Suchergebnisse

The paper proposes the author's interpretation of the concept of "regional inequality" through the category of accessibility, namely the availability of goods and services that are assessed by residents of the regions as necessary for the implementation of their life strategies.

This article examines the specifics of the income inequality structure in modern Russian society, as well as the tendencies for its change during the country's post-Soviet period of development. It is shown that, compared to other countries, the traditional economic indexes which measure income inequality (decile ratio, Gini coefficient) position the Russian Federation as a country with a high degree of inequality within the mass layers of the population, especially when compared to Europe, albeit the level of inequality is slightly lower compared to BRICS member states. When using equivalence scales, which adjust the people's income after factoring in economies of scale in consumption, Russia's inequality figures improve even more. Based on quintile income distribution and the concentration of income within the highest quintile, Russia also occupies an intermediate position, surpassing most European countries, though not BRICS member states. However, the highest quintile is characterized by a high degree of differentiation. When transitioning from the wealthiest 20% of the population to the 1–5%, Russia's place among other countries of the world changes significantly: when it comes to the gap between the "upper crust" and the masses, Russia can be considered one of the leading countries in the world.

It has also been revealed that on the other end of the income distribution spectrum, at the population's lower strata, there has been a noticeable "rise" of low-income groups in the last few years, with them somewhat approaching the middle. It was manifested in a more rapid increase in prosperity among the lower 40% of the population when compared to the population in general, as well as in a noticeable decrease in poverty levels during the 2000's. Those citizens who were left in the lower strata of income distribution created a clearer image of poverty, which differs from the "average Russian" and emphasizes the importance of gauging not only low income level, but also an array of non-monetary inequality dimensions. Such a process of "homogenization" has lead to an increase in the size of groups with median and average income, with them being the most numerous groups in the current structure of Russian society. However, the increase in the number of people in said groups was not only caused by their shifts from low-income groups of the population, but also because of some members from the more prosperous strata experiencing an "averaging" of their level of income as well.

The article provides the analysis of pension inequality in the system of modern state pension provision in Russia. The purpose of work is to reveal pension inequality at each stage of forming pension good and to show the correlation between pension inequality and the implementation of pension preferences mechanism in the system of state pensioning. The paper briefly considers the evolution of social inequality concepts and studies the reasons for social inequality. The author views pension inequality as the subject differentiations arising in the course of forming and receiving pension good. The research analyzes the factors which entail deprivations both in the course of forming pension rights and receiving pension good. The analysis reveals numerous manifestations of pension inequality at different stages of pension process and identifies the correlation between particular forms of pension inequality and pension preferences policy. The paper offers conclusions and recommendations that can be used for further examination of particular aspects in pension inequality.

The article shows social indicators of the level of socio-economic inequality prevailing in Russia in recent decades; specific poverty lines and categories of the poor in Russian society are revealed; the regional nature of poverty is highlighted. It is concluded that the main causes of Russian poverty lie in the organization of the economic sphere of society and the activities of political institutions.

This article is devoted to the study of factors that affect inequality in the housekeeping time allocation among partners in Russia (without considering the time spent on caring for household members). To identify inequality factors, we used nonparametric methods of statistical analysis. Based on data from Selective supervision of use of daily fund of time by the population, we checked the influence of several respondents' characteristics and characteristics of the households, which respondents are a part of, on the distribution of household duties between partners. The work on the basis of empirical data confirmed a number of hypotheses, in particular, it was shown that there is a significant relationship between the distribution of household responsibilities between partners and the age of each of the partners, self- assessment of partners' health status, employment status, self-assessment of the financial status of the household, the number of children and their health condition. It should be noted that, according to our estimates, the difference in the time spent by partners is also influenced by the level of education of male partners, while the level of education of female partners does not have a significant effect. In addition, we did not reveal a clear relationship between the dynamics of the indicator we are interested in and the difference in the age of partners, the presence of chronic diseases or disabilities among respondents, marital status, and working conditions.

The article analyzes the long-term impact of democratic institutions on socio-economic and political development of modern society. The author proves that the transitions to democracy in the twentieth century accelerated not only the pace of economic development, but also the processes of social polarization in society. Despite the positive impact of democratic institutions on economic development and political stability, democracy as a form of political rule cannot solve the problem of social inequality. The history of modern democracy shows that it reduces inequality levels only in certain cases, and in most cases social inequality increases both at the national and global levels. ; Анализируется долгосрочное влияние демократических институтов на социально-экономическое и политическое развитие современного общества. Автор доказывает, что переход к демократии в ХХ в. ускорил не только темпы экономического развития, но и процессы социального расслоения общества. Несмотря на положительное влияние демократических институтов на экономическое развитие и политическую стабильность, демократия как форма политического господства неспособна решить проблему социального неравенства. История современной демократии свидетельствует о том, что она только в отдельных случаях снижает уровень социального неравенства, а в большинстве случаев повышает его.

The problem of income inequality is globally relevant, receiving the attention of both scientists and politicians. Lithuania as a small country has made significant progress in approaching the standard of living in Western Europe. However, there are still differences in economic growth between separate population groups. Thus, the problem of income inequality remains very acute. Currently, researchers are widely discussing the risk of income inequality to the country's society by analysing its causes and proposing various solutions. Although scientific debates address income inequality across regions, such studies are often limited to examples of large countries. Meanwhile, there is a lack of studies on regional income inequality in small countries, so the question of whether a small country is characterised by regional income inequality remains open. This research aims to examine the level of regional income inequality in Lithuania. We hypothesised that Lithuania has a high level of regional income inequality and this is one of the causes of the high income inequality in the whole country. To estimate regional income inequality, we used the most common measures: Gini coefficient, decile ratio, and the coefficient of variation. The analysis was performed at level 3 of the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS), according to which Lithuania is divided into 10 administrative counties. For this research, we chose the indicators illustrating income per capita on various levels, i.e., gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, average disposable household income per capita, and gross hourly wages, as the various types of income can be used. For the estimation of GDP per capita and average disposable household income, we analysed the data provided by the Lithuanian Department of Statistics (Statistics Lithuania) for 2014–2017. Due to a lack of data to estimate gross hourly wages, we examined the statistical data from the Lithuanian Department of Statistics for 2014. The results show that the hypothesis has not been confirmed. According to the research results, there is a small distribution of income between different regions of a small economy, although the level of economic development of different regions differs. The study findings are important not only from an academic perspective for identifying the causes of income inequality and raising questions for further research, but also for regional economic policy makers. The obtained results show that decisions related to a more equal distribution of income in Lithuania as a small country are determined not only by the specificity of its regions but also by the general trends of the country.

The problem of income inequality is globally relevant, receiving the attention of both scientists and politicians. Lithuania as a small country has made significant progress in approaching the standard of living in Western Europe. However, there are still differences in economic growth between separate population groups. Thus, the problem of income inequality remains very acute. Currently, researchers are widely discussing the risk of income inequality to the country's society by analysing its causes and proposing various solutions. Although scientific debates address income inequality across regions, such studies are often limited to examples of large countries. Meanwhile, there is a lack of studies on regional income inequality in small countries, so the question of whether a small country is characterised by regional income inequality remains open. This research aims to examine the level of regional income inequality in Lithuania. We hypothesised that Lithuania has a high level of regional income inequality and this is one of the causes of the high income inequality in the whole country. To estimate regional income inequality, we used the most common measures: Gini coefficient, decile ratio, and the coefficient of variation. The analysis was performed at level 3 of the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS), according to which Lithuania is divided into 10 administrative counties. For this research, we chose the indicators illustrating income per capita on various levels, i.e., gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, average disposable household income per capita, and gross hourly wages, as the various types of income can be used. For the estimation of GDP per capita and average disposable household income, we analysed the data provided by the Lithuanian Department of Statistics (Statistics Lithuania) for 2014–2017. Due to a lack of data to estimate gross hourly wages, we examined the statistical data from the Lithuanian Department of Statistics for 2014. The results show that the hypothesis has not been confirmed. According to the research results, there is a small distribution of income between different regions of a small economy, although the level of economic development of different regions differs. The study findings are important not only from an academic perspective for identifying the causes of income inequality and raising questions for further research, but also for regional economic policy makers. The obtained results show that decisions related to a more equal distribution of income in Lithuania as a small country are determined not only by the specificity of its regions but also by the general trends of the country.

The problem of income inequality is globally relevant, receiving the attention of both scientists and politicians. Lithuania as a small country has made significant progress in approaching the standard of living in Western Europe. However, there are still differences in economic growth between separate population groups. Thus, the problem of income inequality remains very acute. Currently, researchers are widely discussing the risk of income inequality to the country's society by analysing its causes and proposing various solutions. Although scientific debates address income inequality across regions, such studies are often limited to examples of large countries. Meanwhile, there is a lack of studies on regional income inequality in small countries, so the question of whether a small country is characterised by regional income inequality remains open. This research aims to examine the level of regional income inequality in Lithuania. We hypothesised that Lithuania has a high level of regional income inequality and this is one of the causes of the high income inequality in the whole country. To estimate regional income inequality, we used the most common measures: Gini coefficient, decile ratio, and the coefficient of variation. The analysis was performed at level 3 of the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS), according to which Lithuania is divided into 10 administrative counties. For this research, we chose the indicators illustrating income per capita on various levels, i.e., gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, average disposable household income per capita, and gross hourly wages, as the various types of income can be used. For the estimation of GDP per capita and average disposable household income, we analysed the data provided by the Lithuanian Department of Statistics (Statistics Lithuania) for 2014–2017. Due to a lack of data to estimate gross hourly wages, we examined the statistical data from the Lithuanian Department of Statistics for 2014. The results show that the hypothesis has not been confirmed. According to the research results, there is a small distribution of income between different regions of a small economy, although the level of economic development of different regions differs. The study findings are important not only from an academic perspective for identifying the causes of income inequality and raising questions for further research, but also for regional economic policy makers. The obtained results show that decisions related to a more equal distribution of income in Lithuania as a small country are determined not only by the specificity of its regions but also by the general trends of the country.

The problem of income inequality is globally relevant, receiving the attention of both scientists and politicians. Lithuania as a small country has made significant progress in approaching the standard of living in Western Europe. However, there are still differences in economic growth between separate population groups. Thus, the problem of income inequality remains very acute. Currently, researchers are widely discussing the risk of income inequality to the country's society by analysing its causes and proposing various solutions. Although scientific debates address income inequality across regions, such studies are often limited to examples of large countries. Meanwhile, there is a lack of studies on regional income inequality in small countries, so the question of whether a small country is characterised by regional income inequality remains open. This research aims to examine the level of regional income inequality in Lithuania. We hypothesised that Lithuania has a high level of regional income inequality and this is one of the causes of the high income inequality in the whole country. To estimate regional income inequality, we used the most common measures: Gini coefficient, decile ratio, and the coefficient of variation. The analysis was performed at level 3 of the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS), according to which Lithuania is divided into 10 administrative counties. For this research, we chose the indicators illustrating income per capita on various levels, i.e., gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, average disposable household income per capita, and gross hourly wages, as the various types of income can be used. For the estimation of GDP per capita and average disposable household income, we analysed the data provided by the Lithuanian Department of Statistics (Statistics Lithuania) for 2014–2017. Due to a lack of data to estimate gross hourly wages, we examined the statistical data from the Lithuanian Department of Statistics for 2014. The results show that the hypothesis has not been confirmed. According to the research results, there is a small distribution of income between different regions of a small economy, although the level of economic development of different regions differs. The study findings are important not only from an academic perspective for identifying the causes of income inequality and raising questions for further research, but also for regional economic policy makers. The obtained results show that decisions related to a more equal distribution of income in Lithuania as a small country are determined not only by the specificity of its regions but also by the general trends of the country.

This article presents the results of a study of new forms of social inequality, as well as the features of their manifestation in modern Russia, carried out by employees of the Department of Modern Sociology of the Sociology Faculty of Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov. Social inequality as a whole is defined as a specific form of social stratification in which individual individuals, social groups, layers or classes are at different levels of the vertical social hierarchy and have unequal opportunities to satisfy their material, social or spiritual needs. Much attention is paid to the analysis of the ideological foundations of global social inequality, which also includes national states in the vertical hierarchy of individuals, social groups, classes, and layers, which are accordingly ranked within the framework of the world community. It is proved that global social inequality is based on "market fundamentalism" — a special type of political thinking that elevates the principles of the "invisible hand of the market" and "non-interference of the state in the economic activities of economic entities" to the level of a totalitarian type of dogma. The practical embodiment of this dogma entails the reproduction of social inequality and extremely unfair social relations on a global scale.Among the forms of global social inequality, the leading role is played by resource inequality, however, along with the resource inequality, relatively new forms of social inequality are quite clearly manifested, which the Swedish sociologist G. Terborn singled out — vital inequality and existential inequality.Vital or biological inequality captures the basic characteristic of human existence, since it refers to categories such as, for example, environment and health. Existential inequality outlines a system of hierarchies based on inclusion / exclusion categories (social inclusion / exclusion). The article discusses in detail the features of the manifestation of all these forms of social inequality both within the world community and in Russia. In addition, a new methodological approach to the analysis of inequality from the standpoint of social constructivism was substantiated, when the question of what constitutes the basis of social inequality was supplemented by the question of how people themselves produce and reproduce social inequality in the usual practices of everyday social life. ; В настоящей статье представлены результаты исследования новых форм социального неравенства, а также особенностей их проявления в современной России, проведенного сотрудниками кафедры современной социологии социологического факультета Московского государственного университета имени М.В. Ломоносова. Социальное неравенство в целом определяется как специфическая форма социальной стратификации, при которой отдельные индивиды, социальные группы, слои или классы находятся на разных ступенях вертикальной социальной иерархии и обладают неравными возможностями удовлетворения своих материальных, социальных или духовных потребностей. Большое внимание уделяется анализу идеологических основ глобального социального неравенства, которое включает в вертикальную иерархию индивидов, социальных групп, классов и слоев также национальные государства, которые соответствующим образом ранжируются в рамках мирового сообщества. Доказан тот факт, что в основе глобального социального неравенства лежит "рыночный фундаментализм" — особый тип политического мышления, возводящий принципы "невидимой руки рынка" и "невмешательства государства в экономическую деятельность хозяйствующих субъектов" на уровень догмы тоталитарного типа. Практическое воплощение данной догмы влечет за собой воспроизводство социального неравенства и крайне несправедливых социальных отношений в глобальном масштабе.Среди форм глобального социального неравенства ведущую роль играет неравенство ресурсное, однако наряду с ресурсным достаточно ярко проявляют себя такие относительно новые формы социального неравенства, которые выделил шведский социолог Г. Терборн — неравенство витальное и неравенство экзистенциальное.Витальное или биологическое неравенство фиксирует базовую характеристику человеческого существования, поскольку обращается к таким категориям, как, например, окружающая среда и здоровье. Экзистенциальное неравенство очерчивает систему иерархий, основанных на категориях включения/исключения (социальной инклюзии/эксклюзии). В статье детально рассматриваются особенности проявления всех этих форм социального неравенства как в рамках мирового сообщества, так и в России. Кроме того, обоснован новый методологический подход к анализу неравенства с позиций социального конструктивизма, когда вопрос о том, что составляет основание социального неравенства, был дополнен вопросом о том, как сами люди производят и воспроизводят социальное неравенство в обычных практиках повседневной социальной жизни.

Educational inequality is constantly in the scope of foreign and Russian scientists alike, however there are differences in the way it is interpreted. If we were to consider education as a system, we could acknowledge the existence of inequality in initial educational opportunities (at the system's gateway), as well as inequality in the education process itself (within the system), and inequality of education results (when transitioning from one stage to the next, or when exiting the system). The goal of this study was to determine the specifics of how territorial factor in a specific type of environment influences educational inequality among children. Part of the study was to verify the suggestion that this factor has been increasing its influence in Russia. Empirical data was collected using focus group and expert interview methods. Adult and adolescent participants of the study were asked questions about the interpretation of educational inequality (how it manifests in schooling), determining factors which affect the reproduction of educational inequality, including whether there is a territorial aspect to how it manifests. Study participants described local features in educational inequality, comparing city and village, large and small towns. The logic of comparing large and small settlements can be traced throughout the remarks of informants of all ages. Children spoke more of inequality within the education system, citing examples such as differences in how schools are equipped, varying level of skill among teachers, differences in the amount of cultural-leisure, educational and other facilities in their settlement. Experts also pointed out examples of educational inequality at the system's "gateways" and "exits", while speaking about socio-cultural and financial capital being possible sources for educational inequality, which from an organizational standpoint is considered by the study participants on the level of school – locale – region. The suggestion that territorial factor currently plays an increased role in reproducing educational inequality needs to be further researched utilizing regional statistical data.

This article singles out the theoretical and methodological principles involved in the analysis of class inequality in the distribution of incomes, as substantiated and applied by Karl Marx in Capital. In the view of the author, this is indispensable for revealing the reasons behind the excessive deepening of the abyss that exists at present between rich and poor, together with the causes of the growth of social tensions on a world level. The "mainstream" provides only a quantitative (that is, superficial) assessment of inequality by means of the familiar coefficients. This information is of value for analytical purposes, but does not reveal the reasons why inequality is growing worse. The article traces the effects of the economic transformations of the post-Soviet period in destroying Russia's industrial potential and polarising its society. The author reiterates Marx's demonstration of the cause of deepening inequality: the intensification of the exploitation of labour by capital; the growth in the oppressiveness of capital, and the expansion of the boundaries and mass of exploited labour as a result of the thirst for enrichment.

Цель – отразить рост социально-экономического неравенства как фактора деконсолидации общества в депрессивном регионе.Методы исследования – сравнительно-сопоставительный анализ, статистические методы, массовый опрос населения.Результаты – изучены особенности риска развития социальной структуры в регионе; представлены новые материалы, свидетельствующие о нарастании социально-экономического неравенства и социального напряжения в обществе: высокие разрывы в дифференциации доходов, уровне и качестве жизни обеспеченного и бедного населения; обозначены социальные слои, наиболее подверженные современным угрозам; отражены последствия социального неравенства, ведущие к дезинтеграции общества.Выводы – у социума региона имеется определенный запас прочности для выживания, но угроза его деконсолидации постепенно нарастает вследствие низкой эффективности системы управления, отчуждения власти от общества, сокращения «поля деятельности» населения из-за стагнации экономики региона, «бегства капитала» и др. ; The article's aim is a study the aspects of social inequality as a factor of society's consolidation in the depressed region.In the article has been used the statistical method and mass surveys.The main results – features of risk of development of social structure in the region are studied; the new materials demonstrating increase of a social and economic inequality and social tension in society are presented: deep gaps in differentiation of the income, level and quality of life of the rich and poor population; social groups, which are mostly subjected to modern threats, are defined; the consequences of a social inequality, which conduct to disintegration of society are reflected.The main conclusions – the region's society has a certain underlying strength for a survival, but the threat of the society deconsolidation gradually increases as a consequence of the poor effectiveness of the governmental system, the estrangement of the authorities from the society, the reduction of the population "field of activity" because of the economic stagnation in the region, "capital flight" and other reasons.

The article considers the legislative norms which consolidated the different
rights and opportunities of parliamentary and non-parliamentary parties of modern
Russia. These restrictions determine unequal position of parties in the political
system. Conclusions made in the article tell about necessity of alignment of the
formal rights of parliamentary and non-parliamentary structures for effective
functioning of the institute of political parties.