RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks 2010, i.e. by 10% vs the number of the able-bodied as of January 1, 2011 (Fig. 9). Russia has never been in the economic situation with such drastically reducing labor supply. Only once, in the first half of the 1960’es, the rates of natural growth of population reduced almost twice vs 1950, but at that time there was no natural population decline. To help the economy to overcome the demographic gap, a wide range of actions was taken: the military service term was reduced from three to two years, the 11th form (secondary school) was eliminated, the scale of on-campus occupational training was cut short in favor of extra-mural training. As a result, the young labor market increased two-fold. Besides, a lot of services (e.g. office cleaning) became self-maintaining. To release housekeepers and those engaged in personal economies, essential restrictions on keeping livestock in towns were imposed1.
The demographic forecast suggests that the current situation is much more complicated.
“Non-migration” reserves for employment growth or labor productivity improvement are as follows:
- Demographic: a reduced death rate of able-bodied people (primarily connected with alcoholic ethiology and indirectly, with alcoholic consumption, RTI death rate and death rate caused by some other factors) as a result of achievements in the national healthcare sector and due to a self-protective behavior;
- Mobilization of employment: shorter maternity leave 2, reduced scope of on-site training in Universities and shorter training terms, intensive engagement of pensioners and disabled, active application of part-time employment for on-site students;
- Longer duration of the working day and/or working week at the expense of the weekend;
- Export of jobs, outsourcing;
- Higher labor productivity and reallocation of workers: from low-productive sectors to high productive sectors3, from small towns and/or mono-cities with a high unemployment rate to settlements where a labor shortage is experienced.
Each of the above scenarios may be implemented to a certain extent of desirability (starting primarily with the labor productivity growth) with account of available reserves4, political will5, cost scale and cost period6, and social activity of the community. Imbalances may occur, however. It has been proved, e.g. that the labor productivity growth can be mostly ex Zh. A. Zayonchkovskaya. You’d better come to us: What is the threat of a “demographic gap”// The Russian newspaper. June 30, 2010.
Contrary to the birth-rate improvement program.
For details see V. A. Bessonov, V. E. Gimpelson, Ya. I. Kuzminov, E. G. Yasin. Productivity and factors of long-term development of the Russian economy// E. G. Yasin (ed.) X International Scientific Conference of GUVShE on the problems of development of the economy and the society. 2010. P. 11-61.
E.g. due to a relatively early retirement in Russia (55 years of age for women and 60 for men) and low pension allowance, the level of employment of pensioners is high. In 2009, the pensioners made 7.7% of the employed in the Russian economy (Economic activity of the population of Russia. Rosstat. 2010). Further growth of pensioners employment can be ensured as a result of longer and sound lifetime or devaluation of pensions vs wages.
Of late, e.g. it has been announced several times that labor time will not increase in the near future in Russia.
See D. Medvedev. Duration of the working week will remain intact// www.1tv.ru/news/economic/167145;
V. V. Putin speech at the congress of Independent Trade Unions of Russia http://www.rian.ru/economy / 20110112/320715359.html Any of the above mentioned actions requires considerable costs: e.g. a higher involvement of young mothers in labor activities (which has not been achieved yet) may happen if the market is abundant with preschool institutions or if young mothers are paid comparable wages to hire baby-sitters (this is the case in France). The death rate may be reduced as a result of effective growth of absolute and relative costs for the national healthcare, promotion of and adherence to the sports lifestyle, and self-caring behavior of individuals.
Social Sphere pected at the entities located in agglomerations: the average labor productivity in such entities is by 46% higher than in other settlements1. While in small and mid-size cities there are considerable reserves of unemployed.
-------Growth/loss of the population, actual Growth/loss of the population, forecast Growth/loss of able-bodied people, actual Growth/loss of able-bodied people, forecast Sources: Demographic yearbook of Russia 2010. Rosstat. M. 2010. Estimated number of the population of the Russian Federation up to 2030. Statistical bulletin. M. 2010.
Fig. 9. Growth/loss of the population and the able-bodied population of Russia (actual and forecasted) in 1992-2020, in thousand persons Migration can and must become an additional and important support in balancing labor demand and supply. All developed countries of the world even those with more favorable demographic situations as compared to Russia apply the migration reserve. As an officer of the US immigration authorities described, “due to limited economic and demographical factors, the USA will continue to “fly a flag” over the golden door2 (Protectionnisme economique et politique dimmigration. Rabat, 1994. Р. 49).
The Russian industry at the growth stage: factors of competitiveness. Ed. by K. R. Gonchar, B. V. Kuznetsova.M., Publishing House GU-VShE, 2008, p. 374–381.
Protectionnisme economique et politique dimmigration. Rabat, 1994. Р. тыс.человек RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks 5.3.1. On-going migration In the 2000’es, the governments of the world developed countries made a special focus on selective principles of the formation of migration workforce for their countries. The focus was enhanced on the qualifications of the migrated workforce, and intellectual and business migration have become most important. Thus, from 1991 through 2005, the percentage weight of persons who were employed according to preset qualification criteria (together with their family members) increased in Australia from 37 to 64%, in Canada – from 18 to 60%, in the Great Britain from 7 to 62%1. If Russia could articulate such an objective, the choice would have been complicated. Firstly, it is the scale of the “permanent” migration that prevents making such a choice. In recent years, about 280,000 people come to Russia every year. The majority of the migrants – not less than 93-95% annually – arrive from the CIS countries. This niche created by the common past and modest knowledge of the Russian language is extremely useful to Russia moreover there are no other realistic migration sources2. Secondly, a real selection is doubtful in the context of transparent borderlines and common transportation lines.
In 2010, the registered migrations reduced at least by one third (Fig 10). All geographic directions of migration, without exception, demonstrated such reduction, but the proportions between them were maintained: as in 2009, 34% of all the migrants came from the Central Asia (13% of them from Uzbekistan), 21% from the Transcaucasia, and 38% from the CIS western countries.
The CIS migration niche is not limitless for Russia. A survey carried out in 2010 by a GALLUP team in the ex-Soviet states (13.2 thousand persons, at least 1,000 in each country) showed that the migration mood of the citizens of the Central Asian republics was mainly associated with temporary migration. Only 9% of the respondents in Tajikistan, 6% in Uzbekistan and 5% in Turkmenia would leave their countries for good. The Armenian and Moldavian respondents demonstrated the highest mobility (39% and 36% respectively would like to immigrate to become residents, 44% and 53% would like to immigrate to become nonresidents). 13% of the respondents on the average would leave their countries for ever, 24% of the respondents would prefer being temporary employed abroad3. Russia is not the only country to receive the migration potential from the ex-Soviet states. For Moldavia, e.g., whose citizens have been highly mobile, Ukraine is more attractive than Russia in terms of migration. In 2009, according to official statistics, 38% of all migrants (2,663 persons) moved to Russia to become residents while 46% moved to Ukraine 4.
I. P. Tsapenko. Attracting economic migrants to the developed countries//Labor abroad, 2008, No 3, p. 25.
Reduction of the able-bodied population will be observed in the European countries as well in the near future thus enhancing “competition for migrants”.
M. Sergeev. Byelorussians destroyed the myth of their prosperity//Independent Gazette, August 6, 2010.
Population and demographic processes in the Republic of Moldova. 2009. Statistical collection. National Statistics Bureau of the Republic of Moldova.. http://www.statistica.md/public/files/publicatii_electronice/procese_ demografice/Procese_demografice_2009.pdf Section 5.
Social Sphere 2010* -200,0 -100,0 0,0 100,0 200,0 300,0 400,In thousands of people came from the CIS countries and Georgia came from other countries left for the CIS countries and Georgia left for other countries *Data for 2010 are tentative and estimated on the basis of January – November 2010 data plus December extrapolation of the respective trend.
Sources: Demographic yearbook of Russia 2010. Rostat M,. 2010.
Fig. 10. Migration share of Russia in the international migration (for permanent residency or for a period exceeding one year), 2000–2010, in thousand people The State Program of Assistance to Migration of Fellow-Countrymen to Russia started in 2007 was implemented ineffectively or even failed completely thus demonstrating inability of all the parties concerned to implement migration processes pushed from outside. The time of organizational involvement, relocation of agricultural settlements and other organized migration moves has been over. In 2007 – 2010, 19,535 people (including their family members) participated in the Program instead of 300,000, initially announced. The concept to divide the regions into three groups (depending on their demographic and social-economic situation) and to provide various types of support to the migrants has not been implemented. It was assumed that the fellow-countrymen moving to “worse” regions (as a rule, Far East and Siberia) would get better support. However, 79% of all the migrants settled down in three regions (not in the Far East) that were relatively sound in terms of economic situation and had a high demand for workforce: Kaliningrad, Kaluga and Lipetsk regions. The regional migration programs were developed by 31 subjects of the Russian Federation (60% of the regions refused from participation in the Program) and only 15 regions hosted the migrants. For municipal authorities who actually had been granted the hosting functions and who in non-recession times were engaged in implementation of tactical tasks and patching up, such functions became domineering during recessions, and caring about the countrymen was thought to be redundant 1.
For other issues of implementation of the Program of Assistance to Migration of Fellow-Countrymen to Russia, see in Sections “Migration processes” in the reviews: Russian economy in 2008. Trends and prospects (Issue 30). M. IEPP, 2009, section 4.2. p 342–359; Russian economy in 2009. Trends and prospects. (Issue 31), M. IEPP, 2010, section 4.2. p. 376–392.
RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks In terms of demography and economics, students of the Russian Institutes of Higher Learning could have become an important component of the permanent migration flow. In 2007/2008 academic year, 36.5 thousand people from the CIS countries studied in the Russian Institutes, another 41.4 thousand people studied in the Russian Institutes of Higher Learning by correspondence and 84.6 thousand were students of international departments of the Russian Institutes1. Thus, during one academic year, at least 160,000 young specialists got education, according to Russian standards (though with some variations) and therefore potentially were better adapted to the Russian environment as compared to other migrants. However, in 2010, only 1,500 students became citizens of Russia, this being 3.5 times less than in the “non-abundant” 2009.
Almost the same rate of reduction of naturalization in Russia was observed in other categories of the citizens. For 11 months of 2010, 86.4 thousand people (301.8 thousand for the similar period of the previous year) were admitted to citizenship. In 2010, the simplified procedure of admittance to citizenship was cancelled; this can be viewed as a counter-productive measure given the current demographic and economic problems of Russia.
In Russia, there has been no policy of social, cultural and economic integration of the migrants though the Federal Migration Service recently set up an Integration Department, for the first time in the period of the Service functioning.
5.3.2. Temporary migration In 2006 (the implementation began in 2007), a migration legislative reform began in the country that made a significant impact on external labor migration. The main positive innovation of the legislation was that the migrants from visa-free countries were entitled to selfregistration (with the migration authorities) under a “notice-filing” procedure that replaced the earlier authorization-based procedure, to receive a work permit and become free players on the labor market. The employers were granted an opportunity to employ such migrants without receiving a special authorization. To regulate the number of foreign workers, a complex mechanism of quota arrangement, sector shares of foreign employees for certain sectors of economy (retail trade, sports) and some other tools were established.
Материалы этого сайта размещены для ознакомления, все права принадлежат их авторам.
Если Вы не согласны с тем, что Ваш материал размещён на этом сайте, пожалуйста, напишите нам, мы в течении 1-2 рабочих дней удалим его.