Paul
Goble
Staunton, September 12 – It is a
commonplace to observe that Russia has been much changed over the last 50 years
as a result of social and political convulsions, but two Moscow researchers
have now focused on the ways in which those dramatic events have affected the
life trajectories of various generations.
According to Alla
Tyndik of the Center for the Analysis of Incomes and Standard of Living at the
Higher School of Economics and Ekaterina Mitrofanova of that school’s Institute
of Demography, the progression of life stages among Russians has changed in
major ways (publications.hse.ru/en/articles/125374324
and summarized at opec.ru/1744173.html).
On the basis of
two surveys involving some 15,000 respondents born between 1930 and 1989, they
say that the biographies of Russians have become more diverse with significant
changes in the expected order of school, establishing a family, work and pension
among different generations.
In the first
half of the 20th century, they say, “the life paths of Russians were
more predictable,” with a stable order to the experiences of people. But at
century’s end, the changes in Russia meant that younger people have had “more
varied life trajectories,” with all the consequences that entails.
“The life of
Russians became less monotonous,” they say, with “new turning points” arising.
Work became less tied to a single enterprise, marriage became far from the only
“socially acceptable” choice, and people became more willing to consider a
future in which they would not have any children at all.
Because of
rising educational requirements, the age at which Russians have entered the
workforce has continued to rise. Those born in the 1930s began to work on
average at 18.8 years; those born in the 1940s and 1950s at 20.3 years; and
those born between 1960 and 1989 only at 21.
That has
consequences for gender roles. Among those entering the workforce before 20,
there is little difference between the share of men and women, but later, after
finishing their educations, “the chances among women to begin a career are
less,” because that time corresponds with the period of beginning a family with
the birth of a first child.
Compared to
those born earlier and those born later, Russians born in the 1970s, the
researchers say, suffered from unemployment the most frequently. They had a
harder time getting a first positon and were more likely to lose that than
those from older and younger cohorts.
Indeed, it is
precisely the children of the 1970s who have had the “most varied” lives in
which the standard trajectory of the past has been violated. (Those born later
have seen a return in many cases to the standard pattern of earlier
generations.) And that makes them stand out as far as attitudes and expectations
about the future are concerned.
But
intriguingly, the group hit hardest by unemployment during their lives has been
not the children of the 1970s but those born just before them at the end of the
1960s. Of those born in 1969, some 10
percent had had experience with unemployment of less than a year, four percent
for a year to two years, and seven percent with more than two years.
Among the
younger groups, the two researchers say, the most typical pattern is “education,
work, child, voluntary exit from the workforce, and a return to work. For men,
there is the additional element of “army and then work” but “there is no
consistent pattern of ‘army and then education,” only “education, army and then
work.”
And for women,
after leaving the workforce to take care of a child, a return to work is
typical. Becoming homemakers is “a rare thing,” so rare the two demographic
researchers say that it isn’t even shown on their graphs.
No comments:
Post a Comment