ECONOMICS DOI:10.22616/rrd.23.2017.067

DISPARITIES IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RUSSIAN ARCTIC ZONE REGIONS

Irina Efremova1, Nikolay Didenko2, Dmitry Rudenko1, Djamilia Skripnuk2 1Tyumen State University, 2Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, Russia [email protected]

Abstract The paper provides the study of specific spatial conditions of rural development of Arctic zone regions in Russia during 2000 – 2015. The aim of the paper is to propose the methodology for rural development disparities study in the Russian Arctic. Spatial development of the Arctic is described by a system of indicators, reflecting the system of the resettlement, the level and quality of life: total population size, life expectancy at birth, housing stock etc. The extent and nature of disparities, particularly, social and economic disparities within the rural territories of the Arсtic are explained. The assessment has been based on min-max ratio, coefficient of variation as well as Gini index. Eliminating excessive spatial differences in the social development of urban and rural territories of Arctic regions, improving the demographic situation, raising the level and quality of life of the population should be seen as a priority of the state policy in the Arctic in order to make it attractive for living. Key words: Arctic, disparities, inequality, rural development.

Introduction insufficiently that is explained by the lack of local The development of northern territories is data. Thus, the main goal of our paper is to reveal the considered within two opposite approaches: (1) North severity of social and economic development problems as a source of natural resources (a raw appendage of of urban and rural areas of Arctic regions, to assess the Russian economy) and a strategic interests zone spatial development disparities in Russia’s Arctic. of Russia, (2) as the territory with extreme conditions The paper represents the latest attempt to explore the of activity where the need to increase the quality of specific spatial conditions of rural development of life is a more important task than ‘sacrificial work on Arctic zone regions in Russia. Using a regional-level production of resources for the benefit of regions with panel dataset that covers Arctic regions from 2000 favorable climatic conditions’ (Artobolevsky et al., to 2015, we explore the variations in development 2010). The level and quality of life in northern regions indicators over time. do not correspond to the unique natural resources, advantages of geoeconomic and geopolitical character Introduction and do not compensate influence of the extreme climatic The research of territorial distribution features conditions. Due to the increasing geopolitical and of the cities on the example of France was given in geo-economic importance of the Arctic, it is necessary work (Combes et al., 2008), and factors of spatial to pay special attention to problems of sustainable inequality were revealed. The explanation labor development of the Russian circumpolar zone, the migration with the salary, but also non-market factors balanced economic and technical development of the (heterogeneity of preferences of placement in space) polar regions and to the improvement of inhabitant’s is reflected by Tabuchi & Thisse (2001). In later well-being. research, Tabuchi, Thisse, & Zhu (2016) analyzed The negative trends associated with an increase in influence of technological progress in manufacturing inter-regional and intra-regional differentiation, with and transportation together with migration costs a high degree of social disintegration of population, for formation of space. The explanation why skill with a decline in human development are marked in premia is higher in larger cities, how variation in Russia as well as in the Arctic. The Arctic zone of these premia emerges from symmetric fundamentals, Russia with population of 2.4 million people or just 1.7 and why skilled workers have higher migration rates percent of the country’s total produces about 5 percent than unskilled workers when both are fully mobile is of national GDP. Taking it into account the per capita presented in research (Davis & Dingel, 2012). product in all the regions is considerably above the Behrens & Robert-Nikoud (2013, 2014) explained Russia’s average. But the quality of life of inhabitants the interrelation between the city size, productivity does not correspond to high productivity indicators and inequality and found out that income inequality and does not compensate the severe conditions. grows with growth of the cities, and the gain in Disparities of spatial development in Arctic regions productivity promotes growth of the cities at the are shown not only in inequality at the mesolevel, expense of incentives to migration from the rural but in deeper distinctions in the regions - between zone in city. Korchak (2016) analyzed the social the urban and rural areas. Determinants, scales and stability of regions of the North and defined the consequences of intraregional inequality are studied main priority directions of the public social policy in

RESEARCH FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT 2017, VOLUME 2 189 development of the North and the Arctic are reflected in Artobolevsky et al. (2010); features of development and problem of agricultural industry in the North (an example of the ) are reflected in Ivanov et al. (2015). Pilyasov (2009) identified problems of development of the northern periphery, and also a possibility of transition of the North and the Arctic to economy of knowledge that would provide the sustainable development is investigated.

Materials and Methods According to the Russian President’s Decree #296 of 2nd of May 2014, the land areas of the Russian Arctic Zone include the territory of the , Nenets Autonomous , Yamal- and Chukotka, as well as some municipality territories of the Komi Republic, Republic of (Yakutia), and . Since the quality of municipal statistics in Russia is very poor, we will compare the regions as a whole. We have used data for 2000 – 2015 published by Federal State Statistics Service, reflecting the system of resettlement, the level and quality of life of the population in rural territories of the Arctic as empirical base of a research: – total population size is given for resident population covering permanent inhabitants of the given territory, including temporary absentees during the census period. Population comprises urban and rural population according to their place of residence; – life expectancy at birth, is a mean number of years to be lived by a person from a hypothetical cohort, assuming Irina Efremova, Nikolay Didenko, DISPARITIESthe mortality INlevel RURAL for every DEVELOPMENT age remains the OF same THE as in the years for which the rate is calculated; Dmitry Rudenko, Djamilia Skripnuk – housing conditionsRUSSIAN including ARCTIC the ZONE share REGIONS of the housing stock, equipped with heating, hot water, water disposal; – education level of able-bodied population – the population having post-graduate professional, higher professional, incomplete higher professional, secondary vocational, primary vocational, secondary (complete) northern regions of Russia. Zubarevich & Safronov dispersiongeneral, of basic indicators general, is usuallyprimary measured general education, by sample and those without education. (2013) carried out the analysis of social and economic variance,The academic min-max literature ratio, quartile has suggested and percentile a number ratio, of different approaches to test the disparities issue, ranging from simple statistical methods (assessment of the dynamics of the standard deviation) to the use of sophisticated inequality of regions and cities, using the weighed Gini coefficient of variation as well as Gini index. econometric models. The cross-regional dispersion of indicators is usually measured by sample variance, min-max indexes and coefficient of variation. Features of spatial In our analysis, we use coefficient of variation, ratio, quartile and percentile ratio, coefficient of variation as well as Gini index. development of the North and the Arctic are reflected which is given by: In our analysis, we use coefficient of variation, which is given by: in Artobolevsky et al. (2010); features of development and problem of agricultural industry in the North (an CV   y ,, (1) (1) example of the Komi Republic) are reflected in Ivanov WhereWhere σ σ is is standard deviation deviation of ofthe theproposed proposed indicator and y is its mean. et al. (2015). Pilyasov (2009) identified problems of indicator and y is its mean. development of the northern periphery, and also a The Rural Development of the Russian Arctic possibility of transition of the North and the Arctic TheThe Rural extensive Development northern of theterritory Russian is characterizedArctic by a combination of adverse factors (such as extreme climatic to economy of knowledge that would provide the conditions,The extensive backwardness northern territory and high is cost characterized of infrastructure) and unique natural resource and spiritual, and cultural sustainable development is investigated. by potentials;a combination weak of communication adverse factors of(such the asregional extreme and republican centers with the rural periphery; the low number climaticof large conditions, cities which backwardness can carry out and a rolehigh of cost a link of the general social and economic system; dispersion of Materials and Methods of residentialinfrastructure) and ruraland locationsunique natural and the resource centers ofand industrial activity, their considerable remoteness from each other According to the Russian President’s Decree #296 spiritual,and from and thecultural developed potentials; regions weak of communication the country; territorial dispersion of a rural population that creates specific of 2nd of May 2014, the land areas of the Russian of theliving regional conditions and republicanworking in centersbranch; withbackwardness the rural and inaccessibility of transport system; need to use planes and Arctic Zone include the territory of the Murmansk periphery;helicopters the oflow small number aircraft of andlarge hovercrafts; cities which high can transport expenses; worn-out fixed business assets; low level of Oblast, Nenets Autonomous Okrug, Yamal-Nenets carrysocial out arrangement;a role of a linkhigh of ill nessthe generalrate (Pilyasov, social and2009; Lazhentsev, 2010; Lazhentsev & Terentyev, 2011; Savelyev & Titov, 2012; Romashkina, 2015; Simonova, Pogodaeva, & Zhaparova, 2015; Tarasova, 2015; Nalimov & Autonomous Okrug and Chukotka, as well as some economic system; dispersion of residential and rural Rudenko, 2015). municipality territories of the Komi Republic, locations and the centers of industrial activity, their The dynamics of human development index in Russian Arctic regions over the period from 1999 to 2014 is Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), Krasnoyarsk Krai and considerable remoteness from each other and from the Arkhangelsk Oblast. Since the quality of municipal presented in Figure 1. developedFigure 1regions indicates of the that country; the regional territorial differences dispersion have been rapidly decreasing after 2005 due to a weak human statistics in Russia is very poor, we will compare the of development a rural population dynamics that in the creates leading specific Tyumen living Oblast and remarkable progress in other Arctic regions during the regions as a whole. conditions2000th. Theworking reason infor branch;this convergence backwardness is the strong and redistributive policy (mainly social) and a profound economic We have used data for 2000 – 2015 published by inaccessibilitygrowth. Negative of transport character system; of a need demographic to use planes situation is a strong barrier of development of Arctic territories. Federal State Statistics Service, reflecting the system andDemographic helicopters of development small aircraft in and Russian hovercrafts; Arctic highis characterized by a decrease in total number of the population; of resettlement, the level and quality of life of the transportreduction expenses; of specific worn-out weight fixed of a businessrural population, assets; low high mortality rate, migration outflow. Decrease in demographic population in rural territories of the Arctic as empirical levelpotential, of social especially arrangement; in the high rural illness areas, rate promotes (Pilyasov, a sharpening of social and demographic risks of the region that base of a research: 2009;involves Lazhentsev, problems 2010; with reproduction Lazhentsev &of population Terentyev, and manpower (Bulayev & Gorina, 2013). – total population size is given for resident 2011; Savelyev & Titov, 2012; Romashkina, 2015; population covering permanent inhabitants Simonova, Pogodaeva, & Zhaparova, 2015; Tarasova, of the given territory, including temporary 2015; Nalimov & Rudenko, 2015). absentees during the census period. Population The dynamics of human development index in comprises urban and rural population according Russian Arctic regions over the period from 1999 to to their place of residence; 2014 is presented in Figure 1. – life expectancy at birth, is a mean number of Figure 1 indicates that the regional differences years to be lived by a person from a hypothetical have been rapidly decreasing after 2005 due to a weak cohort, assuming the mortality level for every human development dynamics in the leading Tyumen age remains the same as in the years for which Oblast and remarkable progress in other Arctic regions the rate is calculated; during the 2000th. The reason for this convergence is – housing conditions including the share of the the strong redistributive policy (mainly social) and housing stock, equipped with heating, hot a profound economic growth. Negative character water, water disposal; of a demographic situation is a strong barrier of – education level of able-bodied population – the development of Arctic territories. Demographic population having post-graduate professional, development in Russian Arctic is characterized by a higher professional, incomplete higher decrease in total number of the population; reduction professional, secondary vocational, primary of specific weight of a rural population, high mortality vocational, secondary (complete) general, rate, migration outflow. Decrease in demographic basic general, primary general education, and potential, especially in the rural areas, promotes a those without education. sharpening of social and demographic risks of the The academic literature has suggested a number region that involves problems with reproduction of of different approaches to test the disparities issue, population and manpower (Bulayev & Gorina, 2013). ranging from simple statistical methods (assessment Russia overcame the depopulation phase, which of the dynamics of the standard deviation) to the use of was characterized by high mortality and low birth sophisticated econometric models. The cross-regional rates or so called ‘Russian cross’, only in 2012. The

190 RESEARCH FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT 2017, VOLUME 2 [TypeDISPARITIES here] IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE Irina Efremova, Nikolay Didenko, RUSSIAN ARCTIC ZONE REGIONS Dmitry Rudenko, Djamilia Skripnuk

0.95 7

6 0.9 5

0.85 4

3 0.8

2 variation of Coefficient Human development index development Human 0.75 1

0.7 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Komi Republic Sakha Republic Krasnoyarsk Krai Arkhangelsk Oblast Murmansk Oblast Tyumen Oblast (incl. Yamal) Chukotka Coefficient of variation (right axis)

Figure 1. HumanFigure development 1. Human index development and its variation index and in the its Russianvariation Arctic in the zone. Russian Arctic zone.

Russiasituation overcame in the Russian the depopulation Arctic remains phase, constant which –was the characterized the effects by of highreduced mortality birth rateand inlow the birth 1990s rates can or beso calledpopulation ‘Russian is leaving cross’, theonly Arctic. in 2012. A slight The situationincrease in theobserved Russian rightArctic now. remains First constantof all, this – theis expressed population in is leavingthe number the Arctic. of inhabitants A slight increasefor the last in theyear number could ofbe inhabitants the aging for population the last year and could the begrowing observed shortage only in ofthe mostobserved prosperous only Nenetsin the andmost Yamal-Nenets prosperous Nenets Autonomous and Okrugspersonnel (Table in the 1). Russiaeconomy. still The has theaggravation largest number of the of ArcticYamal-Nenets inhabitants, Autonomous but unlike OkrugsCanada, (Table the USA 1). andRussia Norway demographic that number situation is ‘melting’. in the Arctic was also due to Table 1 still has the largest number of Arctic inhabitants, but the high level of mortality. The death rate increased The population of the Russian Arctic regions unlike Canada, the USA and Norway that number is from 6.7 per 1000 population in 1990 to 13.4 in 2003

‘melting’. and then gradually began to decline, amounting to 1 January 2014 1 January 2015 NegativeRegion trends in reproductive processes in the 10.4 per 1000 population in 2013. Existing differences total urban rural total urban rural Arctic as well as in Russia sharpened in the 1990s. in socio-economic, environmental, geographical and The Arctic zone of Russia 2 400 580 2 143 047 257 533 2 391 631 2 135 359 256 272 By the period of 1990 – 1999 the total fertility rate other factors of the Arctic regions define different Komi Republic 84 707 84 210 497 82 953 82 481 472 in Russia on average fell from 1.89 to 1.16. Since trends in population reproduction processes there. The Arkhangelsk Oblast 656 624 608 040 48 584 655 100 606 986 48 114 2000 a revival began – the birth rate began to rise. rate of natural increase and migration increase are the Nenets Autonomous Okrug 43 025 30 478 12 547 43 373 31 118 12 255 Currently, only in the Murmansk region, the birth rate most common characteristics of the intensity of the Murmansk Oblast 771 058 714 445 56 613 766 281 709 548 56 733 lags behind the Russian average values. However, population reproduction process. Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug 539 671 452 569 87 102 539 985 452 570 87 415 Krasnoyarsk Krai 228 493 205 746 22 747 227 205 204 942 22 263 Sakha Republic 26 447 13 449 12 998 26 194 13 192 13Table 002 1 Chokotka Autonomous Okrug The50 population555 34of the110 Russian 16 Arctic 445 regions50 540 34 522 16 018

Negative trends in reproductive processes in the Arctic1 January as well2014 as in Russia sharpened 1in January the 1990s. 2015 By the period Region of 1990 – 1999 the total fertility rate in Russiatotal on averageurban fell fromrural 1.89 to 1.16.total Since 2000urban a revival beganrural – the birthThe rate Arctic began zone toof rise.Russia Currently, only2 400in the 580 Murmansk 2 143 047 region, 257 the 533 birth rate2 391 lags 631 behind2 135 the 359 Russian 256 average272 values. However, the effects of reduced birth rate in the 1990s can be observed right now. First of all, this is expressedKomi Republic in the aging population and the84 growing 707 shortage84 210 of personnel497 in the82 economy.953 82The 481 aggravation 472 of the demographicArkhangelsk situation Oblast in the Arctic was656 also 624 due to the608 high040 level48 of 584 mortality. 655 T 100he death 606 rate 986 increased 48 from114 6.7 perNenets 1000 Autonomous population Okrugin 1990 to 13.4 in 432003 025 and then30 478gradually 12 began 547 to decline,43 373 amounting31 118 to 10.412 per 255 1000 populationMurmansk in Oblast 2013. Existing differences771 in socio058 -economic,714 445 environmental,56 613 geographical766 281 709and 548 other factors56 733 of the Arctic regions define different trends in population reproduction processes there. The rate of natural increase and migrationYamalo-Nenets increase Autonomous are the most Okrug common539 characteristic 671 452s 569of the intensity87 102 of the539 population 985 452reproduction 570 87process. 415 DuringKrasnoyarsk the 2000 Kraith the situation with the natural228 493 increase 205 in 746 the group22 of 747 Arctic regions227 205 was complicated.204 942 All22 263 regions hadSakha positive Republic dynamics of the indicator, which26 447 fully corresponds13 449 to12 the 998 national 26 trends. 194 Three13 192autonomous 13 002 regions andChokotka Sakha Republic Autonomous (Yakutia) Okrug have experienced50 555 the population34 110 increase16 445 for the50 entire 540 period,34 522 while on 16average 018 in Russia a decrease of the population took place. Only in 2013 the crude birth rate exceeded the crude death rate in

RESEARCH FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT 2017, VOLUME 2 191 Irina Efremova, Nikolay Didenko, DISPARITIES IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE Dmitry Rudenko, Djamilia Skripnuk RUSSIAN ARCTIC ZONE REGIONS

During the 2000th the situation with the managed to increase life expectancy up to 72 years natural increase in the group of Arctic regions was for both sexes. Although it is higher than the Russian complicated. All regions had positive dynamics average (71 year in 2014 for both sexes), the potential of the indicator, which fully corresponds to the for growth in life expectancy is enormous comparing national trends. Three autonomous regions and Sakha it with 78 years in Alaska or 75 years in Canadian Republic (Yakutia) have experienced the population territories including Yukon, Northwest Territories increase for the entire period, while on average in and Nunavut. Taking into account the hard situation Russia a decrease of the population took place. Only in Chukotka Autonomous Okrug (62.3 years for both Russia. The data indicate that the demographic situation in different regions of the new industrial development, in 2013 the crude birth rate exceeded the crude death sexes), reserves to increase the life expectancy in suchRussia. as Yamal-Nenets, The data indicate Nenets that and the Chukotkademographic AO, situation the prevalence in different of ‘young’ regions population of the new structure industrial and development, high levels rate in Russia. The data indicate that the demographic the Arctic can be evaluated to more than 15 years – ofsuch income as Yamal-Nenets, provide a steady Nenets natural and increase. Chukotka AO, the prevalence of ‘young’ population structure and high levels situation in different regions of the new industrial the break for a whole historical period. Analysis in Theof incomeweakest provide component a steady of human natural developmentincrease. in the Arctic is a very low life expectancy at birth. Only one development,region,The weakest Yamalo-Nenets such component as Yamal-Nenets,Autonomous of human Okrug,development Nenets has andmanaged in theterms toArctic increase of infant is a life verymortality expectancy low life shows expectancyup tothe 72 same years at significantforbirth. both Only sexes. one ChukotkaAlthoughregion, AO,Yamalo-Nenets it is the higher prevalence than Autonomous the of Russian ‘young’ Okrug, average population has (71 managed yeardifferentiation in to2014 increase for both life with expectancysexes), the the gap potentialup to between 72 yearsfor growth leadingfor both in sexes. Yamal life structureexpectancyAlthough and isithigh isenormous higher levels than ofcomparing income the Russian provideit with average 78 a steadyyears (71 in yearAlaskaand inlosing or2014 75 Chukotka yearsfor both in Canadianbeingsexes), 5 thetimes. territories potential The indicatorincluding for growth of Yukon, a in life naturalNorthwestexpectancy increase. Territories is enormous and comparingNunavut. Taking it with into78 years account inlife Alaska the expectancy hard or situation75 years at birth in ChukotkaCanadian in rural areas territoriesAutonomous is 5.17 including years Okrug less Yukon,(62.3 yearsNorthwestThe forweakest both Territories sexes),component reserves and of Nunavut. human to increase development Taking the intolife expectancyinaccount than the in in hardthe the urban situationArctic (Fig. can in 2 beChukotka and evaluated 3) ones. Autonomous to more than Okrug 15 years (62.3 the– yearsArctic the break for is botha very for sexes),a low whole life reserves expectancy historical to increase period. at birth. the Analysis Onlylife expectancy in termsThe in very of the infant Arcticlow expectancy mortality can be evaluated shows of life the to inmore same Chukotka than significant 15 years onedifferentiation– region, the break Yamalo-Nenets forwith a the whole gap Autonomous historicalbetween leading period. Okrug, Yamal Analysis has andis in losingexplained terms Chukotka of by infant the being mortalitygrowing 5 times. showssuicide The the indicatorrates same in significantofthe a life expectancydifferentiation at birth with in therural gap areas between is 5.17 leading years less Yamal than andin the losing urban Chukotka (Fig. 2 and being 3) ones. 5 times. The indicator of a life expectancy at birth in rural areas is 5.17 years less than in the urban (Fig. 2 and 3) ones. 75. 12 75. 12 70. 10 70. 10 65. 65. 8 60. 8 60. 6 55. 6 55. 4 50. 4 50. 45, 2 variation of Coefficient

2 variation of Coefficient Life Life expactancy at birth,years 45,

40 Life expactancy at birth,years .. 0 40..2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 0 2000 2001Republic2002 2003 of Komi2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Republic2011 of2012 Sakha2013 (Yakutia)2014 2015 KrasnoyarskRepublic of Territory Komi ArkhangelskRepublic of Region Sakha (Yakutia) NenetsKrasnoyarsk Area Territory MurmanskArkhangelsk Regions Region Yamal-NenetsNenets Area Area ChukotkaMurmansk Area Regions CVYamal-Nenets Area Chukotka Area CV FigureFigure 2. Life 2. Lifeexpectancy expectancy at birth at birth (years) (years) and itsand variation its variation in the in Russian the Russian Arctic Arctic zone zone (rural (rural areas). areas). Figure 2. Life expectancy at birth (years) and its variation in the Russian Arctic zone (rural areas). 75. 5 75. 5 4 70. 4 70. 3 65. 3 65. 2 2 60.

60. 1 variation of Coefficient

1 variation of Coefficient Life Life expectancy at birth,years

55 Life expectancy at birth,years . 0 55. 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Republic of Komi Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) KrasnoyarskRepublic of Territory Komi ArkhangelskRepublic of Region Sakha (Yakutia) NenetsKrasnoyarsk Area Territory MurmanskArkhangelsk Regions Region Yamal-NenetsNenets Area Area ChukotkaMurmansk Area Regions CVYamal-Nenets Area Chukotka Area CV Figure 3. Life expectancy at birth (years) and its variation in the Russian Arctic zone (urban areas). FigFigureure 3. 3.Life Life expectancy expectancy at atbirth birth (years) (years) and and its itsvariation variation in inthe the Russian Russian Arctic Arctic zone zone (urban (urban areas) areas).. The very low expectancy of life in Chukotka is explained by the growing suicide rates in the region. The problem ofThe suicides very lowespecially expectancy among of thelife youngin Chukotka population is explained of Arctic by regionsthe growing arose suicide several rates decades in the ago region. and reachedThe problem the peakof suicides in the second especially half ofamong the 1990th. the young population of Arctic regions arose several decades ago and reached the 192Thepeak lack in ofthe access second to half education of the 1990th.or healthcare isRESEARCH also a key factor FOR RURALof well-being DEVELOPMENT (Rudenko & 2017, Didenko, VOLUME 2016). 2 The ArcticThe lackregions of access as well to as education all Russian or subjects healthcare are ischaracterized also a key factor by imbalanced of well-being development (Rudenko of & separate Didenko, components 2016). The ofArctic the human regions development as well as all index. Russian In thesubjects majority are characterizedof northern regions by imbalanced the social development infrastructure of separateis characterized components by theof high the humanlevel of development unevenness ofindex. development, In the majority low level of northern of availability regions of the services social andinfrastructure their limitation, is characterized besides, the by remotethe high rural level areas of unevennessare in most ofcases development, characterized low by level lack of of availability objects of ofa social services infrastructure. and their limitation, In development besides, of the infrastructureremote rural theareas significant are in most gap cases between characterized rural and urban by lack areas of objectsprevails. of In a socialthe rural infrastructure. areas of Arctic In developmentregions, there of infrastructure the significant gap between rural and urban areas prevails. In the rural areas of Arctic regions, there

DISPARITIES IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE Irina Efremova, Nikolay Didenko, RUSSIAN ARCTIC ZONE REGIONS Dmitry Rudenko, Djamilia Skripnuk region. The problem of suicides especially among Conclusions the young population of Arctic regions arose several An access to health care, opportunities for decades ago and reached the peak in the second half education and development of skills, the level of of the 1990th. comfort of housing remain low in the Russian Arctic. The lack of access to education or healthcare The paradox of human development in resource- is also a key factor of well-being (Rudenko & rich regions is the lack of infrastructure, high social Didenko, 2016). The Arctic regions as well as all inequality (in all its forms – money, property, gender, Russian subjects are characterized by imbalanced etc.), which leads to lower social well-being of citizens development of separate components of the human against the background of high incomes. development index. In the majority of northern Thus, regions wholly or partly related to the Arctic regions the social infrastructure is characterized by the zone of the Russian Federation are characterized by high level of unevenness of development, low level of the following specifics: complicated demographic availability of services and their limitation, besides, situation with high levels of population loss; the the remote rural areas are in most cases characterized extremely low supply of health infrastructure, by lack of objects of a social infrastructure. In especially in rural areas; aging of the population; a development of infrastructure the significant gap high mortality rate, as well as an excess of mortality between rural and urban areas prevails. In the rural over births; increased alcohol consumption; the areas of Arctic regions, there is insufficiently high lack of qualified personnel; low level provision of level and availability of social services, insufficient housing and social services (health, education, care security of inhabitants with doctors, average medical for the elderly, etc.); weak development of transport personnel, low level of coverage of children with infrastructure, especially in the remote and isolated preschool education (in particular indigenous ethnic areas. groups of the North) due to the lack of incentives, The study reported here use official up-to-date data and also low transport availability (Toropushina, from the whole range of Arctic regions of Russia. The 2009; Rudenko & Morosova, 2015). The network empirical results confirm that the Arctic regions are of highways with a hard coating averages in the characterized by sharp disparities of qualitative and north of 72.1 percent, a gap between maximum quantitative social development parameters between (Murmansk region – 94.1 percent) and minimum urban and rural areas. The policy implications that (Chukotka Autonomous Okrug – 31.4 percent) values follow are to eliminate excessive spatial differences in of this indicator made 3 times. To compare this area the social development of urban and rural territories with, other Russian regions, the minimum value of of Arctic regions. specific weight of roads with a hard coating inthe general density of public roads of federal, regional Acknowledgements or intermunicipal and local importance constituted The paper is based on research carried out with 51 percent, in the north of the 2th region (Republic the financial support of the grant of the Russian of Sakha – 40.6 percent, the Chukotka Autonomous Science Foundation (Project No. 14-38-00009, The Okrug – 31.4 percent) are characterized by values program-targeted management of the Russian Arctic on this indicator below minimum on other regions of zone development). Peter the Great St. Petersburg Russia. Polytechnic University.

References 1. Artobolevsky, S., Baranov, S., Barasheva, T., Bashmakova, E., Vasilyev, A., Vinogradova, S., … Shpak, A. (2010). North and the Arctic in the spatial development of Russia: a scientific and analytical report. - Apatity - Syktyvkar: Publishing house KSC RAS. 2. Behrens, K., & Robert-Nicoud, F. (2013). Survival of the Fittest in Cities: Urbanisation and Inequality. Universite de Geneve (WPS 13-07-4). 3. Behrens, K., & Robert-Nicoud, F. (2014). Agglomeration Theory with Heterogeneous Agents. Universite de Geneve (WPS 14-09-6). 4. Bulayev, V., & Gorina, K. (2013). Vosproizvodstvennyj potencial gorodskogo i selskogo naseleniya Zabajkalskogo kraya (Reproduction potential of an urban and rural population of Zabaykalsky Krai). Sociologicheskie issledovaniya. 12, 95 – 99. (in Russian). 5. Combes, P.-P., Lafourcade, M., Thisse J.-F., & Toutain J.-C. (2008). The rise and fall of spatial inequalities in France: A long-run perspective. Paris-Jourdan Sciences Economiques Laboratoire d’Economie Appliquee – INRA (PSE Working Papers n2008-54). 6. Davis, D., & Dingel, J.I. (2012). A Spatial Knowledge Economy. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research. (NBER Working Paper No. 18188).

RESEARCH FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT 2017, VOLUME 2 193 Irina Efremova, Nikolay Didenko, DISPARITIES IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE Dmitry Rudenko, Djamilia Skripnuk RUSSIAN ARCTIC ZONE REGIONS

7. Ivanov, V., Lazhentsev, V., Ponomareva, A., & Terentyev, V. (2013). Razvitie agrarnogo sektora severnogo regiona (Development of the agricultural sector of the Northern Region). EKO. Vserossijskij ekonomicheskij zhurnal. 12, 113 – 129. (in Russian). 8. Korchak, E. (2016). Dinamika socialnoj ustojchivosti i uroven zhizni naseleniya regionov Severa Rossii (Dynamics of social stability and level of living of the population of regions of the North of Russia). EKO. Vserossijskij ekonomicheskij zhurnal. 3, 80 – 95. (in Russian). 9. Lazhentsev, V. (2010). Socialno-ekonomicheskie problemy Severa Rossii (Social and economic problems of Russian North). EKO. Vserossijskij ekonomicheskij zhurnal. 12, 40 – 53. (in Russian). 10. Lazhentsev, V., & Terentyev, V. (2011). Problemy i prioritety socialnoj politiki ustojchivogo razvitiya selskih territorij (na primere Respubliki Komi) (Problems and priorities of social policy of sustainable development of rural territories (on the example of the Komi Republic)). Ekonomika regiona. 4, 213 – 223. (in Russian). 11. Nalimov, P., & Rudenko, D. (2015). Socio-economic Problems of the Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug Development. Procedia: Economics and Finance, 24, 543 – 549. DOI: 10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00629-2. 12. Pilyasov, A. (2009). I poslednie stanut pervymi: Severnaya periferiya na puti k ekonomike znaniya (And the last will become the first: The northern periphery on the way to knowledge economy). Moscow: Book House «LIBROKOM». (in Russian). 13. Romashkina, G. (2015). Modernization processes in the regions of Urals federal district. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya. 1, 19 – 26. 14. Rudenko, D., & Didenko, N. (2016). The System of Well-being Indicators in the Russian Arctic Regions. 2nd International Scientific Symposium on Lifelong Wellbeing in the World, 18 – 22 May 2015. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences. 7, 514 – 521. 15. Rudenko, D., & Morosova, E. (2015). Prospects for the Development of Further Vocational Education in the Tyumen Region of Russia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 214, 693 – 699. 16. Savelyev, Yu., & Titov, A. (2012). Novaya model regionalnogo razvitiya rossijskogo Severa (New model of regional growth of the Russian North). EKO. Vserossijskij ekonomicheskij zhurnal. 7, 95 – 101. (in Russian). 17. Simonova, L., Pogodaeva, T., & Zhaparova, D. (2015). Up The Down Staircase Or How To Improve A Rating. International Conference on Applied Economics (Icoae). 24, 652 – 658. 18. Tabuchi, T., & Thisse, J-F. (2001). Taste heterogeneity, labor mobility and economic geography. Universite catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE) (CORE Discussion Papers 2001044). 19. Tabuchi, T., Thisse, J-F., & Zhu, X. (2016). Does Technological Progress Magnify Regional Disparities? Chiba: Institute of Developing Economies (IDE), JETRO (IDE discussion paper № 599). 20. Tarasova, A. (2015). On measurement of modernization stages (by the example of the Tyumen region). Civilization and Modernization, 183 – 187. 21. Toropushina, E. (2009). Socialnaya infrastruktura arkticheskih regionov (Social infrastructure of the Arctic regions). EKO. Vserossijskij ekonomicheskij zhurnal. 8, 120 – 134. (in Russian). 22. Zubarevich, N., & Safronov, S. (2013). Neravenstvo socialno-ekonomicheskogo razvitiya regionov i gorodov Rossii 2000-h godov: rost ili snizhenie? (Inequality of social and economic development of regions and cities of Russia of the 2000th years: growth or decrease?). Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost. 6, 15 – 26. (in Russian).

194 RESEARCH FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT 2017, VOLUME 2