Search results

Urbanizacija kaip procesas yra apibendrinamas kaip viena iš esminių modernėjančios visuomenės sąlygų, o Lietuvos urbanizacijos modelis kardinaliai pasikeičia atgavus nepriklausomybę pereinant prie rinkos ekonomikos. Straipsnyje siekiama atskleisti kaip buvo įgyvendinamos būsto, regioninio ir teritorinio planavimo politinės reformos 1987–1997 m. laikotarpiu, keičiant moderniosios Lietuvos urbanizacijos modelį. Sovietinio centralizuoto ir rinkos ekonomikos decentralizuoto teritorinio, regioninio planavimo ir būsto politikos pokyčiams su kintančia modernaus miesto koncepcija atskleisti yra pasitelkiama nacionalinio lygmens dokumentų analizė. Analizė parodė, kad institucinių veikėjų atsakomybių pokyčiai buvo grįsti greita decentralizacija, miesto gyventojų vaidmuo kito iš pasyvaus gerovės gavėjo į aktyvų vartotoją būsto sektoriuje, o privatizacijos ir restitucijos programų derinimas tapo iššūkiu viešojo sektoriaus institucijoms, siekiant sutaikyti skirtingas gyventojų interesų grupes pereinamuoju laikotarpiu.

Urbanizacija kaip procesas yra apibendrinamas kaip viena iš esminių modernėjančios visuomenės sąlygų, o Lietuvos urbanizacijos modelis kardinaliai pasikeičia atgavus nepriklausomybę pereinant prie rinkos ekonomikos. Straipsnyje siekiama atskleisti kaip buvo įgyvendinamos būsto, regioninio ir teritorinio planavimo politinės reformos 1987–1997 m. laikotarpiu, keičiant moderniosios Lietuvos urbanizacijos modelį. Sovietinio centralizuoto ir rinkos ekonomikos decentralizuoto teritorinio, regioninio planavimo ir būsto politikos pokyčiams su kintančia modernaus miesto koncepcija atskleisti yra pasitelkiama nacionalinio lygmens dokumentų analizė. Analizė parodė, kad institucinių veikėjų atsakomybių pokyčiai buvo grįsti greita decentralizacija, miesto gyventojų vaidmuo kito iš pasyvaus gerovės gavėjo į aktyvų vartotoją būsto sektoriuje, o privatizacijos ir restitucijos programų derinimas tapo iššūkiu viešojo sektoriaus institucijoms, siekiant sutaikyti skirtingas gyventojų interesų grupes pereinamuoju laikotarpiu.

This paper analyzes the phenomenon of anticlericalism in contemporary Lithuania, applying a sociohistorical approach. It starts with a discussion on the problem of criticism of religion and anticlericalism in contemporary societies, and particularly Lithuania. The empirical part of the paper provides a statistical data analysis of two surveys, conducted in 2012 and 2018. The secondary data analysis showed that age and place of residence of Roman Catholics in Lithuania were statistically meaningful factors for the formation of anticlerical stances. Younger respondents expressed more critical stances towards the clergy, while respondents living in large cities of the country had more relaxed stances towards clergy than those living in small towns and rural areas. Living in a proximity to a Roman Catholic church in rural areas determined the prevalent anticlerical attitudes among the Lithuanian population ; Politologijos katedra ; Sociologijos katedra ; Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas

The material and the post-material values of the young generation in the last Soviet decade are analysed according to the theory of human development and compared with the values of the rest of the society. They are further analysed in light of hypocritical dispositions that developed systematically during the Soviet period. The study uses the data of the European Value Survey of 1990. The youngest cohort more preferred post-material values and declared emancipatory aims, but also was more in favour of breaking social norms than the older generation.

Rapid expansion of welfare state model and persistent processes of housing sector commodification are corroding the stable social security net and transforming the structure of housing sector at the same time. The growing private rent sector becomes a desirable option for those households which struggle to acquire housing in private housing sector. Lithuanian private rent sector is a peculiar case because the rent segment is poorly regulated and the practice of informal rent is widely spread. Even the general official framework of Lithuanian housing policy considers private rent sector an economic activity, but not the residential one – the rent is legally treated as just a contract between the renter and the tenant. The study aims at showcasing the situation of Lithuanian youth (18–35 yr.) who rent housing units privately, and their attitudes towards private rent sector. The analysis presents the differences in socio-demographic features and value orientations among young tenants and home-owners. The article describes several profiles of young tenants: they usually live in more compact housing units and are more likely to be single or cohabitate with a partner and without any children. Important feature of Lithuanian private rent sector is a quite short residential period, and the fact that the majority of young tenants have not declared or registered rented housing unit as their primary place of residency. Young tenants are more anxious about their liability to the renter, but not about their rights as the tenants. More than one quarter of young tenants participate in informal housing rent sector, only about half of young tenants have legal contracts with renters. All these features of the private sector allow concluding about the rent sector's ambivalence or existence of various levels of residential security for young tenants.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ppaa.17.3.21958

Rapid expansion of welfare state model and persistent processes of housing sector commodification are corroding the stable social security net and transforming the structure of housing sector at the same time. The growing private rent sector becomes a desirable option for those households which struggle to acquire housing in private housing sector. Lithuanian private rent sector is a peculiar case because the rent segment is poorly regulated and the practice of informal rent is widely spread. Even the general official framework of Lithuanian housing policy considers private rent sector an economic activity, but not the residential one – the rent is legally treated as just a contract between the renter and the tenant. The study aims at showcasing the situation of Lithuanian youth (18–35 yr.) who rent housing units privately, and their attitudes towards private rent sector. The analysis presents the differences in socio-demographic features and value orientations among young tenants and home-owners. The article describes several profiles of young tenants: they usually live in more compact housing units and are more likely to be single or cohabitate with a partner and without any children. Important feature of Lithuanian private rent sector is a quite short residential period, and the fact that the majority of young tenants have not declared or registered rented housing unit as their primary place of residency. Young tenants are more anxious about their liability to the renter, but not about their rights as the tenants. More than one quarter of young tenants participate in informal housing rent sector, only about half of young tenants have legal contracts with renters. All these features of the private sector allow concluding about the rent sector's ambivalence or existence of various levels of residential security for young tenants.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ppaa.17.3.21958 ; Sparti šiuolaikinės gerovės valstybės plėtra ir būsto sektoriaus komodifikacijos procesai retina gerovės apsaugos tinklą ir keičia ...

Emotional attachments are not only an important way of dealing with physical structures that people encounter in their everyday but also an indicator of people's imagination of urban space and meanings that they attach to it. This article focuses on emotions arising from the use of given urban spaces and affective investments that lie in the physical space of three Lithuanian cities, Vilnius, Kaunas and Klaipėda. Using the quantitative data (a survey conducted within the research project "Social Exclusion in Lithuanian Cities: Forms of Spatial Segregation and Polarization" (2012), the article analyzes the structures of feeling of power/powerlessness that people attach to different neighborhoods in Vilnius, Kaunas and Klaipėda. Examining the geography of emotions that people draw with regard to their neighborhoods, the paper argues that respondents often articulate socio-spatial segregation and spatial inequality in terms of the weighty emotions of passivity, insecurity, mistrust in their abilities to affect local change and local government's decisions. It can be argued that these emotions create social barriers and distances. They prevent the emergence of positive, socially bonding collective practices and provoke some collective urban experience (for instance, feeling unsafe and "disposable") that contribute to socio-spatial segregation of some neighborhoods in the Lithuanian cities, particularly those that are at the lowest end of social hierarchies (working-class and Soviet style neighborhoods). They divide and fragment these neighborhoods and communities instead of bringing them closer together and create the so-called places of marginality marred by the growing urban inequality and social antagonisms.

Emotional attachments are not only an important way of dealing with physical structures that people encounter in their everyday but also an indicator of people's imagination of urban space and meanings that they attach to it. This article focuses on emotions arising from the use of given urban spaces and affective investments that lie in the physical space of three Lithuanian cities, Vilnius, Kaunas and Klaipėda. Using the quantitative data (a survey conducted within the research project "Social Exclusion in Lithuanian Cities: Forms of Spatial Segregation and Polarization" (2012), the article analyzes the structures of feeling of power/powerlessness that people attach to different neighborhoods in Vilnius, Kaunas and Klaipėda. Examining the geography of emotions that people draw with regard to their neighborhoods, the paper argues that respondents often articulate socio-spatial segregation and spatial inequality in terms of the weighty emotions of passivity, insecurity, mistrust in their abilities to affect local change and local government's decisions. It can be argued that these emotions create social barriers and distances. They prevent the emergence of positive, socially bonding collective practices and provoke some collective urban experience (for instance, feeling unsafe and "disposable") that contribute to socio-spatial segregation of some neighborhoods in the Lithuanian cities, particularly those that are at the lowest end of social hierarchies (working-class and Soviet style neighborhoods). They divide and fragment these neighborhoods and communities instead of bringing them closer together and create the so-called places of marginality marred by the growing urban inequality and social antagonisms.

Emotional attachments are not only an important way of dealing with physical structures that people encounter in their everyday but also an indicator of people's imagination of urban space and meanings that they attach to it. This article focuses on emotions arising from the use of given urban spaces and affective investments that lie in the physical space of three Lithuanian cities, Vilnius, Kaunas and Klaipėda. Using the quantitative data (a survey conducted within the research project "Social Exclusion in Lithuanian Cities: Forms of Spatial Segregation and Polarization" (2012), the article analyzes the structures of feeling of power/powerlessness that people attach to different neighborhoods in Vilnius, Kaunas and Klaipėda. Examining the geography of emotions that people draw with regard to their neighborhoods, the paper argues that respondents often articulate socio-spatial segregation and spatial inequality in terms of the weighty emotions of passivity, insecurity, mistrust in their abilities to affect local change and local government's decisions. It can be argued that these emotions create social barriers and distances. They prevent the emergence of positive, socially bonding collective practices and provoke some collective urban experience (for instance, feeling unsafe and "disposable") that contribute to socio-spatial segregation of some neighborhoods in the Lithuanian cities, particularly those that are at the lowest end of social hierarchies (working-class and Soviet style neighborhoods). They divide and fragment these neighborhoods and communities instead of bringing them closer together and create the so-called places of marginality marred by the growing urban inequality and social antagonisms.

Analyzing the qualitative data from 4 focus-group interviews (2 interviews were conducted in urban and 2 in rural locations), this article identifies features of political and social trust and participation in relation to the consolidation of democracy in Lithuania. Lithuanians have low trust in political institutions; their trust depends on complex factors such as a big social gap between the political institutions and citizens, negative portrayals of the political institutions in mass media, centralized decisions of the political institutions or minimization of a communal voice. Political trust is low in communities and locations in which local authorities do not support or maintain any social contacts with local residents. Mass media influence immensely citizens' political trust in the national government or political institutions; citizens' distrust is often based on media scandals involving politicians and public figures. Lithuanians' participation in communal or public activities is often characterized by the principle of competition: several communities or non-governmental organizations in the same location often duplicate same tasks and compete with each other. Similarly, because of their narrow activities and social networks, communities tend to maintain fragmentary connections with local residents. Pragmatic, rational and personal interests as well as a trust in narrow social networks characterize the low level of social trust in people and limited communal participation in Lithuania.

Analyzing the qualitative data from 4 focus-group interviews (2 interviews were conducted in urban and 2 in rural locations), this article identifies features of political and social trust and participation in relation to the consolidation of democracy in Lithuania. Lithuanians have low trust in political institutions; their trust depends on complex factors such as a big social gap between the political institutions and citizens, negative portrayals of the political institutions in mass media, centralized decisions of the political institutions or minimization of a communal voice. Political trust is low in communities and locations in which local authorities do not support or maintain any social contacts with local residents. Mass media influence immensely citizens' political trust in the national government or political institutions; citizens' distrust is often based on media scandals involving politicians and public figures. Lithuanians' participation in communal or public activities is often characterized by the principle of competition: several communities or non-governmental organizations in the same location often duplicate same tasks and compete with each other. Similarly, because of their narrow activities and social networks, communities tend to maintain fragmentary connections with local residents. Pragmatic, rational and personal interests as well as a trust in narrow social networks characterize the low level of social trust in people and limited communal participation in Lithuania.

Analyzing the qualitative data from 4 focus-group interviews (2 interviews were conducted in urban and 2 in rural locations), this article identifies features of political and social trust and participation in relation to the consolidation of democracy in Lithuania. Lithuanians have low trust in political institutions; their trust depends on complex factors such as a big social gap between the political institutions and citizens, negative portrayals of the political institutions in mass media, centralized decisions of the political institutions or minimization of a communal voice. Political trust is low in communities and locations in which local authorities do not support or maintain any social contacts with local residents. Mass media influence immensely citizens' political trust in the national government or political institutions; citizens' distrust is often based on media scandals involving politicians and public figures. Lithuanians' participation in communal or public activities is often characterized by the principle of competition: several communities or non-governmental organizations in the same location often duplicate same tasks and compete with each other. Similarly, because of their narrow activities and social networks, communities tend to maintain fragmentary connections with local residents. Pragmatic, rational and personal interests as well as a trust in narrow social networks characterize the low level of social trust in people and limited communal participation in Lithuania.

Analyzing the qualitative data from 4 focus-group interviews (2 interviews were conducted in urban and 2 in rural locations), this article identifies features of political and social trust and participation in relation to the consolidation of democracy in Lithuania. Lithuanians have low trust in political institutions; their trust depends on complex factors such as a big social gap between the political institutions and citizens, negative portrayals of the political institutions in mass media, centralized decisions of the political institutions or minimization of a communal voice. Political trust is low in communities and locations in which local authorities do not support or maintain any social contacts with local residents. Mass media influence immensely citizens' political trust in the national government or political institutions; citizens' distrust is often based on media scandals involving politicians and public figures. Lithuanians' participation in communal or public activities is often characterized by the principle of competition: several communities or non-governmental organizations in the same location often duplicate same tasks and compete with each other. Similarly, because of their narrow activities and social networks, communities tend to maintain fragmentary connections with local residents. Pragmatic, rational and personal interests as well as a trust in narrow social networks characterize the low level of social trust in people and limited communal participation in Lithuania.

Analyzing the qualitative data from 4 focus-group interviews (2 interviews were conducted in urban and 2 in rural locations), this article identifies features of political and social trust and participation in relation to the consolidation of democracy in Lithuania. Lithuanians have low trust in political institutions; their trust depends on complex factors such as a big social gap between the political institutions and citizens, negative portrayals of the political institutions in mass media, centralized decisions of the political institutions or minimization of a communal voice. Political trust is low in communities and locations in which local authorities do not support or maintain any social contacts with local residents. Mass media influence immensely citizens' political trust in the national government or political institutions; citizens' distrust is often based on media scandals involving politicians and public figures. Lithuanians' participation in communal or public activities is often characterized by the principle of competition: several communities or non-governmental organizations in the same location often duplicate same tasks and compete with each other. Similarly, because of their narrow activities and social networks, communities tend to maintain fragmentary connections with local residents. Pragmatic, rational and personal interests as well as a trust in narrow social networks characterize the low level of social trust in people and limited communal participation in Lithuania.