Лекция 2. Развитие городов и сельской местности Зубаревич Н.В.

Agglomeration effect Geographic concentration enlarges economic efficiency: scale effect cutting of transportation costs labor force, equipment, knowledge consentration increase of technologic competition and speeding-up of innovations implementation

Circular causality in spatial agglomeration of firms (consumer-goods producers) and consumers (Fujuta 1996) more consumers locate in the city greater variety of consumer goods produced higher real income from a given nominal wage more firms locate in the city real income effect demand effect

Negative effect of consentration Mono-profile (one-company) town Sustainability risks: - economic situation / demand / price volatility - resource exhaustion Double risks: one-company town + depressive sector company

Russia settlement structure,% instable equlibrium – zones of traditionalism and modernisation 36% 38% cities

Size of the city and capability to adopt to the market conditions Cities 250,000 population and more seems to be the most sustainable. These are the centers of regions and the biggest industrial cities (Treyvish & Nefedova). The number of big cities – only 7%, but they concentrate the half of urban population. 1/4 Russian urban population lives in cities- "millionaires". These are key points for Russia development.

Growing points of Russia economy Federal cities agglomerations Big cities (1 mln population more) Regional centers (250 thousand more) Monofunctional cities/towns of exporting BB companies enterprises location

Diffusion of innovations and concumption/ style of life modernization St-Peters Samara Novosibirsk Yekaterinburg N.Novgorod Moscow Postov-Don Region cenrets Reg. centers Periphery RETAIL MOBILE COM INTERNET BBC 250 th.pop КОЛОГРИВ УРЮПИНСК suburbs TOWNS

Super centralization: share of federal cities/agglomerations in Russia total 2007, % MoscowSt.-Peter- sburg GRP 234 Investment (+Moscow region) 11 (17)5 Foreign trade 386 Retail turnover (+Moscow region) 19 (25)4 Housing construction (+Moscow region) 8 (21)4 Budget incomes 206 Population 73

Shifting of activities not investment Share of big cities in Russia total, % 7% 3% 9% Share of population

Retail expansion: construction of hypermarkets S hare of different types of cities in total offer 2008,%

Slow spreading: share of Internet-audience, % (2005) pop. 1 mln more – 71% pop. 500, mln – 13% pop. 250, ,000. – 10% pop. 100, ,000 – 4%

Internet users in the Russian cities coverage, % of poulation (2009) Russia total – 31% Barriers: poor infrastrusture, low incomes and education level, traditional lifestyle

Speed of Internet diffusion (2009/2001): complex of factors (location, incomes, population etc.)

Regional centers – the main structural shifts Retail functions concentration Share of regional centers in region's trade turnover, % population, thousand people

Regional centers – the main structural shifts Deindustrialisation has stopped, new structure of industry is established Share of regional center in region's trade turnover, % population, thousand people

Advanced wages growth in the centers with the bigger population: status + aggomeration effect advantages (regional center wages to region's average wages, %) population, thousand people

What are the leading regional centers? Average wages in big cities: no significant difference exept Moscow (rubles)

What are the leading regional centers? Retail turnover and housing construction

What are the leading regional centers? Investment per capita industry

Postindustrial shift depends on the structure of industry Industrial output, thousand rubles per capita, constant prices 2005 industrial

What kind of agglomerations will grow up? Regional resources for concentration (share of center/agglomeration in the region, %)

Trends of regional centers development Leading growth of wages Employeers concentration Retail concentration Housing construction concentration as well Low investment Low budget revenues due to redistribution policy Low migration inflow from the other regions and stable inflow within region itself

Suburbian areas – migrants flow concentration Population growth in the regions and cities/towns nearby Moscow agglomeration, 2003 to 1989,% Tula Tver Vladimir Smolensk Yaroslavl Kaluga Ryazan Покров – Штольверк Александров – Рекорд Заокский – рекреация,стр-во Обнинск – технопарк Гагарин – вынос пром. предприятий, логистика Конаково – пром., рекреация Переславль-рекреация

Suburbian areas – migrants flow concentration Population growth in the regions and cities/towns nearby St-Peterburg agglomeration, 2003 to 1989,% St-Pb Vologda Novgorod Pskov Petroza- vodsk Чудово - Кэдберри Струги Красные - Петмол

Big and wealthy cities

Monofunctional (one-company) towns - heritage of industrial planned economy. Different incomes range (high/ medium/ low) and shortage of diverse urban environment cities/towns BB companies location 14% of Russian cities 13% of urban populaton 300 cities/towns – Ministry of Regional Development estimation 460 cities / towns Soviet period (45%)

Monofunctional cities/towns of BB companies location. Many of them were injured by new crisis drastically

Leading cities of Volga and Urals regions: mix of regional centers and monofunctional cities Russian specific of urban development in transition period Investment per capHousing construction per capRetail turnover per capAverage wages/salary Чайковский Казань Энгельс Тольятти Альметьевск Салават Чебоксары Казань Самара Екатеринбург Альметьевск Магнитогорск Новотроицк Альметьевск Стерлитамак Альметьевск Екатеринбург Пермь Магнитогорск Тольятти Нижнекамск Тольятти Оренбург Пермь Уфа Березники Пермь Казань Магнитогорск Нефтекамск Екатеринбург Оренбург Казань Пермь Екатеринбург Ижевск Оренбург Саратов Чебоксары Уфа Самара НовотроицкУфа Березники Чайковский Челябинск Уфа Стерлитамак Н. Новгород Екатеринбург Новокуйбышевс к Магнитогорск Березники Энгельс Новочебо ксарск Нефтекамск ЧелябинскУфа Салават Пермь Уфа Нижнекамск Тольятти Казань Оренбург Нижнекамск Саратов Пермь Оренбург Челябинск Альметьевск Стерлитамак Самара Тольятти Новотроицк Альметьевск Пермь Саратов Курган Новокуйбышевс к Н. Тагил Уфа Тольятти Димитр овград Арзамас Пенза Нефтекамск Димитровград Березники Салават Новокуйбышевс к Киров Нижнекамск Октябрьский Салават Кам.-Уральский Новокуйбышевс к Ижевск Октябрьский Саратов Челябинск Магнитогорск Н. Тагил Челябинск Нефтекамск Н. Тагил Екатеринбург Пенза Салават Сызрань Оренбург Первоуральск

Modernization barriers Despite the high rate of diffusion, development of global information and communication networks in Russian regions encounters real barriers - low incomes and non-modernized lifestyle. Residents of medium-sized and small towns together with rural population have dropped out from the global space and the gap between the central and peripheral regions is widening.

Agricultural functions of countryside are shrinking Center-periphery gradient of rural population and agricultural productivity Population density: from suburbian areas (1) to deep periphery (7) Cattle productivity (liters of milk per cow) from suburbian areas to periphery

Population density and economic "black holes" – visible correlation

New/old functions of countryside: objective trends Nonchernozem areas recreation nature conservation small wooden industries agriculture Huge problem of human capital Chernozem/ Southern areas agriculture Suburbian areas Settlement expansion Recreation Logictics Intensive agriculture Information for planning and doing business

Независимый институт социальной политики Социальный атлас российских регионов Мониторинг кризиса в регионах Тематические разделы Портреты регионов