Sharapov S.V. Informal (expolar) economy of the collective-farm village in Western Siberia in 1939–1953 // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2026. V.11. №1. P. 72-88.

EDN: GEDQPV

Annotation

The author applies T. Shanin’s concept of expolar economy to analyze the ways in which the collective-farm village adapted to the new round of the state mobilization policy in 1939–1953. The article presents various ways of craft resources “penetration” (including land, money, labor and draught power, inventory, equipment, machinery, livestock and all kinds of agricultural products) into the informal sector. They were unevenly redistributed among many “recipients” — local government structures, individual officials, non-agricultural enterprises, top management of collective farms, and peasants. The informal economy provided the state with an invaluable service by compensating for the shortcomings of centralized management, eliminating the gaps in the goods exchange between the city and the countryside, thus reducing the severity of food crisis and shortages of goods in both urban and rural areas. Resources outside the state control allowed collective farms to perform social assistance functions that the state did not provide to the peasantry. The collective-farm economy was rooted in the peasant social life. The expolar ties that held the collective-farm society together helped peasants survive under the aggressive mobilization policies of the state. 

Keywords

Collective farms, peasantry, survival, adaptation, agrarian policy, mobilization.  

About the author

Sergey V. Sharapov, PhD (History), Researcher, Institute of History, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Nikolaeva St., 8, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Brutskus B.D. Agricultural Economy: National-Economic Foundations. Chapter 14. General Principles of Agricultural Cooperation // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2026. V.11. №1. P. 6-24.

EDN: DORWDB

Annotation

This is an English translation of Chapter 14 “General Principles of Agricultural Cooperation” from the textbook published in Russian by the agricultural economist B. D. Brutskus in Germany in 1923. Boris Davidovich Brutskus (1874–1938), a liberal economist, always emphasized the importance of the multi-structured national economy in which various social institutions can have goals and values   different from those of entrepreneurial enterprises of the capitalist market economy. Brutskus recognized the specificity of agriculture compared to other economic sectors, in particular the different organization of the peasant economy and the capitalist enterprise. Thus, he was a like-minded colleague of scholars from Alexander Vasilyevich Chayanov’s organization-production school. The Soviet government declared Brutskus a reactionary bourgeois economist and expelled him from the USSR in 1922 for his profound and witty critique of the political-economic foundations of the socialist economy.
While in exile, Brutskus presented his agrarian-economic views as a textbook on agricultural economy. In both Tsarist Russia and Soviet Russia of the 1920s as a primarily agrarian country, such textbooks were very popular. Brutskus’s textbook had two distinctive features: first, since the author was an agronomist by basic education, he placed a strong emphasis on agricultural biological processes in relation to agrarian economy; second, two final chapters of the textbook focused on agricultural cooperation, which was also unusual for textbooks that certainly included information about cooperation, but not in such large volumes and not in such a structured manner. 
Brutskus’s textbook attracted attention not only in the Russian emigrant community, but also in Soviet Russia, where it was reprinted and widely used in universities until the start of collectivization in 1929, despite the fact that the author was in exile and had been declared an enemy of Soviet power. However, in the USSR the textbook was published without two last chapters on cooperation due to Soviet censorship. Brutskus commented on this ban in the article on cooperative ideology published in the German newspaper in Russian: “Recently, the Soviet government showed minimal liberality towards my academic work. After 15 months of censorship, my course on agricultural economy was cleared for publication4... But in one respect censors showed extreme intolerance: two chapters on agricultural cooperation were cut from the first page to the last. Although there is nothing specifically political in these chapters. However, the Bolshevik censorship could not accept my description of cooperation as a unique principle of economic construction, different from socialism”5. According to Brutskus, cooperative social institutions — a special economic phenomenon, a unique third force, different from institutions of both capitalist and state-controlled, socialist economies; however, cooperation always faces the risk of being incorporated and absorbed by both market entrepreneurship and state bureaucracy. The past hundred years seem to have convincingly confirmed many of Brutskus’s ideas of cooperation and his concerns about the distorting influence of both capitalism and socialism on cooperation. We publish this chapter from Brutskus’s book in English as a still-relevant example of the classic legacy of Chayanov’s school from its golden age.

Keywords

Cooperation, agrarian policy, market, peasantry, capitalism, socialism.  

About the authors

Boris D. Brutskus

Alexander M. Nikulin (publisher), PhD (Economics), Head of the Center for Agrarian Studies, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. 119571, Moscow, Vernadskogo Prosp, 82.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Irina V. Trotsuk (translator), DSc (Sociology), Senior Researcher, Center for Agrarian Studies, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. 119571, Moscow, Vernadskogo Prosp, 82.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Dorofeev A. F., Belozerova I. A., Krikun E. V., Davityan M. G. Organization of the rural population’s leisure activities as a factor of preservation and development of the rural human capital // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2024. V.9. №4. P. 246-256.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2024-9-4-246-256

Annotation

The article describes the role of leisure activities in the effective development of human capital in rural areas. The article is based on the results of the monitoring study conducted by the survey method to examine the cultural-leisure activities of villagers in the Belgorod district of the Belgorod Region. The culture of leisure in the rural society was assessed according to the three main indicators — institutional, information and sociological. The authors identified the following rural groups depending on cultural-leisure preferences and activities: consumer (50%), spontaneous (18%), limited (17%) and active (15%). According to the features of leisure, seven types of cultural-leisure activities were identified: entertaining (28%), imitative (20%), consumer (19%), conservative (10%), contemplative (9%), cultural-creative (9%) and non-traditional (5%). Despite the declared desire to take an active part in cultural events (83%), only 10% of villagers do participate in them. One of the reasons is the discrepancy between cultural needs and the ability of cultural institutions to satisfy them. The authors note that the effective organization of cultural-leisure activities influences both formation and reproduction of human capital in rural areas. Thus, indicators of the improving quality of life in rural areas are not only modernized production and high wages but also the development of educational and cultural-leisure institutions.

Keywords

Leisure culture, cultural-leisure activities, human capital, rural population, rural territories, rural development, economic efficiency, agrarian policy.

About the authors

Andrey F. Dorofeev, DSc (Economics), Associate Professor, Vice-Rector for Research and Innovation, Belgorod State Agrarian University named after V.Ya. Gorin. 308503, Belgorog region, pos. Maysky, Vavilova str., 1.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Irina A. Belozerova, PhD (Philosophy), Associate Professor, Belgorod State Agrarian University named after V.Ya. Gorin. 308503, Belgorog region, pos. Maysky, Vavilova str., 1.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Elena V. Krikun, PhD (Philosophy), Associate Professor; Belgorod State Agrarian University named after V.Ya. Gorin. 308503, Belgorog region, pos. Maysky, Vavilova str., 1.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Manushak G. Davityan, PhD (Sociology), Associate Professor; Belgorod State Agrarian University named after V.Ya. Gorin. 308503,Belgorog region, pos. Maysky, Vavilova str., 1.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Sharapov S. V. Peasantry of collective farms: Subsistence ethics during the Great Patriotic War (based on the materials from the Novosibirsk Region) // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2024. V.9. №3. P. 169-184.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2024-9-3-169-184

Annotation

The article considers the social-economic behavior of the collective-farm peasantry during the Great Patriotic War. Under the strengthening mobilization pressure, the imperative of survival still determined the peasant attitude to work, economy, close social circle and higher authorities. The situation in collective farms differed, since their economy depended on the labor supply of lands as subject to taxes in kind, which determined differences in the peasant attitude to work on the collective farm. In the most unfavorable circumstances, participation in the artel work promised the peasant nothing else than super-intensive work without sufficient payment. Although peasants’ behavior could be considered adaptive in general, unbearable conditions in economically unpromising collective farms forced peasants to practice passive resistance (from poor work and missing deadlines to illegal actions). The limits of tolerance towards peasant disobedience kept changing in the 1930s — 1940s; however, their weak supervision in the countryside did not allow the authorities to further reduce these limits during the war. The peasant community morally justified illegal actions as often helping to save themselves from hunger. The persistent peasant violations of the boundaries of legality greatly reduced the authorities’ ability to control the collective farm economy.

Keywords

Collective-farm peasantry, subsistence ethics, Great Patriotic War, agrarian policy.

About the author

Sergey V. Sharapov, PhD (History), Researcher, Institute of History, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Nikolaeva St., 8, Novosibirsk, 630090.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Merl S. “I consistently contribute to the assessment of the Soviet economic model” // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2023. V.8. №1. P. 131-163.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2023-8-1-131-163

Annotation

As a part of our traditional “Interviews” we present the selected fragments from the biographical memoirs of Stephan Merl, Professor of the Bielefeld University, a famous researcher of the agrarian economy and policy of the Soviet state. The memoirs were written as answers to the questions formulated by Stephan Merl together with his colleague and friend Alexander Nikulin. The questions set the direction for the biographical reflections as connected with the study of the Russian history and culture, in particular the fate of the Russian village, tragedy of collectivization, and turns of the Soviet agrarian policy. The memoirs reflect the dramatic episodes of the European history in the second half of the 20th century, some of which the author experienced, while others studied in the scientific perspective. Professor Merl’s diligence, deep knowledge of historical sources and research objectivity allowed him to suggest a new interpretation of the events that have become history quite recently or are becoming history now. We present an excerpt from his memoirs which will be published in full in the book series of the Russian Peasant Studies. 

Keywords

Russia, Germany, USSR, agriculture, collectivization, agrarian policy, perestroika.

About the author

Stephan Merl, DSc (History), Professor, Bielefeld University, Universitätsstr., 25, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Doktorov B.Z., Nikulin A.M. Teodor Shanin: Peasant Studies and Russia // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2020. V.5. №3. P. 146-172.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2020-5-3-146-172

Annotation

In this interview, Boris Doktorov, a Russian sociologist living in America, a researcher of intellectual biographies and methods of social sciences in the 20th–21st centuries, together with the Editor-in-Chief of the Russian Peasant Studies and Head of the Chayanov Research Center of the Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences, Alexander Nikulin, talks about the outstanding British sociologist Teodor Shanin, whose scientific legacy is closely related to the development of an interdisciplinary social science—peasant studies, and who conducted a number of fundamental historical-sociological and economic-sociological studies of rural Russia. The interview considers the basic concepts and milestones in the development of peasant studies as a branch of the historical-sociological knowledge in Russia, analyzes Shanin’s estimates of various aspects of the Russian social-humanitarian thought as related to the study of the peasantry and to the recommendations on alternatives for the development and transformation of peasant worlds, which were suggested by agrarian populists and Marxists, G.V. Plekhanov and V.I. Lenin, A.V. Chayanov and I.V. Stalin. The interview considers the impact of literature and art on descriptions and explanations of the role of the peasantry through the intellectual interests of Teodor Shanin; focuses on his joint activities with his closest colleagues in the study of rural Russia—the outstanding agrarian scientists V.P. Danilov and T.I. Zaslavskaya. Throughout the interview, Shanin’s worldview and moral-ethical principles in the search for humanistic alternatives for the Russian and global rural development are discussed.

Keywords

peasantry, peasant studies, agrarian policy, Teodor Shanin, V.P. Danilov, T.I. Zaslavskaya, village writers, rural Russia

About the authors

Boris Z. Doktorov, DSc (Philosophy), Professor, Independet Analyst. 100 Village Lane, Foster City, CA 94404, USA.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Alexander M. Nikulin, PhD (Economics), Head of the Center for Agrarian Studies, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration; Head of the Chayanov Research Center, Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences. 119571, Moscow, Vernadskogo Prosp, 82.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Kiselev S.V., Nikulin A.M. “Culture is a factor of labor productivity” // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2019. V.4. №2. P. 160-176.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2019-4-2-160-176

Annotation

In his interview to the Russian Peasant Studies, Sergei Kiselev, the Head of the Department of Agricultural Economics of the Lomonosov Moscow State University, refers to the facts of his biography to provide an extensive overview of the evolution of some important approaches in the Russian and foreign agrarian economic science and politics in the late 20th—early 21st centuries. The interview focuses on the agrarian and economic policy of the perestroika, the creation of the Agrarian Institute headed by the Academician A.A. Nikonov, the interaction of the state regulation of agriculture with emerging market-economy institutions and relations. One of the topics of the interview is the long-term accession of Russia to the WTO as connected with negotiations on various areas of the economy and especially on agriculture, in which Kiselev took part. The interview also describes the studies of foreign agrarian economies, especially of the USA, which were conducted by meetings of Kiselev with American farmers, scientists and businessmen. When describing the current development of the Russian agriculture Kiselev stresses that Russia has reached a plateau of economic indicators, and to increase them the country needs a substantial increase in agricultural labor productivity, which depends not only on the successes of the national economy as a whole, but also on the quality of agricultural science and education, and the most important factor of their successful improvement is culture in the most extensive and deep meaning of the word.

Keywords

agrarian economy, agrarian policy, agricultural education, perestroika, WTO, farming, labor productivity, culture

About the authors

Sergei V. Kiselev, DSc (Economics), Professor, Head of the Department of Agroeconomics, Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University. 119992, Moscow, Leninsky Gory, New Building, Faculty of Economics, Room 422.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Alexander M. Nikulin, PhD (Economics), Head of the Center for Agrarian Studies, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. 119571, Moscow, Vernadskogo Prosp, 82.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Merl S. Reassessment of the Soviet agrarian policy in the light of today’s achievements // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2019. V.4. №1. P. 45-69.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2019-4-1-45-69

Annotation

Obvious successes of Putin’s policy require a reassessment of the Soviet agrarian policy. The article addresses the question of whether the Bolsheviks’ approach was appropriate for the Russian peasantry and considers limitations of the concept “socialist industrialized agriculture’. To assess achievements of the Soviet agriculture the author uses qualitative instead of quantitative criteria: per hectare yields and milk per cow since 1913. They kept to be extremely low which is striking for the agriculture based on large-scale and partly mechanized production. The gap in yields as compared to the neighboring capitalist countries even widened from 1930 to 1991. The strong and steady growth in yields since 2000 does not allow to explain failures of the Soviet agriculture by bad soils, specific climate or natural limitations—the Soviet agrarian policy is to blame. Instead of “revolutionizing”, socialist agriculture did not take part in any significant productivity rise as elsewhere in the world during the “green revolution”. The author argues that the main reason for such a failure was “infantilization” of agricultural producers—peasants, heads of state and collective farms—by a combination of mistrust and scrupulous control. During the Soviet period agricultural producers never were the masters of their fields. The situation became even worse after the planned economy provided agriculture with insufficient and ineffective machinery below Western standards. Although necessary machinery and knowledge of organizing the production were available in the West, in the Soviet Union the mechanization of crop production and animal husbandry was not completed. The article starts with the description of peasants’ interests, behavior und expectations in the Revolutions of 1905 and 1917– 1918; then the author focuses on the foundations of the Soviet agrarian policy suggested by Lenin and Stalin, continues with a short review of different approaches to agriculture developed by Khrushchev, Brezhnev und Gorbachev, and finishes with a summary of the reasons for Putin’s successes paying special attention to the short periods of yields growth—1924–1930, 1953–1958, 1965–1970, and 1986–1991.

Keywords

Socialist agriculture, agrarian policy, industrialized agriculture, infantilization of peasants, class differentiation, V.I. Lenin, J.V. Stalin, N.S. Khrushchev, L.I. Brezhnev, M.S. Gorbachev, V.V. Putin.

About the author

Stephan Merl, DSc (History), Professor, Bielefeld University; 25 Universitätsstr., 33615, Bielefeld, Germany.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Kerblay B. A.V. Chayanov. Evolution of the Russian agrarian thought from 1908 to 1930: At the crossroads (Article of B. Kerblay) // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2018. V.3. №4. P. 17-68.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2018-3-4-17-68

Annotation

The Russian Peasant Studies presents a collection of archival documents related to the publication of Alexander Chayanov’s works in 1967 in France and England, which was prepared by the Professor of Sorbonne University Basile Kerblay. This collection includes the correspondence of Olga Gurevich, the widow of Chayanov, with Basile Kerblay in 1966-1970, and her translation from French of Kerblay’s article on the work of Chayanov. Kerblay’s article was published as a preface to the collected works of Chayanov and became classic. This is the first serious study of the biography and work of Chayanov and of the theory of the Russian organization-production school of the 1920s in Western sociology. This article is published in Russian for the first time. The letters of Kerblay and Olga Gurevich reveal some additional circumstances of the publication of Alexander Chayanov’s works in 1967 and some features of the ideological atmosphere of the USSR at that time. The collection of archival documents in the Russian Peasant Studies includes comments and a brief biography of Olga Gurevich. These documents are a part of the funds of the Russian State Archive of Economics. This publication is dedicated to the anniversary of Chayanov. The publication with comments was prepared by I.A. Kuznetsov and T.A. Savinova.

Keywords

A.V. Chayanov, rural Russia, peasant studies, interdisciplinary research, agrarian policy, Russian revolution, collectivization.

About the authors

Basile Kerblay
Editors: Igor A. Kuznetsov, PhD (History), Senior Researcher, the School of Public Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. 119571, Moscow, Vernadskogo Prosp., 82.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Tatyana A. Savinova, PhD (Economics), Head of Organizational-Methodical and Personnel Work Chair, Russian State Archive of Economy; 119992, Moscow, B. Pirogovskaya St., 17.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Translator: Olga E. Gurevich

Round table “The 100th anniversary of the academician Alexander Alexandrovich Nikonov (1918–1995)” // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2018. V.3. №3. P. 70-94.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2018-3-3-70-94

Annotation

The round table at the Center for Agrarian Studies of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration was dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the academician Alexander Alexandrovich Nikonov (1918–1995) and focused on the milestones of the biography of this prominent agrarian scientist, his intellectual and organizational contribution to the Russian agricultural science. A.A. Nikonov, a heroic participant of the Great Patriotic War, took part in the organization and development of agriculture in Latvia, the Stavropol Region and Moscow, held many senior positions from the Minister of Agriculture of Latvia to the President of the Lenin All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences, was known not only for outstanding organizational and intellectual but also personal qualities. The participants of the round table recognized the contribution of the academician Nikonov to the development of the agrarian reforms’ strategy in the USSR of the 1980s and to the creation in the years of perestroika of the Agrarian Institute — a scientific organization of a fundamentally new type, which is now named after the scientist — Nikonov VIAPI. The round-table discussions emphasized that A.A. Nikonov was not working in safe conditions, and scientific activities often demanded from him civil courage and political responsibility. It is to A.A. Nikonov that the Russian agrarian science should be grateful for the consistent desire to rehabilitate the names of A.V. Chayanov and his colleagues from the organization-production school and to re-introduce into scientific discourse the forbidden and forgotten heritage of these outstanding scientists. Finally, the discussions emphasized the importance of the last work of the scientist, his book The Spiral of the Century-Old Drama: Agrarian Science and Policy of Russia (18-20 centuries). The participants of the round table consider this book as a still unique and relevant guide for the scientific and moral search for the ways of decent rural development of Russia. 

Keywords

A.A. Nikonov, Nikonov VIAPI (Alexander Nikonov All-Russian Institute of Agrarian Issues and Informatics), VASKhNIL (Lenin All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences), agrarian science, agrarian policy, agrarian reforms, agriculture, A.V. Chayanov’s school.

About the authors

Vladimir V. Bakaev , DSc (Economics), Researcher, Alexander Nikonov All-Russian Institute of Agrarian Issues and Informatics; 105064, Moscow, Bolshoi Kharitonievski Per., 21–1.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Vladimir M. Bautin, DSc (Economics), Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor, Chair of Management and Rural Consulting, in 2002–2013 — Rector, in 2013–2016 — President of the Russian State Agrarian University — Timiryazev Moscow Agricultural Academy; 127550, Moscow, Timiryazevskaya St., 49.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.  
Elmira N. Krylatykh, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, DSc (Economics), Chief Researcher, Alexander Nikonov All-Russian Institute of Agrarian Issues and Informatics; 105064, Moscow, Bolshoi Kharitonievski Per., 21–1.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.  
Alexander M. Nikulin, PhD (Economics), Head of the Center for Agrarian Studies, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration; 119571, Moscow, Prosp. Vernadskogo, 82.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Lyubov A. Ovchintseva, PhD (Economics), Senior Researcher, Department of Sustainable Rural Development and Rural Cooperation, Alexander Nikonov All-Russian Institute of Agrarian Issues and Informatics; 105064, Moscow, Bolshoi Kharitonievski Per., 21–1.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Alexander V. Petrikov, DSc (Economics), Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Head of the Alexander Nikonov All-Russian Institute of Agrarian Issues and Informatics, in 2007–2016 — Deputy Minister of Agriculture; 105064, Moscow, Bolshoi Kharitonievski Per., 21–1.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Vasily Y. Uzun, DSc (Economics), Chief Researcher, Center for Agro-Food Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, 119571, Moscow, Vernadskogo Prosp., 82.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Elena Y. Frolova, PhD (Economics), Senior Researcher, Alexander Nikonov All-Russian Institute of Agrarian Issues and Informatics; 105064, Moscow, Bolshoi Kharitonievski Per., 21–1.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Nikolay S. Kharitonov, PhD (Economics), Honored Lecturer, Chair of Agroeconomics, Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University. 119992, Moscow, Leninskie Gory, 1-46, bld. 3.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Nikolay Т. Khozhainov, PhD (Economics), Associate Professor, Chair of Agroeconomics, Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University. 119992, Moscow, Leninskie Gory, 1-46, bld. 3.
Е-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.