Urban environment quality index list of cities. All municipalities in the country participating in the program for the improvement of Russian cities will receive an assessment of the quality of the urban environment. Methodology for assessing the quality of the urban living environment

Habitat (residence), which is based on the collection, description and assessment of quantitative and qualitative indicators. Quantitative indicators are annual statistical data for cities of the Russian Federation, and qualitative characteristics are the own characteristics of the subject of assessment. The purpose of compiling the rating is to conduct a comprehensive, collective, public analysis of the urban habitat, compare urban habitats with each other, assess strengths and weaknesses, prepare data for management analysis and personnel decisions.

By the order of the President of the Russian Federation formulated in paragraph 1 of the Instructions of the President of the Russian Federation No. Pr-534 dated February 29, 2012, issued to executive authorities following the results of the meeting “On measures to implement housing policy” dated February 14, 2012 - by the order of the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation formulated in paragraph 4 of the list instructions of the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 20, 2012 No. VP-P9-1581 “On the development of a methodology for assessing the quality of the urban living environment and conducting such an assessment in large cities of Russia.”

Theoretical significance of the rating

• To create the rating, the world practice of regional studies and construction of city ratings is summarized;
• A new methodological apparatus has been developed, based on statistical, mathematical and qualimetric analysis;
• The rating is a comprehensive work on collecting, systematizing and analyzing quantitative and qualitative data, verifying the reliability of the results obtained;

Practical significance of the rating

• A tool has been created to ensure an objective comprehensive assessment of municipalities of the Russian Federation according to criteria that determine the level of development of significant spheres of the city’s life;
• A tool has been created to determine competitive advantages and destructive factors in the development of municipalities;
• A tool has been prepared to determine the growth poles in the country - from the point of view of conditions favorable for the life of the population, doing business, investing in real estate, etc.;
• A mechanism for an integrated system for monitoring socio-economic indicators of cities has been formed, which makes it possible to compare them, as well as conduct analytical studies to identify trends in socio-economic development;
• An indicator has been prepared for timely decision-making to enhance competitive advantages and reduce negative factors for future development, as well as leveling imbalances in the economic complex of municipalities based on a number of socio-economic factors;

Calculation methodology

The methodological basis for assessing the quality of the urban living environment (habitat) was the methodology created by the Russian Union of Engineers when forming the General Rating of the attractiveness of Russian cities

As a key method for calculating the attractiveness properties of cities, a quality assessment technique is used, borrowed from qualimetry, where several approaches to quantitative assessment of quality have been developed.

The method used in the work is based on the following principles:

1. attractiveness is a set of only those properties inherent in an object that are associated with achieving a result with their help (but not with the costs incurred) and which manifest themselves in the process of managing the object in accordance with its purpose;
2. some complex and any simple properties can be measured using absolute property indicator . The obtained indicator values ​​are expressed in quantitative units specific for each property. Metrological, expert, and analytical methods can be used for measurements;
3. all properties that form quality form a hierarchical structure in the form of a tree of properties. The lowest tier of this tree (the root of the tree) represents the most complex property - the quality of the object, and the branches of the higher tier represent simple and quasi-simple properties;

To compare various properties measured in scales of different ranges and dimensions, a relative dimensionless indicator is used, reflecting the degree of approximation of the absolute indicator of the property to the maximum and minimum indicators.

To compare the relative importance of all properties included in the “property tree”, dimensionless weight coefficients are used. The values ​​of weight coefficients are determined using varieties of expert and analytical methods. In this work, both methods are used. To determine the relative weight, the method of expert survey of 50 specialists from various industries and fields of activity, various social and professional positions was used.

The groups of indicators that form the indices fully satisfy the requirements of sufficiency and independence.

The assessment of cities was carried out in the following areas: demographic and social characteristics of society, urban economic development, citizens' well-being, innovative and entrepreneurial activity, housing affordability, development of the housing sector, state of utilities and transport infrastructure, development of the social services sector, natural and environmental situation.

Data from the statistical collection “Regions of Russia. Basic socio-economic indicators of cities" of the Federal State Statistics Service, the electronic database "Indicators of Municipal Formations" of the FSGS, official data from local authorities, information presented on the websites of relevant ministries, departments, agencies, as well as other open sources of information.

Development of the rating and application of the rating

In May 2013, the rating and methodology for assessing the quality of the urban living environment (living) were approved by the Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation D. Kozak with instructions to the Ministry of Regional Development of the Russian Federation to conduct an assessment of the quality of the urban living environment (living) on ​​an ongoing basis.

In the future, it is planned to increase the number of cities to be analyzed.

The country's prosperity grows along with its economic situation. Today, many regions of Russia lag significantly behind in terms of living standards, while others, on the contrary, occupy leading positions in terms of quality of living.

1. Tyumen- the most favorable locality in Russia for living, taking the leading place in the rating for the third time in a row. According to statistics, this Siberian city is the best in road construction and education.

Key Features:

• The locality has a high level of salaries.
• The city is equipped with many places for leisure of the population and children.
• In Tyumen, healthcare is at a high level, which makes it the best place to live.
• The work of housing and communal services is marked by coherence and interaction with the population.
• The urban environment is well-maintained and allows you to find something to do for people of any age.

2. Moscow– the capital ranks second in terms of quality of life in the vastness of the homeland. One of the beautiful settlements, accommodation here is characterized by high prices. There are a small number of poor people here, since the city ranks 2nd in terms of the well-being of populated areas in Russia.

Key Features:

• Among those surveyed, 70% of Muscovites believe that their hometown is the best place to live.
• Developing sectors of the national economy are noted in Moscow.
• The pace of reconstruction and development in the Moscow region is characterized by high rates.
• Moscow has a large number of interesting places, as well as a high level of income.
• Compared to Tyumen, the weather conditions of this settlement are much better and more favorable for life.

3. Kazan continues the list of the best places suitable for a comfortable stay. The capital of Tatarstan is proud of its decent level of education and maintenance of its housing stock.

Key Features:

• The activities of the authorities in the field of road construction cannot but please drivers - the roads are clean, smooth and well-groomed.
• The city is the sixth most populous in Russia, characterized by the presence of major attractions and interesting places.
• The government is implementing many government programs to improve the well-being of this locality.
• Considerable attention is paid to the development of the culture of the national majority.
• In general, indigenous residents are 96% satisfied with the state of Kazan.

4. Krasnodar– sunny living conditions combined with a favorable climate. Despite this, Krasnodar is named the leader among drinking cities according to the latest data: this is where lovers of strong drinks live.

Key Features:

• It is considered a major industrial center in the south of Russia.
• In recent years, there has been a high percentage of people moving to live here from all regions of the country.
• Krasnodar is considered a good place to start a business.
• This city has a low unemployment rate.
• The advantageous location of the point near resort areas makes it popular.

5. St. Petersburg– second among million-plus people recognized as favorable for living.

Key Features:

• It is considered the best of the megacities, where the level of healthcare is at its best.
• The city is not on the list of criminal settlements, which makes it safe.
• Leningrad is a major tourist center with a large number of historical places and attractions.
• The city has a unique climate that not everyone will like, but local residents and visitors note that St. Petersburg is the best place on Earth.
• The beauty of this metropolis can captivate anyone, and the infrastructure is comparable to Moscow.

As you can see, the best settlements in Russia for living are characterized by high wages, a cultural sphere and a developed housing and communal services fund.

Ecology rating

Living in a clean city, where the air is not polluted by emissions, is much healthier than living in industrial cities.

We propose to consider the three settlements in Russia recognized as the cleanest:

1. Sarapul from Udmurtia– leader among the cleanest mid-sized cities. Sarapul is characterized by a low amount of emissions, which makes for favorable living conditions on its territory.
2. Derbent from Dagestan– ranks first among large populated areas in Russia. Ecological, livable Derbent, as the amount of emissions is small.
3. Taganrog is a large city in terms of population, has 18,000 tons of emissions per year and is a leader in cleanliness among large populated areas.

The dirtiest cities in Russia

It is a known fact that the mortality rate of citizens increases due to poor ecology; below are the settlements that are leaders among the worst in terms of ecology.

1. Norilsk– the main polluted region of Russia. It is here that the metallurgical industry is widely developed, which emits nitrogen dioxide, sulfur, lead and carbon disulfide into the atmosphere in large volumes.
2. Moscow- ranks second among dirty habitats. About a million harmful substances enter the air every year, most of which come from car exhaust.
3. Saint Petersburg– has a well-deserved 3rd place, the number of emissions as a percentage is growing every year.

It is possible to live in these regions, but the environmental situation is not conducive to improving human health.

Ranking by population

All cities by population can be divided into several categories, each of which will have its own top three:

1. Millionaires. The first three places are occupied by Moscow, St. Petersburg and Novosibirsk. It is in the territory of these settlements that a huge number of people live, increasing every year.
2. Major cities. The top three were occupied by Krasnodar, Saratov and Tyumen - it is here that the number of people living is close to a million.
3. Medium-sized cities. The first three positions are firmly occupied by Kirov, Tula and Cheboksary, characterized by a population of more than 400 thousand people.
4. Small towns. Among places with a population of up to 250 thousand, Syktyvkar, Khimki and Nalchik took the lead.

Useful video

Related Posts

The Russian Federation is a country with a huge area, on the territory of which there are more than 1000 cities and towns.

Many Russians and foreign citizens are interested in the standard of living in Russia, in which city it is the highest. The answer can be found in the results of research conducted by an organization called the Center for Strategic Research, which belongs to the Russian State Insurance Company.

Sociological studies and surveys of Russians living in various cities of the Russian Federation have shown which regions are most in demand among Russian residents, and which are in less demand for living.

To understand which region is better to live in, employees of the Center for Strategic Studies asked residents of each of the regions and cities presented below about how satisfied they were with the level and quality of life in them.

The table displays the general standard of living and satisfaction of Russian citizens with their regions and cities.
But in addition to such a survey, the research center conducted social surveys on whether Russians were satisfied with the quality of the urban environment. The surveys were conducted according to the following selected criteria:

1. Housing and communal services.
2. Cultural level of the city.
3. Medical care.
4. Educational sphere.
5. Transport.
6. Level of corruption.

Housing and communal services

When studying the situation with housing and communal services, many Russian citizens had to answer the question, are they satisfied with the quality of service of housing and communal services and housing prices?

Residents of Grozny, Ufa, Vladivostok, Astrakhan and Volgograd are least satisfied with housing and communal services.

Cultural level

1. Kazan;
2. Grozny;
3. Yekaterinburg;
4. Novosibirsk;
5. Rostov-on-Don;
6. Saint Petersburg;
7. Krasnodar;
8. Penza;
9. Moscow;
10. Khabarovsk.

Medical care

List of cities with the highest level of medical care:

1. Grozny;
2. Tyumen;
3. Kazan;
4. Barnaul;
5. Naberezhnye Chelny;
6. Orenburg;
7. Penza;
8. Saint Petersburg;
9. Ulyanovsk;
10. Krasnodar.

Educational field

Corruption

List of cities and regions with the highest corruption rates:

Transport sector

List of regions with the most developed transport systems:

1. Grozny;
2. Tyumen;
3. Kazan;
4. Moscow;
5. Saint Petersburg;
6. Tolyatti;
7. Izhevsk;
8. Novokuznetsk;
9. Tomsk;
10. Penza.

Wages

Many will agree that statistics on the standard of living of the population largely depend on the average salary of a person. According to statistics, people in Russia receive the highest wages in the following districts and cities:

1. The Chukotka Autonomous Okrug ranks first in the Russian Federation in the top 10 regions with the highest salaries. According to statistics, in the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug the average salary is 71,000 rubles. The economy of this district is built on the mining industry.
2. Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug. The average salary, according to statistics, is 69,000 rubles per month. Such high wages are due to gas and oil production in this district.
3. Nenets Autonomous Okrug. The average salary in this district is 68,000 rubles. Basically, most of the workers of the Nenets Autonomous Okrug are involved in the forestry, food and fishing industries.
4. The Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug has an average monthly salary of 67,000 rubles. The fact that this region ranks 4th in the top is not at all surprising. According to statistics, more than 60% of the total oil production in Russia is produced in this region.
5. Magadan region. In this area, there is an annual increase in average monthly wages. In 2017, residents of the Magadan region earned an average of 66,000 rubles. This level of payment is determined by the main field of activity of the Magadan region and high labor productivity. It's no secret that this area produces large quantities of gold. But in addition to the extraction of this precious metal, the region makes good money from the fishing industry.
6. The Tyumen region has taken one of the leading positions in the top thanks to its developed real estate market. In the Tyumen region, realtors and truck drivers are in great demand. On average, residents of this region earn 65,000 rubles.
7. Moscow. The capital of the Russian Federation is known not only for its developed infrastructure and multi-million population, but also for its very high wage levels. In the capital, on average they receive 60,000 rubles.
8. Sakhalin region. The lowest salary on Sakhalin is 16,000 rubles. But less than 20% of the population receives such a salary. On average, residents of the Sakhalin region earn 59,000 rubles monthly.
9. The Kamchatka region is known for its very developed fishing industry. The financial and mining industries are also well developed in this region. The average salary, according to statistics, is 54,000 rubles per month per person.
10. Yakutia (officially: Sakha Republic) is able to provide an average salary of 54,000 rubles to people living and working in this area.

The decline in GDP was influenced by the conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine

The first reason for the low standard of living in Russia is the decline in GDP. This is one of the main indicators of the level of quality of life and the market value of all final goods and services.

Dynamics of changes in the level of gross domestic product of the Russian Federation over the past 20 years

Based on the data in the table, one can note a sharp drop in the standard of living in Russia and its GDP. Many political scientists argue that the sharp decline in GDP was influenced by the conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine. Let us recall that in 2014 the Crimean Peninsula seceded, after which the Ukrainian authorities officially announced the presence of Russian military personnel on Ukrainian territory.

This statement served as the basis for the introduction of sanctions against Russia by the European Union. Due to many sanctions, Russia was unable to fully carry out trade turnover; product exports decreased significantly, which resulted in a decline in the level of gross domestic product.

According to statistics, Russia ranks 10th in the world in terms of GDP.

It's no secret that the level of GDP is affected by production volumes, and the country has very low labor productivity. This is the second reason for the low standard of living in Russia.

Low labor productivity was a consequence of worn-out infrastructure and old production equipment.

The third, but not least important reason for the decline in the quality of life of citizens of the Russian Federation is corruption, which flourishes in almost every city in the country.

Today, more than half the world's population and 74% of Russians live in cities. More than 57 million people live in the Russian cities covered by the rating in 2012 (54% of the number of citizens in Russia). The quality of the urban environment is one of the determining factors in people's living and working conditions. The efforts made by city authorities to create a favorable environment for living in cities and increase the efficiency of resource use by urban management make a significant contribution to the development of the Russian economy. The rating methodology was formed from 7 key categories: air environment, water consumption and water quality, waste management, use of territories, transport, energy consumption, environmental impact management.
The rating is calculated for 85 cities. The assessment methodology covers environmental issues and takes into account international recommendations and the experience of similar ratings for other countries and regions.

In the “air environment” category, the first six places were taken by Makhachkala, Volgograd, St. Petersburg, Tambov, Penza, and Tula. In the category "water consumption and water quality" - Anadyr, Kursk, Orel, Moscow, Ulan-Ude, Naryan-Mar. In the category "waste management" - Yaroslavl, Veliky Novgorod, Perm, Izhevsk, Cheboksary, Murmansk. In the category "use of territories" - Vladikavkaz, Vladivostok, Abakan, Belgorod, Ivanovo, Yaroslavl. In the "transport" category - Veliky Novgorod, Kemerovo, Kursk, Moscow, Volgograd, Ivanovo. In the category "energy consumption" - Izhevsk, Arkhangelsk, Magas, Moscow, Tambov, Tyumen. In the category "environmental impact management" - Saransk, Tolyatti, Naryan-Mar, Chita, Abakan, Grozny.

The outsiders in the rating were, first of all, cities that were unable to provide a sufficient amount of data, and probably do not have systems for collecting reliable statistical information on a number of important indicators in the field of environmental protection. These are Voronezh, Blagoveshchensk, Gorno-Altaisk, Krasnodar, Irkutsk and others.

“The rating demonstrates that Russian cities in the top ten of the rating are in no way inferior to large cities in the world, and according to some criteria even surpass them,” said Deputy Head of the Ministry of Natural Resources Rinat Gizatulin.

In particular, Moscow's air quality monitoring data is annually compared with indicators of other world megacities (London, Paris, Hong Kong, Stockholm, New York). According to monitoring data, in residential areas the air quality in Moscow is comparable to the air quality in New York. Near highways, pollution is slightly higher than in Paris, Stockholm and London. In terms of greening, Moscow ranks first among all major cities.

According to the Ministry of Natural Resources, more than half the world's population and 74% of Russians live in cities. More than 57 million people live in the Russian cities covered by the rating in 2012 (54% of the number of citizens in Russia).

480 rub. | 150 UAH | $7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Dissertation - 480 RUR, delivery 10 minutes, around the clock, seven days a week and holidays

Popov Alexey Alexandrovich. Assessment of territorial differentiation of the quality of the urban environment of Moscow: dissertation... Candidate of Geographical Sciences: 25.00.24 / Popov Alexey Aleksandrovich; [Place of protection: Moscow. state University named after M.V. Lomonosov]. - Moscow, 2008. - 233 p. : ill. RSL OD, 61:08-11/12

Introduction

Chapter 1. Theoretical and methodological approaches to assessing the quality of the urban environment 8

1.1. The city as an object of study in economic geography 8

1.2. Evolution of approaches to the analysis of internal heterogeneity of urban areas 13

1.3. Definition of the concept “quality of the urban environment” 30

1.4. Basic principles for assessing the quality of the urban environment of Moscow 40

Chapter 2. Analysis of the results of calculating the quality index of the Moscow urban environment 51

2.1. Assessment of the quality of the situation in the transport system 51

2.2. Assessment of the situation regarding commercial and social infrastructure facilities 79

2.3. Assessing the impact of heterogeneity in the level of environmental tension

2.4. Assessment of the quality of the position relative to objects of negative and positive neighborhood 104

2.5. Analysis of the final distribution of urban environment quality index values ​​116

Chapter 3. The influence of the quality of the urban environment on the development of the social

stratification in Moscow 125

3.1. The territorial component of the evolution of the development of social stratification in Moscow 125

3.2. Factors indicating a possible increase in social stratification 142

3.3. Factors indicating a possible weakening of social stratification 155

Conclusion 177

References 183

Appendix 198

Introduction to the work

Relevance of the research topic. In the last two decades, large cities of the Russian Federation are going through a new stage of their development, which is associated both with a fundamental change in the economic system (the transition from a planned economy to a market economy) and with a global trend of increase; the role of non-productive sectors in the post-industrial era. All this explains the depth of transformation of their internal structure, which is currently observed - expressed in: a change in the functional purpose of urban spaces, implementation; projects for both integrated development of territories and spot development, changes in the ethnosocial composition of the population.

One of the most important results of socio-economic
transformations of the post-reform period in relation to

intra-city development began with increased polarization and growth of social tension in society, the beginning of the process of territorial segregation of the population. The philosophy of urban development in the Soviet period, based on the desire to unify space and minimize differences between regions, has been replaced by their functioning in a market economy under the significant influence of factors of the qualitative characteristics of the environment, the cost of urban land and real estate.

The topic of a comprehensive assessment of the urban environment in the context of a change in the main vector of urban planning policy (the transition from the priority development of vacant lands to the renovation of established territories) is currently quite relevant. Geographical research methods make it possible to obtain significant results for solving scientific research and applied problems. All the latest changes in both the material and spiritual components of social dynamics are most clearly and profoundly manifested in the capital of the Russian Federation.

Analysis of intra-city differences has never been among the key areas of Russian socio-economic geography. Research work on a formal assessment of the quality of the urban environment, carried out by representatives of the Soviet school of factor ecology (Medvedkov Yu.V., Barbash N.V.) in the 1970-1980s, was not continued in the 1990-2000s. The growing interest in microgeography, noted recently, is expressed mainly in the study of individual aspects of the evolution of the components of urban systems (development of segments of the real estate market, changes in 1 ethno-social composition, environmental issues, issues of restructuring of industrial territories).

Object of study- quality of the urban environment of Moscow.

Subject of research- influence of the quality of the urban environment on the territorial component of social stratification in the capital RF.

Purpose and objectives of the study.

Target The work consists in developing methodological approaches to assessing the quality of the urban environment with the subsequent use of the obtained calculated data to predict the spatial aspect of social stratification in Moscow.

During the study, the following tasks were solved:

determination of principles and justification of methodological approaches to formal assessment of the quality of the urban environment;

development of a methodology for assessing individual components within the framework of the integral index of the quality of the urban environment, taking into account the characteristics of the territorial structure of Moscow;

analysis of territorial differentiation of the distribution of both individual parameters influencing the qualitative characteristics of the urban environment and the final index values;

determining the relationship between objective and subjective factors in pricing in the Moscow residential real estate market;

5) comparative analysis of the qualitative characteristics of the urban environment

and the territorial component of the processes that are

indicators of the development of social stratification in the capital of the Russian Federation;

To conduct the study, a combination of general scientific and geographical methods: cartographic and mathematical modeling, field monitoring studies, method of expert assessments, comparative, sociological (questioning) and historical-evolutionary methods.

Methodological and information base. The theoretical and methodological basis for the dissertation research was the works of economic geographers who specialized in studying the internal heterogeneity of urban space N.V. Barbash, O.I. Vendina, V.G. Glushkova, G.M. Lappo, E.N. Pertsika, as well as specialists in spatial development of urban systems and urban planning D. Forrester, F. Braudel, K. Lynch, R. Murphy, E. Soji, V.L. Glazycheva.

As an information base, we used materials from the Research and Development Institute of the General Plan of Moscow, specialized exhibitions on the topic of urban development, held in 2004-2008, data from the research company ESPAR-Analyst, the consulting and assessment department of Paul's Yard Realty, the results of field monitoring studies, materials from specialized Internet sites, satellite images of the city at different times.

Scientific novelty The work consists of a fundamentally different approach to a formalized assessment of the qualitative characteristics of urban space. For the first time in a comprehensive economic-geographical study of Moscow, the emphasis was placed not on assessing the heterogeneity of indicator values ​​across administrative units, but on analyzing the fields of distribution of indicators throughout the city (without the distorting influence of the configuration and spatial dimensions of the grid of cells chosen for calculations). Basic methodological methods have been developed

principles for assessing the quality of the urban environment using a combination of systemic and environmental approaches to the object and subject of research. An index of the quality of the Moscow urban environment was calculated, including 67 private indicators, combined through an iterative procedure into 5 typological groups, the significance of which was determined based on a sociological study of the population and a survey of experts. A comparative analysis of the index values ​​and the cost of residential real estate made it possible to identify overvalued and undervalued areas of the city in the housing market, as well as the significance of the objective and subjective components in pricing on it. Key factors were identified that are indicators of the development of social stratification in Moscow at the present time, and a forecast of this process was also given.

The obtained research results have both methodological and practical significance and allow obtaining socially significant results that can be used in regulating the territorial development of urban systems. The methodology for assessing the quality of the urban environment proposed in this work is used in applied research to develop options for the most efficient use of land in the largest cities of the Russian Federation. The calculations of the urban environment quality index for specific territories were used by Millhouse Capital in the development of concepts for integrated development of residential and commercial real estate in Omsk and Tyumen. The results of the study can be used to make management decisions in the field of long-term development of urban areas and municipalities at the local level.

Approbation of work and publication. The main provisions and results of the dissertation were reported and discussed at conferences: “B.N. Semevsky and the development of Soviet economic geography through the eyes of contemporaries and young researchers" (Smolensk, 2007), VI

International scientific and practical conference “Shevchenko Spring” (Kyiv, 2008). 9 scientific works were published on the topic of the dissertation (including 1 article in the publication of the Higher Attestation Commission list) with a total volume of 3 pp. The materials of the completed research were used when delivering individual lectures at the Department of Economic and Social Geography of Russia, Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University.

Structure! work. The dissertation consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, a list of references and an appendix. The main content of the work is presented on 169 pages of text. The list of sources used includes 215 items (of which: 187 literary sources, 11 Internet resources, as well as 17 regulatory documents). The dissertation contains 51 figures and 6 tables.

First The chapter is devoted to an analysis of the development of microgeographical research in domestic and foreign geography, as well as in a number of related disciplines. The evolution of methodological approaches to the concept of “quality of the urban environment” is considered, and the rationale for the basic principles of calculating this complex index for the city of Moscow is given.

In second The chapter provides a detailed description of the territorial heterogeneity of the distribution of individual components of the urban environment quality index. A description of the methodology for integrating intermediate and final results for each of the blocks of indicators is given. An analysis of the features of the distribution of the obtained calculated index values ​​throughout the city is carried out.

IN third The chapter, taking into account the historical features of the development of the process of territorial stratification, as well as on the basis of a comparative analysis of the spatial component of the “external” (in relation to the urban environment) indicators of this process, characterizes the options for changing the internal structure of the city of Moscow in the medium term. The appendix provides additional information on the methodology for calculating the index and intermediate results.

The city as an object of study in economic geography

The city is one of the most complex and multifaceted objects to study in economic geography. It is characterized by the functioning of a large number of subsystems (population, economic complex, engineering infrastructure, transport), concentrated in a relatively small area. Cities are systems within large systems, formed according to certain laws at focal points of vast territories, which are concentrations of industrial, scientific and cultural values, with significant growth potential and force of attraction (Pertsik, 1999).

Many scientific disciplines (ecology, economics, urban planning) study the problems of urban environment development, but each of them approaches the issue under study from a utilitarian point of view, while geography, thanks to the combination of different scales and research methods, as well as the use of an integrated approach, is capable give a more holistic and complete assessment. In scientific research on urban topics, complex areas have developed - urban studies, urban planning, as well as urban subdisciplines (urban climatology, engineering geology, urban sociology). One of the distinctive features of geography as a science is that each of the levels of geographical research of urban areas provides answers to different blocks of questions: macroanalysis allows one to assess general trends in the development of large urban systems, the meso level - individual urban agglomerations or their groups, and when analyzing at the micro level It is possible to identify specific problems in the functioning of the city that affect the life of an individual. Various objects and phenomena “function” depending on the scale of consideration in different ways: some do not carry new information at each level, for others each of them is important. The characteristic step, the rhythm of phenomena in time and space makes it possible to identify trends and market fluctuations, displacements and pulsations of different frequencies (Treyvish, 2006).

Large cities are the epicenters of man-made problems and crisis phenomena in the economic and social sphere. The advantages of city life are often sources of conflicts of different interests. In moving towards the declared goal of improving the quality of the urban environment, it is necessary to combine opposing tasks: to preserve the diversity of places where labor is applied and to solve environmental problems that arise during production activities; to find territorial reserves for housing construction, preserving the existing volumes of areas occupied by natural complex objects

Features of urban development in modern Russia are inseparable from countrywide socio-economic transformations. The most important of them is the transition to market relations, which radically changed the features of the evolution of urban areas in our country. The placement of objects and regulations for the use of land in cities are no longer dictated from above, but are the prerogative of the “natural” development of the territory (based on a combination of the interests of business and municipal authorities).

The development of all major Russian cities is currently associated with the following complex problems:

Large-scale deindustrialization, accompanied by a radical change in the employment structure of the population and the emergence of unemployment;

Narrowing of reproduction and reduction in the size of its own population, in most cases covered by the migration influx from neighboring regions and neighboring countries;

Deep physical deterioration of engineering infrastructure; - obsolescence of urban planning and architectural planning ideas implemented in the largest Russian cities;

Transport problems associated with the explosive growth of motorization, increased mobility of the population in conditions of unpreparedness of the outdated network of city highways and public transport routes to receive an ever-increasing traffic flow;

A change in the social composition of many urban areas, accompanied by the first signs of social tension;

Overdensification of residential areas in the central part of cities, leading to the development of intra-block areas, public gardens, sports and children's playgrounds and related conflicts;

Dense development of peripheral territories, preventing the expansion of existing and construction of new transport routes, the allocation of sites for mass housing construction, for the placement of communal and social facilities. The city as an object of study has a number of features. It is a complex, but at the same time relatively weakly structured system, the main research methodology of which in most cases is system analysis. This determines the presence of a large number of cause-and-effect relationships between factors in a complex system, the result of the interaction of which is not always obvious. The city is a dynamic system, the development of which is studied in dynamics, processes are analyzed taking into account the duration of the life cycle of its structural components (population, industry, infrastructure). In addition, the city is considered as a self-regulating system in which there are internal organizational processes, and ill-considered management decisions can lead to imbalances. Therefore, in urban development there is often a conflict between long-term planning goals and short-term solutions. Good living conditions in the coming years in some cases may cause crisis phenomena in the long term.

One of the central procedures of system analysis is the construction of a generalized (unified) model of an object, reflecting the most important factors and interrelations of the system. The city as a modeling object is characterized by the following features:

Some weakness of theoretical knowledge about the object;

The lack of a general theory of urban development applicable to each specific urban entity;

The qualitative nature of much knowledge about the system, a significant share of expert assessments in the description and structuring of the modeling object (Mitichkin, 2001).

The distribution of material objects forms the spatial scheme of the city, and their relationships form the functional one. Everything is combined into the functional-spatial structure of the object. Impacts on complex and contradictory relationships that develop during functional-spatial changes are especially important in the design, development and management of complex urban systems (Resin, Popkov, 2000).

But there is another approach to the city as an object of study. According to a number of researchers, the unique in the city prevails over the typical and for its full analysis it is necessary to consider it not only as a spatial-economic, but, first of all, as a social phenomenon. The French historian F. Braudel believes that building typologies and classifications in relation to cities is pointless and that “... whatever city you take, everywhere you will see a different social structure with its own original features, its own destiny, its own peculiarity...”. He calls the goal of his analysis of the city to identify those connections that transform rural and urban areas into ordered structures. The essence of explanation in the social sciences lies in the discovery of fundamental, often unobservable mechanisms of the causal relationship of phenomena. Such invisible, unobservable structures are economic flows and their spatial distribution (Braudel, 1999). A city is determined by a set of external factors, the environment, and arises at a certain point in space, which is characterized by varying degrees of convenience of the geographical location, as well as varying intensity of economic flows. The diversity of these indicators forms the “social formulas” specific to a particular city. That is, social interactions within cities are determined primarily by external (for the city as an object of the socio-economic system) factors (Litvinova, 2002).

The above two approaches to intra-urban space as an object of study (the city as a complex structured system and the city as a unique object) are presented in various proportions in related scientific disciplines that study cities, and in various theories within the framework of geographical science.

Assessment of the quality of the situation in the transport system

The level of development of transport infrastructure and the position relative to its key elements are among the most important parameters influencing the level of attractiveness of Moscow districts. It is the indicators of transport accessibility that are of paramount importance for the development of most segments of the city’s real estate market. Due to the increase in population mobility (over the past 2 decades, the average daily travel distance has increased by 1.7 times), the influence of indicators included in this group on the quality of the urban environment has increased even more. Their significance is also important for the reason that their position in the city’s transport system indirectly affects other characteristics of the quality of the urban environment (as they determine the daily time spent on meeting human needs, and often limiting their implementation).

The weighted average duration of a weekday trip (to work or school) in one direction is 67 minutes (that is, the average Muscovite currently spends about 2.5 hours a day on the road; in addition, a fairly significant percentage of the capital’s residents spend more than 3. 5 hours, which significantly limits the possibility of carrying out any activities on a working day that are not related to a person’s main activity or travel to it). Thus, the time spent by Moscow residents in transport is only 2-2.5 times less than the duration of the working day. Therefore, within the framework of this study, special attention was paid to the transport component of the urban environment quality index, and 5 separate indicators were identified within this group.

Main characteristics of the indicators of the “position in the transport system” block.

Indicator Unit of measurement Source

No. 1 Time to reach the conditional city center in traffic jams Minutes Service "Yandex.Traffic"; traffic police data, expert survey

No. 2 Time to reach the conditional city center along free streets Minutes Author’s calculations

No. 3 Time to reach the conditional city center using public transport Minutes Data from the State Unitary Enterprise Mosgortrans, author’s calculations

No. 4 Distance to the nearest metro station Meters Author’s calculations

No. 5 Position of the cell for research relative to chord routes of public transport Calculation coefficient Data from the State Unitary Enterprise "Mosgortrans", calculations by the author

The selected indicators reflect the main features of the situation

specific points of the urban area relative to the existing transport system. The time spent on reaching the conditional city center in the morning traffic jams (these calculations were made for those using both personal and public transport; indicators No. 1 and No. 3) characterize the level of comfort of living in the area for the convenience of daily trips.

For those using personal cars, the time costs for a similar trip were additionally calculated when driving on free city highways (indicator No. 2: reflects the level of living comfort for trips on weekends and holidays, as well as during the summer decline in load on the road network).

An additional indicator of the distance to the nearest metro station was introduced (indicator No. 4). Despite some “similarity” with indicator No. 3, it reflects another feature of the area’s position relative to the transport network: the possibility (or lack of possibility) of planning the exact travel time, the need/absence of the need to use various modes of transport.

The above indicators are widely used to analyze the intra-city heterogeneity of the transport accessibility indicator, which somewhat reduces the value of these calculations, since it reflects only one component of the planning structure. Moscow - radial (that is, they estimate the time costs when moving from the periphery to the conditional center of the capital ). At the same time, the level of development of chord connections, based on the characteristics of the city’s planning scheme, is also an important factor. Therefore, within the framework of this study, a method was developed to assess the position of areas in relation to the convenience of movement in chord directions (indicator No. 5).

The calculation of the time required to reach a conditional city center in traffic jams was carried out in several stages.

The entire territory of the city was evenly covered by a network of more than 2,300 reference points (located at the hubs of transport networks), for each of which it was planned to calculate transport accessibility to the streets located along the borders of Kitai-Gorod (along the highways Kremlevskaya Embankment - Okhotny Ryad - New Square - Old Square - Kitaygorodsky Proezd").

For each of the selected segments between reference points, using a survey of experts, monitoring the service “Yapsieh. Traffic jams" and the "START" system of the Moscow State Traffic Safety Inspectorate in 2006-2007. The average speed for movement towards the center during the morning rush hour was determined. For the convenience of developing the model, not real speed values ​​were calculated, but a choice was made from 5 possible values ​​(10,20,30,40 or 50 km/h), which corresponds to situations from an almost complete stop of traffic (10 km/h) to free movement with stopping only at traffic lights (50 km/h) (Fig. 2.2).

Based on the length of the segments and the speed of movement, the time required to overcome each of them was determined. For all points, the “ideal” path to reach the city center was determined (according to a reasonable ratio of time and mileage of the trip). Having summed up the duration of the trip for each segment from a specific point to the conditional center, an indicator of time costs was obtained for each of the points, then 500-meter buffer zones were built around them to assign the calculated indicator from points to cells for research. As a result, for each of the cells, the time to reach the central part of the city was obtained under the conditions indicated above (and the final indicator was obtained as the arithmetic average of the values ​​​​for each of the buffer zones “covering” the cell, which made it possible to take into account the factor of the driver’s ability to choose a travel route).

class3 The influence of the quality of the urban environment on the development of the social

stratification in Moscow class3

The territorial component of the evolution of the development of social stratification in Moscow

Currently, Moscow is experiencing a period characterized by the most large-scale restructuring of urban space in its entire history. In terms of its depth and intensity, the changes noted in Moscow over the past decade and a half can only be compared with the consequences of the fire of 1812 (which led to a radical change in the nature of the capital's development) and Stalin's plan for the reconstruction of Moscow in the 1930s-1950s. Then, to achieve the goal of creating a “model communist city,” they stopped at nothing: huge industrial zones were organized; wide highways have been built; a network of high-rise architectural dominants has been created, and a project for the “façade” development of the main radial directions has been partially implemented.

Even the large-scale development of the peripheral part of the capital in the 1960-1980s (when the area of ​​the city's territory doubled, the pace of housing construction corresponded to today's, and the volume of commissioning of engineering infrastructure facilities was ahead of them) left a smaller mark on the territorial structure of the city. The main emphasis in development in that period was focused on the outskirts of the then urban area of ​​Moscow15; in addition, the changes that took place were more “homogeneous” (standard residential construction, relatively uniform development of the network of trade and social infrastructure) than modern ones. Current changes affect both central regions, peripheral zones, and reserve lands. In addition, there is a change in the functional purpose of vast tracts of urban territory, the social composition of many areas is changing (moreover, the process of both intra-city migrations and migrations in the directions “Moscow - Moscow region”, “Moscow - other regions of the Russian Federation”, “Moscow - CIS countries").

The results of calculating the quality index of the urban environment can be considered as a formalized (that is, translated into digital form) characteristic of the attractiveness of various areas of Moscow for the average resident. In its composition, the distribution characteristics of not only the total values, but also the individual components are important. It is a reflection of the qualitative characteristics of certain areas, “multiplied” by the characteristics of consumer preferences noted at the time of the study (expressed in the assessment of the importance by residents of the capital of the Russian Federation and experts of certain groups of factors). In fact, its values ​​have a significant impact on the current features of the development of intracity socio-economic processes. Among them, the most important are intra-city migrations (based on the assumption that each person is aimed at finding the most comfortable living environment for him, in which he can realize all his needs), leading to changes in the social composition of various districts of the city, as well as changes in general level of territorial heterogeneity.

To fully solve the problems posed to this study, it is necessary to add a dynamic component to the calculation of the index (which can be considered as a kind of complex multi-layer “photograph” of the city territory as of 2007). Direct modeling of changes in the values ​​of the urban environment quality index within the framework of the geographical approach and geographical research methods is not possible, therefore, dynamic trends in key segments of the real estate market, as well as a territorial projection of the development of other indicators and processes with the help of which it is possible to obtain an answer to the question of the intensification (or, conversely, weakening) of the process of social stratification in modern Moscow.

Urban space never “lies”; it is formed under the influence of both modern factors (both economic and sociocultural) and reflects the peculiarities of the city’s development in a historical context (Kulakova, 2006). Therefore, in order to understand and correctly comprehend the direction of the processes taking place in Moscow at the present time, it is necessary to carefully take into account the features of the centuries-old development of the Russian capital (within the framework of this study, the emphasis was placed on the features of strengthening and weakening of the social stratification of the city’s population in its spatial aspect).

The intracity heterogeneity of the social structure of the Moscow population has a long history. It highlights both periods in which it intensified and times in which there was a desire to minimize differences. The selected time periods differ both in duration and in the main driving mechanism, and in Soviet times they even overlapped in time. The scale of influence of each period on the development of the process of territorial stratification in modern Moscow differs significantly, but their combined impact determines the complexity and multidimensionality that are characteristic of the development of the city at the present stage.