Creating a comfortable urban environment: problems of interaction between society and government in the implementation of priority projects at the management municipal level

Автор: Maksimov Anton M., Nenasheva Marina V., Vereshchagin Ilya F., Shubina Tatyana F., Shubina Polina V.

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

Рубрика: Development of municipal formations

Статья в выпуске: 1 т.14, 2021 года.

Бесплатный доступ

The federal program on the formation of comfortable urban environment was initiated in Russia in 2017. Its aim is to improve local and public territories. The program implies the active involvement of citizens, which is taken into account in the Urban Environment Quality Index. On the basis of an empirical study, conducted using mass survey and expert interview methods in the towns of the Arkhangelsk Oblast, the authors analyze a degree of civic participation of residents in the implementation of projects to create a comfortable urban environment and assess the efficiency of existing mechanisms of interaction between society and government. We assume the theoretical provision that a social activity is the citizens’ work to transform the environment, carried out under the influence of external and internal factors. External factors include activities of municipal authorities to inform town residents about the program for creating a comfortable urban environment and to involve them in the implementation of projects. Internal factors are citizens’ personal interest and their meaningful participation in the program. The results of the sociological survey indicate a high potential for citizens’ social activity, which is a necessary condition for effective interaction between government and society and a successful implementation of the program. However, practical participation of urban residents remains weak. The main reasons are the lack of citizens’ awareness about the implemented program, the lack of clear ways of interaction between government and society, as well as an understanding of the program’s fundamental principles, which, in turn, leads to passivity and distrust toward the authorities. The authors conclude that, in order to increase civic engagement, we need a system of measures, which would allow adjusting the existing communication means between government and society and increasing the effectiveness of the program on the formation of a comfortable urban environment.

Еще

Civic participation, urban resident, comfortable urban environment, engagement, public communication, municipal administration, urban community

Короткий адрес: https://readera.org/147225523

IDR: 147225523   |   DOI: 10.15838/esc.2021.1.73.6

Список литературы Creating a comfortable urban environment: problems of interaction between society and government in the implementation of priority projects at the management municipal level

  • Wirth L. Urbanism as a way of life. Sotsial’nye i gumanitarnye nauki. Otechestvennaya i zarubezhnaya literatura. Ser. 11. Sotsiologiya: Referativnyi zhurnal=Social and Human Sciences. Domestic and Foreign Literature. Ser. 11. Sociology: Abstract Journal, 1997, no. 3, pp. 169–196 (in Russian).
  • Rousdepp M. Environment as a place for behavior (Roger Barker School of Environmental Psychology). In: Chelovek v sotsial’noi i fizicheskoi srede: sb. statei [Man in sociophysical environment: Collection of articles]. Ed. by Kh. Liimets et al. Tallinn: Tallinna Pedagoogiline Instituut, 1983. 188 p.
  • Ikonnikov A.V. In search of ways to a humanized environment. In: Lynch K. Obraz goroda [Image of the City]. Translated from English by V.L. Glazychev; ed. by A.V. Ikonnikov. Moscow: Stroiizdat, 1982. 328 p.
  • Pochtovaya A.V. The current state of the urban environment: Basic concepts, problems and features of management. Voprosy ekonomiki i upravleniya=Economics and Management, 2017, no. 4 (11). Available at: https://moluch.ru/th/5/archive/73/2782/ (accessed: 24.11.2019) (in Russian).
  • Kasatkina S.S. Everyday life of cities in the European North of Russia: Philosophical understanding of development issues. In: Istoricheskaya urbanistika: proshloe i nastoyashchee goroda: sb. nauch. st. Vseros. konf. S mezhdunar. uchastiem, g. Surgut, SurGU, 14 noyabrya 2014 goda [Historical urban studies: The past and the present of the city: Collection of scientific articles following the All-Russian conference with international participation, Surgut, SurSU, November 14, 2014]. Ed. by I.N. Stas’ et al. Kurgan: Kurganskii Dom pechati, 2015. 819 p.
  • Vysokovsky A. Bor’ba za gorozhanina: chelovecheskii potentsial i gorodskaya sreda [Struggle for the Citizen: Human Potential and the Urban Environment]. Higher School of Urbanism, National Research University Higher School of Economics. Available at: http://docplayer.ru/380260-Borba-za-gorozhanina.html (accessed: 22.11.2019).
  • Chernova E.B. Sociological justification of strategy of territorial development: Methodological and practical aspects. Regional’naya ekonomika. Yug Rossii=Regional Economy. South of Russia, 2017, no. 1 (15), pp. 36–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/re.volsu.2017.1.4 (in Russian).
  • Habermas J. Moral’noe soznanie i kommunikativnoe deistvie [Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action]. Translated from German by D.V. Sklyadneva, afterword by B.V. Markova. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2000. 380 p.
  • Habermas J. The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. 2. Lifeworld and System: a Critique of Functionalist Reason. Translated by T. McCarthy. Boston, Massachusetts: Beacon Press, 1987. 457 p.
  • Burkart R. On Jürgen Habermas and public relations. Public Relations Review, 2007, vol. 33, iss. 3, pp. 249–254.
  • Yiftachel O., Huxley M. Debating dominance and relevance: Notes on the «communicative turn» in planning theory. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 2000, no. 24 (4), pp. 907–913.
  • Mattila H. Public participation and legitimacy management in planning: A Habermasian Perspective to Finnish Welfarist Planning Tradition. Geografiska Annaler, Series B: Human Geography, 2018, vol. 100, iss. 4, pp. 309–328.
  • Brige G. Reason in the City? Communicative action, media and urban politic. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 2009, vol. 33.1, pp. 237–240.
  • Burstrom von Malmborg F. Environmental management systems, communicative action and organizational learning. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2002, no. 11, pp. 312–323.
  • Steinberg F. Can development communication improve urban management? Habitat International, 1996, vol. 20, iss. 4, pp. 567–581.
  • Kataeva Yu.V. Asymmetry of the interests of the urban environment transformation subjects as a factor of its unbalanced development. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Seriya: Ekonomika=Perm University Herald. Economy, 2013, no. 3 (18), pp. 129–137. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/asimmetriya-interesov-subektov preobrazovaniya-gorodskoy-sredy-kak-faktor-ee-nesbalansirovannogo-razvitiya (accessed: 12.04.2020) (in Russian).
  • Zhelnina A.A., Tykanova E.V. Formal and Informal civic infrastructure: Contemporary studies of urban local activism in Russia. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial’noi antropologii=Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, 2019, no. 22 (1), pp. 162–192 (in Russian).
  • Glukhova A.V., Kol’ba A.I., Sokolov A.V. Political-institutional and communicative aspects of interaction of subject of urban conflicts (based on expert survey). Chelovek. Soobshchestvo. Upravlenie=Human. Community. Management, 2017, no. 18 (4), pp. 44–65 (in Russian).
  • Tykanova E.V., Khokhlova A.M. Interaction configuration of St. Petersburg social movements organizations aimed at improving the urban environment quality. Sotsial’noe prostranstvo=Social Area, 2019, no. 5 (22), pp. 2–17 (in Russian).
  • Shevtsova I.K., Bederson V.D. “Authorities’ point of view is to keep silence”: Interaction of initiative groups and local authorities in the urban planning policy. Politicheskaya nauka=Political Science (RU), 2017, no. 4, pp. 111–136 (in Russian).
  • Afzalan N., Sanchez Th.W., Evans-Cowley J. Cities. The International Journal of Urban Policy and Planning, 2017, no. 67, pp. 21–30.
  • Evans-Cowley J. Planning in the real-time city: the future of mobile technology. Journal of Planning Literature, 2010, no. 25 (2), pp. 136–149.
  • Odendaal N. Information and communication technology and local governance: Understanding the difference between cities in developed and emerging economies. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 2003, no. 27, pp. 585–607.
  • Dridze T.M. Ecoanthropocentric model of social cognition as a way to overcome the paradigmatic crisis in sociology. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya=Sociological Studies, 2000, no. 2, pp. 20–28 (in Russian).
  • Nikovskaya L.I., Skalaban I.A. Civic participation: Features of discourse and actual trends of development. Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya=Polis. Political Studies, 2017, no. 6, pp. 43–60. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2017.06.04 (in Russian).
Еще
Статья научная