The value sphere of native and newcomer youth in their subjective assessment of the environment of a megalopolis

Abstract

IntroductionThe modern world is a civilization of cities. The development of society, technology, culture, wealth, and new knowledge are today primary functions of cities but not of other socio-territorial formations. Cities are now centers of freight logistics, information, and social streams. Therefore, fullness of city life -- especially if we speak about a large city with multiple events and a large number of alternatives for work, leisure, education, sources of information, services, and other benefits (Kogan, 1990) -- makes this type of settlement most attractive location for many groups of people. This attraction is also evidenced by population growth of large Russian cities (including as a result of internal migration) and sparser rural population (Volkova, Sokolov, & Terentyev, 2015).The development of modern cities depends on their human resources -- that is to say, on their populations. Therefore, to attract and retain in city class -- young people -- city has to create conditions for its future development. To this end, many cities have implemented targeted programs of social support for young people and formation of specific conditions of urban environment conducive to maximum fulfillment of capacity of their young residents. Thus, in strategic development plan of municipality of Ekaterinburg (Strategic development plan of Ekaterinburg through 2020, 2010), one of priorities is development of conditions for active self-determination and self-realization of young people as carriers of innovation. However, socioeconomic-development strategy for Moscow (Strategy for socio-economic development of Moscow through 2025, 2012) emphasizes that one of major challenges will be reduction of population of 20-35 year-olds by a third; as a result, Moscow will become a city with a strongly deformed age structure. In connection with these trends special attention in development strategy of Moscow is paid to mechanisms for creating special conditions to attract people necessary for a megalopolis: representatives of the creative class, highly qualified specialists, as well as active, talented youth.A significant proportion of young people migrate actively inside country. For example, more than 70% of high school graduates from small settlements moved to Central federal region. And, in 2013, 114,347 people from rural settlements arrived in cities of Ural federal region; of them 39,754 people were from other regions of Russian Federation and 74,593 migrated inside Ural federal region[1] (Migration inside Russia by territories of arrival and departure, 2014).141The experience of living in certain places affects perceptions and environmental preferences of people. They may prefer or look for what they are accustomed to (Hauge, 2007). When they transfer their residence experience in other areas to urban environment, certain risks of pseudourbanization are created. But also arriving in cities are young people with increasing experience of interaction within an urban community; they are changing themselves more and more, and city and its way of life have already become for them a measure for evaluating environmental living conditions. The acquired experience of life in a city creates individual stories of young people as citizens who identify themselves with city. Identity with place is formed through a combination of human-ascribed meanings and values of a particular location (for example, a city) and various features (Lalli, 1992). Thus urban environment becomes for young people a place of opportunities for self-realization. This process takes place with a background of risks of urban life, and goals that young people set reflect their need-motivational bases of personality.A city concentrates opportunities, but young people are quite aware of obvious disadvantages of artificial, highly dynamic environment of a city (Kruzhkova, 2014); this environment runs counter to natural conformity built up for thousands of years by rural way of life that was typical for majority of population of Russia one hundred years ago (Bondyreva & Kolesov, 2004). …