To the City or to the Suburbs: What Russians Choose at Different Stages of Life Course?

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

Migration between large cities and their suburbs is considered from the perspective of two conceptual approaches: models of urban development and urban agglomeration development; life course concept. Research objectives come down to, firstly, analyzing the migration flow of the population between large cities and suburbs, and secondly, to identifying its age-related characteristics and assessing the applicability of migration models described using life course concepts to Russian realities. Individual depersonalized data on internal long-term migration of the population in Russia for 2011–2020 was used, which makes it possible to detail the directions of migration and identify different age groups of migrants. 137 Russian cities with a population of over 100 thous. people were considered as large cities; the suburbs included territories formed around cities of a given size at a certain distance from them (20–100 km depending on the population of the city). An indicator of migration efficiency is analyzed, which makes it possible to evaluate not only the directions of flow, but also its effectiveness. The results obtained showed that every year large cities lose population in exchange with suburbs on average of about 50 thous. people. Almost all of these losses occur in the surrounding suburbs. Distant suburbs are losing population in migration exchanges with the centers. High efficiency of migration is recorded between the centers and their nearby suburbs. Without identifying individual age groups, of the 25 migration directions considered, 16 are directed towards the suburbs, and only 9 - towards large cities; these flows are also characterized by lower efficiency. The analysis of migration at different stages of the life course in the migration flow between large cities and their suburbs does not have a clear focus. The most active movers to the suburbs are families with children aged 0 and preschoolers, as well as people of older working and retirement age. In this sense, the Russian case is characterized by the same patterns that are observed in other countries. However, these rules do not work in Moscow and its suburbs, which raises a number of questions at this stage that require further research.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

L. B. Karachurina

HSE University

Author for correspondence.
Email: lkarachurina@hse.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow

N. V. Mkrtchyan

HSE University

Email: lkarachurina@hse.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow

References

  1. Andreev E., Churilova E. The results of the 2021 All-Russian Population Census in the light of civil registration statistics and censuses of previous years. Demogr. Rev., 2023, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 4–20. https://doi.org/10.17323/demreview.v10i3.17967
  2. Antonov E.V., Makhrova A.G. Largest urban agglomerations and forms of settlement pattern at the supra-agglomeration level in Russia. Reg. Res. Russ., 2019, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 370–382. https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970519040038
  3. Artamonova А., Mitrofanova E. Matrimonial behavior of Russians in a European context. Demogr. Obozr., 2018, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 106–137. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17323/demreview.v5i1.7711
  4. Berg L., van den Drewett R., Klaassen L., Rossi A., Vijverberg C.H.T. A Study of Growth and Decline. Pergamon press, 1982.
  5. Berry B. The counterurbanization process: how general? In Human Settlement Systems: International Perspectives on Structure, Change and Public Policy. Hansen N., Ed. Ballinger: CUP, 1978, pp. 25–49.
  6. Booi H., Boterman W.R., Musterd S. Staying in the city or moving to the suburbs? Unravelling the moving behaviour of young families in the four big cities in the Netherlands. Popul. Space Place, 2021, vol. 27, no. 3, art. e2398. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2398
  7. Brown D.L., Schafft K.A. Population deconcentration in Hungary during the post-socialist transformation. J. Rural Stud., 2002, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 233–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(01)00046-8
  8. Bures R. Migration and the life course: is there a retirement transition? Int. J. Popul. Geogr., 1997, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1220(199706) 3:2<109::AID-IJPG65>3.0.CO;2-I
  9. Bures R. Moving the nest: The impact of coresidential children on mobility in later midlife. J. Fam. Issues, 2009, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X09332349
  10. Champion T. Urbanization, suburbanization, counterurbanization and reurbanization. In Handbook of Urban Studies. Paddison R., Ed. London: Sage, 2001, pp. 143–161.
  11. Chen S., Jin Z., Prettner K. Can I live with you after I retire? Retirement, old age support and internal migration in a developing country. Can. J. Econ., 2023, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 964–988. https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12666
  12. Chugunova N.V. Transformations in the settlement systems of the Belgorod region: new trends in modern geo-economic conditions. In Mnogovektornost’ v razvitii regionov Rossii: resursy, strategii i novye trendy [Multi-Vector in the Development of Russian Regions: Resources, Strategies and New Trends]. Streletsky V.N., Ed. Irkutsk, 2016, pp. 217–227. (In Russ.).
  13. Clark W.A.V., Huang Y. The life course and residential mobility in British housing markets. Environ. Plan. A, 2003, no. 35, pp. 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3542
  14. de Jong P. Later-life migration in the Netherlands: Propensity to move and residential mobility. J. Aging Environ., 2020, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/26892618.2020.1858384
  15. Denisov E.A. Migration processes in the cities of the Russian north in the 1990–2000s. Reg. Issled., 2017, no. 2, pp. 44–55. (In Russ.).
  16. Dokhov R.A., Sinitsyn N.A. Sprawl in Russia: growth and structural transformation of the Belgorod suburbs. Reg. Res. Russ., 2020, no. 2, pp. 247–259. https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970520020057
  17. Fry R. The Rapid Growth and Changing Complexion of Suburban Public Schools. Washington: Pew Hispanic Center, 2009. 29 p.
  18. Gabdrakhmanov N.K., Karachurina L.B., Mkrtchyan N.V., Leshukov O.V. Educational migration of young people and optimization of the network of universities in cities of different Sizes. Vopr. Obrazov., 2022, no. 2, pp. 88–116. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2022-2-88-116
  19. Galster G., Hanson R., Ratcliffe M.R., Wolman H., Coleman S., Freihage J. Wrestling sprawl to the ground: Defining and measuring an elusive concept. Hous. Policy Debate, 2001, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 681–717. https://doi.org/10.1080/105114 82.2001.9521426
  20. Geyer H., Kontuly T. A theoretical foundation for the concept of differential urbanization. Int. Reg. Sci. Rev., 1993, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/016001769301500202
  21. Gibbs J. The evolution of population concentration. Econ. Geogr., 1963, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 119–129.
  22. Goyette K. A., Iceland J., Weininger E. Moving for the kids: Examining the influence of children on white residential segregation. City Community, 2014, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 158–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12058
  23. Gritsai O.V., Ioffe G.V., Treivish A.I. Tsentr i periferiya v regional’nom razvitii [Centre and Periphery in Regional Development]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1991. 168 p.
  24. Karachurina L.B. Urbanization and suburbanization: Which one determines population migration in Moscow oblast? Vestn. S.-Peterb. Univ. Nauki Zemle, 2022, no. 2, pp. 360–381. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu07.2022.208
  25. Karachurina L., Mkrtchyan N. Age-specific migration in regional centres and peripheral areas of Russia. Comp. Popul. Stud., 2020, no. 44, pp. 413–446. https://doi.org/10.12765/CPoS-2020-12
  26. Karachurina L., Mkrtchyan N. Internal migration and population concentration in Russia: age-specific patterns. GeoJournal, 2022, vol. 87, no. 6, pp. 4741–4762. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-021-10525-z
  27. Karachurina L.B., Mkrtchyan N.V., Petrosyan A.N. Spatial patterns of net migration in the suburbs of Russian regional centers. Vestn. Mosk. Univ., Ser. 5: Geogr., 2021, no. 6, pp. 123–134. (In Russ.).
  28. Klaassen L, Scimeni G. Theoretical issues in urban dynamics. In Dynamics of Urban Development. Klaassen L., Molle W., Paelinck J., Eds. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1981, pp. 8–28.
  29. Kley S., Drobnič S. Does moving for family nest-building inhibit mothers’ labour force (re-)entry? Demogr. Res., 2019, no. 40, pp. 155–184. https://doi.org/10.4054/DEMRES.2019.40.7
  30. Kostelecky T., Vobeckâ J. Housing affordability in Czech regions and demographic behaviour – does housing affordability impact fertility? Czech Sociol. Rev., 2009, vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 1191–1213. https://doi.org/10.13060/00380288.2009.45.6.02
  31. Krisjane Z., Berzins M. Post-socialist urban trends: New patterns and motivations for migration in the suburban areas of Riga, Latvia. Urban Stud., 2012, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098011402232
  32. Kümmel T. Staged concept of urbanization: methodology and methods of analysis. In Metody izucheniya rasseleniya [Methods for Studying Settlement]. Moscow: IG AN SSSR, 1987, pp. 82–100. (In Russ.).
  33. Li S., Gu H., Shen J. Detecting spatial heterogeneity in the determinants of intercity migration in China. Popul. Space Place, 2023, vol. 29, no. 3, art. e2649. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2649
  34. Litwak E., Longino C.F. Migration patterns among the elderly: a developmental perspective. Gerontol., 1987, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 266–272. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/27.3.266
  35. Lopez R., Hynes H.P. Sprawl in the 1990s: Measurement, distribution, and trends. Urban Aff. Rev., 2003, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 325–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087402238805
  36. Lundholm E. Returning Home? Migration to birthplace among migrants after age 55. Popul. Space Place, 2012, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.645
  37. Makhrova A.G. Specific features of stadial development of the Moscow agglomeration. Vestn. Mosk. Univ., Ser. 5: Geogr., 2014, no. 4, pp. 10–16. (In Russ.).
  38. Makhrova A.G., Babkin R.A. Analysis of Moscow agglomeration settlement system pulsations based mobile operators’ data. Reg. Issled., 2018, no. 2, pp. 68–78. (In Russ.).
  39. Makhrova A.G., Kirillov P.L. Seasonal Fluctuations in population distribution within Moscow metropolitan area under travelling to second homes and labor commuting: Approaches and estimations. Reg. Issled., 2015, no. 1, pp. 117–125. (In Russ.)
  40. Makhrova A.G., Nefedova T.G., Treivish A.I. Moskovskaya oblast’ segodnya i zavtra: Tendentsii i perspektivy prostranstvennogo razvitiya [Moscow Region Today and Tomorrow: Trends and Perspectives of Spatial Development]. Moscow: Novyi Khronograf Publ., 2008. 344 p.
  41. Morrill R. Aging in place, age specific migration and natural decrease. Ann. Reg. Sci., 1995, no. 29, pp. 41–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01580362
  42. Mulder C.H. Migration Dynamics: A Life Course Approach. Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers, 1993.
  43. Mulder C.H. Family dynamics and housing: Conceptual issues and empirical findings. Demogr. Res., 2013, no. 29, art. 14, pp. 355–378. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2013.29.14
  44. Mueser P.R., White M.J., Tierney J.P. Patterns of net migration by age for U.S. counties 1950-1980: The impact of increasing spatial differentiation by life cycle. Can. J. Reg. Sci., 1988, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 57–75.
  45. Nefedova T.G., Treivish A.I. The theory of “differential urbanization” and hierarchy of cities in Russia. In Problemy urbanizatsii na rubezhe vekov [Problems of Urbanization at the Turn of the Century]. Makhrova A.G., Ed. Smolensk: Oikumena Publ., 2002, pp. 71–87. (In Russ.).
  46. Ouředníček M. Differential suburban development in the Prague urban region. Geogr. Ann. B: Hum. Geogr., 2007, vol. 89, no. 2, pp. 111– 126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0467.2007.00243.x
  47. Plane D.A, Heins F. Age articulation of U.S. inter-metropolitan migration. Ann. Reg. Sci., 2003, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 107–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001680200114
  48. Plane D.A., Henriec C.J., Perry M.J. Migration up and down the urban hierarchy and across the life course. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 2005, vol. 102, no. 43, pp. 15313–15318. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507312102
  49. Plane D.A., Jurjevich J.R. Ties that no longer bind? The patterns and repercussions of age‐articulated migration. Prof. Geogr., 2009, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 4–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330120802577558
  50. Raagmaa G. Centre-periphery model explaining the regional development of the informational and transitional society. 43rd Congress of the ERSA: “Peripheries, Centres, and Spatial Development in the New Europe”, 27th– 30th August 2003, Jyväskylä, Finland. Louvain-la-Neuve, 2003.
  51. Rérat P. The new demographic growth of cities: The case of reurbanisation in Switzerland. Urban Stud., 2012, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 1107–1125. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098011408935
  52. Rogers A., Watkins J. General versus elderly interstate migration and population redistribution in the United States. Res. Aging, 1987, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 483–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027587094002
  53. Sage J., Evandrou M., Falkingham J. Onwards or homewards? Complex graduate migration pathways, well-being, and the ‘parental safety net’. Popul. Space Place, 2013, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 738–755. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.1793
  54. Schmidt S., Fina S., Siedentop S. Post-socialist sprawl: A cross-country comparison. Eur. Plan. Stud., 2015, vol. 23, no. 7, pp. 1357–1380. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2014.933178
  55. Stawarz N., Sander N. The impact of internal migration on the spatial distribution of population in Germany over the period 1991–2017. Comp. Popul. Stud., 2020, no. 44, pp. 291–316. https://doi.org/10.12765/CPoS-2020-06
  56. Stockdale A., Catney G. A lifecourse perspective on urban-rural migration. Popul. Space Place, 2014, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.1758
  57. Stockdale A., MacLeod M. Pre-retirement age migration to remote rural areas. J. Rural Stud., 2013, no. 32, pp. 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.04.009
  58. Tammaru T., Kulu H., Kask I. Urbanization, suburbanization, and counterurbanization in Estonia. Eurasian Geogr. Econ., 2004, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 212–229. https://doi.org/10.2747/1538-7216.45.3.212
  59. Thorkild A. Residential choice from a lifestyle perspective. Hous. Theory Soc., 2006, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 109–130.
  60. van Diepen A., Mulder C. Distance to family members and relocations of older adults. J. Hous. Built Environ., 2009, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-008-9130-0
  61. Vobecka J. Spatial dynamics of the population in the Czech Republic, 1989–2007. PhD. Thesis. Charles University in Prague, Universite de Bourgogne in Digon, 2010.
  62. White L. Coresidence and leaving home: Young adults and their parents. Ann. Rev. Sociol., 2003, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 81–102. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.20.080194.000501
  63. Yang S., Guo F. Breaking the barriers: How urban housing ownership has changed migrants’ settlement intentions in China. Urban Stud., 2018, vol. 55, no. 16, pp. 3689–3707. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098018757873
  64. Zaionchkovskaya Zh.A. Demograficheskaya situatsiya i rasselenie [Demographic Situation and Settlement]. Moscow: Nauka Publ, 1991. 130 p.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Radius of allocation of suburbs and their parts depending on the size of large cities (thousand people), km. Compiled by the authors.

Download (157KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Efficiency of migration between large Russian cities and their suburbs, 2011-2020, %. Compiled by the authors.

Download (286KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Figure 3. Efficiency of migration between large cities and their suburbs by individual age groups, 2011-2020, %. Note. The maximum number of horizontal arrows connecting cities of a certain population with suburbs of more or less than 100,000 people is three (with near, medium, and far suburbs). The absence of an arrow means that there are no middle or far-flung suburbs of this size. Compiled by the authors.

Download (494KB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2024 Russian Academy of Sciences

Согласие на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика»

1. Я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных»), осуществляя использование сайта https://journals.rcsi.science/ (далее – «Сайт»), подтверждая свою полную дееспособность даю согласие на обработку персональных данных с использованием средств автоматизации Оператору - федеральному государственному бюджетному учреждению «Российский центр научной информации» (РЦНИ), далее – «Оператор», расположенному по адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А, со следующими условиями.

2. Категории обрабатываемых данных: файлы «cookies» (куки-файлы). Файлы «cookie» – это небольшой текстовый файл, который веб-сервер может хранить в браузере Пользователя. Данные файлы веб-сервер загружает на устройство Пользователя при посещении им Сайта. При каждом следующем посещении Пользователем Сайта «cookie» файлы отправляются на Сайт Оператора. Данные файлы позволяют Сайту распознавать устройство Пользователя. Содержимое такого файла может как относиться, так и не относиться к персональным данным, в зависимости от того, содержит ли такой файл персональные данные или содержит обезличенные технические данные.

3. Цель обработки персональных данных: анализ пользовательской активности с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика».

4. Категории субъектов персональных данных: все Пользователи Сайта, которые дали согласие на обработку файлов «cookie».

5. Способы обработки: сбор, запись, систематизация, накопление, хранение, уточнение (обновление, изменение), извлечение, использование, передача (доступ, предоставление), блокирование, удаление, уничтожение персональных данных.

6. Срок обработки и хранения: до получения от Субъекта персональных данных требования о прекращении обработки/отзыва согласия.

7. Способ отзыва: заявление об отзыве в письменном виде путём его направления на адрес электронной почты Оператора: info@rcsi.science или путем письменного обращения по юридическому адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А

8. Субъект персональных данных вправе запретить своему оборудованию прием этих данных или ограничить прием этих данных. При отказе от получения таких данных или при ограничении приема данных некоторые функции Сайта могут работать некорректно. Субъект персональных данных обязуется сам настроить свое оборудование таким способом, чтобы оно обеспечивало адекватный его желаниям режим работы и уровень защиты данных файлов «cookie», Оператор не предоставляет технологических и правовых консультаций на темы подобного характера.

9. Порядок уничтожения персональных данных при достижении цели их обработки или при наступлении иных законных оснований определяется Оператором в соответствии с законодательством Российской Федерации.

10. Я согласен/согласна квалифицировать в качестве своей простой электронной подписи под настоящим Согласием и под Политикой обработки персональных данных выполнение мною следующего действия на сайте: https://journals.rcsi.science/ нажатие мною на интерфейсе с текстом: «Сайт использует сервис «Яндекс.Метрика» (который использует файлы «cookie») на элемент с текстом «Принять и продолжить».