Subjective Well-Being and Conflicting Social Identities in the Frontier Regions of Russia

This factor also has the maximum level of statistical significance, but its contribution is not the same in the two groups of regions; in the frontier, it is twice as influential in terms of life satisfaction as in the center.

Among the universal predictors of life satisfaction that are relevant both to frontier and region, it is also a locus of control. However, its weight in models for the regions of the center is twice as high.

The respondent's gender and place of residence were found to be insignificant factors in both samples. The influence of having children in the family has a feeble negative effect on life satisfaction only in the regions of the frontier. It disappears when the factor of economic optimism is included in the model. On the contrary, the factor of an individual's religiosity shows a weak positive relationship with life satisfaction only in the regions of the center of the country. It also disappears when the predictor of satisfaction with the situation in the country is added to the model.

Finally, the classical for the frontier theory socio-cultural trait presented as an indicator of social cohesion showed its influence in all models for the frontier sample; in the regions of the center, it showed weak significance only in models 1-3, before the inclusion of predictors of satisfaction with life in the region and the country.

Conclusion

It has become commonplace in social research to speak of a high degree of territorial heterogeneity and socio-cultural diversity in Russia. This diversity is viewed both in an “optimistic” way as a country's development potential and in a “challenging” one, as a possible source of division and even separatism. The issue of the optimal level of regional differentiation in Russia is up to date, which, on the one hand, would support the development and active interregional “economic division,” and on the other hand, would preserve the political and economic unity of the country. The frontier location of the region has an impact on various socio-cultural and socio-political features of its communities, thus shaping the specific territorial-civic identity of people living on the front lines of Russia. For instance, in the frontier regions, the cross-border mobility of the population is higher, leading to the familiarity with the social life and economic conditions of neighboring countries. This awareness determines that the population of the frontiers is more loyal and open to cultural exchange with the border states. Such features of the mass consciousness and social practice of the inhabitants of the frontier regions, presumably, are significant factors in the formation of a special territorial, social, and political identity. According to the descriptive analysis of the regional survey data, the frontier and core Russian regions differ slightly in terms of most of the analyzed indicators of social well-being. The residents of frontier regions are relatively more likely to express satisfaction with the state of affairs in their region than the residents of control regions. The studied regions turned out to be rather heterogeneous by territorial identity; however, some specificity has to be mentioned. National identity prevails in two frontier regions, Kaliningrad and Murmansk regions, and one control region, Chuvash Republic. Regional identity is relatively more salient in the Primorsky Territory and especially in the Crimea. For the first region, the geographical remoteness of the Far Easter from central Russia, the feeling of being “on the edge of the earth” intensify the awareness of belonging to the region of residence. For the latter, the high level of regional identity may be explained by the relatively recent entry of Crimea into Russia and the change of citizenship, which entails a change of territorial identity; thus the identification with Crimea is of an adaptive nature and allows maintaining a sense of stability against the background of ongoing socio-political transformations. Representing the Russian core Kostroma region has the highest level of local identity: probably, many Kostroma residents, despite their belonging to the Central Federal District, also feel abandoned by the “center”, which is also confirmed by the low satisfaction with affairs in the region.

Nevertheless, the “frontier” specifics in territorial identity was revealed in the regression modeling. Correspondingly with hypothesis one, by means of ordinary least squares model, we find that concerning life satisfaction, the attitudes of frontier and central populations are influenced by different territorial social identities that are also negatively correlated with each other. In line with hypothesis two, frontier inhabitants tend to be more satisfied with life is they associate themselves with the country as the whole, but not with their region or place of residence. However, this proposition did not work for the population of the core regions. On the contrary, in the central regions, the territorial identity of any kind does not play any role in explaining its inhabitants' life satisfaction, the primary focus is on the factors of socio-economic, socio-demographic, psychological and cultural nature, such as income, economic optimism, age, locus of control and religiosity. In its turn, social ties and feeling of cohesion between the surrounding people contribute to the subjective well-being of the frontier residents. Finally, hypothesis three confirmed for both groups of the regional samples, as far as the assessment of the state of affairs in the region, and the country showed a positive effect on life satisfaction in all models.

Additionally, the study of attitudes and well-being of the population in the frontier regions of the country under the conditions of current geopolitical competition and challenging foreign affairs situation might contribute to the more profound understanding of modern Russian society. In the course of such work, it becomes possible to conduct a sociological comparison of the frontier and internal regions of the country, in the context of the theory of the frontier. This, in turn, contributes to the theoretical and methodological tools of studies of the border areas. The results of the study seem to be important for the public administration in charge of the socio-economic development of the country, for the specification of a strategy for the development of the regions of the Russian frontier.

References

social identity indicator life satisfaction

1. DeNeve, K.M, Cooper, H. (1998). The Happy Personality: a Meta-analysis of 137 Personality Traits and Subjective Well-being. In Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 197-229. DOI: 10.1037/00332909.124.2.197

2. Diener, E., Diener, M., Diener, C. (1995).Factors Predicting the Subjective Well-being of Nations.In Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 851-864. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022- 3514.69.5.851

3. Diener, E., Suh, E.M., Lucas, R.E., Smith, H.L. (1999). Subjective Well-being: Three Decades of Progress. In Psychological Bulletin, 125 (2): 276-302. DOI:10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276

4. Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., White, M. (2008). Do We Really Know What Makes Us Happy? A Review of the Economic Literature on the Factors Associated with Subjective Well-being. In Journal of Economic Psychology, 29, 94-122. DOI:10.1016/j.joep.2007.09.001

5. Dovidio, J.F., Gaertner, S.L., Pearson, A.R. and Riek, B.M. (2005). Social Identities and Social Context: Social Attitudes and Personal Well-Being. In Thye, S.R. and Lawler, E.J. (Ed.) Social Identification in Groups (Advances in Group Processes, Vol. 22), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, 231-260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0882-6145(05)22009-X

6. Easterlin, R.A. (1974). Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot?: Some Empirical Evidence. In P. A. David & W.R. Levin (Eds.) Nations and households in economic growth, pp. 98-125. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

7. Foa, R.S., Nemirovskaya, A.V. (2019). Frontier Settlement and the Spatial Variation of Civic Institutions.In Political Geography, 73, 112-122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2019.05.013

8. Guzhavina, T. A. (2019). Social Capital of the Urban Community: State and Dynamics in the Industrialized City. In Siberian Socium, 3(4), 38-52. DOI: 10.21684/2587-8484-2019-3-4-38-52.

9. Imamura, M. (2015).Rethinking frontier and frontier studies. In Political Geography, 45 (96-97). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2014.09.014

10. Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Societies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1990. 504 p.

11. Klein, C. (2013). Social Capital or Social Cohesion: What Matters For Subjective Well-Being? In Social Indicators Research, 110, 891-911. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9963-x

12. Maksimova, S.G., Noyanzina, O.E., Goncharova, N.P., Omelchenko, D.A., Avdeeva, G.S. (2015). Usloviyaformirovaniyarossiyskoynatsional'noyidentichnostinaseleniyasovremennoyRossii (naprimereissledovaniya v Altayskomkraye [The conditions for the formation of the Russian national identity of the population of modern Russia (on an example of research in the Altai Territory)]. In UchonyyezapiskiZab- GU.Seriya: Filosofiya, sotsiologiya, kul'turologiya, sotsial'nayarabota [Scientific Notes of ZabSU. Series: Philosophy, Sociology, Cultural Studies, Social Work], 4 (63), 150-156.

13. Maksimova, S.G., Morkovkina, A.G. (2017). The Image of Russia in Contemporary Representations by the Population of the Border Regions.In Siberian Socium, 1(1), 57-61. DOI: 10.21684/2587-8484-20171-1-57-61

14. Maslow, A.H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation.In Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-396.

15. Nemirovsky, V.G. (2013). Mass Consciousness of Siberia Region Inhabitants: Ideas of Selves and of Russia. In SotsiologicheskieIssledovaniya, 4, 54-60. DOI: WOS:000319891000006

16. Pohl, J. (2001). Regional Identity. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 12917-12922. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/02488-8

17. Reeskens.T., Wright, M. (2010). Subjective Well-being and National Satisfaction: Taking Seriously the `'Proud of What?'' Question.In Psychological Science, 22, 1460-1462. DOI: DOI: 10.1177/0956797611419673

18. Tay, L., Li, M., Myers, D., Diener, E. (2014). Religiosity and Subjective Well-Being: An International Perspective. In Kim-Prieto C. (eds) Religion and Spirituality Across Cultures. Cross-Cultural Advancements in Positive Psychology, 9, Springer, Dordrecht, 163-175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017- 8950-9_9

19. Turner, Frederick J. (1920). The Frontier in American History. New York, NY: Henry Holt.

20. Veenhoven, R. (1991). Is Happiness Relative? In Social Indicators Research, 24(1), 1-34. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1007/BF00292648

Размещено на Allbest.ru