Post-Soviet urban environment: the experience of St. Petersburg

Anokhin, A. A.; Lachininskii, S. S.; Zhitin, D. V.; Shendrik, Alexander V.; Mezhevich, Nikolay; Krasnov, Anton I.

doi:10.1134/s2079970517030042

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…St Petersburg is a monocentric city, a 'nut in a shell'. It did not deeply change until the 1950s when it grew northward and southward [13]. Sovietera residential areas built in the 1950-80s account for most of St Petersburg's area.…”

Section: Data Sources and Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, in some municipal units, such as Aptekarsky Island in the Perogradsky district and the Palace District in the Central district, over half of the adult population had a university degree. 12 A high level of education is characteristic of the population of some remote municipal ities: Komarovo (Kurortny district) (51.8% of people with a university degree) and Tyarlevp (Pushkinsky district) (49.4%) 13 (Fig. 7).…”

Section: Percentage Of Entrepreneurs the Distribution Of Business Owners Across Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12 Here and below, the percentage of people with a university degree is calculated as a proportion of people aged twenty and older. 13 Nevertheless, the spatial unevenness of the level of education in St Petersburg should have a demographic explanation since the characteristic in question de pends strongly on the age structure of the population. Whereas the average city percentage of people with a university degree among the population aged 20 and older is 38%, in the 25-29 age cohort, this indicator reached 45.7% in 2010.…”

Section: Percentage Of Entrepreneurs the Distribution Of Business Owners Across Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Socio-spatial differentiation in transition: a preliminary comparative analysis of post-soviet St Petersburg and Riga

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research into the socio-spatial dynamics in Central European cities is an important area of contemporary transition studies. Open issues in this domain range from defining a theoretical framework to data availability and methodological approaches. As to the former aspect, recent literature focuses on the hybrid nature of the post-socialist urban space, which underwent modernization in the conditions of globalization and economic liberalization; the earlier model of spatial development changed dramatically as a result. The multi-scalar and comparative approaches may shed new light on the complex patterns of urban socio-spatial differentiation and its post-Soviet dynamics. Growing regional socio-economic imbalances observed in the former socialist states are lending new urgency to this area of research. This study employs a comparative approach to investigate post-1991 socio-spatial transformations in St Petersburg and Riga — the two largest post-Soviet urban centres in the Baltic Sea region. An important result of the research is a methodology for multi-level analysis of changes in the urban environment of post-socialist cities. Data from post-1991 national censuses and population registers are used to calculate measures of social well-being in urban districts as well as to identify territorial imbalances. Comparative analysis makes it possible to trace the spatial patterns of post-Soviet differentiation and set out guidelines for further research in the area.

show abstract

Section: Data Sources and Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Percentage Of Entrepreneurs the Distribution Of Business Owners Across Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Percentage Of Entrepreneurs the Distribution Of Business Owners Across Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Socio-spatial differentiation in transition: a preliminary comparative analysis of post-soviet St Petersburg and Riga

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is noted in [15] that the city has gone through seven key stages of development over the past period of transfor mation. In another work [16], when interpreting the main trends in the transfor mation of St. Petersburg, special attention is paid to the preserved old postSo viet features. In [17], the calculation of indicators of wellbeing in the regions was carried out to identify the spatial patterns of postSoviet differentiation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of Municipal Districts in Saint Petersburg Over the Last Decade: An Economic and Spatial Analysis

Smirnov¹

2022

Balt. Reg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article analyses economic and spatial indicators to produce a typology of the economic development levels of St Petersburg municipal districts. To normalise the city’s development, it is vital to understand which territories have contributed more to the process and which have inhibited it. It is also essential to analyse the principal economic indicators of each municipal district and assess transport accessibility, street activity and transit. The study demonstrates the connection between the economy and space, which gives the answer to the question about the causes of economic growth. An economic analysis of the districts is carried out by ranking ten leading indicators obtained from the municipal databases and geoinformation services, whilst a spatial analysis is performed based on testing the Space Syntax methodology. The study made it possible to describe the city’s spatial development, improve the methodology and provide recommendations for municipal administrators. The findings will enhance strategic urban planning in St Petersburg.

show abstract

“…Convergence occurred only in the first half of the 2000s when St. Petersburg received target support from the federal authorities. As for the socio-demographic and spatial structure of the city and its agglomeration, we can recall a number of dedicated studies (Bugaev 2015;Degusarova et al 2018;Reznikov 2017;Hodachek 2017;Krykova 2016), including those held by the authors of this article (Anokhin et al 2017;Zhitin 2015). These studies analyze the change in population during the intercensus period, as well as the transformation of the social structure of the population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban transformation of a post-soviet coastal city: the case of Saint Petersburg

Zhitin

Lachininskii

Mikhaylova

et al. 2020

GES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At the turn of the XX-XXI centuries, post-socialist cities of Europe experienced an active transformation of their socio-demographic and economic structure. A striking feature of post-Soviet cities was the preservation of the disproportionate weight of industry in the economy against the background of a long absence of the real estate market. This phenomenon highlighted the need to solve the problems of socio-economic inequality within the city and restructuring its economy. This is especially true for Russian cities experiencing the shifts in the territorial structure of the population under the influence of transition to market economy, the third industrial revolution and the change of economic- geographical location. This study focuses on identifying trends in the social segmentation of the urban space of St. Petersburg as the second largest city in Russia and a socio-economic center of national importance. The social stratification of the city was studied at the grassroots administrative and territorial level based on the assessment of spatial distribution and the formation of territorial groups of the population with certain qualitative characteristics. The object of the study was 111 municipalities of St. Petersburg. The dynamics of their five most important indicators of demographic, social and economic development in 1989–2018 was analyzed: real estate tax on individuals per capita; the proportion of entrepreneurs; own incomes of municipalities per inhabitant; the proportion of people with an academic degree; cost of housing. Using the rank method, a social welfare rating was compiled. Information for the study was taken from the materials of the general urban planes of St. Petersburg in 1966, 1987 and 2005, the All-Russian population censuses of 2002 and 2010, the databases of the Federal State Statistics Service and the Federal Tax Service, and from the real estate «CIAN» company. The increasing social segregation by income was revealed. The existing differentiation of municipalities in terms of welfare is shown. The poorest are the municipalities of the southern part of the city (Kolpinsky, Nevsky, Krasnoselsky districts and Kronshtadt), while the most prosperous are the municipalities of Petrograd and Central districts, as well as certain territories of the municipal district of Moskovskaya Zastava, the villages of Komarovo, Repino and Solnechnoe.

show abstract

Post-Soviet urban environment: the experience of St. Petersburg

Cited by 4 publications

References 18 publications

Socio-spatial differentiation in transition: a preliminary comparative analysis of post-soviet St Petersburg and Riga

Socio-spatial differentiation in transition: a preliminary comparative analysis of post-soviet St Petersburg and Riga

Development of Municipal Districts in Saint Petersburg Over the Last Decade: An Economic and Spatial Analysis

Urban transformation of a post-soviet coastal city: the case of Saint Petersburg

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About