	3651	3108
NAO		479	179	89	49	40	479	179	89	49	40
Velskiy		334	532	411	303	258	539	532	411	303	258

4 Administrative-territorial division of the Arkhangelsk province and region in XVIII–XX centuries: Handbook. Arkhangelsk: STI ‘True North’, 1997; GAAO, f. 1892, op. 1, file 697; op. 4, etc. 71, l. 1.

5 Data (columns 2 and 7) are up VPN 1959 administrative boundaries on January 1, 1961.

6 GAAO, f. 1892, op. 25, 4885 d, l. 3 vol. (January 12, 1989: The number of s/s, n/p).

7 The rural population of the Arkhangelsk region. Results of the National Population Census 2010. Statistical Yearbook. T. 2. Arkhangelsk Arhangelskstat, 2012. 128 p.

Verhnetomskiy	324	465	361	268	223	472	465	361	268	223
Vilegodskiy	325	346	219	172	143	325	346	219	172	143
Vinogradovskiy)8	354	314	110	96	90	354	314	110	96	90
Emezkiy9	287	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Kargopolskiy	522	479	418	215	169	644	595	418	215	169
Karpogorskiy10	182	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Konoshskiy	194	156	200	157	126	228	156	200	157	126
Kotlasskiy	436	441	376	253	216	663	441	376	253	216
Krasnoborskiy	470	668	574	302	239	767	668	574	302	239
Lenskiy	206	267	228	136	88	226	267	228	136	88
Leshukonskiy	71	104	59	50	44	71	104	59	50	44
Mezenskiy	78	59	47	43	41	78	59	47	43	41
Nyandomskiy	346	223	189	140	116	312	223	189	140	116
Onejskiy	180	122	171	95	83	176	122	171	95	83
Pinejskiy	168	238	136	118	108	350	238	136	118	108
Plesezkiy	310	236	295	224	173	644	501	295	224	173
Primorskiy	146	282	203	198	194	146	282	203	198	194
Priozerniy11	456	381	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Rovdinskiy12	412	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Solvichegodskiy13	247	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Ystiyanskiy	391	385	304	223	199	506	385	304	223	199
Holmogorskiy	342	511	447	389	358	629	511	447	389	358
Cherevkovskiy14	560	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Shenkurskiy	414	533	412	220	200	621	533	412	220	200
The results according the regions	7755	6742	5160	3602	3068	7751	6742	5160	3602	3068

According to the 1939 census, in the Arkhangelsk area, there were 8234 villages with their populations, which were located in rural areas (excluding the administrative authority of the city council). During the period of 1939-2010 years their number was reduced to 5126, including: the 1939–1959 years – in 1313, in 1959–1970 – in 1762, in the years 1970–1989 – in 1598, in 1989– 2010 – in 543 settlements.

Between the censuses of 1939–1959 years have changed dramatically territorial settlement structures Belsky, Verkhnetoemsky, Kotlas, Krasnoborsky, Pinega, Ustyansky, Kholmogorsky Shen-kursky and areas that had joined rural communities disbanded Emetskogo, Karpogorskogo, Rovdinskogo, and Solvychegodsk Cherevkovskogo areas. In the early 1960’s. ceased to exist Lakeside district, whose territory was ceded to Kargopol and Plesetsk area. At the same time, significantly increased the number of the villages in the Primorsky region due to the transfer of certain territories of rural councils. Minor changes have occurred in the years 1939–1970 a territorial settlement structures, caused by transmission from one village councils in rural areas to others.

Turn to an analysis of data obtained in the simulation territorial settlement structures of municipalities in their administrative boundaries. They coincide with the boundaries of the former administrative units (rural) administrative-territorial structure of the Arkhangelsk region.

Table 2

Dynamics of the changes in the number of the villages in the rural areas

Arkhangelsk region (1939–2010) Within the administrative boundaries on January 1, 2010

As a percentage of the number of the villages in 1939

	1939	1959	1970	1989	2010
The results of the region	100.0	84.1	63.8	44.4	37.8
Nenetskiy Autonomous District	100.0	37.4	18.6	10.2	8.4
The results in the regions (without NAO)	100.0	87.0	66.6	46.5	39.6
Vinogradskiy	100.0	88.7	31.1	27.1	25.4
Kargopolskiy	100.0	92.4	64.9	33.4	26.2
Plesezkiy	100.0	77.8	45.8	34.8	26.9
Pinejskiy	100.0	68.0	38.9	33.7	30.9
Krasnoborskiy	100.0	87.1	74.8	39.4	31.2
Shenkyrskiy	100.0	85.8	66.3	35.4	32.2
Kotlasskiy	100.0	66.5	56.7	38.2	32.6
Nyandomskiy	100.0	71.5	60.6	44.9	37.2
Lenskiy	100.0	118.1	100.9	60.2	38.9
Ystiyanskiy	100.0	76.1	60.1	44.1	39.3
Vilegodskiy	100.0	106.5	67.4	52.9	44.0
Onejskiy	100.0	69.3	97.2	54.0	47.2
Verhnetoemskiy	100.0	98.5	76.5	56.8	47.2
Velskiy	100.0	98.7	76.3	56.2	47.9
Mezenskiy	100.0	75.6	60.1	55.1	52.6
Konoshskiy	100.0	68.4	87.7	68.9	55.3
Holmogorskiy	100.0	81.2	71.1	61.8	57.7
Leshykonskiy	100.0	146.5	83.1	70.4	62.0
Primorskiy	100.0	193.2	139.0	135.6	132.9

In the analysis of the changes that have occurred in the territorial-residential structure in the rural areas of the Arkhangelsk region, it should be a very important fact. As the study of the materials to the 1939 census, they revealed considered all rural areas, some of which was located at the place of objects or areas of industrial activity of the rural population. For example, in the Nenets National District These include the location of the farms, encampments, tents, various items, summering, industrial and hunting huts, weather and radio stations, etc. This situation was common to all rural areas of the Arkhangelsk region. During the subsequent censuses indicates the type locality, which determines the nature of industrial activity living in it the adult population.

Territorial and settlement structure in the Nenets Autonomous District for this period has changed dramatically: in 1939 there were 479 rural settlements. In the following decades the tendency to reduce them. For example, in 1959, compared to 1939, the number fell to 2.7 times in 1970 (compared to 1959) – almost 2 times. Approximately the same rate typical for the period 1970-1989 years. During the period of market reforms number of villages was reduced from 49 to 40.

The analysis of the census years 1939–2010 allows several groups of the rural areas, which are characterized by the changes in the territorial and residential structure.

The first group consists of three rural areas: Vynohradovskiy, Kargopolskiy and Plesetskiy, which has remained virtually a quarter of the settlements with residents.

The second group includes Pinezhsky, Krasnoborsky, Shenkurskiy, Kotlas, Lenski and Usty-ansky areas. The first four ‘lost’ almost two-thirds of settlements, and the rest – almost 60 % of the level in 1939.

The third group consists Vilegodsky, Onega, and Belsky Verkhnetoemsky areas (left settlements within 44–48 %).

The fourth group. In the four areas (Mezen, Konoshsky, Kholmogorsky, Leshukonsky) for this period continues to operate settlements within 52,6–62 %.

The fifth group. As for the assessment of changes in the territorial structure of the settlement of the Primorsky district, there is a sharp increase in the number of villages in between census years 1939–1959 explained by acceding to the territories of the village councils from other areas. If we take the basic framework for the exponent of the rural settlements of the 1959 census, and compare it with the data of the census of 1989 and 2010. This relationship is as follows: 70.2 and 68.8 % compared to 1959.

Summing up the results of preliminary analysis of the changes that occurred in the territorial structure of the settlement of the Arkhangelsk region in the period 1939–2010. Should pay attention to the underlying trends. It was during the Soviet period came a contradictory process, which was characterized, on the one hand, the industrial development of the natural resources of our northern region and, therefore, increase the number of rural communities (30–40-ies XX century). On the other hand, as the results of the census in the next few decades have seen a significant reduction in there. Overall, over half a century of Soviet power in the region has decreased 4 583 villages or 55.7 % of the total in 1939.

A more detailed research of the territorial settlement structure in the rural areas of the Arkhangelsk region covers the time period between the censuses 1970–2010. This is due primarily to the fact that it covers two equivalent to the time frame stages of developed socialism (1970–1989) And the transition to a market-liberal model of Russian society (1989–2010). One of the objectives of our research was to investigate the changes that took place in the territorial-residential structure in the groups of the settlements (villages, villages, towns, railways, etc.).

The sample of the study was 5 393 villages with their populations. They operate in rural areas of the Arkhangelsk region in 1970–2010. At the time of the census (15 January 1970), there were 5 249 villages with the residents (excluding the administrative authority of the city governments). There is a difference in 144 settlements due to a number of circumstances. First, during the study period due to operational need arose new rural settlements. They could not be included in the proceedings of the previous census. Secondly, a comparative analysis of the lists of villages and the number of people in them in the context of rural councils from censuses in 1970, 1989, 2002 and 2010 provides the ability to identify individual cases of ‘revival’ of settlements in connection with the appearance of their inhabitants. However, according to the materials of the next census, these settlements could stay again with no permanent residents. Third, create a so-called temporary settlement, inhabited by people. This group of villages is also counted in censuses.

Almost all groups of rural settlements territorial settlement structure of the Arkhangelsk region underwent a process of reducing their numbers. In the 1970–2010 years the number of villages with a population decreased by 2,121 units, of which 1,440, or 67.9 % – in the years 1970– 1989, 491, or 32.1 % – in the period of 1989–2010. In the group of villages the number of ‘loss’ between the two comparable time intervals correspond as 45 (‘Market’) to 52, and in general for the entire period – 97. The group got their number remained virtually unchanged – 76–75 units. The number of railway settlements decreased by 90, of which 75.6 % – in the years 1970–1989. From 54 to 13 was the reduction in the group of other towns, with 35 of them in the years 1970–1989.

Turn to the analysis of the changes taking place in the territorial-residential structure in the context of the rural areas as a local territorial entities in the Arkhangelsk region in three main groups of the rural settlements: villages, towns, and railroad villages.

As noted above, a core group of the rural settlements are villages. The North Village, whatever the conditions of their life does not have, as a social barometer sensitively captures all the changes taking place in the ‘living space’ of its residents. Functioning simultaneously in the ‘space power’, it is not always able to resist the activities of government agencies to restructure rural settlements.

Census, recording the results of this policy and its implications, provide researchers the opportunity to analyze the changes that have occurred in the territorial, life and social environment of rural residents, which has been and remains for them the northern village. And if the ‘living space’ becomes ‘lifeless’, it meant that some of the villages have been his life, performing, usually in advance of its social mission.

In the Arkhangelsk region, the number of villages with a population decreased from 4,582 in 1970 to 2,651 in 2010, or 42.1 %, in the Nenets Autonomous District – from 48 to 19 villages, or 60.4 %, respectively. The situation in rural areas is contradictory. In the Maritime and Mezenski areas, their number decreased marginally (1.2 and 4.3 %). In the four rural areas in the process of restructuring the ‘losses’ were from 20.2 to 23.5 % of villages (Kholmogorsky, Leshukonsky, Vynohradiv, Pinega). In six areas, the number of villages has decreased from 33.5 to 40.3 % (Vilegodsky, Ustyansky, Konosha, Nyandoma, Belsky, Verkhnetoemsky). ‘Leaders’ to reduce ‘deadend’ have been found to Lenski (62.4 %), Kargopol (60.4 %), Krasnoborsky (58.9 %), Shenkurskiy (53.8 %), Onega (53.2 %), Plesetsk (47.8 %) and Kotlas (44.9 %) regions.

The restructuring in the Arkhangelsk region of the register of the rural settlements with residents for the period 1970–2010 years. ‘Dropped out’ 1931 Village. The ratio of ‘lost’ villages was 1,440 in 1970–1989 to 491 in 1989–2010, or 2.9 to 1. In the Nenets Autonomous District, this indicator is 6.3 to 1. Seven rural areas identified exceeding the regional level: in Shenkursk (7.8 to 1), Onega (6.3 to 1), and Vynohradiv Kargopolsky (4.3 to 1), Krasnoborsky (4.2 to 1), Ustyansky (3.8 to 1), the Kotlas (3.6 to 1). In Pinega area ratio was found to be, in Seaside – not in favor of the post-Soviet period. In other rural areas have been below the regional level.

If we analyze the changes that occurred in the territorial structure of the rural settlement of the region in the terms of the market changes, it should be noted that two-thirds of the villages in the number of ‘lost’ their inhabitants to 1989–2004 years. The average regional rate exceeded in nine municipalities, including in the Kotlas (94.1 %), Vilegodsky (91.3 %), Nyandoma (90.5 %), Onega and Ustyansky (77.8 %).

The process of the formation, operation and restructuring of the settlements in the Arkhangelsk region is closely linked to the economic development of the natural resources in its territory in the Soviet era, and in the next decade – with a sharp drop in production in those sectors of the economy of the region, which provides vital functions of this group of the rural settlements. In it we have not included the railway settlements, which are considered as a separate group and element territorial settlement structure of the region.

According to census data, in 1970, in the Arkhangelsk region there were 400 villages, inhabited by people, in 1989 – 348, in 2010 – 303. During this time period the total number fell by 24.3 %, in the Nenets Autonomous District – by 30.0 %. In rural areas, the pace of restructuring in the group of rural settlements is as follows. In Mezenski area, not a single village. Decreasing trend in the number of settlements, compared with the level in 1970, is typical of 14 rural districts, at the level of 1970 and for Vynohradiv Kotlassky areas above this level – for the Plesetsk District. If we compare the data on the areas with the regional index, its excess is observed in the 11 local territorial entities, especially in Leshukonsky (66.7 %), Lensky (51.7 %), and Kargopolsky Nyandoma areas by 50 %, respectively.

If we compare the changes that took place in between censuses, 1970–1989 and of 1989– 2010., in the first period only Vynohradiv, Kotlas, Plesetsk and Primorsky regions there was a slight increase in the number of the settlements, in the second period – in Pinega area. In Belsky, Vilegodsky, Krasnoborsky, Kholmogorsky Shenkursk areas and all the ‘loss’ occurred in the time period 1970–1989. In the rest of the distribution of the ‘lost’ villages in the mentioned period is approximately equal to the character with minimal deviations. Note that 30 of the 40 villages (75.0 %), who were without inhabitants in post-Soviet period, became deserted settlements in 1989–2004, That is, at the initial stage of the market reforms.

The rail group of the settlements in the rural areas in 1970–2010 steadily decreased from 137 in 1970 to 45 in 2010 for the last almost 20 years of Soviet power had fallen by 2 times, at the beginning of the second decade of this century, one-third of the remaining rural settlements of the total. The lowest rates were observed in their restructuring Nyandoma (58.3 %) and Konoshsky (42.9 %) regions. At the same time in the six districts was exceeded average regional rate. For example, in the Lena area including railway settlements declined in 1970-2010 from 22 to 3, or 86.4 %, in the Onega district – from 21 to 5 (by 76.2 %), respectively. Almost the same pattern was observed in Plesetsk District.

Conclusions

• 1)    As a result of the transformational changes those have occurred in the territorial and residential structure in the Arkhangelsk region in 1939–2010. Almost two thirds of the villages ceased to exist. The biggest ‘loss’ characteristic of the Nenets Autonomous District, as well as rural areas, located generally in areas in the river basins of the Northern Dvina and its tributaries, Onega (Plesetsk Kargopol-sector), Pinega.

• 2)    In the depth analysis of the transformation processes in the territorial structure of the settlement of the region for 1970–2010 groups villages showed that in the period from the register of rural settlements retired two-thirds of railway settlements, 42.1 % of villages and one in four village. The greatest reduction was observed in their 1979–1989. Examination of the data characterizing the transformation processes in the territorial structure of the settlement of the Arkhangelsk region in the conditions of the market transformation, leads to the following conclusion. A significant number of the lost settlements fall on the initial stage of the economic reform, that is, 1991–2002. It was during this period were formed models of territorial organization of the local government in the region. The obvious question is: how to account for changes in the territorial structure of the settlement of the Arkhangelsk region during the 2003 municipal reform.

• 3)    The recent developments in the period between the censuses of 1939–2010 years undergo profound changes in the territorial structure of the settlement of the Arkhangelsk authorities affected the livelihoods of the rural population. ‘Space Life’ rural residents resulting from the expansion of exploiting natural resources in the region actually become a ‘space of work and survival’. Therefore, no less interest to the researcher is subject influence of the demographic processes occurring during this period in the rural areas of the northern region, its territorial settlement structures and territorial organization of local government. That's the topic and will be dedicated to our next article.