Actors of rural autonomous household: meanings and results

Автор: Velikii Petr P., Velikaya Nataliya M.

Журнал: Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast @volnc-esc-en

Рубрика: Social and economic development

Статья в выпуске: 4 т.14, 2021 года.

Бесплатный доступ

The article examines the main areas of life of self-employed in agriculture from the position of the meanings of life, defined as the goals - principles of life activity. The self-employed include those heads of households who, having passed the initial adjustment and relying on their human potential, use the reserves of new household forms in the local environment, having partially or completely terminated their labor relations with an agricultural enterprise. They have no farm land, they do not have the status of farmers, nevertheless they live and operate according to similar technology. In terms of material wellbeing they surpass their fellow villagers, who are limited to work in an agricultural enterprise. In the context of free employment choice, these actors adhere to certain attitudes and guidelines, conforming (with varying degrees of completeness) to the norms and requirements of the institutions surrounding them. We have described the problems that arise in families whose lifestyle is determined by the objects of their household - plant and animal life. On the basis of our research we have defined the contours of the self-employment actors' creativity and the opportunity limitations of implementing the meanings of household, which is explained by the violation of conjugations in interaction with large agricultural entities, destruction of connections and relations in the production and sale of products. We have found that depending on the changes in a family life, with the transformation of such indicators as age, health, achievement of ultimate goals (for example, the completion of children's education in universities or, on the contrary, their return to the village), the head and family members constantly cross the formal and essential boundaries of the pre-established status, the scale of activity and, in general, the space mastered and not mastered by them. The study of the social experience of autonomous family household contributes to a deeper comprehensive understanding of the deployment of modernization in the village in the context of the conjunction of innovative and traditional trends.


Village, farming, family household, self-employment, meanings, life-world, agricultural enterprises, prestige, status, socio-cultural practices, indicators of success

Короткий адрес:

IDR: 147235425   |   DOI: 10.15838/esc.2021.4.76.12

Список литературы Actors of rural autonomous household: meanings and results

  • Staroverov V.I., Staroverova I.V. Problems of subjectivity of the modern Russian village. Rossiiskoe obshhestvo i gosudarstvo v usloviyah pandemii: sotsial'no-politicheskoe polozhenie i demograficheskoe razvitie Rossiiskoi Federatsii v 2020 godu: kollektivnaya monografiya [Russian Society and the State in the Conditions of a Pandemic: Socio-Political Situation and Demographic Development of the Russian Federation in 2020: Collective Monograph]. N.V. Osipov et al.; ed. by G.V. Osipova, S.V. Ryazantseva, V.K. Levashova, T.K. Rostovskoi; exc. ed. V.K. Levashov. Moscow: ITD PERSPEKTIVA, 2020. Pp. 137–146. (In Russian).
  • Blandford D. Agricultural trade liberalization, globalization, and rural economies. Published as Liberalización del commercio agrario, globalización y economías rurales. Información Comercial Española, Revista de Economía, 2002, November – December, no. 803, рр. 23–32. Available at: (accessed: May 15, 2021).
  • Woods M., McDonagh J. Rural Europe and the world: Globalization and rural development (Editorial). European Countryside, 2011, January, no. 3 (3). pp 153–163. DOI: 10.2478/v10091-012-0001-z
  • Richardson T. Discourses of furality in EU spatial policy: the European spatial development perspective. Sociologia Ruralis, 2000, vol. 40, no. 1, рр. 53–71.
  • Saraceno E. Recent trends in rural development and their conceptualization. Journal of Rural Studies, 1995, no. 10, рр. 321–330.
  • Van der Ploeg J.D., Renting H., Brunori G., Knickel K., Mannion J., Marsden T., de Roest K., Sevilla Guzmán E., Ventura F. Rural development: from practices and policies to theory. Sociologia Ruralis, 2000, no. 40 (4), pp. 391–408. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9523.00156
  • Lowe P. European agricultural and rural development policies for the 21st century. In: A New Rural Agenda. London: IPPR, 2006. Pр. 29–45.
  • Toshchenko Zh.T. Prekariat: ot protoklassa k novomu klassu [Precariat: from a proto class to a new class]. Moscow: Nauka, 2018. (In Russian).
  • Shkaratan O.I., Yastrebov G.P. Discovering real (homogenous) social groups in the Russian society: methods and results. Prikladnaya ekonometrika=Applied Econometrics, 2007, no. 7 (3), pp. 95–118. (In Russian).
  • Kalugina Z.I. Rynochnaya transformatsiya agrarnogo sektora Rossii: sociologicheskii diskurs [Market Transformation of the Russian Agricultural Sector: Sociological Discourse]. Novosibirsk: IEIE SB RAS Publ., 2015. 342 p. (In Russian).
  • Toshchenko Zh.T., Velikiy P.P. The main meanings of the life world of Russian rural residents. Mir Rossii=World of Russia, 2018, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 7–33. DOI: 10.17323/1811-038X-2018-27-1-7-33 (In Russian).
  • Staroverov V.I. De-peasantryization: a sociological and political analysis. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya=Sociological Studies, 2010, no. 4, pp. 23–32. (In Russian).
  • Golenkova Z.T., Goliusova Y.V., Gorina T.I. Sociological portrait of the self-employed in contemporary Russia. Vestnik rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: sotsiologiya=RUDN Journal of Sociology, 2020, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 821–836. DOI: 10.22363/2313-2272-2020-20-4-821-836 (In Russian).
  • Velikiy P.P., Shabanov V.L. Features of agrarian self-employment. Experience of sociological research of the independent economy of rural families. Istoricheskaya i social'no-obrazovatel'naya mysl'=Historical and Socio-Educational Thought, 2019, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 105–121. (In Russian).
  • Smysly sel'skoi zhizni (Opyt sotsiologicheskogo analiza) [The Meanings of Rural Life (Experience of Sociological Analysis)]. Ed. by Zh.T. Toshchenko. Moscow: Tsentr social'nogo prognozirovaniya i marketinga, 2016. 368 p. (In Russian).
  • Abakumov I. Captured perspectives. Agricultural holdings may leave the country without a rural population. Agrovestnik. November 1, 2016. Available at: (accessed: March 31, 2021). (In Russian).
  • Uzun V.Ya., Shagaida N.I. Evaluation of the impact of institutional and structural changes on the development of the Russian agricultural sector. Voprosy Ekonomiki, 2019, no. 4, pp. 39–58. URL: (In Russian).
  • Ildarkhanova Ch.I. Category “successful development” in the context of transition of family household in a private farm: socio-economic and value contradictions. Regional'nye agrosistemy: ekonomika i sociologiya=Regional Agrosystems: Economics and Sociology, 2018, no. 5, pp. 15. (In Russian).
  • Schutz A. Smyslovaya struktura povsednevnogo mira. Ocherki po fenomenologicheskoi sociologii=Semantic structure of the everyday world. Essays on phenomenological sociology. Moscow, 2002. (In Russian).
  • Velikiy P.P., Shabanov V.L. et al. Semeinoe hozyaistvovanie v zhiznennom prostranstve sovremennoi derevni: monografiya [Family Management in the Living Space of a modern village: Monograph]. Saratov: Saratovskii istochnik, 2020. 240 p. (In Russian).
  • Velikiy P.P. Povsednevnost' rossiiskogo sela v nachale XXI veka [Everyday life of the Russian village at the beginning of the 21st century]. Ed. by Yu.S. Voronova. Saratov: Saratovskii istochnik, 2020. 307 p. (In Russian).
  • Porter M. “What is strategy?” Harvard Business Review, 1996, no. 19 (3), рр. 61–78.
  • Velikiy P.P., Zaikin A.V. Rural realities in the optics of operational sociological observation. Gumanitarnyi nauchnyj zhurnal=Humanitarian Scientific Journal, 2021, no. 1, pp. 9–17. (In Russian).
Статья научная