CC BY
1■_
ДОХОДЫ НАСЕЛЕНИЯ И ОПЛАТА ТРУДА / INCOMES AND SALARIES
ORIGINAL PAPER
DOI: 10.34022/2658-3712-2024-56-3-84-96
УДК 331.2
JEL J11; J18; J31
THE WELL-BEING OF RUSSIAN HOUSEHOLDS IN THE CONTEXT OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT (CASE OF VOLGA FEDERAL DISTRICT)
O.V. Selivanova, A.A. Razumov
All-Russian Research Institute of Labor, Moscow, Russia
ABSTRACT
The article considers theoretical, methodological and methodological approaches to the definition and measurement of poverty, taking into account international and Russian experience. The connection between the specific socio-economic circumstances of different regions in Russia and poverty levels is highlighted. The aim of the research is to investigate the characteristics of regional poverty and public administration strategies aimed at reducing it. Research methods include the dialectical method of inquiry, a systematic approach, structural analysis, a comparative perspective, methods for processing statistical information, and general scientific methods of cognition (analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, abstraction, and specification, etc.). Research results: during the examination of regional poverty reduction programs in the subjects of the Russian Federation, the main indicators of socio-economic and demographic development were analyzed.
Keywords: poverty; living wage; income of the population; the working poor; social assistance; regional programs.
For citation: Selivanova O.V., Razumov A.A. The well-being of russian households in the context of regional development (case of Volga Federal District). Social and labor research. 2024;56(3):84-96. DOI: 10.34022/2658-3712-2024-56-3-84-96.
ОРИГИНАЛЬНАЯ СТАТЬЯ
МАТЕРИАЛЬНОЕ ПОЛОЖЕНИЕ РОССИИСКИХ ДОМОХОЗЯЙСТВ В КОНТЕКСТЕ РАЗВИТИЯ РЕГИОНОВ (НА ПРИМЕРЕ ПРИВОЛЖСКОГО ФЕДЕРАЛЬНОГО ОКРУГА)
О.В. Селиванова, А.А. Разумов
Всероссийский научно-исследовательский институт труда, Москва, Россия
АННОТАЦИЯ
В статье рассмотрены теоретико-методологические и методические подходы к определению и измерению бедности с учетом международного и российского опыта. Выявлена взаимосвязь между особенностями социально-экономического развития территорий России и уровнем бедности. Целью работы является изучение особенностей региональной бедности и механизмов государственного управления, направленных на ее сокращение. Методы исследования: диалектический метод познания, системный подход, структурный анализ, сравнительный подход, методы статистической обработки информации, общенаучные методы познания (анализ и синтез, индукция и дедукция, абстрагирование и конкретизация и др.). Результаты исследований: в ходе экспертизы региональных программ по снижению бедности в субъектах Российской Федерации были проанализированы основные показатели социально-экономического и демографического развития территорий России. Выявлены общие и специфические особенности региональной бедности, определены основные факторы и причины, обуславливающие попадание определенных категорий населения за официальную монетарную черту бедности. Проанализированы основные мероприятия, направленные на снижение уровня бедности в регионах России, как в сфере политики занятости и заработной платы, так и в области повышения эффективности реализации мер социальной поддержки населения. Обозначены основные характеристики бедности и риски попадания за черту бедности на региональном уровне, сформулированы проблемные вопросы по оценке влияния мер социальной защиты населения на снижение уровня бедности.
Ключевые слова: бедность; прожиточный минимум; доходы населения; работающие бедные; социальная помощь; региональные программы.
For oitation: Селиванова О.В., Разумов А.А. Материальное положение домохозяйств в контексте развития регионов (на примере Приволжского федерального округа). Social and labor research. 2024;56(3):84-96. DOI: 10.34022/2658-3712-2024-56-3-84-96.
© Селиванова О.В., Разумов А.А., 2024
■
INTRODUCTION. THE MAIN APPROACHES TO DEFINING AND MEASURING POVERTY: GLOBAL AND RUSSIAN EXPERIENCE
Overcoming poverty is one of the most important goals of sustainable development of the planet, which is reflected in the global social, economic, and political agenda of most countries of the world, regardless of their level of development. As one of the most ambitious and complex problems of human development, the problem of poverty is the focus of attention of various disciplines, including philosophy, sociology, political science, and economics.
Poverty, directly or indirectly, affects all aspects of human life, including physical and mental well-being, opportunities for social interaction, attitudes towards reproduction, and the acquisition of work-related skills and knowledge. Poverty has always been a significant obstacle to individual and societal development, slowing the process of social reproduction and leading to increased social tensions and violence.
Poverty, as a multifaceted phenomenon, continues to be one of the foremost concerns on the economic agenda. This is reflected in both the fundamental documents of the United Nations and national programs aimed at reducing the scale of this social issue.
The categorization of the issue of poverty as a distinct area of study is linked to the development of industrial society. The emerging capitalist relations in Europe have led to the emergence of two essentially opposite concepts of poverty based on the ideas of Egalitarianism and Social Darwinism. According to the Egalitarian perspective, poverty is viewed as a result of an unjust distribution of resources and the exploitation of workers by the ruling class. This approach emphasizes the need for equal access to opportunities and resources in order to reduce poverty. On the other hand, Social Darwinism's followers estimated poverty as an unavoidable, yet generally beneficial, result of inequality inherent in society's evolutionary trajectory. They argued that poverty can serve as a mechanism for selecting the fittest individuals and promoting progress.
Thus, A. Smith, in the book "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations" (1776), defines poverty and wealth as the main incentives for economic growth, at the same time does not exclude that extreme manifestations of poverty will eventually be eliminated due to increased labor productivity [1].
According to the theory of T. Malthus [2], poverty is an inevitable consequence of evolutionary development, a natural social phenomenon that is gener-
ated by an increase in population in conditions of limited means of livelihood, the poor generate the poor, the social assistance contributes to the growth of the number of poor, and the dynamics of the number of poor can be regulated by famine and war.
G. Spencer [3] also considered poverty as an organic part of public life. He also denied the expediency of the state social assistance. At the same time, he was one of the first to study poverty through the prism of economic processes, noting its impact on slowing down the development of social production.
Thus, the Social Darwinism' representatives considered poverty as an integral part of social development based on the struggle for survival, proceeding from the concept of personal responsibility of each individual for his material well-being, while denying the need for social transformations that only violate the interests of all members of society.
The further evolution of capitalist systems has led to a shift in perspectives on poverty as a social phenomenon.
According to the view of representatives of egali-tarianism (K. Marx, F. Engels, etc.), poverty is a social evil that arises as a result of capitalist modes of production and the unfair appropriation of surplus value by dominant classes.
K. Marx claimed that poverty is a result of class inequality, unequal income distribution, and limited access to the essential factors of production. This is a logical consequence of capitalist relations, where profit is generated at the expense of the working class through oppression.
In his fundamental book "Capital", the founder of Marxism emphasizes that: "The greater the social wealth, the functioning capital, the size and energy of its growth, and consequently, the greater the absolute size of the proletariat and the productive power of its labor, the greater the industrial reserve army. The free labor force develops due to the same reasons as the power of capital expansion. Consequently, the relative size of the industrial reserve army increases with the increase in the forces of wealth. But the larger this reserve army is in comparison with the active workers' army, the more extensive the constant overpopulation, the poverty of which is directly proportional to the torments of the labor of the active workers' army. Finally, the larger the impoverished strata of the working class and the industrial reserve army, the greater the official pauperism. This is the absolute, universal law of capitalist accumulation" [4, p. 659].
K. Marx and F. Engels [5] consider poverty through the absolute and relative impoverishment of the pro-
letariat. Absolute impoverishment is expressed in an extreme decrease in the standard of living of a person, which occurs due to the extremely low cost of labor in the labor market, which is formed taking into account unemployment and the exploitation of labor for the purposes of capitalist production aimed at extracting maximum profit. According to Marx, relative impoverishment is understood as a norm of exploitation associated with the share of wages of the working class in national income under capitalism.
Thus, within the framework of the egalitarian trend, poverty is inextricably linked with the social context that reveals its essence and causes. According to Marx, poverty is the result of social relations in a capitalist society, when the pursuit of maximum profit, unlimited by the mechanisms of state regulation, inevitably leads to the impoverishment of the proletariat. Within the framework of this concept, the criteria of poverty are ownership of the means of production and the measure of exploitation. Overcoming poverty according to K. Marx is achieved through the radical dismantling of the capitalist system through the open confrontation of the exploited masses of workers against the ruling classes.
Thus, within the context of the egalitarian movement, poverty is intrinsically linked to the social circumstances that reveal its essence and origins. According to Marxist theory, poverty arises from social relations in capitalist societies, where the pursuit of maximal profit, unrestrained by state regulations, inevitably leads to impoverishment among the working class. Within this framework, the criteria for poverty include ownership of the means of production and levels of exploitation. Overcoming poverty, according to Marxism, requires the complete dismantling of the capitalist system, achieved through open confrontation between the exploited working class and the ruling elite.
Another position was held by the German scientist Max Weber [6], the author of the theory of the society's status structure. Sharing K. Marx's opinion on class inequality, Weber, at the same time, noted the essential role of the status hierarchy of capitalist society in the distribution of public goods, highlighting the bureaucracy as a special social stratum with priority access to the distribution of public goods. It should be noted that in the future, Weber's theory was confirmed when the incomes of management specialists almost equaled the incomes from the property of representatives of not only the middle but also the large bourgeoisie.
According to Weber, labor income and social status depend not only on belonging to certain classes but also on life chances obtained, including through
status opportunities, which is especially clearly demonstrated in bureaucratic and administrative fields.
An important stage in developing poverty concepts occurred during the improvement of statistical and sociological approaches to poverty measurement. Within this framework, significant steps were taken to develop the modern understanding of poverty in the United Kingdom at the end of the 19th century. During this period, fundamental definitions such as the poverty line and cost of living were well established.
The well-known British researcher, Ch. Booth, [7] who studied the situation of low-income citizens, concluded that poor people are those whose needs are not being met in accordance with the typical standards of living in their respective countries. By examining the income levels, consumption patterns, and degree of satisfaction with basic needs among representatives of working households in London, Charles Booth was among the first to identify that poverty is largely caused by factors outside the control of the poor, including, for instance, low and irregular wages.
Another famous British sociologist, Benjamin Seebohm Rowntree, who is rightfully considered one of the founders of the modern concept of absolute poverty, refers to those whose income is insufficient to maintain their physical well-being as poor. According to him, the cost of living should correspond to the minimum expenses required for basic human needs, including food, clothing, and housing, which are essential for maintaining health and productivity [8]. S. Rowntree calculated the poverty line based on dietary data, thereby laying the groundwork for the subsequent development of the absolute poverty paradigm, which is currently used to determine the poverty threshold in many countries. He also introduced the concepts of primary and secondary poverty to the scientific community. Thus, according to S. Rowntree, primary poverty results from a lack of funds, even when they are used economically and efficiently to meet the basic needs of a family. Secondary poverty, on the other hand, results from an irrational use of these resources.
In the 20th century, the problem of poverty was further explored in the research of M. Orshansky, P. Townsend, A. Sen, and other authors. During this time, modern understandings of poverty as a multidimensional phenomenon were developed, and quantitative indicators for measuring poverty were established and calculated on an empirical basis.
For instance, the calculation of monetary poverty in the United States is based on the research of M.
■
Orshansky [9], who proposed a method for determining the poverty line through the estimation of a set of essential goods (food, shelter, clothing) required to meet an individual's basic needs for physical survival. This approach introduces a numerical criterion for the poverty threshold into the scientific framework, known as the subsistence minimum. Additionally, Orshansky developed a consumer basket based on a minimal diet recommended by nutrition experts, which ensures physical existence.
In the 1970s, the English sociologist P. Townsend put forward the relative concept of poverty (the concept of relative deprivation). According to this concept, poverty assessment should take into account the degree to which an individual's needs are satisfied in comparison to the needs of most members of society. Townsend argued that poverty is not simply a lack of income, but rather a situation in which an individual has insufficient income when compared to the majority of members of their community [10].
In the last quarter of the 20th century, Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen [11] broadened the definition of poverty to include not only a lack of physical resources for survival but also social exclusion. This social exclusion manifests itself in the denial or restriction of individuals' rights to work, receive education, and access healthcare, and other essential services, leading to an inability to lead long-term, healthy, and productive lives. According to this definition, when assessing poverty, it is important to consider not only the economic and social resources available to households but also the circumstances under which these resources are used.
According to A. Sen, when building long-term strategies to combat poverty, in order to objectively assess this multifactorial phenomenon, it is important to combine both approaches - absolute and relative, and not to contrast them. Currently, the concept of A. Sen is the basic one for building a "multidimensional" or "multicriteria" model of poverty.
To date, the definition of poverty has been primarily based on the wording proposed by the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), which defines poverty as a condition in which individuals or groups have such limited resources that they are unable to lead a minimally adequate lifestyle in the country in which they reside1.
In Russia, during its Soviet period, despite the ideological prohibition of the category "poverty", the works of many famous economists were devoted to the study of the peculiarities of life of low-income
1 The United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). URL: https:// www.un.org/ecosoc/en (accessed 02.07.2024).
households, among which the works of Gordon L.A., Kuznetsova N.P., Sarkisyan G.S., Strumilin S.G. [12,13,14] and other authors should be noted.
The Soviet experience of researching the "minimum cost of living" category in modern Russia formed the basis for determining minimum consumer budgets (subsistence minimums). These social standards began to be developed for different socio-demographic groups of the population. Their calculation provided for the satisfaction of minimum needs (needs) and an appropriate set of consumer goods (goods and services) necessary to meet these needs.
In the 1990s, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia embarked on a transformational path towards a market economy, accompanied by a series of socio-economic shocks. As a result, a significant and stable segment of the population fell below the absolute poverty line. The same period was also marked by the increase in the scientific community's interest in exploring the phenomenon of poverty in Russia and the factors contributing to it.
Among the prominent modern Russian poverty researchers, we would like to highlight the works of V.N. Bobkov, L.N. Ovcharova, and N.M. Rimashevs-kaya [15, 16, 17], along with other scholars, who have made significant contributions to studying the factors causing poverty in Russia. These authors explore the sources of socio-economic inequality and social stratification, features of social protection of the Russian population, mechanisms for overcoming poverty, etc.
The complexity of poverty is reflected in the diversity of approaches to its categorization and classification. For example, N.M. Rimashevskaya identified "fixed" and "fluctuating" types of poverty and argued that "poverty breeds poverty." The emergence of "fluctuating poverty" is associated with a temporary decrease in the individual or family's income due to a change in life circumstances [17].
L.A. Gordon approaches poverty from a different perspective. According to the author, there are two types of poverty: poverty of the "strong" and poverty of the "weak". The poverty of the "weak" refers mainly to social poverty, which is most prevalent among the disabled population. This form of poverty is historically rooted in certain previously established patterns of well-being for certain categories of people. The poverty of the "strong", on the other hand, is associated with employment and labor market conditions, as well as a decrease or loss of income from work (wages). While the first form of poverty (the poverty of the "weak") is primarily social in nature,
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
The number of people living below the poverty line, million people Poverty level, %
Fig. 1 / Рис. 1. The main indicators of poverty in Russia / Основные показатели бедности в России
Source/ Источник: Росстат / Rosstat.
the second form (the poverty of the "strong") is more economic in nature [12, p. 23].
E.S. Balabanova examines poverty taking into account the available resources to meet the needs of families and individuals and their use. At the same time, such forms of poverty as active, passive, and parasitic are distinguished.
According to the author, active poverty refers to a situation where a person, despite having limited resources, is able to improve their situation through increased education and/or employment mobility. In contrast, passive poverty refers to circumstances where an individual is unable to increase their resources due to factors such as disability or living in an area with a low standard of living. The author distinguishes between active and passive poverty based on the capacity of individuals to independently increase their resources. Vagrancy and begging are considered parasitic forms of poverty, as they rely on external assistance to survive, rather than generating income through personal efforts [18].
A.A.Razumov considers poverty, including from the point of view of non-material factors, believing that this phenomenon is associated not only with a lack of funds to acquire a minimum set of life benefits but with the moral and ethical aspects of the relationship between the state and society [19].
The variety of approaches to defining and ty-pologizing poverty highlights its complex, multidimensional nature. Despite a significant amount of work in this field, the global scientific community has not yet formed a universally recognized unified comprehensive understanding of the essence of poverty.
As noted above, the idea of defining poverty as a set of deprivations belongs to the British scientist P. Towsend, who first applied this approach to assess the level of poverty in the UK. According to P. Townsend, deprivations are understood as material and social conditions that determine a citizen's subjective perception of himself as a poor member of society. Deprivations are relative because they correspond to a social context that is specific to each particular society and time.
A person with a certain set of deprivations is unable to lead a social life and therefore is subjected to social exclusion, which displaces him to the periphery of society. This state of affairs significantly reduces the citizens' ability to acquire the competencies and qualifications necessary to overcome alienation and improve their social status, and get out of poverty. A person is effectively deprived of basic social rights, such as the right to work, housing, medical care, and education. Such social exclusion contributes significantly to the rupture of social ties between an individual and society.
Collectively, the above factors have led in European society towards the study of social exclusion in terms of the impossibility of realizing basic "social rights" preventing a citizen from remaining a member of society. This conception of social exclusion was endorsed by the United Nations Development Programme in 20112, dedicated to the inclusive transformation of societies around the world.
In international practice, poverty measurement and assessment are carried out on the basis of three
2 United Nations Development Programme. URL: https://hdr.undp.org/ content/human-development-report-2011 (accessed 03/12/2024).
■
different conceptual approaches - absolute, relative, and subjective - or their combination. Each of their conceptual approaches to the definition of poverty implies the development of monetary and non-monetary methods for its definition and measurement. The poverty line can be determined both in absolute terms through a certain minimum budget, and in relative terms through the establishment of a certain proportion of the minimum income to the base value, which characterizes some minimum standards of a particular society in a certain period of time.
Additionally, in recent years, efforts have been made to develop a methodology for measuring poverty, utilizing data on citizens' expenditures. These methodologies are based on assessing the ability of citizens to make expenditures to support their households. However, to date, this approach has remained largely theoretical, as its implementation requires comprehensive information about the socioeconomic circumstances of citizens as well as their financial transactions. The collection and analysis of this information may present significant practical and legal challenges.
The international comparison of poverty is most frequently conducted in accordance with the methodology of the World Bank for determining the level of absolute poverty. Starting in 2022, countries with the lowest gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (low-income countries) consider individuals with average per-capita incomes up to $2.15 a day to be poor, based on purchasing power parity (PPP) in 2017 prices. In 108 countries with middle-income economies, which account for approximately 5.5 billion people, or 75% of the global population, individuals with incomes between $3.65 and $6.85 (lower-middle-income economy countries) are considered poor, also based on PPP in 2017. The absolute poverty line in countries with the highest GDP per capita is set at 24.36 US dollars a day.
In addition to the poverty calculation methodology used by the World Bank, most countries use their own approaches to calculating national poverty lines. The applied approaches are determined by the degree of social and economic development of a particular country, and the selected criteria for classifying a family/household as poor.
In the history of modern Russia, the poverty line has been initially calculated based on the concept of absolute poverty. For various socio-demographic groups of the population, consumer baskets have been developed based on norms and standards for food, food products, and services, as well as taxes and fees.
In 2021, a reform of approaches to measuring poverty was carried out in Russia, which consisted in the transition from the absolute method of determining poverty based on the consumer basket to the relative method, when the poverty line began to be calculated taking into account median income.
Therefore, in Russia's practice of measuring poverty, the preconditions were created for the transition from assessing those in need based on the availability of a specific set of food products and then the consumer basket, to determining the monetary poverty line based on a share of median per capita income. This may in fact indicate Russia's engagement with global scientific and socio-economic trends, as similar processes have taken place in leading countries of economic development. At the same time, the experience gained through measuring poverty using the consumer basket allows for a better understanding of the practice of poverty measurement in countries where this method is still employed.
Due to the significant differentiation of the territories of Russia in terms of demographic, economic, and social development, the regionalization of social policy in the context of overcoming poverty is becoming increasingly important. This implies the selection of optimal mechanisms to reduce poverty levels in various regions. Although a lot of studies have been conducted on this topic [20-25], the significance of these issues and the need for a comprehensive approach to their solution remain relevant.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The aim of this paper is to investigate regional poverty and the public administration mechanisms designed to reduce it. During the study, the following objectives were met:
• Development of tools to examine the characteristics of regional poverty.
• Identification of the main factors and reasons that lead certain categories of people to fall below the official monetary threshold of poverty, their interactions and interdependencies.
• Assessment of regional programs to reduce poverty and specific measures included in them in terms of employment, salaries, and social protection for the population with the aim of reducing poverty in Russian regions.
The study of poverty in the regions of Russia has been conducted using the dialectical approach to knowledge, within the framework of which, poverty is understood as being interconnected with a range of socio-economic, demographic, and other processes
that change over time and form specific features in the development of Russian territories.
The application of a systematic approach has revealed the specific characteristics of regional poverty as a socio-economic phenomenon that reflects the low standard of living for a portion of the country's population. This approach has allowed for the establishment of internal links and dependencies between regional poverty and factors that have a significant impact on it. It has also contributed to the identification of qualitative characteristics of this phenomenon to gain a comprehensive understanding of it.
The study of the characteristics of low-income population groups was based on information obtained through statistical surveys conducted by the Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat). Using methods of statistical analysis of economic data, comparative analysis, classification, and grouping, socio-economic and demographic features of the low-income population in several regions of Russia were examined.
To analyze the structure of poverty in Russian regions, a sample of data was collected from the Statistical Survey of Income and Participation in Social Programs 2022 (SSIPSP) by Rosstat. The sample included members of households whose average per capita income was below the poverty line. Their characteristics were then examined using a range of features, including position in the labor market, level of education, type of occupation of the household head, dependent burden, place of residence, and other relevant factors.
The materials presented in the regional strategic policy documents on poverty reduction were also used in the collection, presentation, analysis, and interpretation of data.
RESULTS
In 2023, the number of poor people amounted to 12.4 million people, or 8.5% of the total population, having decreased by more than 900 thousand people compared to the previous period (Table 1). Targeted social assistance to the poor, primarily to families with children, pension indexation, increase in the minimum wage, increase in the level of employment, and the workers 'salaries contributed to a steady reduction in absolute household poverty.
The poverty situation in the regions of Russia is heterogeneous and closely linked to the unique socio-economic characteristics of each region. These factors have a direct or indirect impact on employment, household incomes, access to essential services, and other aspects of quality of life.
Let us consider the relationship between the key indicators of economic development in the regions and the poverty situation, using the example of the regions of the Volga Federal District (VFD).
The VFD occupies 6.1% of Russia's total territory, whereas the multinational population of 21.3% of the total number of Russian citizens. It consists of 14 subjects of the Russian Federation, including Bashkortostan, Mari El, Mordovia, Tatarstan, Udmurtia, Chuvashia, Perm Krai, Kirov region, Nizhny Novgorod region, Orenburg region, Penza region, Samara region, Saratov region, Ulyanovsk region.
The Volga Federal District has a diverse economic structure, with significant contributions from the extractive, mechanical engineering, and petrochemical industries. The district also has a highly developed agro-industrial complex, and it ranks second among federal districts in terms of oil and gas production. Extracted hydrocarbons in the district are not only used as raw materials for petrochemical production but also exported internationally. The mechanical engineering and petrochemical sectors are traditional specializations of the region. Food and processing industries play an important role in the district's economy, relying heavily on agricultural products for their supply and meeting significant consumer demand.
The Volga Federal District is located close to the geographical center of Russia and has a relatively high population density in many of its regions. This fact determines the potential for extensive markets for consumer goods produced within the district. Natural conditions in most parts of the district are among the best in Russia for living and conducting business. Such features of the economy ensure that significant investments are attracted to this mac-roregion.
However, in general, the Volga Federal District is characterized by relatively low living standards, the main indicators of which are average per capita monetary incomes (in 2023, the VFD ranked 6th among federal districts). This situation is a consequence of a significant interregional differentiation of the subjects of the Volga Federal District, which is revealed when analyzing the main indicators of socio-economic development of the subjects of the VFD.
Traditionally, the Republic of Tatarstan holds the leading position in terms of key indicators of living standards. The region significantly outperforms other constituent entities of the Volga Federal District in terms of investments in fixed assets, production of goods and services, and the level of wages of employees (see Table 2). The decrease in mining activ-
Table 1 / Таблица 1
Indicators of socio-economic development of the subjects of the Volga Federal District in 2023 / Индикаторы социально-экономического развития субъектов ПФО в 2023 году
Indicator/ Показатель Population, thousand people as of January 01, 2024/ Численность населения, тыс. чел на 01 января 2024 г. The total coefficient of natural growth, per million / Общий коэффициент естественного прироста, промилле Average per capita income of the population, RUB / Среднедушевые денежные доходы населения, руб. The ratio of the average per capita monetary income of the population to the value of the subsistence minimum / Соотношение среднедушевых денежных доходов населения с величиной прожиточного минимума Poverty level, % / Уровень бедности, % Investments in fixed assets per capita, thousand rubles / Инвестиции в основной капитал в расчете на душу населения, тыс. руб. Industrial production Index, %/ И ндекс промышленного производства, % Retail trade turnover per capita, thousand rubles / Оборот розничной торговли в расчете на душу населения, тыс. руб The average monthly nominal accrued salary of employees of organizations, RUB / Среднемесячная номинальная начисленная заработная плата работников организаций, руб. The unemployment rate, % / Уровень безработицы, %
Russian Federation 146203,6 -3,3 50 265 369,7 8,5 232,4 101 323,7 73 709 3,2
Volga Federal District 28549, 5 -4,9 40405 168,4 102,8 286,4 54831 2,4
Republic of Bashkortostan 4065,6 -3,0 39 375 316,3 9,5 152 106,5 313,4 56720 2,3
Republic of Mari El 670,3 -4,4 29351 235,0 15,1 77,7 114,1 192,5 48 558 3,4
Republic of Mordovia 766,7 -7,3 28473 250,5 13,2 96 108 205,4 46 236 2,5
The Republic of Tatarstan 4003,1 -1,6 51704 427,4 4,6 295 103,3 349,9 61841 2,1
Udmurt Republic 1434,6 -3,8 36028 299,8 8,8 115,3 108,7 234,3 52 502 2,5
The Chuvash Republic 1167,4 -4,4 31735 261,4 13,0 105,1 127,2 211,5 50187 2,4
Perm Krai 2495,7 -4,3 42000 339,8 9,9 192 105,2 284,6 60944 2,8
Kirov region 1130,1 -7,5 37189 297,1 10,4 93,3 108,4 247,1 47 967 3,2
Nizhny Novgorod region 3061,8 -7,0 49791 372,1 7,2 222,9 110,6 354,3 54204 1,9
Orenburg region 1828,7 -5,0 34815 292,7 11,0 159,3 102,9 252,4 53049 2,6
Penza region 1236,7 -8,2 34446 291,6 10,2 97,7 114,1 259,6 48167 2,9
Samara region 3129,6 -5,8 42 203 313,2 10,2 164,4 109,2 302,2 55 780 2
Saratov region 2385,8 -6,9 32488 273,1 12,5 119,1 103,4 234 49585 2,7
Ulyanovsk region 1173,3 -6,4 35 277 279,4 11,7 102,3 111,9 232,7 48901 2,8
Source/Источник: Unified interdepartmental information and statistical system (UIISS). URL: https://www.fedstat.ru/ (accessed 25.07.2024) / Единая межведомственная информационно-статистическая система (ЕМИСС) - URL: https:// su
www.fedstat.ru/ (дата обращения: 25.07.2024). С
3
■
ity (-7.19% in 2023 compared to the 2022 indicator) due to restrictions imposed by the European Union on imports of hydrocarbons from Russia and efforts by the United States and European countries to artificially reduce prices for Russian energy resources, led to a slower growth rate in industrial production in the republic. However, despite this, wage growth was observed in the region. This, combined with a relatively low unemployment rate and the active social policy aimed at targeted support for the most vulnerable groups of the population, resulted in the highest per capita income and lowest poverty rate (4.6% in 2023).
In the same year, the highest level of poverty was recorded in the Mari El Republic (with a poverty rate of 15.1% in 2023), where the economy has been stagnating for many years and the lowest wages of the working population have been observed.
In 2023, despite a significant increase in industrial output in the Mari El Republic (114.1% compared to 2022 figures), wages for workers remained at the level that is insufficient to significantly enhance the living standards of the population.
Thus, in 2023, the average monthly nominal accrued salary in the manufacturing sector, where every fifth citizen of the Republic of Mari El worked (21.2% in 2022)3 amounted to 59,871 rubles or 81% of the salary level in this area in the Republic of Tatarstan (73576 rubles, in the Russian Federation - 71273 rubles). 9.6% of the employed population in the republic were engaged in agriculture, hunting, and fishing where the average monthly wages (RUB 43,703) were below the similar indicator in the Republic of Tatar-stan (RUB 44,346), and were 1.2 times less than the national average (RUB 52,868).
By the end of 2023, Mari El's average per capita income was 1.7 times lower than Tatarstan's (29,351 rubles versus 51,704 rubles), remaining the lowest in the district, which led to the highest level of poverty among the regions of the Volga Federal District.
The relatively low wages of workers employed in the economy of the Republic of Mari El are largely due to higher costs for the production of goods and services than in other regions of the district. In particular, the cost of electricity for enterprises of the republic in June 2024 was 1.38 times higher than the value of a similar indicator in the neighboring Chuvash Republic (7.91 rubles and 5.71 rubles per kilowatt hour, respectively) and was 1.2 times higher than the cost of electricity in the Republic of Tatar-
3 Labor Force Survey-2023. URL: https://rosstat.gov.ru/compendium/docu-ment/13265 (accessed 07/25/2024).
stan (6.42 rubles per 1 kilowatt hour)4. High energy costs reduce the competitiveness of industrial enterprises in the region (by the end of 2023, the share of profitable enterprises in Mari El amounted to 78.0%. (for comparison: 84.1% in the Chuvash Republic, 80.7% in the Republic of Tatarstan5), which, in turn, affects the level of wages of employees and is directly reflected in the indicators of the poverty level of the macroregion.
POVERTY PROFILES IN THE SUBJECTS OF THE VOLGA FEDERAL DISTRICT
According to Rosstat, in 2023, the total number of poor people in the Volga Federal District was 2.7 million, while the poverty rate ranged from 4.6% in the Republic of Tatarstan to 15.1% in the Republic of Mari El6.
The calculations made by us based on the data of the Statistical Survey of Income and Participation in Social Programs 2022 by Rosstat7 showed that in 2021 the largest share of low-income households were families with children (89.5%). In 81.7% of such households, working parents brought the main income.
Among poor families with children and working parents, the largest proportion was among families with two children (44.4%). Within large families with working adults, 32.4% were low-income residents of the district. 23.2% of the poorest residents of the Volga Federal District resided in families with one child.
The families with one child typically lived in urban areas. In Nizhny Novgorod region, Kirov region, Penza region, and the Republic of Mordovia, these families were more likely to reside in smaller towns with populations of up to 50,000. Conversely, in Tatarstan and Bashkortostan, they were more likely to live in larger urban agglomerations with populations exceeding 500,000. Most working adults in these families had secondary or vocational education, and they were commonly employed in agriculture, forestry, trade, and services. In the Ulyanovsk region and the Republic of Mordovia, there were a lot of working women who were responsible for income per each member of the family being employed in service, trade, agricultural sector. In the Republics of Mari El and Udmurtia, such families most often lived in rural areas.
4 Electricity tariffs for medium-sized enterprises. URL: https://time2save.ru/ tarify-na-elektroenergiu-dlya-srednih-predpriyatiy (accessed 07/28/2024).
5 Unified interdepartmental information and statistical system (UIISS). The share of profitable organizations. URL: https://www.fedstat.ru/indica-tor/57751 (accessed 07/28/2024).
6 Rosstat Inequality and poverty/ URL: / https://rosstat.gov.ru/folder/13723 (accessed 07/15/2024).
7 Statistical Survey of Income and Participation in Social Programs 2022/ URL: https://rosstat.gov.ru/free_doc/new_site/vndn-2022/index.html (ac-
cessed 02/03/2024).
■
The main source of income for low-income families with two children, as a general rule, was provided by men. These families typically lived in urban areas. The working fathers in these families, as a matter of course, had secondary vocational training and were skilled workers in fields such as agriculture, forestry, manufacturing, assembly, driving, and service sector employment, among others. However, in some urban areas of the Chuvash Republic, there were a lot of poor families with two children and divorced women with advanced education had insufficient salaries to provide an adequate standard of living for each member of the family.
The poor families with multiple children with working parents were primarily concentrated in urban areas too. The distribution of large urban families was quite polarized: these families resided either in cities with populations exceeding 250,000 people or in smaller towns with populations under 50,000. The latter category included large families residing in small towns in the Nizhny Novgorod Region and the Republic of Tatarstan. The heads of low-income urban large families were most often men with general or secondary vocational education and employed in the formal sector in low-paid jobs. The exception is the Chuvash Republic, where income was provided, most often, by working women with higher education.
Poor large families living in rural areas were concentrated mainly in the Penza region, in the Republic of Bashkortostan. These families were headed, mainly, by men who had completed secondary or vocational training, and who worked as agricultural, forestry, or industrial workers, as well as in construction and transportation.
Thus, in 2021, the main causes of poverty of families with children in the regions of the Volga Federal District were low wages for parents, which prevented each family member from earning above the regional minimum income, limited educational attainment, and/or inadequate levels of professional training, lack of demand for the education and/or qualifications in the regional labor markets, the absence of paid employment, family problems, divorces.
THE MAIN TOOLS FOR REDUCING POVERTY IN THE VOLGA FEDERAL DISTRICT
Poverty reduction has been identified as one of the main national development goals of the country8. To achieve the set targets, the subjects of the Russian Federation are developing programs to reduce
regional poverty, taking into account the geographical, socio-economic, and infrastructural specifics of the development of territories.
The well-being of the majority of Russian citizens is primarily determined by income from employment and social benefits. Therefore, two key factors contribute to reducing poverty: the increase in wages of the country's working population and the provision of adequate social assistance to meet the actual needs of low-income individuals.
The regional poverty reduction programs implemented within the Volga Federal District include measures aimed at the growth of the salaries of employees, enhancing the level of employer benefits provided to workers, stimulating investment activity, promoting the growth of small and medium-sized enterprises, and supporting individual entrepreneurs and self-employed individuals.
For instance, in the Kirov, Penza, and Ulyanovsk regions, as well as in several other regions within the Volga Federal District, investment projects and industrial enterprises are supported through subsidies for interest payments on loans, reimbursement of costs for engineering and transportation infrastructure, tax benefits on property, and other measures. The aim of these initiatives is primarily to enhance the economic performance of the regions and create conditions for reducing low-wage employment.
Measures to legalize "shadow" employment, aimed at ensuring the labor rights of employees, are of particular importance in small businesses and play a significant role in the work of regional management teams. As an example, let us take the Udmurt Republic. Thanks to interdepartmental cooperation between republican and municipal authorities, more than five thousand employees9 have officially registered their employment relations in 2023, which has provided them not only with timely and full wage payments but also with guaranteed social insurance and the possibility of receiving benefits for maternity leave and childcare up to 1.5 years, as well as the ability to claim personal income tax deductions.
All regions of the Volga Federal District place great emphasis on employment support. It includes vocational training programs for unemployed individuals in popular occupations on the local job market, assistance with job search and employment placement for the unemployed, and assistance in starting people' businesses.
Since one of the main characteristics of poverty in the Volga Federal District is the large number of poor
8 Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 309 dated May 7, 2024 "On the National Development Goals of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2030 and for the future up to 2036"
9 Ministry of Social Policy of the Udmurt Republic. - URL: https://minsoc18. ru / (accessed 06/23/2024)
families with children, a significant part of social assistance measures focuses on providing financial support to these groups of citizens. This includes, first and foremost, the child allowance benefits for families with income below the regional subsistence level and the benefits for poor pregnant women. Additionally, there are regional allowances for larger families, student families, and other groups of people with low income.
At the same time, our analysis indicates that the number and scope of measures to provide targeted assistance to low-income families varies significantly depending on regional specificities and the financial capacity of the budgets of constituent entities of the Russian Federation. For example, the Republic of Tatarstan in addition to the traditional mandatory targeted benefits and payments for needy families with children, provides compensation for education, health care, food, and transport expenses for children from low-income families among other things.
In all regions of the Volga Federal District, families receive maternity capital upon the birth of a child. The amount of this benefit is determined by federal legislation and indexed annually, and it does not depend on the specific region where the family resides. As of February 1st, 2024, the amount is 631,000 rubles for the first child and 834,000 for the second. Most families use this significant payment to improve their living conditions.
In addition to this form of social support, many regions provide regional maternity benefits, the amount of which varies depending on the ability of regional budgets and demographic policies. For example, as of 2024, the amount of regional maternity benefits in the Nizhny Novgorod Region is 100,000 rubles, while in the Republic of Mordovia, it is slightly higher, ranging from 130,156 rubles. These benefits are provided only for the birth of the third child or subsequent children, and at the discretion of families, they can be used for home improvements, child education, monthly payments for children under 3 years of age, and purchases for children with disabilities.
A special place in the system of social support for the population is held by the social contract, which provides assistance for vocational training and additional professional education for low-income individuals, the assistance to open startups and develop self-employment, organize a personal subsidiary farm, and so on. As an example, we can take the Chuvash Republic, which has accumulated significant experience in concluding such social contracts. There is
a positive trend in the income of families participating in these contracts. By the end of 2023, approximately 6.5% of low-income residents of the republic were covered by social contracts. At the same time, 74.5% of these citizens increased their per capita income after the social contract ended, and 43.3% left the category of low-income. In order to support the "survival" of newly established small businesses, comprehensive assistance is provided at all stages of implementing the social contract, from the development of a business plan to the start-up phase and beyond, until the entrepreneur reaches a level of productivity. For two years, monitoring of the activities of social contract participants who have started their businesses is conducted.
CONCLUSIONS
The poverty of the population in the Russian Federation is closely linked to the specific characteristics of the country's regional development, which directly and indirectly impact employment, household income, living standards, and access to social infrastructure. The formation of the extent, structure, and characteristics of regional poverty is shaped by the state of local labor markets, competitive environment, infrastructure, and the sectoral and export-oriented nature of the regional economy. Additionally, factors such as access to education, healthcare, and other services also play a significant role in determining the level of poverty in different regions.
Therefore, at the federal and regional levels, it is essential to develop and implement efficient mechanisms for reducing poverty that take into consideration the aforementioned factors.
Poverty in the regions of the Russian Federation, as exemplified by the constituent entities of the Volga Federal District, is characterized by a high proportion of families with children, where incomes are most often provided by low wages for working parents.
Among the targeted social support measures that have had the most significant impact on reducing poverty in most regions of the Russian Federation in 2023, two stand out: the monthly child benefits to the low-income families (from January 1st, 2023) the amount of which is adequate to the deficit of cash income of low-income families, and the provision of state social assistance through social contracts. However, given that low wages are the main cause of poverty in Russia, these measures of government social assistance are significant but insufficient for achieving long-term reductions in poverty.
As our analysis has indicated, the income levels of the working population are largely determined by
■
the creation of equitable conditions for business operations, particularly in the provision of electricity to industrial enterprises. State regulation of energy prices for industrial entities will serve as a means of enhancing the efficiency of regional economies, which will ultimately have a positive effect on the standard of living and poverty reduction among the population.
A constructive dialogue between the government and businesses is essential to improve the living standards of employees and their families. It is crucial to adopt an integrated approach that focuses on
government social support for vulnerable populations and enhancing corporate social responsibility. This involves ensuring stable employment, creating opportunities for career growth, and improving the quality of life through measures such as housing, assisting with mortgage payments, offering healthcare benefits, and supporting access to health resort treatments. Developing and implementing innovative strategies for collaboration between government and businesses at the federal and regional levels to promote corporate social responsibility is an important area for further improvement of regional anti-poverty programs.
REFERENCES
1. Smith A. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. M.: Sotsekgiz; 1962. 684 p.
2. Malthus T.R. An Essay on the Principle of Population. Translated from English by I. Werner. — Moscow: AST Publishing House; 2023. 256 p. ISBN 978-5-17-152072-4
3. Spencer G. Social statics, or, the conditions essential to human happiness specified, and the first of them developed. St. Petersburg; 1872. 471 p.
4. Marx K. Capital. Marx K., Engels F. Soch. Vol.23. M.: Politizdat; 1960. 682 p.
5. Marx K., Engels F. Essays. The second edition. Volume 2. Moscow: State Publishing House of Political Literature; 1955. 651 p.
6. Weber M. Basic concepts of stratification. Sociological Research. 1994;(5):152.
7. Booth Ch. Life and Labor of the People in London. New York: Macmillan; 1892.
8. Rowntree S. B. Poverty: A study of town life. London; 1901. 452 p.
9. Orshansky M. How poverty is measured. Monthly Labor Review. 1969;92:37-41
10. Townsend P. Poverty in the United Kingdom: A survey of household resources and standards of living. London: Allen Lane and Penguin Books; 1979.
11. Sen A. Poverty and Famines. An Essay in Entitlement and Deprivation. Oxford University, NY; 1997. 257 p.
12. Gordon L.A. Four kinds of poverty in modern Russia. Sociological Journal. 1994;(4):18-35. EDN TZJOEN
13. Sarkisyan G.S., Kuznetsova N.P. Family needs and incomes: level, structure, prospects. M.: Nauka; 1967. 177 p. (In Russ.).
14. Strumilin S. G. Problems of labor economics. M.: Gospolitizdat; 1957. 735 p. (In Russ.).
15. Bobkov V.N., Gulyugina A.A., Kolmakov I.B., Odintsovo E.V., Chernykh E.A. Monitoring of incomes and living standards of the Russian population. 2020 [monograph]. M.: Offset printing Factory; 2021. 116 p. (In Russ.).
16. Ovcharova L.N. Theoretical and practical approaches to assessing the level, profile and factors of poverty: Russian and international experience. Institution of the Russian Academy of Sciences Institute of Social Economics. Population Problems of the Russian Academy of Sciences. M.: M-Studio; 2009. 268 p. (In Russ.).
17. Rimashevskaya N.M., Migranova L.A. Socio-economic inequality in Russia. Population. 2016;3(73):17-33. (In Russ.).
18. Balabanova E.S. Socio-economic dependence and social parasitism: A strategy of "negative" adaptation. Sociological Research. 1999;(4):46-57. (In Russ.).
19. Razumov A.A., Yagodkina M. A. Poverty in modern Russia. M.: Formula of Law; 2007. 336 p. (In Russ.).
20. Bobkov V N., Gulyugina A.A., Odintsova E.V. About the risks in the sphere of living standards of the Russian population, opportunities and solutions to reduce them. Living standard of the Population of the Regions of Russia. 2024;20(1):59-75. DOI 10.52180/1999-9836_2024_20_1_6_59_75. EDN IJGJXW. (In Russ.).
21. Galkin A.I., Kochetkov D.S. Social contract as an effective measure of social support for families with children. Management and Business Administration. 2024;(2):53-61. DOI 10.33983/2075-1826-2024-2-53-61. EDN LDGBXI. (In Russ.).
22. Grishina E.E., Tsatsura E.A. Targeted allowances for children aged 3-7 and 8-17: Accessibility, effectiveness and lessons for unified benefit. Population. 2023;26(3):77-92. DOI 10.19181/population.2023.26.3.7. EDN UHCPDM. (In Russ.).
23. Dozortsev O.E. Agarucheva A.V., Starokozheva V.P. Remuneration of coal industry workers: the result of a social dialogue. Social and Labor Research. 2022:4(49):123-132. DOI 10.34022/2658-3712-2022-49-4-123-132. EDN FDXVQA. (In Russ.).
24. Lebedeva L.G. To the discussion of poverty, welfare and equity in the generational aspect. Bulletin of the Nizhny Novgorod University named after N.I. Lobachevsky. Series: Social Sciences. 2024:2(74):153-160. DOI 10.52452/18115942_2024_2_153. (In Russ.).
25. Korobkova N.Yu. Standard child allowance in the system of social support measures in current conditions: impact assessment based on income modeling. Social and Labor Research. 2023:4(53):132-142. DOI 10.34022/2658-3712- 2023-53-4-132-142. EDN LNMFOY. (In Russ.).
26. Selivanova O.V., Razumov A.A. Working poverty: main trends and regional experience to reduce its. Russian Journal of Labor Economics. 2023;10(2):279-296. DOI 10.18334/et.10.2.117385. EDN ELVJFP. (In Russ.).
27. Tkachenko A.A. Actual Problems of Development of Russian Regions: Economics and Demographics. Economy. Taxes. Law. 2024;17(3):115-124. DOI 10.26794/1999-849X-2024-17-3-115-124. EDN LAZTXW. (In Russ.).
СПИСОК ИСТОЧНИКОВ
1. Смит А. Исследование о природе и причинах богатства народов. M.: Соцэкгиз, 1962. 684 с.
2. Мальтус Т. Опыт закона о народонаселении / Т.Р. Мальтус; [перевод с англ. И. Вернера]. М.: АСТ, 2023. 256 с. ISBN 978-5-17152072-4
3. Спенсер Г. Социальная статика: изложение социальных законов, обусловливающих счастье человечества / С.Петербург, 1872. - 471 с.
4. Маркс К. Капитал/ К. Маркс, Ф. Энгельс. Соч. том 23. M.: Политиздат, 1960. 682 с.
5. Маркс К. и Энгельс Ф. Сочинения. Издание второе. Том 2. Москва: Государственное издательство политической литературы, 1955. 651 с.
6. Weber M., Basic concepts of stratification // Sociological research. 1994. No. 5.- p. 152.
7. Booth Ch. Life and Labor of the People in London. New York: Macmillan, 1892.
8. Rowntree S. B. Poverty: a study of town life / S. B. Rowntree. - London, 1901. - 452 p.
9. Orshansky M. How poverty is measured // Monthly Labor Review, 1969.vol. 92 - pp. 37-41
10. Townsend P. Poverty in the United Kingdom: A survey of household resources and standards of living. London: Allen Lane and Penguin Books, 1979.
11. Sen A. Poverty and Famines. An Essay in Entitlement and Deprivation. Oxford University, NY, 1997. - 257 p.
12. Гордон Л.А. Четыре рода бедности в современной России // Социологический журнал. 1994;(4):18-35. EDN TZJOEN
13. Саркисян Г.С., Кузнецова Н.П. Потребности и доходы семьи: уровень, структура, перспективы. М.: Наука, 1967. 177 с. - 177 p.
14. Струмилин С.Г. Проблемы экономики труда. M.: Госполитиздат, 1957. - 735 с.
15. Мониторинг доходов и уровня жизни населения России - 2020 год: Монография / В. Н. Бобков, А. А. Гулюгина, И. Б. Колмаков [и др.]. 2021;4(200)116 с. Москва: ОАО Фабрика офсетной печати. ISBN 978-5-89697-361-4. DOI: 10.19181/ monogr.978-5-89697-361-4.2021. EDN POOVUI.
16. Овчарова Л.Н. Теоретические и практические подходы к оценке уровня, профиля и факторов бедности: российский и международный опыт / Учреждение Российской акад. наук Ин-т соц.-эконом. проблем народонаселения РАН. М.: М-Студио, 2009. 268 с.
17. Римашевская Н. М. Социально-экономическое неравенство в России / Н. М. Римашевская, Л. А. Мигранова // Народонаселение. 2016;3(73):17-33. EDN WWRJVX.
18. Балабанова Е.С. Социально-экономическая зависимость и социальный паразитизм: стратегии «негативной адаптации» // Социологические исследования. 1999;(4): pp. 46-57.
19. Разумов А.А. Бедность в современной России / А.А. Разумов, М.А. Ягодкина; А.А. Разумов, М.А. Ягодкина. Москва: Формула права, 2007; 335 с. ISBN 978-5-8467-0056-7. EDN OSISPJ.
20. Бобков В.Н. О рисках в сфере уровня жизни населения России, возможностях и решениях по их снижению / В.Н. Бобков, А.А. Гулюгина, Е.В. Одинцова // Уровень жизни населения регионов России. 2024;20(1):59-75. DOI: 10.52180/1999-9836_2024_20_1_6_59_75. EDN IJGJXW.
21. Галкин А. И. Социальный контракт как эффективная мера социальной поддержки семей с детьми / А. И. Галкин, Д. С. Кочетков // Менеджмент и бизнес-администрирование. 2024;(2):53-61. DOI: 10.33983/2075-1826-2024-2-53-61. EDN LDGBXI.
22. Гришина Е.Е. Адресные выплаты на детей 3-7 и 8-17 лет: доступность, результативность и уроки для единого пособия / Е.Е. Гришина, Е.А. Цацура // Народонаселение. 2023;26(3):77-92. DOI: 10.19181/population.2023.26.3.7. EDN UHCPDM.
23. Дозорцев О. Е. Оплата труда работников угольной промышленности: результат социального диалога / О.Е. Дозорцев, А.В. Агарычева, В.П. Старокожева // Социально-трудовые исследования. 2022;4(49):123-132. DOI: 10.34022/2658-3712-2022-49-4123-132. EDN FDXVOA.
24. Лебедева Л. Г. К дискуссии о бедности, благосостоянии и справедливости в поколенческом аспекте / Л.Г. Лебедева // Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н.И. Лобачевского. Серия: Социальные науки. 2024;2(74):153-160. DOI: 10.52452/18115942_2024_2_153. EDN IWUIBI.
25. Коробкова Н.Ю. Единое пособие на ребенка в системе мер социальной поддержки в современных условиях: оценка влияния на основе моделирования доходов / Н.Ю. Коробкова // Социально-трудовые исследования. 2023;4(53):132-142. DOI: 10.34022/2658-3712-2023-53-4-132-142. EDN LNMFOY.
26. Селиванова О.В. Бедность работающего населения: анализ основных тенденций и опыт регионов по снижению ее уровня / О.В. Селиванова, А.А. Разумов // Экономика труда. 2023;10(2):279-296. DOI: 10.18334/et.10.2.117385. EDN ELVJFP.
27. Ткаченко А.А. Актуальные проблемы развития регионов России: экономика и демография / А.А. Ткаченко // Экономика. Налоги. Право. 2024;17(3):115-124. DOI: 10.26794/1999-849X-2024-17-3-115-124. EDN LAZTXW.
ИНФОРМАЦИЯ ОБ АВТОРАХ / ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Ольга Владимировна Селиванова - кандидат экономических наук, старший научный сотрудник ФГБУ «ВНИИ труда» Минтруда России, Москва, Россия
Ol'ga V. Seiivanova - Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Senior Researcher, Federal State Budgetary Institution "All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Labor" of the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of Russia, Moscow, Russia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9628-409X ovselivanova@vcot.info
Александр Александрович Разумов - доктор экономических наук, профессор, Заслуженный работник
Минтруда России, советник генерального директора ФГБУ «ВНИИ труда» Минтруда России, Москва, Россия
Aleksandr A. Razumov - Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Honored Worker of the Ministry of Labor of Russia,
Advisor to the General Director of the Federal State Budgetary Institution "All-Russian Scientific Research Institute
of Labor" of the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of Russia, Moscow, Russia
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6935-0397
aarazumov@vcot.info
Конфликт интересов: авторы заявляют об отсутствии конфликта интересов. Conflicts of Interest Statement: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Статья поступила в редакцию 05.08.2024; после рецензирования 08.08.2024, принята к публикации 10.08.2024. Авторы прочитали и одобрили окончательный вариант рукописи.
The article was submitted on 05.08.2024; revised on 08.08.2024 and accepted for publication on 10.08.2024. The authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.
