Regional priorities in the utilities’ infrastructure upgrading in rural areas for improving quality of life of the population (Part Two)
Research Article
How to Cite
Pilipenko I.V., Schneiderman I.M. Regional priorities in the utilities’ infrastructure upgrading in rural areas for improving quality of life of the population (Part Two). Population. 2024. Vol. 27. No. 2. P. 26-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24412/1561-7785-2024-2-26-40 (in Russ.).
Abstract
This article considers the problem of rural areas’ significant lagging behind urban territories of the Russian Federation in terms of the utilities’ infrastructure development that comprises water supply, sewage systems, heating and gas supply. We use for our analysis six indicators from the Rosstat surveys entitled «The Comprehensive Monitoring of the Living Conditions of the Population» as of 2014 and 2022 reflecting access of ca. 18.5 thousand households in rural settlements of 82 regions of the Russian Federation (excluding three federal cities) to water pipelines, hot water supply, up-to-date sewage systems, availability of up-to-date toilets, heating systems as well as gas supply. Part One of the article shows that the rural households’ quality of life is lagging behind that of urban ones most considerably in terms of access to sewage systems (50,6 percentage points (pp) less households across all the country), up-to-date toilets (29,3 pp less) and hot water supply (21,0 pp less). The Central and North Caucasian federal districts are the leaders by average indicators while the Siberian and Far Eastern federal districts critically fall behind the other federal districts by the degree of development of the utilities’ infrastructure. The largest gap between urban and rural areas in average terms exists in such regions of the Russian Federation as the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), the Komi Republic, Irkutsk Oblast, the Nenets Autonomous Okrug, the Republic of Tuva, the Republic of Karelia, the Republic of Buryatia, Amur Oblast, Tyumen Oblast and Krasnoyarsk Krai. In Part One and Part Two of the article, we present six classifications with six groups of regions of the Russian Federation by the degree of lagging of rural settlements behind urban areas by each component of the utilities’ infrastructure under consideration. Part Two of the article presents a method and calculations of values of the composite index of the utilities’ infrastructure underdevelopment in rural areas for 82 regions of the Russian Federation. Based on the results obtained, we compose a typology encompassing seven types of regions of the Russian Federation that may serve as a foundation for setting or adjusting regional priorities of the state programmes aimed at developing components of the utilities’ infrastructure in rural areas.
Keywords:
utilities’ infrastructure, water supply, water pipeline, sewage system, heating, household gas, rural area, rural settlement, quality of life, regions of Russia
References
1. Schneiderman I. M., Pilipenko I. V. Modernizatsiya sistemy vodosnabzheniya i vodootvedeniya v sel’skoj mestnosti kak faktor povysheniya kachestva zhizni naseleniya [Upgrading water supply and wastewater collection systems in rural areas as a way to improve quality of life of the population]. Narodonaselenie [Population]. 2023. Vol. 26. No. 1. P. 147–159. (in Russ.)
2. Burda A. G., Burda S. A. Sotsial’nyje parametry agrarnogo sektora Kubani: razvitije i kolichestvennaya otsenka vzaimosvyazej [Social parameters of agrarian sector of Kuban: Development and quantitative assessment of interrelations]. Politematicheskij setevoj elektronnyj nauchnyj zhurnal Kubanskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta [Polythematic Online Scientific Journal of Kuban State Agrarian University]. 2015. No. 108. P. 792–816. (in Russ.)
3. Remizova A. A., Nardina S. A. Vliyanie urovnya gazifikatsii na kachestvo zhizni sel’skogo naseleniya [Influence of the gasification level on the quality of life of rural population]. Sibirskaya finansovaya shkola [Siberian Finance School]. 2019. No. 5(136). P. 41–50. (in Russ.)
4. Fomina V. F., Fomin A. V. Otsenka komfortnosti zhilishchno-kommunal’nykh uslovij v sel’skikh rajonakh Respubliki Komi [Evaluation of the comfort of the housing and communal conditions in rural areas of the Republic of Komi]. Sever i rynok: formirovanije ekonomicheskogo poryadka [The North and Market: Forming the Economic Order]. 2019. No. 2 (64). P. 88–105. (in Russ.)
5. Gagiev N. N., Goncharenko L. P., Sybachin S. A., Shestakova A. A. Perspektivy razvitiya inzhenernoj infrastruktury sel’skih territorij [Prospects for the development of engineering infrastructure in rural areas]. APK: ekonomika, upravlenije [AIC: Economy, Management]. 2021. No. 9. P. 95–100. (in Russ.)
6. Petrova Z. K. Modernizatsiya sel’skikh poselenij putem primeneniya innovatsionnykh tekhnologij [Modernization of rural settlements through the use of innovative technologies]. Academia. Arkhitektura i stroitel’stvo [Academia. Architecture and Construction]. 2021. No. 4. P. 86–93. (in Russ.)
2. Burda A. G., Burda S. A. Sotsial’nyje parametry agrarnogo sektora Kubani: razvitije i kolichestvennaya otsenka vzaimosvyazej [Social parameters of agrarian sector of Kuban: Development and quantitative assessment of interrelations]. Politematicheskij setevoj elektronnyj nauchnyj zhurnal Kubanskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta [Polythematic Online Scientific Journal of Kuban State Agrarian University]. 2015. No. 108. P. 792–816. (in Russ.)
3. Remizova A. A., Nardina S. A. Vliyanie urovnya gazifikatsii na kachestvo zhizni sel’skogo naseleniya [Influence of the gasification level on the quality of life of rural population]. Sibirskaya finansovaya shkola [Siberian Finance School]. 2019. No. 5(136). P. 41–50. (in Russ.)
4. Fomina V. F., Fomin A. V. Otsenka komfortnosti zhilishchno-kommunal’nykh uslovij v sel’skikh rajonakh Respubliki Komi [Evaluation of the comfort of the housing and communal conditions in rural areas of the Republic of Komi]. Sever i rynok: formirovanije ekonomicheskogo poryadka [The North and Market: Forming the Economic Order]. 2019. No. 2 (64). P. 88–105. (in Russ.)
5. Gagiev N. N., Goncharenko L. P., Sybachin S. A., Shestakova A. A. Perspektivy razvitiya inzhenernoj infrastruktury sel’skih territorij [Prospects for the development of engineering infrastructure in rural areas]. APK: ekonomika, upravlenije [AIC: Economy, Management]. 2021. No. 9. P. 95–100. (in Russ.)
6. Petrova Z. K. Modernizatsiya sel’skikh poselenij putem primeneniya innovatsionnykh tekhnologij [Modernization of rural settlements through the use of innovative technologies]. Academia. Arkhitektura i stroitel’stvo [Academia. Architecture and Construction]. 2021. No. 4. P. 86–93. (in Russ.)
Article
Received: 17.11.2023
Accepted: 18.06.2024
Citation Formats
Other cite formats:
APA
Pilipenko, I. V., & Schneiderman, I. M. (2024). Regional priorities in the utilities’ infrastructure upgrading in rural areas for improving quality of life of the population (Part Two). Population, 27(2), 26-40. https://doi.org/10.24412/1561-7785-2024-2-26-40
Section
CONDITIONS AND QUALITY OF LIFE OF POULATION
