Субъективная оценка личной безопасности как показатель адаптированности к рискогенной среде

Abstract

The basis for this article is the point that the risk level in a certain environment grows under the influence of economic crisis, causing the population to become vulnerable and require adaptation. Determined is the specificity of the sociological approach towards personal safety assessment based on its connection with social well-being and the process ofadaptation to conditions of environmental uncertainty, while substantiating the need for including subjective safety assessment in empirical studies of social well-being. It proves that traditional indicators are incomplete for an adequate interpretation of the empirical estimation of “personal safety”, as measured in a risky environment. An empirical view of personal safety is augmented by complementing this indicator with assessments ofthe daily emotional and psychological state and certainty/uncertainty for the future. According to the constructed indicator of personal safety, population groups which differ when it comes to estimates of social well-being were revealed. The analysis was based on empirical data from the Institute of Sociology FCTAS RAS monitoring survey (“fifth wave”, October 2016). Social portraits of population groups which have and have not adapted to the risky environment are presented. The relationship between personal safety and the level of adaptability to a risky environment is proven based on analyzing the contribution ofpersonal safety to the assessment of social well-being. Demonstrated is the fact that a high rating of personal safety is an important adaptive resource, while a low rating acts as a barrier when it comes to adapting. The aim ofadaptation to a risky environment is to achieve a certain safety status based on high assessments of one’s own position and the state of the environment. Including assessments of environment state in the social well-being indicator shows the main directions of development for adaptive potential in a risky environment: recovery of the economy; raising living standards for the population, normalizing the labor market and reducing unemployment, improving health, education and pension support, developing democracy and improving the situation with human rights and freedoms.