The specifics and spatial structure of circular migration in Russia

Abstract

This article aims at distinguishing recurrent population movements within the territory of the Russian Federation between urban localities of different sizes and rural areas in connection to the processes of urbanization, suburbanization, and de-urbanization. Incomplete urbanization and the strong polarization of socio-economic space in Russia have resulted in two powerful contradictory population flows: centrifugal seasonal sub- and de-urbanization and centripetal labor migration from rural and small towns to large urban centers. The article discusses three forms of recurrent population mobility in Russia: (1) daily commuting of urban and rural inhabitants within metropolitan areas; (2) commuting to large cities and their suburbs for long-term employment intervals (weekly, monthly, etc.), (3) second-home commuting to countryside dachas. Unfinished urbanization in Russia not only attracts rural and small towns’ population to major cities but also keeps it within the latter. It slows down the real de-urbanization and induces specific dachas (second-home) suburbanization/de-urbanization, with these processes being closely interrelated. An opportunity to earn money in cities together with the impossibility of moving to major centers due to expensive housing encourages households to remain in small towns and rural areas. Meanwhile, inhabited rural localities (even ones distant from cities) attract seasonal population (dachniks).

Keywords:

• Socio-economic polarization
• urbanization
• de-urbanization
• spatial recurrent population mobility
• labor migration
• commuting
• dacha
• otkhod
• Russia

Acknowledgments

The first part of the article was written by T.G. Nefedova and J. Pallot. The second, third, fourth, and fifth parts were written by A.G. Makhrova and T.G. Nefedova in the framework of the project of Russian Science Foundation (Institute of Geography Russian Academy of Sciences) No 14-18-00083, “Geography of Recurrent Population Mobility within the Rural–Urban Continuum.”

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. Researchers delimited Moscow agglomeration in different ways. In this study we simply define it in the borders of Moscow oblast.

2. Otkhodnik was the name for a peasant in the eighteenth to the early twentieth centuries who, during the cold seasons, departed from rural areas to work in a city. The phenomenon disappeared in the 1930s after collectivization, as peasants did not have passports and could not freely leave their place of residence for temporary employment. However, since the late 1980s overall population mobility has increased and otkhodnichestvo has again become a significant practice to ensure the economical welfare of households and provide workforce for the major cities and remote regions that specialize in natural resource extraction.

3. The Non-Chernozyom regions refer to an area in Central and Northern European Russia named for the predominant soil type, as opposed to the southern area with chernozyom soils.

4. Calculated from Obsledovanie naseleniya (2014).

5. Unlike its English language definition, a “cottage” in Russia pertains to a multi-storied mansion or a villa.