Social Cohesion of the Armenian Diaspora in Russia: Theory and Practice of Measurement
Research Article
Acknowledgments
The research was carried out with the financial support of the RFBR within the framework of the scientific project No. 20-511-05007 “Socio-economic potential of the Armenian Diaspora in the context of integration processes in the EAEU”.
How to Cite
Osadchaya G.I., Kireev E.Y., Vartanova M.L., Roslavtseva M.V. 2022. Social Cohesion of the Armenian Diaspora in Russia: Theory and Practice of Measurement — Sociologicheskaja nauka i social’naja praktika. Vol. 10. No. 2. P. 87-104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19181/snsp.2022.10.2.9030
Abstract
The social cohesion of the Armenian Diaspora in Russia is the most important condition for ensuring its well-being, vitality, stability of daily life, creating conditions for the realization of socioeconomic potential in the interests of Russia and Armenia. However, despite the attention to the study of various aspects of its functioning as an ethnocultural and ethnopolitical phenomenon, this problem has remained outside the Russian scientific discourse. The purpose of the article is to show the mechanisms of formation of cohesion, social ties, altruistic behavior, to reveal the forms of exchange, interaction, cooperation in the interests of meeting the needs of members of the Armenian Diaspora as a way of capitalizing trust based on similarity of interests and awareness of oneself as a special ethnic group.
The methodology of studying the social cohesion of the Armenian Diaspora in Russia is determined by the specifics of the subject under study, the author’s research approach to measuring this phenomenon, the purpose of the study, as well as the theoretical constructs of social cohesion that allow us to articulate the results more clearly. The methodological strategy includes a questionnaire survey of 1,273 members of the Armenian Diaspora in the Moscow agglomeration, Krasnodar and Stavropol Territories.
The article proposes a multidimensional model for assessing the social cohesion of the Armenian Diaspora in Russia, representing a system of criteria characterizing its essential features, which includes subjective representations and behavioral aspects of mutual assistance and interaction of diaspora members.
Based on the analysis of empirical data on the social cohesion of the Armenian Diaspora in Russia, four groups are identified: the central one is the most numerous, representing a cohesive core, the peripheral one is a group of the alienated, a group of undecided in assessing the degree of cohesion of the Armenian diaspora and marginals.
Measuring the cohesion of the diaspora based on the material of quantitative empirical research is difficult and has limitations. However, it allows avoiding the subjectivity of the conclusions of studies conducted on small samples, clarifying not only the state, but also the causes and consequences, which is productive for assessing the social cohesion of the Armenian Diaspora.
Keywords:
social cohesion, diaspora, trust, interaction, helping behavior, social boundaries, identity
References
1. Avdashkin A. A. (2015). Fenomen diaspory: metodologicheskie osnovy nauchnogo issledovaniya. [The phenomenon of diaspora: methodological foundations of scientific research]. Vestnik CHelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. № 2 (357). Istoriya. Vyp. 62. P. 131–137.
2. Veber M. (1994). Osnovnye ponyatiya stratifikatsii. [Basic concepts of stratification]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. № 5. P. 147–157.
3. Gevorgyan O. Z. (2018). Faktor diaspory v otnosheniyah Armenii s ES i SShA. [The diaspora factor in Armenia’s relations with the EU and the USA]. Postsovetskie issledovaniya. Vol. 1, № 6. P. 567–573.
4. Gevorkyan G. N. (2020). Fenomen geterogennosti armyanskoj diaspory Moskvy (konets XX – nachalo XXI vv.): k postanovke problem. [The phenomenon of heterogeneity of the Armenian Diaspora in Moscow (late XX – early XXI centuries): towards the formulation of the problem]. Istoricheskij zhurnal: nauchnye issledovaniya. № 1. P. 102–114. DOI 10.7256/2454-0609.2020.1.31883.
5. Dyurkgejm E. (1994). Samoubijstvo: Sotsiologicheskij etyud. [Suicide: A sociological study]. M.: Mysl’ publ. 399 p.
6. Imanov A. Ch., Yanovskij V. V. (2017). O vozmozhnosti povysheniya effektivnosti kommunikatsij natsional’nyh diaspor Sankt-Peterburga. [On the possibility of improving the effectiveness of communications of the national diasporas of St. Petersburg]. Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie. № 8. P.103–109.
7. Zakharyan I. E. (2012). Sotsial’nyj kapital kak kontseptsija issledovanija sovremennoj diaspory. [Social capital as a concept for the study of the modern diaspora]. Bulletin of the SSTU. № 4 (68). P. 230–236.
8. Molodikova I. N., Emel’yanova L. L., Lyalina A. V. (2018). Vzaimodejstvie s diasporami i diasporal’nymi organizatsiyami kak klyuch k uspeshnoj politike integratsii migrantov v ES. [Interaction with Diasporas and Diaspora Organizations as the key to a successful policy of integration of migrants into the EU]. Baltijskij region. Vol. 10, № 3. P. 58–79.
9. Osepyan A. K. (2013). Kontsepty i harakteristiki diaspory v klassicheskom i sovremennom vide. [Concepts and characteristics of the Diaspora in classical and modern form]. Vestnik OGU. №7 (156). P. 68–76.
10. Papoyan A. R. (2018). Rol’ armyanskoj diaspory v uchastii Respubliki Armeniya v mezhdunarodnyh delah na rubezhe XX-XXI vv. [The role of the Armenian Diaspora in the participation of the Republic of Armenia in international affairs at the turn of the XX–XXI centuries]. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. № 2. P. 128–134. DOI: 10.7256/2454-0641.2018.2.25965.
11. Poloskova T. V. (1999). Sovremennye diaspory. Vnutripoliticheskie i mezhdunarodnye aspekty. [Modern diasporas. Domestic and international aspects]. M.: Nauchnaya kniga publ. 252 p.
12. Sadykov R. A. (2016). Sotsial’naya splochennost’: kritika opredelenij i vozmozhnosti dlya novoj kontseptualizatsii. [Social cohesion: Critique of Definitions and opportunities for new conceptualization]. Sotsiologicheskij ezhegodnik 2015–2016. Sbornik nauchnyh trudov. Ed. by O. A. Simonova, M. A. Yadova. M.: INION publ. P. 16–32.
13. Sovremennaya molodezh’ Armenii i Rossii: sotsial’no-demograficheskie i etnokul’turnye orientatsii (2020). [Modern youth of Armenia and Russia: socio-demographic and ethno-cultural orientations]. Ed. by R. A. Starchenko, R. S. Karapetyan. M.: IEA RAN publ. 193 p.
14. Tirabyan K. K. (2017). Diaspora v sisteme mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij v sovremennom mire (na primere armyanskoj diaspory). [The diaspora in the system of international relations in the modern world (on the example of the Armenian Diaspora)]. Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie. № 5. P. 188–194.
15. Tirabyan K. K. (2018). K voprosu ob opredelenii fenomena diaspory (na primere armyanskoj diaspory Rossijskoj Federatsii). [On the question of defining the phenomenon of the Diaspora (on the example of the Armenian Diaspora of the Russian Federation)]. Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie. № 2. P. 128–136.
16. Tishkov V. A. (2005). O kul’turnom mnogoobrazii. [About cultural diversity]. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie. № 1. P. 3–22.
17. Tokvil’ A. de. (1992). Demokratiya v Amerike. [Democracy in America]. M.: Progress publ. 559 p.
18. Toshchenko Zh. T., Chaptykova T. I. (1996). Diaspora kak ob”ekt sociologicheskogo issledovaniya. [Diaspora as an object of sociological research] Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. № 12. P. 33–42.
19. Tuchina O. R. (2018). Diaspora kak pogranichnyj fenomen kul’tury. [Diaspora as a borderline cultural phenomenon]. Yaroslavskij pedagogicheskij vestnik. № 1. P. 249–252.
20. Firsov E. YU. (2002). Invarianty armyanskoj diaspory v Rossijskoj provintsii. [Invariants of the Armenian Diaspora in the Russian province]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial’noj antropologii. Vol. V, № 2. P. 113–132.
21. Hobsbaum E. (2000). Izobretenie traditsij. [The invention of traditions]. Vestnik Evrazii. № 1(8). P. 47–62.
22. Yarskaya-Smirnova E. R., YArskaya V. N. (2014). Sotsial’naya splochennost’: Napravleniya teoreticheskoj diskussii i perspektivy sotsial’noj politiki. [Social cohesion: Directions of theoretical discussion and prospects of social policy]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial’noj antropologii. № 4. P. 41–61.
23. Anderson В. (1991). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. New York: Verso.
24. Brah A. (2003). Diaspora, border and transnational identities. Edinburgh University Press.
25. Bruhn J. G. (2009). The group effect: Social cohesion and health outcomes. N.Y.: Springer, XII, 171 p.
26. Budge S. (1981). Group сohesiveness revisited. Group. Vol. 5, № 1. P. 10–18.
27. Galabuzi G. -E., Teelucksingh Ch. (2010). Social cohesion, social exclusion, social capital, region of peel immigration. Discussion Paper. February URL: http://www.peelregion.ca/socialservices/pdfs/discussion-paper-1.pdf (date of access: 19.11.2014).
28. Hanifan L. J. (1916). The rural school community center. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. № 67. P. 130–138.
29. Hemerijck A. (2010). Social cohesion, welfare recalibration and the European Union. Challenges of Social Cohesion in Times of Crisis. Ed. by M. Zupi and E. E. Puertas. Madrid: Editorial Complutense. P. 71–150.
30. Oxoby R. (2009). Understanding social inclusion, social cohesion and social capital. Economic Research Paper: 2009-09 URL: http://lcerpa.org/public/papers/LCERPA_2009-09.pdf (date of access: 19.11.2014).
31. Putnam RD. (2004). Education, diversity, social cohesion and ‘social capital’. Dublin, Ireland: OECD Education Ministers.
2. Veber M. (1994). Osnovnye ponyatiya stratifikatsii. [Basic concepts of stratification]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. № 5. P. 147–157.
3. Gevorgyan O. Z. (2018). Faktor diaspory v otnosheniyah Armenii s ES i SShA. [The diaspora factor in Armenia’s relations with the EU and the USA]. Postsovetskie issledovaniya. Vol. 1, № 6. P. 567–573.
4. Gevorkyan G. N. (2020). Fenomen geterogennosti armyanskoj diaspory Moskvy (konets XX – nachalo XXI vv.): k postanovke problem. [The phenomenon of heterogeneity of the Armenian Diaspora in Moscow (late XX – early XXI centuries): towards the formulation of the problem]. Istoricheskij zhurnal: nauchnye issledovaniya. № 1. P. 102–114. DOI 10.7256/2454-0609.2020.1.31883.
5. Dyurkgejm E. (1994). Samoubijstvo: Sotsiologicheskij etyud. [Suicide: A sociological study]. M.: Mysl’ publ. 399 p.
6. Imanov A. Ch., Yanovskij V. V. (2017). O vozmozhnosti povysheniya effektivnosti kommunikatsij natsional’nyh diaspor Sankt-Peterburga. [On the possibility of improving the effectiveness of communications of the national diasporas of St. Petersburg]. Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie. № 8. P.103–109.
7. Zakharyan I. E. (2012). Sotsial’nyj kapital kak kontseptsija issledovanija sovremennoj diaspory. [Social capital as a concept for the study of the modern diaspora]. Bulletin of the SSTU. № 4 (68). P. 230–236.
8. Molodikova I. N., Emel’yanova L. L., Lyalina A. V. (2018). Vzaimodejstvie s diasporami i diasporal’nymi organizatsiyami kak klyuch k uspeshnoj politike integratsii migrantov v ES. [Interaction with Diasporas and Diaspora Organizations as the key to a successful policy of integration of migrants into the EU]. Baltijskij region. Vol. 10, № 3. P. 58–79.
9. Osepyan A. K. (2013). Kontsepty i harakteristiki diaspory v klassicheskom i sovremennom vide. [Concepts and characteristics of the Diaspora in classical and modern form]. Vestnik OGU. №7 (156). P. 68–76.
10. Papoyan A. R. (2018). Rol’ armyanskoj diaspory v uchastii Respubliki Armeniya v mezhdunarodnyh delah na rubezhe XX-XXI vv. [The role of the Armenian Diaspora in the participation of the Republic of Armenia in international affairs at the turn of the XX–XXI centuries]. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. № 2. P. 128–134. DOI: 10.7256/2454-0641.2018.2.25965.
11. Poloskova T. V. (1999). Sovremennye diaspory. Vnutripoliticheskie i mezhdunarodnye aspekty. [Modern diasporas. Domestic and international aspects]. M.: Nauchnaya kniga publ. 252 p.
12. Sadykov R. A. (2016). Sotsial’naya splochennost’: kritika opredelenij i vozmozhnosti dlya novoj kontseptualizatsii. [Social cohesion: Critique of Definitions and opportunities for new conceptualization]. Sotsiologicheskij ezhegodnik 2015–2016. Sbornik nauchnyh trudov. Ed. by O. A. Simonova, M. A. Yadova. M.: INION publ. P. 16–32.
13. Sovremennaya molodezh’ Armenii i Rossii: sotsial’no-demograficheskie i etnokul’turnye orientatsii (2020). [Modern youth of Armenia and Russia: socio-demographic and ethno-cultural orientations]. Ed. by R. A. Starchenko, R. S. Karapetyan. M.: IEA RAN publ. 193 p.
14. Tirabyan K. K. (2017). Diaspora v sisteme mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij v sovremennom mire (na primere armyanskoj diaspory). [The diaspora in the system of international relations in the modern world (on the example of the Armenian Diaspora)]. Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie. № 5. P. 188–194.
15. Tirabyan K. K. (2018). K voprosu ob opredelenii fenomena diaspory (na primere armyanskoj diaspory Rossijskoj Federatsii). [On the question of defining the phenomenon of the Diaspora (on the example of the Armenian Diaspora of the Russian Federation)]. Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie. № 2. P. 128–136.
16. Tishkov V. A. (2005). O kul’turnom mnogoobrazii. [About cultural diversity]. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie. № 1. P. 3–22.
17. Tokvil’ A. de. (1992). Demokratiya v Amerike. [Democracy in America]. M.: Progress publ. 559 p.
18. Toshchenko Zh. T., Chaptykova T. I. (1996). Diaspora kak ob”ekt sociologicheskogo issledovaniya. [Diaspora as an object of sociological research] Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. № 12. P. 33–42.
19. Tuchina O. R. (2018). Diaspora kak pogranichnyj fenomen kul’tury. [Diaspora as a borderline cultural phenomenon]. Yaroslavskij pedagogicheskij vestnik. № 1. P. 249–252.
20. Firsov E. YU. (2002). Invarianty armyanskoj diaspory v Rossijskoj provintsii. [Invariants of the Armenian Diaspora in the Russian province]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial’noj antropologii. Vol. V, № 2. P. 113–132.
21. Hobsbaum E. (2000). Izobretenie traditsij. [The invention of traditions]. Vestnik Evrazii. № 1(8). P. 47–62.
22. Yarskaya-Smirnova E. R., YArskaya V. N. (2014). Sotsial’naya splochennost’: Napravleniya teoreticheskoj diskussii i perspektivy sotsial’noj politiki. [Social cohesion: Directions of theoretical discussion and prospects of social policy]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial’noj antropologii. № 4. P. 41–61.
23. Anderson В. (1991). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. New York: Verso.
24. Brah A. (2003). Diaspora, border and transnational identities. Edinburgh University Press.
25. Bruhn J. G. (2009). The group effect: Social cohesion and health outcomes. N.Y.: Springer, XII, 171 p.
26. Budge S. (1981). Group сohesiveness revisited. Group. Vol. 5, № 1. P. 10–18.
27. Galabuzi G. -E., Teelucksingh Ch. (2010). Social cohesion, social exclusion, social capital, region of peel immigration. Discussion Paper. February URL: http://www.peelregion.ca/socialservices/pdfs/discussion-paper-1.pdf (date of access: 19.11.2014).
28. Hanifan L. J. (1916). The rural school community center. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. № 67. P. 130–138.
29. Hemerijck A. (2010). Social cohesion, welfare recalibration and the European Union. Challenges of Social Cohesion in Times of Crisis. Ed. by M. Zupi and E. E. Puertas. Madrid: Editorial Complutense. P. 71–150.
30. Oxoby R. (2009). Understanding social inclusion, social cohesion and social capital. Economic Research Paper: 2009-09 URL: http://lcerpa.org/public/papers/LCERPA_2009-09.pdf (date of access: 19.11.2014).
31. Putnam RD. (2004). Education, diversity, social cohesion and ‘social capital’. Dublin, Ireland: OECD Education Ministers.
Article
Received: 08.02.2022
Accepted: 20.06.2022
Citation Formats
Other cite formats:
Harvard
Osadchaya, G. I., Kireev, E. Y., Vartanova, M. L. and Roslavtseva, M. V. (2022) ’Social Cohesion of the Armenian Diaspora in Russia: Theory and Practice of Measurement’, Sociologicheskaja nauka i social’naja praktika, 10(2), pp. 87-104. doi: https://doi.org/10.19181/snsp.2022.10.2.9030.
Section
ETHNOSOCIOLOGY
Publisher: Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences (FCTAS RAS)