XIII Международная студенческая научная конференция Студенческий научный форум - 2021

Introduction

Transformational processes in Russian economy resulted in significant consequences of social structure and escalated the inconsistency of market institutionalization in terms of population's social mobility. This tendency manifested itself in following aspects: on the one hand the demand on qualified labor force rose in local-territorial economic "point of growth", and on the other hand the number of factors increased which strengthen uncertainty of prospects associated with professional and social status of workers in general. Hence the negative tendencies increased in Russian social-economic environment, in regional labor markets and in framework of social mobility processes associated with them, being distinct in educational grade and qualification of state's human potential. Therefore the factors of social mobility institutionalization should be studied to specify mechanisms for more balanced social development. Factors of people's social mobility institutionalization process in modern conditions are defined: firstly, by social mobility types; secondly, by social mobility channels; thirdly, by appreciation of these factors in public consciousness as moving stimuli and motives of individual status change.

Role of social mobility types and channels

Sorokin P.A. distinguished and described the types of social mobility in his work "Social mobility":

1. Horizontal social mobility is a moving of individual (or group) within one social layer without social status ing change. For example, change of occupation, place of residence etc.

2. Vertical social mobility is a moving of individual (or group) within stratified structure without social status being change. Depending on moving direction there are ascending and descending stream.

Ascending social mobility is the most interesting one followed by social status growth, in other words promotion within stratified structure of society due to social mobility channels. Under the latter one should understand social institutes which influence individuals and whole groups in ascending (to the corresponding extent) the social ladder . They are: family, education, economic and political organizations, military, church. Their activity is not isolated but combined with each other. Certainly the intensity and way of social mobility channels' functioning are the main indicators of "social" health.

Availability of social mobility channels depends not only on individual but on the society structure he lives in. Modern societies give their members a possibility to easily climb the carrier ladder depending on individual abilities. Though there are certain social groups with difficult access due to their closeness and obstacles made on the way of other social groups' representatives. Ways of achieving the higher status may be closed due to ethnic or social and class discrimination as well, or due to individual's personal peculiarities making his talents difficult to use.

The quickest and the most available social mobility channel is education which enables individuals to get highpaid job and to ascend the carrier ladder quickly (under other favorable conditions), with the ascending being obligatory to move every scale of social hierarchy.

A lot of works by national and foreign scientist are devoted to study of dynamics and intensity typical of people's social mobility processes. These works studied wide circle of demographical, social and economic problems, political relationships, and development of different economical forms.

Class structure and social stratification analysis in Russian pre-revolutionary, soviet and post-soviet researches is interesting because of few aspects.

The problem of classes and social stratification are the most interesting ones in pre-revolutionary Russia from the end of 60s of XIX century and to Publishing House "ANALITIKA RODIS" 81 Institutionalization factors of social and economic mobility of Russian population 1917 due to the risen influence of social democrats, Marxists, as it was the Marx theory to describe the class struggle as moving power in history. In debates with representatives of the Marx theory the other directions were noticed taking into account problems of working class due to rural community collapse in times of Stolypin reforms.

In first years of soviet government the fair study of social structure and class stratification became practically impossible because of heated ideological conflicts which later resulted in repressions under slogan of "class struggle escalation in building of socialism", and sociology was called "bourgeois science".

In 1960s (during the period of the "Krushchev Thaw") attempts are made to resume studies in these fields, but the tough ideological control dictated the distinct social structure of soviet society, where there were two classes (workers and peasants) and intellectual layer. Later this paradigm began to widen as results of empiric studies were not covered by the frameworks given.

Neutral study of social stratification without ideological tension began in period of "glasnost" and "perestroika" in the end of 80s – the beginning of 90s XX. But later market reforms initiated a wide range of specific problems in Russia, with the necessity of extending and adapting classical theories having been raised to explain the processes in question.

Dramatic changes in economy, new forms of ownership unavoidably resulted in changes of social structure as well. Social form of all social institutes – economic, political, cultural institutes, ownership and power changed. The great social turnover took place, with the social foundations and regulators to shape social structure having been transformed. New layers and social and structural establishments appeared: entrepreneurs, managers, farmers, hired workers, unemployed etc. The problems of social and wealth inequalities with features of class contradictions and conflicts became of the primal importance. The issue rose to find a theory which would properly explain the ongoing transformation of Russian social structure.

Since the end of 90s of previous century many researches began focusing on criteria of authorities in frames of social stratification, as it had a special 82 Economics: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow. 1-2`2013 Melan'ina Mariya Vyacheslavovna impact in Russia4. One who had power had an access to privileges, wealth and prestige. The interest also rose in study of Russian society's elite (V. Shubkin, Y. Levada)5. Today Levada-Centre studies actively the public opinion in these directions and within a wide circle of related issues6.

Role of public opinion

Factors of social and economical mobility are institutionalized not only through traditional channels of individual's movement in society (education, military, authorities etc.), but they also get a foothold in priority of some factor in public consciousness, being reflected in public opinion in turn.Public opinion is a value judgment, unities of knowledge and judgment on issues vital for economic subject. Practically each public judgment of actions is an unconscious process, less accurate and has a poor structure, being influenced by emotions. Multi-attributive features of social mobility factors show that the individuals' attitude to social mobility consists of three components:

– cognitive (awareness of the factors and social mobility channels);

– affective (feelings and emotional reactions of individuals on their social status changes etc.);

– conative (behavior intentions determined by values of individuals' group on different decisions taken by representatives of different target individuals' groups; disposition to react in certain way on company and everything connected with it). Therefore social mobility factors after being reflected in public opinion Publishing House "ANALITIKA RODIS" 83 Institutionalization factors of social and economic mobility of Russian population tablish a comprehensive analytical indicator of social self-identification which shows sinuous dynamics in its different dimensions in frameworks of cognitive, affective and conative aspects. So, social self-identification of Russians was studied in terms of main mobility factors (such as education, profession, qualification, necessary contacts, job, rate of wages, political authority etc.) in 2002-20068. Results showed the increase of respondents' self-identification in frameworks of education, necessary contacts and jobs, income levels and rate of wages. The value of respondents' self-identification decreased in terms of profession, qualification, political factor. One should notice that there is a certain regulatory in this divide shown by the rise of selfesteem associated with education factor on the one hand and the decrease of self-esteem connected with competitive parts of social mobility factors. In general value of all factors in public opinion slightly increased showing grown but insufficient valuation of social mobility in Russians' public opinion. Overall one may argue that Russian mostly trust to non-formal factors of social mobility than formal. It shows the insufficient level of population's adaptation to changing environment and choice of corresponding directions and factors of social mobility in civil society.

As far as the self-identification of Russian on their belonging to a certain layer is concerned, according to the results of the Levada-Centre's study9 published in January 2012 the majority of Russians relate themselves to the middle-class (in spite of the low income), among them: to the lower part of middle class layer 33 %, to the middle part of middle class layer 47 %, and to the higher part of middle class layer 5 %. Experts consider these indicators to be seriously overestimated. It may be connected with the uncertainty of criteria to evaluate the middle class in Russia, as well as with a shift of concepts, definitions and selfidentification. It is especially noticeable in frames of comparable international comparisons and definitions given by The World Bank, according to which average monthly income of middle class representative starts from $3500.

Conclusion

Using different approaches, researches try to get the full landscape of social and stratified model associated with transforming Russian society. Modern science has a wide range of social mobility concepts. At the same time the main issue is the necessity to choose from these theories the one being mostly usable for the modern Russian situation analysis with its contradictions and social conflicts. This time regardless of its direction the mobility increases gap between two different social groups and contributes to the social relationships escalation.

Analyzing factors of populations' social and economic mobility institutionalization leads to the necessity of comprehensive study for modern transformation processes in terms of social structure; the peculiarities of modern processes in Russia social and economic environment should be also taken into account.

References

1. Frolov, S.S. (2011), General Sociology: textbook [Obshchaya sotsiologinad chertoi bednosti"], available at: www.rb.ru/article/sredniy-klass-v-rossii-eto-nadchertoy-bednosti/6805177.html ya: Uchebnik], Prospekt, Moscow, 384 p.

2. Golenkova, Z.T., Igitkhanyan, E.D., "Social structure of society: in the search for adequate responses" ["Sotsial'naya struktura obshchestva: v poiskakh adekvatnykh otvetov"], SotsIS, available at: www.isras.ru/ socis_2008_7.html

3. Gorshkov, M.K. (1988), Public opinion: Past and Present [Obshchestvennoe mnenie: Istoriya i sovremennost'], Politizdat, Moscow, 383 p.

4. Levada, Yu.A. (1994), "The elite and the "mass" in public opinion: the problem of Social elite" ["Elita I "massa" v obshchestvennom mnenii: problema cotsial'noi elity"], Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskie i sotsial'nye peremeny. Informatsionnyi byulleten', No. 6, pp. 7-11.

5. Levada-Tsentr, available at: www.levada.ru

6. Levashov, V.K. (2006), Civil Society in Contemporary Russia (sociological dimension) [Grazhdanskoe obshchestvo v sovremennoi Rossii (sotsiologicheskie izmereniya)], ISPI RAN, Moscow, 52 p.

7. "Middle class in Russia – above the poverty line" ["Srednii klass v Rossii – eto nad chertoi bednosti"], Publishing House "ANALITIKA RODIS" 85 Institutionalization factors of social and economic mobility of Russian population available at: www.rb.ru/article/sredniy-klass-v-rossii-eto-nad-chertoybednosti/6805177.html

8. Radaev, V.V., Shkaratan, O.I. (1996), Social stratification: study guide [Sotsial'naya stratifikatsiya: Ucheb. posobie], Aspekt Press, Moscow, 318 p.

9. "Russians identify themselves as a middle class society" ["Rossiyane otnosyat sebya k srednemu sloyu obshchestva"], Levada-Tsentr, available at: www.levada.ru/23-01-2012/ rossiyane-otnosyat-sebya-k-srednemu-sloyu-obshchestva

10. Shubkin, V.N. (1995), "Clubbish set of Siberia" ["Vlastvuyushchie elity Sibiri"], Sotsiologicheskii zhurnal, No. 1, pp. 147-155. 11. Sorokin, P.A., Sokolova, M.V. (2005), Social mobility [Sotsial'naya mobil'nost'], Academia, LVS, Moscow, 588 p.

Код для цитирования: Скопировать