The present time

Vinogradskaya O.Ya. Ontological foundations of the townspeople moving to the village // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2018. V.3. №4. P. 123-135.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2018-3-4-123-135

Annotation

The article considers key reasons for townspeople moving to the village as a permanent residence. The author believes that the main reason is that the technological world of the big city forcibly deprives the man of subjectivity and does not allow him to influence continuous plunge into mandatory daily household routine and everyday endless cycle. The daily technological routine of urban life enhances the feeling of hopelessness and even danger of everyday practices, isolates people from each other. Some townspeople believe that rural world can provide them with a place and nature to live as “human beings”. Townspeople try to at least temporarily escape from the technological world that seized them by getting out of the city to visit one’s country house, by taking a journey, by visiting one’s relatives in the village or, sometimes and today more and more often, by moving to the countryside. Townspeople, unlike villagers, consider the village an unusual expolar space that makes them happier and more creative and provides opportunities for activities that are possible only in this new world. The difference of the new world from the urban “mechanized” one is not the degree of mechanization but that the “technology” no longer subjugates the man but frees him from dangers and provides with opportunities to skillfully and effectively master a variety of innovations.

Keywords

City, village, former townspeople, villagers, migration, economic practices, technological world, technological development.

About the author

Vinogradskaya Olga Ya., Senior Researcher, 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. 

 

Bozhkov O.B. Same addresses 10 years later (first impressions of the expedition-2018 to Boksitogorsky and Babaevsky districts) // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2018. V.3. №3. P. 115-127.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2018-3-3-115-127

Annotation

In 2006–2008, the author took part in the expeditions to seven districts of four subjects of the Russian Federation, which were supported by the Russian Foundation for Humanities. The research project included (according to the sequence of field trips): in the Tver Region — Maksatikhinsky and Lesnoy districts; in the Novgorod Region — Pestovsky district; in the Vologda Region — Ustyuzhensky, Kaduysky and Babayevsky districts; in the Leningrad Region — Boksitogorsky district. At that time, the Federal Law No. 131 “On Local Self-Government” was adopted, and we conducted a survey of all heads of municipalities (rural settlements) and heads of operating agricultural enterprises including peasant farms. The results of expeditions were presented at a number of Russian and international conferences, and in numerous publications. The current research aims at studying those mechanisms of interaction of rural business with local authorities that reproduce the rural entrepreneurial stratum. To achieve this goal, we focus on the interaction of agricultural business with local (district and municipal) authorities and on its changes over the past fifteen years; and consider configurations of different interaction factors, which ensure the most effective reproduction of the entrepreneurial stratum in the village, in order to reconstruct models of interaction based on such configurations. Thus, the research focus on regional differences in the policies of local authorities for agricultural production and on their changes determined by the changes of the heads of district and municipal administrations. 

Keywords

Local self-government, agricultural production, municipal government, rural entrepreneurship, Internet.

About the author

Bozhkov Oleg B., Senior Researcher, Sociological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Head of the Research Center “Biographical Foundation”. 190005, Saint Petersburg, 7th Krasnoarmeiskaya St., 25/14.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 


 

Fadeeva O.P., Nefedkin V.I.  “Regional dirigisme” and rural self-organization in Tatarstan // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2018. V.3. №3. P. 95-114.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2018-3-3-95-114

Annotation

The article considers a wide range of issues of functioning and development of rural settlements under the permanent reduction of powers and financial independence of local self-government. Based on the data of the sociological expedition to five municipal districts of the Republic of Tatarstan, the authors show that regional and municipal authorities aim at developing self-organization of local population, which allows to partially offset negative consequences of unitary trends and to expand the possibilities of rural development. The article identifies reasons for the relative failure of regional authorities attempts to create large vertically integrated agricultural holdings in Tatarstan, and features of the large enterprises (former state farms and collective farms) participation in supporting livelihoods and development of rural settlements. Such participation consists of a set of reciprocal, patron-client and market interactions, the ratio between which depends on the specific local historical and ethnocultural context. The authors conclude that even in adverse external conditions the system of rural self-government is capable of initiating self-organization of local communities and of performing functions of a development institution. Thus, the diversity of economic and social practices determined by ethnocultural and religious peculiarities contributes to the accumulation of symbolic, social and cultural capital of rural communities and to its conversion to economic capital, and activates rural-urban exchanges that compensate for the limited resources of rural development. 

Keywords

Tatarstan, rural settlement, local practice, self-organization, selfgovernment, dirigisme.

About the authors

Fadeeva Olga P., PhD (Sociology), Senior Researcher, Institute of Economics and Organization of Industrial Production, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 630090, Novosibirsk, Prosp. Lavrentieva, 17.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Nefedkin Vladimir I., PhD (Economics), Senior Researcher, Institute of Economics and Organization of Industrial Production, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 630090, Novosibirsk, Prosp. Lavrentieva, 17.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 


 

Krylatykh E.N., Lerman Z., Strokov A.S., Uzun V.Ya., Shagaida N.I. Round table “Assessment of structural changes in agriculture: Methodological approaches and estimated results” // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2018. V.3. №2. P. 102-126.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2018-3-2-102-126

Annotation

The round table on the “Assessment of structural changes in agriculture: Methodological approaches and estimated results” was held under the leadership of Natalia Ivanovna Shagaida, head of the Center for Agro-Food Policy, and consisted of two main reports and discussion on them. The first report “International methodological approaches to assessing structural changes in agriculture” was presented by Zvi Lerman, professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Uzun Vasily Yakimovich, chief researcher of the Center for Agro-Food Policy, presented the second report “Assessment of structural changes in Russian agriculture: Hypotheses and research methods”. Professor Lerman conducted a comparative analysis of the dynamics of various indicators of structural changes in agriculture of such post-socialist countries as Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan. Professor Uzun was a co-rapporteur of professor Lerman and described structural changes in Russian agriculture paying special attention to the institutional components of agrarian structural changes associated with the interrelation of large and small forms of agricultural production. At the end of the seminar, the discussion focused on the phenomenon of agroholdings as the main factor of diverse and ambiguous agrarian changes in the contemporary Russian agriculture. 

Keywords

Agriculture, post-socialist countries, structural changes, agroholdings, research methods.

About the authors

Krylatykh Elmira N., academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, DSc (Economics), Head of the Department of Organizational Management, Higher School of Corporate Management, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, 119571, Moscow, Vernadskogo Prosp., 84.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Lerman Zvi, Sir Henry d’Avigdor Goldsmid Professor Emeritus of Agricultural Economics, Department of Environmental Economics and Management, Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Israel), P.O. Box 12, Rehovot, 76100, Jerusalem, Israel.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Strokov Anton S., Senior 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. 
Uzun Vasily Ya., 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. 
Shagaida Natalia I., DSc (Economics), Head of the 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. 


 

Rogozin D.M. Challenges and prospects of rural aging // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2018. V.3. №2. P. 86-101.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2018-3-2-86-101

Annotation

Of the three large-scale studies conducted by the Institute of Social Analysis and Forecasting of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the author selected eight most significant manifestations of rural aging and divided them into two groups. The first group presents limitations, while the second — opportunities for aging in the countryside. Elderly villagers, as a rule, do not work, do not study, do not travel, and are sick — these are the restrictions. But they manage the household, take care of themselves, move and keep intimate relationships — these are opportunities. Most limitations and opportunities make pairs. For instance, elderly villagers do not work but manage the household; do not travel, but move; get sick, but keep intimate relationships and take care of their bodies. Only the lack of educational opportunities does not have a positive pair in rural areas. The author believes that continuous education can become a main factor of active aging, that is why it should become an integral part of social policies. 

Keywords

Aging studies, life-long learning, illness, variety of aging, education, rural aging, sexuality, sociology of aging, old age.

About the author

Rogozin Dmitry M., PhD (Sociology), Head of Laboratory for Social Research Methodology, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. Address: 119034, Moscow, Prechistenskaya Nab.,1.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 


 

Fadeeva O.P. Sketches for the farm project: An Altai palette // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2018. V.3. №1. P. 141-173.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2018-3-1-141-173

Annotation

The article considers a wide range of challenges in the implementation of the “farm project” in Russia. The author refers to the initial assumptions of the Chayanov’s theory of family-labor economy to identify objective difficulties and results of the development of farming in Russia. Based on the state statistics and two All-Russian agricultural censuses, the article presents key trends in the development of peasant (farm) economy as compared to other economic actors. The author conducted interviews with farmers, business leaders and representatives of local authorities in a rural district of the Altai Region in 2013–2017. The results of these field studies are presented as a “Kulunda case”, which allowed to identify some typical success and failure stories. The farmers’ stories prove that the family-consumer orientation limits development opportunities and in many cases determines the cessation of farming; while the entrepreneurial and creative motivation prevails in the stories of successful farmers. Successful family-labor farms are gradually turning into family-entrepreneurial and hire employees. Such farms accumulate and provide their heirs with both tangible and intangible assets, primarily in the form of unique local knowledge, which is the main factor of sustainable family business and its further development.

Keywords

Farm project, agrarian reform in Russia, farmers’ stories, the Altai Region.

About the author

Fadeeva Olga P., PhD (Sociology), Senior Researcher, Institute of Economics and Organization of Industrial Production, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 630090, Novosibirsk, Prosp. Lavrentieva, 17.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 


 

Nefedova T.G. Contemporary peasant economy in the rural-urban environment // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2018. V.3. №1. P. 117-140.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2018-3-1-117-140

Annotation

The article considers features of contemporary Russian households under the concentration of large enterprises and polarization of the countryside. The author compares farms at the beginning and in the middle of the twentieth century to show that many factors determining the households’ life a century ago are still active. The article describes features of today’s small households and farmers and their main types; identifies their variety in the Non-Black Earth, southern and eastern regions, in the suburbs and on the periphery. Among the factors affecting activities of population in households, the author focuses on the degree of rural depopulation, rural ethnic composition, and interaction between households and large agricultural enterprises. Thus, inefficient enterprises were not replaced by small farms due to the gradual decrease of agricultural activities of rural population. There is a significant share of the unused land with an exception of some southern regions, which proves that land is not the key factor in enhancing agricultural activities of small farms. However, the agricultural land use of gardeners is very intensive except for the suburbs of Moscow and Saint Petersburg. The greatest activity is typical for farms with high marketability, including “shadow farms”, and for subsistence households following peasant traditions and partially self-sufficient.

Keywords

Peasant farm, agricultural enterprises, farmers, household plots, gardeners, land use, livestock.

About the authors

Nefedova Tatyana G., DSc (Geography), Chief Researcher, Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences; 119017, Moscow, Staromonetny Per., 29.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

 

Nikulin A.M., Trotsuk I.V., Wegren S. Ideology and philosophy of the successful regional development in contemporary Russia: The Belgorod case // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2018. V.3. №1. P. 99-116.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2018-3-1-99-116

Annotation

The article considers economic successes of the Belgorod region as significantly determined by the governor Yevgeny Savchenko’ agrarian policies, which compensate for the region’s small size and modest human capital. In 2017, the authors published an article describing economic policies and social programs of regional authorities; now the authors focus on the leadership by Yevgeny Savchenko, and his rather paradoxical personal and management views. First, according to Max Weber’s typology of authority, Savchenko is a charismatic leader with strong personality traits and careful political behavior, who benefits from the traditional Slavophile populism and institutional design of the gubernatorial powers that has allowed governors to become more powerful compared to other regional actors during 2002–2012. Second, the Belgorod governor’s project has quite traditional Russian roots in the spirit of A.V. Chayanov’s novel “My brother Alexey’s journey to the land of peasant utopia”, which allowed the Belgorod modernization project to successfully cope with unpredictable challenges from the Russian oligarchy and global economy, and to use competitive standards of consumer society as the grounds for conservative modernization and solidary society development. The Belgorod governor implements his own model of new economy consisting of the extensive development of solidarity and cooperation; ideals of healthy lifestyle; and freedom in choosing ways to work and to rest (regional authorities support corporate, family and individual strategies of life). Third, Savchenko has publicly articulated his personal political-economic theory reflecting a conglomerate of conservative, socialist and populist ideas, and combining anti-liberalism and statist philosophy as the basis for the revival of the Russian state, which the governor sees as an engine of social progress.

Keywords

Belgorod region, governor, leadership, regional authorities, regional development, ideological roots, philosophical foundations.

About the authors

Nikulin Alexander M., PhD (Economics), Head of the Center for Agrarian Studies, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. Prosp. Vernadskogo, 82, Moscow, Russian Federation, 119571.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Trotsuk Irina V., DSc (Sociology), Senior Researcher, Center for Agrarian Studies, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration; Associate Professor, Sociology Chair, RUDN University. Prosp. Vernadskogo, 82, Moscow, Russian Federation, 119571.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Wegren Stephen, Professor of Political Science, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas, USA.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 


 

Merl S. Agrarian transformations in the former GDR in 1989–2017: A success story? // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2017. V.2. №4. P. 130-147.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2017-2-4-130-147

Annotation

The transformations of agriculture in the direction of privatization and adaptation to the market started in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union in the late 1980s. Looking back from today, this was a difficult process for the economic transition was strongly influenced by changing prices and demand for agricultural goods. Today in most countries, agricultural productivity is higher though problems and uncertainties are still evident especially considering the structural changes of agricultural enterprises and their consequences for rural life. The article focuses on the country in which agrarian transformations seem to be a success story: in the GDR, the agricultural productivity grew significantly, and the new structures of the agricultural enterprises allowed competing at the world market. The author does not directly compare the former GDR and Russia though the article contributes to understanding the reasons of the problematic outcomes of the transition in Russia. The article highlights general problems of agrarian transformations such as the uncertainty of their structural aims, and puts forward the following questions: can the GDR be considered a success story transferable to other countries as the political approach in Germany was more sophisticated or is there another explanation of its success? Was the success a result of the political course, or was it, on the contrary, an unexpected result of the lack of control? Another question is the criteria for considering the transition in the GDR a success in the economic sense (increase in productivity), social (keeping up the rural community), ecological or agricultural (increase in sustainability of production). To answer these questions the author relies on the statistical data for more than two decades, monitoring data on the still ongoing transition and partly privatization and registration of new enterprises, his own studies of agricultural enterprises in different new countries together with the Russian colleagues (1992, 1997, 2002 and 2016), which allowed to understand the estimates and reactions of people to different challenges of the transition.

Keywords

agrarian transformations, the former GDR (German New Countries), economic transition, agricultural production, rural communities

About the author

Merl Stephan, 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.      

 

Gusakov T.Yu. Rural informal economy of the Crimean village Novoalekseevka // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2017. V.2. №4. P. 107-129.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2017-2-4-107-129

Annotation

The article considers the situation in the Crimean village as a result of the dynamic development of informal economy in the 1990s after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The author tries to adapt the existing classifications of informal economy to the specific features of rural Crimea, in which informal relations are primarily determined by the exogenous forces such as the return of deported peoples, the collapse of the collective farms system and peculiarities of the Ukrainian state building. The Crimean countryside became a hostage of the social-economic transformations of the post-Soviet period, and found the only way to adapt and survive under the “wild capitalism” in the refusal to follow the rules of ineffective formal institutions and in replacing them with informal ones.
“Self-reliance” became the main slogan of the Crimean village in the ‘dashing 1990s’. Ethnic, ideological and intercultural disagreements and a lack of trust determined a new model of coexistence of rural residents — a commonalty (an analogue of the pre-revolutionary rural community) constituted by a network of informal ties. Combinations of various mental features determine specific types of informal economy such as a traditional shift to trade and agriculture due to the available resource base. Transformations of the institutional environment and social-economic stabilization in the 2000s contributed to the reduction of informal sector in the rural economy of the Crimea.

Keywords

Crimea, countryside, informal economy, shadow economy, agriculture, peasantization, commonalty

About the author

Gusakov Timur Yu., Junior Researcher, 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.     

 

Russian Peasant Studies. Scientific journal

Center for Agrarian studies of the Russian Presidental Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA)

Hard copies of the journal can be purchased at the Delo e-store or by subscription in the "Press of Russia" Agency (subscription index - Т81017).

e-issn