МОЛОДЕЖНАЯ СУБКУЛЬТУРА БЕЛГОРОДСКОЙ АГЛОМЕРАЦИИ: ДОМИНИРОВАНИЕ ГОРОДСКИХ ТРЕНДОВ
На основе социологической диагностики обобщены ключевые тенденции развития современной городской молодежи, которые существенным образом влияют на агломерационные процессы в городе. Перекос в пользу доминирования в молодежном сообществе городских аксиологических установок свидетельствует о том, что в настоящее время формировать Белгородскую агломерацию пока еще весьма затруднительно. В этой связи необходимо сосредоточить усилия на разработке технологических моделей, направленных на снижение доминирующего влияния города и увеличение значимости пригородных и сельских поселений. ; Leading politicians and economists of Belgorod and the region state the fact of development of the city's agglomeration. The main criteria of agglomeration processes are often regarded the following: 1) commuting expressed in mass labor, educational, household trips to Belgorod; a significant portion of the working population from rural settlements surrounding the city work in the regional center; 2) common built-up areas suburbs are adjacent to the city without significant gaps in the building, they have good transport links with Belgorod; 3) political will: subjects of the federal and municipal administration of the oblast publicly express interest in the development of agglomeration around the city of Belgorod. Meanwhile, any effect of agglomeration bears the stamp of side effects, most often expressed in the socio-cultural sphere. Each city of a specific size has its own subculture, not to mention the contrast between the rural and the urban cultures. We assume that the development of agglomeration in the city of Belgorod and around it will result in a clash of cultures of urban and rural recreation. Moreover, among the adult population it is possible to predict the shift towards rural types of leisure (this largely contributes to the development of individual housing and infrastructure improvement of social clusters in the suburbs). But in the youth subculture, on the contrary, we should expect the dominance of urban trends and their distribution in the behavior patterns of rural youth. Development of transport links, the combination of key youth facilities (schools, places of leisure) in downtown inevitably erase the blurred boundaries of rural youth identity. We offer to systematize a number of criteria of youth leisureby the following criteria: 1) personal and cultural development: pastimes of developmental (reading fiction, theater, concerts, movies, going to church, sports, hobbies, music); entertainment (visit discos, cafes, bars, play computer games, walking, idleness); degradation (alcohol and drugs) characters; 2) social interaction: contact (communicative) pastime (meeting friends, going to the theater, concerts, cinema, discos, cafes, walking, playing sports, going to church, communication on the Internet); non-contact (watching TV, reading fiction, computer games, household, listening to music, idleness); 3) personal activity: active (meeting friends, visiting discos, cafes, walking, playing sports, going to church, housekeeping); passive (watching TV, going to the theater, concerts, movies, computer games, listening to music, reading, alcohol and drug use, communication on the Internet, idleness).