Suchergebnisse

В статье анализируется дуалистическое противоречие формирования национальных интересов в условиях активизации глобализационных процессов. Рассматривается их структура, и раскрываются факторы, влияющие на их формирование. Сделан вывод, что в условиях активизации современных глобализационных процессов национальные интересы формируются исходя из политических и рыночных условий. При этом система национальных интересов России определяется совокупностью базисных интересов личности, общества и государства в важнейших сферах общественной жизнедеятельности: в области экономики, социальной и духовной жизни, во внутриполитической, международной, оборонной, информационной сферах. ; In article the dualistic contradiction of formation of national interests in the conditions of activation of globalization processes is analyzed. Their structure and the factors influencing their formation are considered. The conclusion that in the conditions of activation of modern globalization processes national interests are formed proceeding from political and market conditions is received. Thus the system of national interests of Russia is defined by set of basic interests of the personality, society and the state in the most important spheres of public activity: in the field of economy, social and spiritual life, in internal political, international, defensive, information spheres.

В статье подробно рассматривается история двух экспедиций в губернии Верхнего Поволжья в 1837-1840 гг., отправленных для выяснения вопроса о том, влияет ли истребление лесов на климат и уровень воды в реках. Показывается, что эти экспедиции были частью публичной дискуссии о возможной взаимосвязи между сокращением площади лесов и изменением климата, развернувшейся в России в 1830-х начале 1840-х гг. Анализ её политического и институционального контекста позволяет лучше понять различные подходы к пользованию лесными ресурсами, которые отстаивались противоборствующими группами в составе высшего государственного управления Российской империи. В статье также рассматривается вопрос о содержании «лесной науки» этого периода, а также о характере образования и предшествующей подготовки лиц, признававшихся в то время экспертами в этой области. ; The paper examines in detail the history of two expeditions sent to the Upper Volga provinces of the Russian empire in 1837-1840 in order to establish whether the destruction of forests in the region could have caused climate change and falling water levels. The expeditions were a part of broader debates about the causal links between deforestation and climate change that took place in Russia in the 1830s-1840s. The author explores the political and institutional contexts of these debates in order to understand different approaches to forest exploitation that were advocated by rival factions within the imperial administration. The paper also examines the content of "forest science" of the period that shaped the understanding of efficient forest management, as well as the choice of men who were considered as 'experts' in these issues.

The article is devoted to the history of the first climate and soil maps that were published in the Economic-Statistical Atlas of European Russia (1851). It examines the wider scientific and sociopolitical contexts, in which these maps were compiled in the Ministry of State Domains (MSD). The author emphasizes a key role played by "ministerial science" - academic committees and statistical sections in various branches of Russian civil service - as an institutional infrastructure for scientific research in the decades prior to the Great Reforms era. The article further examines the scientific underpinnings of the project demonstrating that the climate and soil maps, contrary to the prevailing opinion, were in line with the state of research in these fields in France and Germany. The conceptual framework provided by Humboldtian science perfectly fitted the pragmatic consid­erations of the "enlightened bureaucrats" at the MSD who were engaged in developing more efficient means of supervising state lands and natural resources. Finally, the article examines the interaction between the MSD in St. Petersburg and its provincial correspondents who provided field data for the maps. It analyzes in detail the nature of their interaction, demon­strating how local knowledge had to be transformed into scientific data for the success of the enterprise. Elsewhere in Europe and North America provincial amateur naturalists ensured the success of Humboldtian science by providing a stable "input" of reliable data, while at the same time their scholarly endeavors were essential for the formation of modern local and regional identities and for the rise of "civic science." The article draws on these observations to argue against interpreting the compilation of climate and soil maps only as an attempt to make territory "legible" for the state. The dependency on local informants ensured that these and similar projects, even in the context of the Russian Empire, contributed to the making of modern civil society. In Russia, however, the key problem was the lack of amateur naturalists in the provinces who could have taken part in compil­ing the atlas. This was one of the major reasons why the MSD had to rely predominantly on its own personnel "on the ground" - a factor that gave the project its "bureaucratic" reputation.

SUMMARY:
The paper examines the origins of kraevedenie (local studies), as a distinctive form of public mobilization for regional studies in the early 1920s, and traces its links to the conceptual shift in Russian geography as an academic discipline, which defined itself as a science concerned with the spatial characteristics of natural regions. The paper focuses on the first conference for regional studies (1921) and analyzes the visions of regional studies, as they were offered by the key figures who defined these studies in the 1920s, particularly in the earlier years of the decade – Vladimir Bogdanov and his colleagues from the school of geography at Moscow University, Alexander Fersman, Veniamin Semenov-Tyan-Shansky, and others. The author argues for a further need to examine the connections between new forms of public science, a conceptual shift in geography and related disciplines, and debates about the principles of administrative-territorial organization of the Soviet state, which were directly related to the making of the Soviet Union in the 1920s.

SUMMARY:
The paper considers the history of local and regional societies of naturalists in the heartland provinces of the Russian Empire / Soviet Union from the late nineteenth century to the 1920s. In particular, it examines in detail the history of a few learned societies of the Upper Volga region, traces their links to the established academic institutions of imperial standing and the presence of their members at the periodic congresses of Russian naturalists and physicians. The paper argues that the establishment of provincial learned societies in the heartland territories of the empire as a mass phenomenon did not occur until the early years of the twentieth century and must be linked not only to the adoption of more liberal legislation on voluntary associations in 1906 but also to the emergence of a new professional stratum in the provinces in the early twentieth century. At about the same time, a number of leading scholars and younger researchers in various field disciplines developed an essentially liberal research agenda that paralleled the rise of provincial learned societies and imagined them as a new research infrastructure for scientific exploration of the imperial territory. This program suggested that all sorts of natural and human phenomena would be recorded and mapped for each province and each district by a local self-mobilized public, providing factual data for professional scholars and thus contributing to a better understanding of Russia. World War I, the revolution, and the civil war forced local societies to expand their range of activities, to establish salaried research positions, in this way facilitating the professionalization of provincial scholarship. At the same time global trends in science prompted established academic institutions to seek new forms of cooperation between amateurs and professionals in field research. These developments led to the proliferation of societies for local studies in the country in the 1920s and to the rise of a very broad and multifaceted kraevedenie movement that was connected with but could not be reduced to the liberal vision of field sciences as mass movements that would comprise established professional scholars and a local self-organized public engaged in provincial and district surveys.

SUMMARY:
The concept of region remains relatively rarely used by historians when they talk about Russia. Most problems concerning the political, social and economic history of the country are routinely analyzed on the basis of aggregate data. When scholars do talk about regions they usually address specifically the issues of nationalism, national policy of the Russian state or the rise of competing nationalisms of the non-Russian ethnic groups. Thus regions seemingly exist only on the borders of the country. But what about Russia itself? Are there any regional divisions in Russia which would be something more than mere administrative divisions? For a long time these questions did not attract scholarly attention, as the principal task of writing history was to establish and legitimize the rise of the modern state. The history of Russia was no exception in this case. However, with the post-communist transformations in the political geography of the Central and Eastern Europe, the ongoing process of European integration, and the parallel rise of regional identities and politics, regions and regionalisms emerge as a new focus of professional research in both the humanities and social sciences.

Marina Loskutova focuses on the ways in which post-elementary and secondary education in the Empire encouraged or discouraged students to think about their country in terms of particular regions and localities. Formal education and schooling has long been considered as one of the major forces promoting the making of a nation by imposing upon the pupils relatively standardized views and practices, forging a sense of belonging to a large collectivity". In particular, such subjects as modem literature, history and geography gained their significance as the vehicles for the very idea of a nation. However, if the role of formal schooling in the process of national formation has long been acknowledged, there are still few detailed studies on the transformation of various courses and curricula in specific national settings, and even less has been written on the changes in the curriculum and textbooks in nineteenth-century Russia. The article focuses on Russian secondary and post-elementary textbooks on geography and the ways they portrayed or constructed the regional divisions of the Empire. Acknowledging a generally limited impact that schooling might have had upon students everywhere, and especially in the late imperial Russia, where post-elementary education was available only for a very thin stratum of the population, Marina Loskutova argues that the ways in which the regions, regional divisions and the interrelationships between a locality, a region and the country as a whole were conceptualized in the pre-revolutionary decades, left a deep imprint upon subsequent school practices well into the twentieth century, and their legacy is still perceptible even today.

This article examines the way divisions of imperial space were represented in the most commonly used Russian school textbooks and readers through the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Particular attention is given to the gradual emergence of local studies in the school curriculum as part of a broader movement that sought to establish an intermediary space between the individual and the Empire as a whole.

Although the idea that immediate locality and the native region could be used as the best medium to make children familiar with their country as a whole was already present by the mid-nineteenth century, for a long time it remained only an abstract proposition. For a course of "motherland studies" of sufficient academic credibility to be developed "from below", provincial public had first to take an interest in preserving local nature and history. Indeed, mid-nineteenth century attempts to establish "motherland studies" at school failed due to the lack of supporting social structures in the provinces. It was only in the last decade of the nineteenth century when local initiative matured enough to give a boost for provincial museums and voluntary societies. At the turn of the century, as progressive educators from the main centers of the Empire gradually ventured to take their students out of the school grounds to explore the wider world through direct experience, some cities and whole regions, such as the upper-Volga, the Crimea, Caucasus and Ural, began to attract organized groups of young tourists. A decade later, in the years immediately preceding World War I, provincial initiative in a few city centers of Russia had reached sufficient maturity to organize school excursion tours and even to launch a journal monitoring the progress in this area of public life. It was only with the advent of a local studies movement, which enjoyed a brief period of exuberant growth in the 1920s, when the concept of a local identity was employed in educational practices.

В статье исследуются вопросы возможного роста эффективности социальной ответственности российских корпораций. К числу слагаемых социальной ответственности корпораций отнесено формирование эффективного рынка труда, предоставление социальных услуг работникам и жителям региона, благотворительная деятельность, участие в политической жизни и формировании управленческой элиты, развитие предпринимательской культуры и делового климата. ; In the article the problems of possible growth of efficiency of social responsibility of the Russian corporations are investigated. The components of social responsibility of corporations include the formation of the effective labour market, granting of social services to the workers and inhabitants of region, charities, participation in the political life and administrative elite formation, development of enterprise culture and business climate.