Russian Sociology Research Articles

The Annual Canadian Sociological Association Conference 2023. Research Cluster: Sociology of Housing

From May 29 to June 2, 2023, the Annual Conference of the Canadian Sociological Association was held at York University in Toronto, where various academic, research, educational, and administrative topics were discussed. The conference was part of the Congress of the Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences and attracted speakers and attendees from Canada and other countries. Notably, for the first time since 2003, a research cluster focusing on the sociology of housing was presented, which had been initiated within the association at the end of 2021. Participants included scientific and pedagogical professionals, students, practitioners, and independent researchers, who engaged in two sections dedicated to sociological studies of housing and homelessness. Discussions covered a range of topics including chronic homelessness among women, mobile homelessness, the risk of homelessness among youth, attitudes towards the homeless, housing conditions of different social groups, and housing precarity. Special attention was given to state housing policy and the federal 'Housing First' strategy, the outcomes of which are subject to debate. The reports presented by the Sociology of Housing Research Cluster are of great interest to researchers focusing on housing issues in liberal democratic countries, including Canada, and to sociologists interested in developing housing sociology in Russia based on international experiences.

Sociology of professions – situation and prospects (round table)

The «round table» discussed the problems of sociology of professions and the prospects for a relatively new section in the journal «Sociological Studies» in the year of the anniversary of the journal. The discussion focuses on the analysis of the subject and object of this discipline, its theoretical and methodological foundations, issues of modern problems of the discipline, the most promising research areas, the specifics of its existence in Russian sociology. The most significant aspects of the sociology of professions subject area are related to the professional activity, the interaction of professionals and professional communities with the state, society, and the market. Attention is paid to the analysis of the discipline origins, the adaptation of its conceptual and methodological approaches: developments in the national sociology of labour, employment and management, studies of the intelligentsia, approaches of sociology, anthropology, ethnography of professions, and other disciplines played an important role. Contradictions in the development of sociology of professions theoretical and methodological explanatory models, as well as research directions, are also shown. It is noted that despite the long-term crisis of the discipline, its potential in the study of modern processes in the field of labor and employment, social policy, and the formation of professional communities is still high. Participants: Roman N. ABRAMOV, Dr. Sci. (Sociol.), Prof. of Sociology Department, Leading Researcher of the International Laboratory for Social Integration Research, HSE University; Leading Researcher Institute of Sociology of FCTAS RAS, Moscow (rabramov@hse.ru, socioportal@yandex.ru); Elena R. IARSKAIA-SMIRNOVA, Dr. Sci. (Sociol.), Рrof., Head of International Laboratory of Social Integration Research, HSE University, Moscow (elena.iarskaia@gmail.com; eiarskaia@hse.ru); Valeriy A.MANSUROV, Dr. Sci. (Sociol.), Prof., Chief Researcher, Head of the Sector of Sociology of Professions and Professional Groups, Institute of Sociology of FСТAS, Moscow (mansurov@isras.ru); Aleksandra A. MOSKOVSKAYA, Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Director, Centre for Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation Studies, HSE University, Moscow (amoskovskaya@hse.ru); Irina P. POPOVA, Cand. Sci. (Sociol.), Leading Researcher, Institute of Sociology of FCTAS RAS, Moscow (irina_popova@list.ru); Natalya N. STARTSEVA, Cand. Sci. (Soc.), Assoc. Prof., Ural State University of Railway Transport, Yekaterinburg (NStarceva@usurt.ru); Olesya V. YURCHENKO, Cand. Sci. (Sociol.), PhD, Senior Researcher of the Institute of Sociology of FCTAS RAS, Moscow (olesya@mail.ru). All – Russia.

Social studies of finance as a new vector for sociological research of modern society

The article introduces readers to a new academic direction for Russian sociology – social studies of finance. This research field is actively producing new scientific concepts and topics, as well as the epistemic tools to study society. Sociologists play their part in this collective work. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate sociological perspectives of finance, to investigate how sociologists see the subject of their scientific search and its theoretical problems. It is noted that the formation of the academic field has been going on for more than 20 years, therefore, each decade was allocated to a separate research wave, for which an analytical review of key sociological scientific works of the European sociologists from the specialized issues of academic journals (Socio-Economic Review и Economic Sociology. European Electronic Newsletter, Finance and Society etc.) was conducted. This analysis helped identify a range of relevant research issues and theoretical problems, to trace their evolution. As a result, the author concludes that the study of the sociological problems of finance is a key to understand the structure of modern society, for it has transformative influence on society at all its levels – from state and organization to individual.

Россия в перспективе исторической социологии: эвристические перспективы и методологические проблемы

The article discusses the heuristic and methodological potential of historical sociology as one of the most dynamically developing disciplines of modern social and scientific knowledge. It is argued that this area of research is functionally capable of taking on the role of today's analytical philosophy of history in the form of integrity and, at the same time, the operational reflection of the historical experience of our country. The article points out the deficient nature of previous conceptualizations of the domestic past from the point of view of historical sociology. First, the development of this discipline in the West is briefly analyzed, starting with the classics of world sociology. The qualitative and quantitative growth of historical and sociological research in the second half of the 20th century—which led to a significant expansion of the explanatory repertoire of macrosociology—is highlighted. Next, the ambivalent position of historical sociology in Russia is discussed, where—despite the existing interest in its methodological categories and substantive results—a full-fledged institutionalization of this sociological discipline has not yet occurred. Thus, a conclusion is made about the existence of a serious local tradition of interest in historical-sociological synthesis, starting with the classics of historiography and pioneers of Russian sociology at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. At the same time, substantial progress is highlighted on the part of the domestic social-scientific community in the reception of the achievements of world-historical sociology at the beginning of the 21st century. The next section shows the particular relevance of modern historical-sociological approaches to the problematization of the past in the context of the domestic epistemological situation. A number of the most promising thematic complexes in modern Russian academia are highlighted. In conclusion, we highlight issues concerning framework research and scientific organization faced by historical sociology in Russia.

Как можно понимать и как тогда практиковать историческую социологию

The essay presents its author's understanding of historical sociology, as well as a view on how to practice historical sociology. The preconditions that have been necessary for the emergence of historical sociology from the American intellectual tradition are the following: first, to overcome the ‘historiosophical ahistoricism’ of classical sociology and the ahistoricism of early empirical sociology in the United States. Second, the emergence of ‘social history’ in Europe under the influence of the Great War and the social sciences rejecting the idea of progress in its evolutionary and revolutionary interpretations. The essay provides a detailed investigation of the features of the ‘new historical science’ in comparison with its traditional counterpart, as well as exploring the similarities and differences between social history and historical sociology. Social history is considered as an intermediate link between the classical ‘sociology of history’ and American historical sociology. Following social history, historical sociology turns to comparative studies and quantitative methods, but at the same time does not abandon hermeneutics. Historical sociology presupposes a mutual weakening of the nomothetics of classical ‘grand theories’ and the ideography of traditional history. It also implies a full-fledged sociological investigation of historical phenomena using procedures accepted in empirical sociology, rather than the reinterpretation of historical research in sociological-theoretical terms. This results in the emergence of special (rather than general) processual and medium-level theories of social change based on historical facts. Historical sociology focuses on theoretical generalizations, which clearly distinguishes it from social history. The essay investigates the different approaches and purposes of using the comparative historical method - and the quantitative methods that complement it. In turn, their utilization leads to problems with the acceptance of their results by traditional historians specialized in a single country and on studying primary sources in the original. Instead of concluding, the author discusses his experience and participation in the institutionalization of historical sociology in Russia and points out the problems hindering it.

Developmental trends of military sociology IN Russia (based on the analysis of publications in Sociological Studies, 2014–2023)

The article presents an analysis of the state and prospects of military sociology in Russia, reflected in Sociological Studies for the period 2014–2023. The article is a logical continuation of the previously begun work on the analysis of military sociology institutionalization in Russia for the period 1974–2013. Thus, the results of the 50-year activity of the journal’s editorial board on the support and development of military sociology in Russia are summarized. Based on the thematic content analysis of publications and an analysis of quantitative and qualitative authorship characteristics, conclusions are drawn about a decrease in the number of studies of army problems in the last ten years, an increase in the number of materials on historical issues and prospects for the formation of the sociology of war as a new field of interdisciplinary knowledge. The authorship is being transformed to wards expanding regional and international diversity, reducing the number of authors representing the military department. Such problematic issues of military sociology development as the closed nature of research results in the military and the narrowing of traditional military sociological issues are stated. The potential of military sociology in the study of wars and armed conflicts remains unrealized, finding expression in the coverage of peripheral topics.

Russians of the near abroad in the focus of Russian sociology: the evolution of research approaches and angles (1990s – 2020s)

The article examines main directions of sociological research on the Russian population of the near Abroad, establishes quantitative, thematic dynamics, territorial priorities of publications devoted to this problem complex. A shift in publication activity has been revealed from large forms (author’s and collective monographs, collections of articles) that dominated in the 1990s to scientific periodicals, the quantitative peak of which occurred in the second half of the 2000s. Of the leading Russian sociological publications “Sociological Studies” paid maximum attention to the problems of foreign Russians. The professional community, initially consisting of researchers from Moscow academic structures, gradually expanded to include specialists from St. Petersburg and the post-Soviet countries themselves. Since the late 2000s, the activity of researchers from Russian regions has been growing significantly. In the context of content, there was a gradual thematic detailing of research, a shift to more specific angles and narrow groups of the analyzed Russian population. Geographically, the interest of ethnosociologists was extremely unevenly distributed – three quarters of all publications were devoted to Russians from four post-Soviet countries (Kazakhstan, Estonia, Latvia, Ukraine). At the same time, the Russian communities of the South Caucasus, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan practically fell out of the research focus, despite the fact that their adaptation to the new conditions of functioning was quite difficult.

Politics in the journal “sotsiologicheskiye issledovaniya”: between ideology and episteme

Each historical era is characterized by its own “episteme” – a general system of thinking and scientific theorizing. The episteme of politics in Russian sociology was formed in conditions of confrontation between ideology and scientific analysis, state patronage and academic freedom. The main stages are highlighted: 1) the first decade 1974–1984; 2) Perestroika 1985–1990; 3) 1990s; 4) 2000s. The journal «Sotsiologicheskiye issledovanya» is considered as a specific form of representation of professional knowledge and ways of knowing, determined by the current level of development of the discipline and the concept of the journal itself. The increasing complexity of the thematic structure, transdisciplinary approach, and the project-based and discussion-based nature of publications help overcome the epistemological uncertainty of politics.

Changing values of work (based on the materials from Russian and foreign publications)

The sphere of work, which was previously central to Soviet and Russian sociology constantly covered in the Sociological Studies journal, is no longer so, although work remains an important subject of research in the conditions of the challenging digital transformation and growing uncertainty. Based on the analysis of domestic and foreign publications, the authors tried to identify current trends in the development of research that reflect global and regional changes in labor. Solving this problem allows the authors to show which problems attract the prime attention of scientists from different countries, and define the prospects for the future research. The authors show the discussion conducted by researchers on the topic of changing labor values. Particular attention is paid to how precarization is analyzed and the growth of the “meaninglessness” of labor is argued. A significant similarity of the identified problems in Russia and foreign countries is emphasized, regardless of the fact that they belong to different levels of socio-economic development, differ in work culture and other characteristics.

Changes in the problem and subject field of labor sociology against the backdrop of the time challenges (Based on publications in the journal “Sociological Studies” over 50 years)

Trends in the problem and subject field of labor sociology were identified by referring to the Sociological Studies journal publications for 1974–2023. An array of 351 articles on labor sociology was selected for qualitative and quantitative content analysis. Eleven problematic subject areas of research were identified by the criterion of the leading target of the article’s text. Fourtime frames in Russian society and economic development over the past 50 years have been distinguished to identify the time challenges that vary in content. Each period was provided with a brief description of the content of the research problem and subject areas, as well as interpretations thereof with due consideration of the time challenges. Analysis of the publications permitted to reveal that by the criteria of how frequent and stable the sociologists’ referrals to the selected areas have been, the core, the margins, and the mobile realm may be identified in the Russian sociology of labor. The core is formed by the areas related to the studies of labor attitudes, labor incentives, labor values, employee behavior, and job satisfaction. The areas – whose principal object of study is labor itself, along with its role and significance in both the society and the employees’ values as well as social problems of work at the enterprise – are adjacent to the core. The margins are formed by rare areas of research such as the workers’ capacity to act, manifestations of independence and involvement in the organization’s affairs, problems of the socioeconomic standing of workers and degree of labor protection, labor culture, shortage and reproduction of workers. The mobile realm of labor sociology is composed by the areas treated generally depending on the context of time and the aggravation of particular problem situations (labor organization, labor relations, precarity of labor, etc). We observed adequate coverage of the critical time challenges in publications in all those time frames; however, that coverage was reactive and appeared to lack forward-looking ideas that are ahead of theory and practice.

Становление современной российской социологии: интервью с профессором Владимиром Вячеславовичем Козловским

We had a conversation with Vladimir Kozlovskiy in April 2024, coinciding with the 300th anniversary of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Vladimir Kozlovskiy is a Doctor of Sciences (Philosophy), Professor, Director of the Sociological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Branch of the Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences (SI RAS – FCTAS RAS), Head of the Department of Sociology of Culture and Communication, Faculty of Sociology, Saint Petersburg State University, and Chief Co-Editor of the Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology. During the interview, the influence of culture and social processes on the development and institutionalization of Russian sociology was discussed. Vladimir Kozlovskiy is one of the leading experts in the field of the history of sociology and was awarded the II-class Medal of the Order "For Merit to the Fatherland"; he is the Honoured Worker of Higher Education of the Russian Federation. His studies of civilizational development models of modern societies have made a great contribution to modern sociology. The relevance of research conducted under the leadership of Vladimir Kozlovskiy is especially high in the context of the modern development of Russian society.

An apology for utopia: on the return of utopian constructions to the mainstream sociological theorizing

Utopian thought, the aspiration toward idealized conditions, and the progression toward advancement have historically constituted a cornerstone of the modernist ethos. Sociology, as an intellectual offspring of the modern epoch, has inherently engaged with utopian constructs – directing its gaze towards conceivable societal futures. In the current era where global challenges – such as climate change, social inequality, and populist political movements – present complex social problems, the relevance of utopian thinking in sociology is underscored as a tool for envisioning transformative solutions. Nonetheless, contemporary developments within the discipline signal a marked attenuation of utopian fervor. This paper scrutinizes the factors contributing to the diminished enthusiasm for utopian speculations within sociological theory. The decline is largely attributed to a shift towards postmodern paradigms, characterized by skepticism towards grand narratives and a pervasive mid-20th-century critique of utopianism. Despite this, the heuristic value of utopian thinking as a methodological instrument for social analysis remains substantial. The central thesis advocates for a resurgence of utopian thought within sociological inquiry, proposing that its restoration functions as a potent critical apparatus. Amid pressing societal crises, sociological engagement with utopian ideals is not merely an academic exercise but a practical imperative. It empowers the discipline to envision alternative social configurations, articulate social aspirations, and pragmatically approach their realization. Utopian thought can stimulate innovative policy-making, encourage societal engagement, and help construct resilient social systems in the face of adversity. Presently, Russian sociology, reflective of broader global sociological trends, does not proffer a societal ideal, hence it navigates without direction, merely mapping and interpreting the existing social landscape. This trajectory has practical implications, potentially limiting the discipline’s ability to be prescriptive and proactive. Confronted with this reality, Russian sociologists – and the discipline more broadly – are urged to rekindle the utopian imagination as a pivotal component of their intellectual endeavor. In doing so, they may foster a renewed sense of direction and purpose in the discipline of sociology, making it all the more pertinent in addressing the multifaceted complexities of today’s world.

N.A. Berdyaev: strokes to the portrait of a social philosopher

The article examines the views of N. A. Berdyaev. The author relies on the publications of the historian of Russian sociology V.V. Sapov, problemicizing on nature of thinking and style of Berdyaev’s philosophizing, of how sociological is his methodology, as well as the assessment of his so-called “apophatic sociology”. The author shows that Berdyaev’s social philosophy is based on the doctrine of man (philosophical anthropology), the core of which is religious and philosophical concept of personality (personalism). Parallels are drawn with the views of V.l. Solovyov, S. N. Bulgakov, S. L. Frank, M. Scheler. The ideological and value meaning of Berdyaev’s “Christian sociology” is shown to be based on the ideal of “personalistic socialism”, which he considered “true communism”, and is crowned by eschatology, calling for an “active understanding of the apocalypse”. In conclusion, the author emphasizes the relevance of Berdyaev’s views for our time – the epoch of the dominance of digital techniques, social technologies, and a decline of human spiritual potential.

Nearing his 90th Anniversary. Not so Cheerful Memories. Yakov Gilinsky Answers Boris Doktorov’s Questions. Interview prepared by B.Z. Doktorov

Strictly speaking this is an anniversary interview with Yakov I. Gilinsky, a renowned Russian sociologist and criminologist who dedicated many years of his life to researching various forms of deviant behavior. But in reality this is me having a discussion with a colleague and a friend who is approaching an important milestone in his life – his 90th birthday. With this being far from our first discussion about his life experience and accomplishments, as ten years ago he spoke about himself in a book titled “Me in the World, the World in me”, and bearing in mind that there are multiple videos on YouTube where he was interviewed, I thought it would be appropriate to avoid going over every stage of Mr. Gilinsky’s life and instead suggested we talk about events that transpired within the previous 20 years, leaving the more distant past in the background. Thanks to this key component of the conversation readers can get some insight into the trials and tribulations that his ancestors went through, into his path towards becoming a scientist and his accomplishments in the field, as well as into the happy and most productive years of his life during the perestroika. Readers learn about Mr. Gilinsky’s frequent communication with the world’s most renowned criminologists, his participation in major scientific conferences, his business trips and travels with his wife – who was always by his side – when they visited many countries in Europe and located on other continents. But aside from that we discuss the dynamics of important global and national macro-political processes, negative tendencies in the development of social sciences in Russia, overwhelming hardship in his own personal life, all of which made our conversation not all that cheerful. That being said, overall Yakov Gilinsky made it in life, his achievements will be relevant for many years to come.

Conceptualization of the “precariat” phenomenon in Russian sociology

Conceptualization of the “precariat” phenomenon in Russian sociology

Why Chinese “Society” is So Called: How Social and Managerial Discourse Caused the Choice of the Word at the Turn of the 19th and 20th Centuries

Introduction. The purpose of this article is to investigate the reasons for the choice of the term “shehui” to designate the concept of “society” in China at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. The research novelty of the work is manifested in the complex analysis of social and managerial discourse of that time and in the identification of factors that influenced the terminological choice. The relevance of the study is conditioned by the necessity to understand the processes of formation of social sciences in China, which is important for the interpretation of modern socio-political processes in the country, including in the context of modern sociology of management. This is especially important for Russian sociology, since its area of interest includes the search for mutually beneficial strategies of interaction between Russian and Chinese societies. And this is impossible without studying China's approaches to managing the country's development processes, its internal and external social relations. Methodology and sources. The study applies a system-historical approach, as well as discursive, terminological, etymographic and factor analysis. The paper analyzes classical Chinese texts and works of Chinese enlighteners of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and also uses some materials collected by modern researchers, in particular, by N.M. Kalyuzhnaya. Results and discussion. The main results of the study were the identification and analysis of factors (including internal political, social, foreign policy and linguistic factors) that determined the social and managerial discourse of the period under study and the choice in favor of “shehui” among the main terms competing for the right to designate the concept of “society”. Author pointed out that the process of formation of social and managerial discourse was in line with the gradual decline in the influence of traditionalism and strengthening of the ideas of anti-monarchism, people's power and self-government. Conclusion. Author emphasized that the term “shehui” became one of the key terms in the social and managerial discourse of China at the turn of the century, reflecting global socio[1]political trends. The choice of this term is the result of a complex interaction of various factors in the formation of discursive practices, which themselves were further modified under the influence of the term and its derivatives.

Russian sociologists on the foundations of solidarity: subjectivity, predictability and common feelings

Each concept of solidarity emphasises certain grounds and factors of solidarisation of society, linking them to social changes or, on the contrary, to the constants of human existence. In periods of social change, not only a decrease or increase in the degree of social consolidation takes place, but also a weakening of some forms of solidarity and the formation of others. The purpose of this study is to identify the bases of solidarity related to sociality and anthropological parameters of being. Although forms of solidarity change from society to society and at different historical stages of their development, no society remains viable and progressive in the absence of solidarity. The present study of the foundations of solidarity goes beyond both traditional sociological concepts of integration and disintegration, of normal society and anomie, and psychological theories of group needs and self-expression, that describe only the immediate preconditions and effects of solidarity. The author relies on secondary analysis of sources and theoretical analysis of sociological concepts of sociality and social reproduction. The research materials include publications by Russian scholars from the 19th century, when the first concepts of sobornost', omnipresence and positivist-practical interpretations of solidarity emerged in Russian sociology, to the present day, devoted to the issues of conditions for the formation of solidarity, consolidation and deconsolidation of society. The author identifies explicitly and implicitly present in the sources of understanding about the foundations of solidarity related to the constants of human existence and sociality: subjectivity, predictability and commonality of feelings. The subjectivity of social actors as the highest, reflexive level of subjectivity determines their ability and will to social creativity and actions in favour of the social whole. The predictability of the social environment ensures the majority's adherence to acceptable common rules, belief in common values on the basis of mutual trust and justice. Mutual aid and altruism within solidarity communities are considered as impossible without the third foundation of solidarity - the community of feelings of social subjects, associated with the commonality of their life worlds.

РАЗВИТИЕ РОССИЙСКОЙ СОЦИОЛОГИИ ФИЗИЧЕСКОЙ КУЛЬТУРЫ И СПОРТА КАК НАУЧНОГО НАПРАВЛЕНИЯ И УЧЕБНОЙ ДИСЦИПЛИНЫ

For over a century, Russian sociologists have been engaged in the study of physical culture and sport, with a particular focus on the mass and professional spheres. Physical education and sport are integral parts of social, cultural as well as socio-political life. Motivation, socialization through sport, education and health improvement, attitudes to physical education, the problems of Olympic and mass sports movement, etc., have come to the fore in different historical periods. All this can be found in the scientific publications of Russian sociologists and other social and humanitarian scientists. In the meantime, the analysis of sociological publications on this topic and their systematization, with the exception of the work of Russian sociologist O. A. Milstein, have not been carried out in a practical manner. In this paper, a scientific analysis of a variety of sources was carried out using two distinct approaches: comparative-historical and problem-chronological. The sources included brochures, articles and monographs, dissertations, and periodicals. Consequently, the principal thematic orientations of sociological inquiry into physical culture and sport in Russia, as well as the distinctive characteristics of sociological research across different historical eras, are elucidated. The institutionalization of the sociology of sport is considered in close connection with the institutionalization of Russian sociology. Moreover, experts examine the teaching of courses on the sociology of physical culture and sport in Russian universities. The process began in the 1920s and was subsequently interrupted. It can be stated that there has been an increase in the number of scientific publications on the sociology of physical culture and sport during the 2000-2020s. Furthermore, a number of textbooks on this subject have emerged during the same period.

Methodology of processing bibliographic data in Russian language to construct collaboration networks (using the example of the eLibrary database)

The methodology for processing bibliographic data in Russian is presentedbased on the example of analyzing publications of Russian sociologists in the eLibrary, Russia's largest electronic library of scientific publications.The developed methodological approach involves the use and adaptation of technological solutions to form a bibliographic database, builds networks for further analysis and applies network analysis methods to study various fields of knowledge. The main steps of collecting and preprocessing data in Russian from the eLibrary are described. Examining a corpus of sociological publications within the eLibrary, this study delves into common challenges encountered during the preprocessing stage of bibliographic information related to author names and affiliations. The paper suggests potential solutions to address these issues. Additionally, the paper suggests various solutions to address these challenges. The methodology is applicable to the analysis of various publications by Russian-speaking authors indexed in the eLibrary.

DISPROPORTIONS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL REPUBLICS OF RUSSIA IN THE ASSESSMENTS OF RUSSIAN SOCIOLOGISTS: THE ETHNOSOCIAL ASPECT (USING THE EXAMPLE OF ASIAN RUSSIA)

The article is devoted to the problem of disproportion in the regional development of the national republics of Asian Russia: the Republic of Altai, the Republic of Buryatia, the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), the Republic of Tyva, the Republic of Khakassia. The problems of demographic development of regions (decrease in average life expectancy and the share of the population, including Russian, “Western” migration trend), quality of life (decrease in income and employment), development of industry and agriculture are considered. The empirical basis of the study was a comparative analysis of indicators of average life expectancy at birth, average per capita income, employment and unemployment levels based on Rosstat data. The results of research by Russian sociologists studying these regions were used as secondary sources of information. A serious lag in the quality of life of the national regions of the Siberian and Far Eastern districts from the Russian average has been revealed. The conclusion is made about the need to overcome the view of Asian Russia as an exclusively resource storehouse.