Peripheralization: Theory and modern practices of studies

Abstract

Nowadays the focus of regional studies shifts from the problems of the peripheral development to the study of the process of its emergence, expressed in the term “peripheralization”. The differences of the regions, the exhaustion of traditional sources of economic growth actualize the task of such works in relation to Russia. The purpose of the study is to identify peripheralization of Russian economic space using modern foreign approaches to the study of this phenomenon. The center-periphery theory, the theory of peripheral economics, as well as the results of the Russian and foreign scientists dealing with the problem of peripherization have been used as a theoretical basis of the work. The original method for the assessment of the peripherization of the Russian economic community developed by the author is based on the method of calculating the coefficient of peripherization by J. Eder. Empirically the research is based on the data accepted from the Federal State Statistic Service of Russia. The current approaches to the investigation of the concepts “periphery”, “peripherality”, “peripheralization” and their main restrictions are described in the article. The author comes to the conclusion, that the concept “periphery” is applied to territories or spaces with certain characteristics; the term “peripherality” is used as a combination of these properties, and “peripheralization” means a process of appearance, or “production” of peripheries. The author has adapted the method of calculating a peripheralization index, proposed by J. Eder using the specifications of the domestic data base. The testing of the improved method in the case study of Russia has revealed the peripheralization of a significant part of the country. It has been revealed that 54 out of 83 regions of Russia investigated in the research are characterized by a combination of centralization and peripheralization processes. Meanwhile, only 24 regions are characterized by peripheralization in all three investigated aspects (geographic, demographic and economic), whereas economic peripheralization is typical for 49 regions, demographic – for 51 regions and geographic – for 59 regions of the Russian Federation. Most regions are characterized by peripheraliztion in two spheres. Further research on this topic will be connected with the clarification of the content “peripheralization” within the frameworks of the Russian conventional regional science, as well as with the improvement and/or development of appropriate methodological approaches, the allocation of factors, that determine the peripheralization of territories of different levels.

Keywords

peripheralization, region, regional economy, periphery, center, peripherality, territory, center-periphery theory, central regions, peripheral regions, subject of the Russian Federation

For citation

Kaibicheva E.I. Peripheralization: Theory and modern practices of studies. Perm University Herald. Economy, 2019, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 448–461. DOI 10.17072/1994-9960-2019-3-448-461

References

1. Nefedova T.G. Rossiiskaya periferiya kak sotsial'no-ekonomicheskii fenomen [Russia’s periphery as a socio-economic phenomenon]. Regional'nye issledovaniya [Regional Stadudies], 2008, no. 5 (20), pp. 14−30. (In Russian).
2. Kaganskii V.L. Kul'turnyi landshaft i sovetskoe obitaemoe prostranstvo [Cultural landscape and soviet inhabited area]. Moscow, Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie Publ., 2001. 576 p. (In Ruusian).
3. Pilyasov A.N. I poslednie stanut pervymi. Severnaya periferiya na puti k ekonomike znaniya [And the last will be the first: Northern periphery on the route for knowledge economy], Moscow, LIBROKOM Publ., 2009. 544 p. (In Russian).
4. Chernova O.A. Metodicheskie podkhody k razvitiyu sistemy otnoshenii “tsentr – periferiya” v strategiyakh sbalansirovannogo razvitiya regiona [Methodical approaches to the development of the system of the relation “Centre-periphery” in the strategies of a balanced development of the region]. Regional'naya ekonomika. Yug Rossii [Regional Economy. South of Russia], 2014, no. 1, pp. 114–121. (In Russian).
5. Rodoman B.B. Rossiiskaya vnutrennyaya periferiya [Russian domestic peripherals]. Nauka. Innovatsii. Tekhnologii [Science. Innovations. Technologies], 2014, no. 4, pp. 139–147. (In Russian).
6. Gritsai O.V., Ioffe G.V., Treivish A.I. Tsentr i periferiya v regional'nom razvitii [Centre and periphery in regional development]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1991. 167 p. (In Russian).
7. Chromý P., Jančák V. Periferní oblasti Česka jako jeden z pólů polarizovaného prostoru. Životné Prostredie, 2005, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 106–108. (In Slovak).
8. Marada M., Chromý P. Contribution to studies on peripheral regions of Czechia. Acta Facultatis Rerum Naturalium Universitatis Comenianae, Geographica Supplementum, 1999, no. 2, pp. 241–255.
9. Novotný L., Mazur M., Egedy T. Definition and delimitation of peripheries of Visegrad countries. Studia Obszarów Wiejskich, 2015, no. 39, pp. 35–48.
10. Kaibicheva E.I. Evolyutsiya teoreticheskikh podkhodov k issledovaniyu periferiinykh territorii [Development of theoretical approaches to the study of peripheral areas]. Regional'naya ekonomika: teoriya i praktika [Regional Economics: Theory and Practice], 2018, vol. 16, no. 1 (448), pp. 4–17. (In Russian).
11. Esin O. Different definitions of “periphery” and different peripheries in the EU. A Thesis. The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences of Middle East Technical University, 2005. 198 p.
12. Makarychev A.S. Marginal'nost' i voina v “populyarnoi geopolitike”: Vostochnaya Evropa v sovremennom kinematografe [Marginality and war in 'popular geopolitics': Eastern Europe in contemporary cinema]. Kul'turnaya i gumanitarnaya geografiya [Cultural Geography and Geohumanities], 2012, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 159–165. (In Russian).
13. Zyryanov A.I. Marginal'nye territorii [Marginal territories]. Geograficheskii vestnik [Geographical Bulletin], 2008, no. 2, pp. 9−20. (In Russian).
14. Leksin V.N., Shvetsov A.N. Obshcherossiiskie reformy i territorial'noe razvitie. Depressivnye territorii: prezhnie problemy i novye varianty ikh resheniya [Russian reforms and territorial development. Depressive territories: Previous problems and their solutions]. Rossiiskii ekonomicheskii zhurnal [Russian Economic Journal], 2001, no. 9, pp. 35−63. (In Russian).
15. Keim K.-D. Peripherisierung ländlicher räume. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, 2006, no. 37, pp. 3–7. (In German).
16. Wirth P., Elis V., Müller B., Yamamoto K. Peripheralisation of small towns in Germany and Japan – Dealing with economic decline and population loss. Journal of Rural Studies, 2016, no. 47, pp. 62–75.
17. Kühn M., Weck S. Peripherisierung – Prozesse, Probleme und Strategien in Mittelstädten. The Planning Review, 2012, no. 48 (2), pp. 14–26. (In German).
18. Weck S., Beißwenger S. Coping with peripheralization: Governance response in two German small cities. European Planning Studies, 2014, no. 22 (10), pp. 2156–2171. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2013.819839.
19. Bernt M., Liebmann H. Peripherisierung, stigmatisierung, abhängigkeit? Deutsche Mittelstädte und ihr Umgang mit Peripherisierungsprozessen. Wiesbaden, Springer. 2013. 225 p. (In German).
20. Anokhin A.A., Kuzin V.Yu. Podkhody k vydeleniyu periferii i periferizatsiya v prostranstve sovremennoi Rossii [Approaches to the allocation of periphery and рeripheralization in the spatial development of modern Russia]. Izvestiya russkogo geograficheskogo obshchestva [Regional Research of Russia], 2019, no. 1, pp. 2–16. (In Russian).
21. Prostranstvo sovremennoi Rossii: vozmozhnosti i bar'ery razvitiya (razmyshleniya geografov-obshchestvovedov) [The space of modern Russia: opportunities and barriers of development (reflections of social geographers)]. Otv. red. A.G. Druzhinin, V.A. Kolosov, V.E. Shuvalov [Eds. Druzhinin A.G., Kolosov V.A., Shuvalov V.E.]. Moscow, Vuzovskaya kniga Publ., 2012. 336 p. (In Russian).
22. Cheshkov M. Postsovetskaya Tsentral'naya Aziya v trekh izmereniyakh: traditsionalizatsiya, periferizatsiya, globalizatsiya [Post-Soviet Central Asia in three dimensions: Traditionalization, periphery, globalization]. Tsentral'naya Aziya i Kavkaz [Central Asia and the Caucasus], 1998, no. 12. (In Russian) Available at: https://ca-c.org/journal/13-1998/st_02_cheshkov.shtml (accessed 21.07.2019).
23. Kühn M. Peripheralization: Theoretical concepts explaining socio-spatial inequalities. European Planning Studies, 2015, vol. 23, iss. 2, pp. 367–378. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2013.862518.
24. Herrschel T. Regional development, peripheralisation and marginalization – and the role of governance. The Role of Regions? Networks, Scale, Territory, 2011, pp. 85–102.
25. Augustin A.-L. A. Spaces in the Making: Peripheralization and spatial injustice in Southern Yemen. Middle East – Topics and Arguments, 2015, vol. 5, pp. 47–55. doi: 10.17192/meta.2015.5.3526.
26. Eder J. Peripheralization and knowledge bases in Austria: Towards a new regional typology. European Planning Studies, 2019, vol. 27, iss. 1, pp. 42–67.
27. Dubovik V.O. Otsenka transportnoi dostupnosti gorodov na primere stran Yuzhnoi Ameriki. Diss. kand. geogr. nauk [Assessment of transport accessibility of cities in the case study of South America. Cand. geogr. sci. author. diss.]. Moscow, 2014. 153 p. (In Russian).
28. Savchenko E.E. Transportnaya infrastruktura kak instrument regionalizatsii ekonomiki, ee sut' vliyaniya na region [Transport infrastructure as a tool of economic regionalization, its essence and influence on the region]. Izvestiya Irkutskoi gosudarstvennoi ekonomicheskoi akademii (elektronnyi nauchnyi zhurnal) [On-line Scientific Journal of Baikal State University], 2012, no. 5. (In Russian) Available at: http://brj-bguep.ru/reader/article.aspx?id=16807 (accessed 15.05.2019).
29. Bugromenko V.N. Transport v territorial'nykh sistemakh [Transport in territorial systems]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1987. 112 p. (In Russian).

Show full text