Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Urban Regimes and Socially Significant Projects of Transformation of the Urban Environment in the Russian Federation

  • URBAN STUDIES
  • Published:
Regional Research of Russia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The authors of the article aim to identify the principles and patterns of mutual influence of socially significant projects for transformation of the urban environment and urban regimes in the Russian Federation. Clarence Stone’s concept of urban regimes is used as a theoretical framework. Based on the author’s system of social significance criteria, six projects for transformation of the urban environment in four cities were selected and analyzed: Okhta Center and Tuchkov Buyan in St. Petersburg, Zaryadye Park and development of the fields at the Timiryazev Academy in Moscow, St. Catherine’s Church in Yekaterinburg, and concreting of the embankments of the Vologda River in Vologda. Whereas the initial phase of all projects took place in the realities of local urban growth regimes, with the predominance of the interests of the established coalitions of business and government, the subsequent increase in the role of public activism in all projects and the change of goal-setting under its influence led to a change in the local urban regime during their implementation. It is shown that in five studied cases, during implementation of projects, there was a transition of local urban regimes from growth to progressive, and in one, from growth to a greater extent towards a status quo regime. The general principles and patterns of mutual influence of socially significant transformation projects and urban regimes in the Russian Federation are identified and described: competitive public interaction of all types of actors; change or relocation of the project as a spatial way of conflict resolution; the prevailing shift from the realization of the government and business interests in favor of society; employment of paternalistic tools as a way to achieve consensus. Such conditions of mutual influence of socially significant projects and urban regimes can develop in a certain period in any major Russian city; then we can expect in it spatial transformation similar to the results described. The results of the study clearly demonstrate the onset of the process of local transformation of the dominant urban regimes in the Russian Federation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. In Smolny they want to regulate the height of new buildings in St. Petersburg, 2015. https://www.novostroy-spb.ru/novosti/v_smolnom_hotyat_kontrolirovat (accessed December 22, 2021); Lower and lower, 2015. https://asninfo.ru/magazines/html-version/672-spb/15114-vse-nizhe-i-nizhe (accessed December 22, 2021).

  2. Putin supported the idea of setting up a park instead of a judicial quarter in St. Petersburg, 2019. https://www.rbc.ru/society/23/04/2019/5cbf1ba29a7947cde3bed5f9 (accessed December 23, 2021); S. Satanovsky, Why not everyone in St. Petersburg is happy about the move of the Supreme Court of Russia to the city, 2020. https://www.dw.com/ru/why-in-St. Petersburg-is-not-everyone-happy-to-move-to-the-city-of-the-supreme-court-of-Russia/a-52178204 (accessed December 23, 2021).

  3. Paternalistic urbanism is a type of decision-making in city government, when it is expected that some important controversial issues related to the jurisdiction of the city will be resolved (or resolved de facto) not by the city itself, but by central (external higher) authorities. The important thing is that after intervention by the central (external, higher) authorities in a controversial issue of urban development, all conflicting urban subjects cease their conflict, even if the solution does not fully satisfy them and such a compromise would not have been acceptable to them before (Bin Li et al., 2021).

  4. In 2020, under the leadership of K.E. Aksenov, master’s students of the Geourban Studies Program at St. Petersburg State University collected and summarized primary material on nine cases of socially significant transformation projects of the last decade in five cities, among them: the project for construction of the Okhta-Lakhta Center (Gazprom Tower); protest against the development of Fedorov Park in Moscow; conflicting projects for the construction of the Church of St. Catherine in the park on Oktyabrskaya Square in Yekaterinburg; landscape and architectural planning on Tuchkovy Buyan in the center of St. Petersburg, etc. This material has not been compiled and published before. The authors assess the relevance of using these materials and supplement them with new data and new cases.

  5. Muscovites vote for Bolotnaya and Zaryadye as a counterpart to Hyde Park, 2012. https://ria.ru/20120525/657359450.html (accessed February 1, 2022).

  6. On the site of the Rossiya Hotel, a counterpart to San Marco Square will be built, 2013. https://www.vedomosti.ru/realty/articles/2013/04/19/na_meste_gostinicy_rossiya_postroyat_analog_ploschadi (accessed February 1, 2022).

  7. In Yekaterinburg, the results of a survey on a new site for the temple were tallied, 2022. https://www.rbc.ru/society/14/10/2019/5da443249a794740315d8995 (accessed February 4, 2022).

  8. Residents of Yekaterinburg came out to protest against construction of the temple for the third evening in a row, 2019. https://www.interfax.ru/russia/661291 (accessed January 19, 2022); Activists proposed putting to a referendum the issue of land for a temple in Yekaterinburg, 2019. https://www.interfax.ru/russia/664818 (accessed January 19, 2022); Putin intervened in the conflict over construction of a temple in Yekaterinburg, 2019. https://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/articles/2019/05/16/801646-konflikt-vokrug-stroitelstva (accessed January 19, 2022).

  9. Putin proposed a way to resolve the conflict over the temple in Yekaterinburg, 2019. https://www.rbc.ru/politics/16/05/2019/5cdd66b29a79470bfa116d24#ws (accessed February 4, 2022).

  10. The governor liked the projects of the Embankment of Europe, 2009. https://www.bsn.ru/news/market/spb/16141_gubernatoru_ponravilis_proekty_naberezhnoy_evropy/ (accessed February 1, 2022).

  11. In St. Petersburg, land is being cleared for federal judges, 2012. https://www.rbc.ru/spb_sz/04/12/2012/5592a5af9a794719538cd961?utm_source=amp_full-link (accessed February 1, 2022).

  12. BBC: instead of a park, Putin wants to complete construction of a judicial quarter in St. Petersburg, 2022. https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5157179 (accessed February 1, 2022).

  13. Putin assured Boris Eifman that his theater project would not disappear from the development plans of St. Petersburg, 2013. https://tass.ru/spb-news/618351 (accessed February 15, 2022).

  14. So what if the banks will be concreted: the Vologda governor spoke about the work on the embankment, 2019. https://newsvo.ru/news/121398 (accessed February 9, 2022).

  15. Vladimir Putin hears complaints about concreting the historical embankment in Vologda, 2019. https://vologda-poisk.ru/news/na-zlobu-dnya/vladimiru-putinu-pozhalovalis-na-betonirovanie-istoricheskoy-naberezhnoy-v-vologde-video/ (accessed January 19, 2022); Vladimir Putin was again reminded of the scandalous concreting of the embankment in Vologda, 2020. https://www.xn–b1aqxu.xn–p1ai/articles/society/vladimiru_putinu_vnov_napomnili_o_skandalnom_betonirovanii_naberezhnoy_v_vologde_/?sphrase_id=2623533 (accessed January 19, 2022); Architect Nadezhda Snigireva told Putin that the city embankment in Vologda is being poured with concrete, 2019. https://newsvo.ru/news/118678 (accessed February 9, 2022); Putin was again reminded of the concreting of the embankment in Vologda, 2020. https://newsvo.ru/blogovo/127926 (accessed

  16. The period of work on bank protection of the embankment in Vologda was extended until September 2020, 2020. https://newsvo.ru/news/124744 (accessed February 9, 2022).

  17. Embankment. Abstracts of a large interview with the mayor, 2020. https://newsvo.ru/blogovo/124235 (accessed February 9, 2022).

  18. Putin proposed leaving the Timiryazev Academy alone, 2016. https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/570f8f059a794765734b5ea8 (accessed February 8, 2022).

  19. The closer to the elections, the larger the bloating, 2016. https://www.gazeta.ru/politics/2016/04/14_a_8176571.shtml (accessed January 19, 2022).

  20. They want to build up the Timiryazev Academy again, 2021 https://www.vesti.ru/article/2626889 (accessed February 8, 2022).

  21. Appendices 1.1 and 1.2 can be found at https://escjournal.spbu.ru/article/view/13187/10272. The appendices are given in the original form.

REFERENCES

  1. Ageeva, A.F., Analysis of approaches to assessing socially significant investment projects in the Russian economy, Vestn. Akad., 2019, no. 2, pp. 40–51.

  2. Akkermans, B., Sustainable obligations in (Dutch) property law, Maastricht Law, 2020a, no. 4, pp. 1–14.

  3. Akkermans, B., Sustainable property law: Towards a revaluation of our system of property law, SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020b. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3645983. Cited February 15, 2022. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3645983

  4. Aksenov, K.E., Transformatsiya obshchestvenno-geograficheskogo prostranstva metropolisa: Sankt-Peterburg i Moskva, 1989–2011 (Transformation of the Sociogeographical Space of the Metropolis: St. Petersburg and Moscow, 1989–2011), Saarbrucken: Lambert Academic Publ., 2012.

  5. Aksenov, K.E., System-forming properties of space-time in the transformation of socio-geographic space, Reg. Res. Russ., 2015, vol. 5, pp. 83–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Aksenov, K.E., Geographic Patterns of Desovietization of Toponymy in Russian Cities Reg. Res. Russ., 2021, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 220–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Altshuler, A. and Luberoff, D., Mega-Projects: The Changing Politics of Urban Public Investment, Brookings Institution Press, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ansberg, O.N. and Margolis, A.D., Obshchestvennaya zhizn’ Leningrada v gody perestroiki, 1985–1991 (Social Life of Leningrad during the Years of Perestroika, 1985–1991), St. Petersburg: Serebryanyi Vek, 2009.

  9. Axenov, K., Between Degradation and Gentrification in a Post-Transformational Metropolis City Center: the Case of St Petersburg, Eurasian Geogr. Econ., 2014, vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 656–673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Axenov, K., Timoshina, A., and Zemlyanova, A., Commercial redevelopment of industrial and residential periphery of Russian metropolis: St. Petersburg, 1989–2017, Reg. Sci. Policy Pract., 2020, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 705–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bakharev, V.V. and Demina, V.A., Participation of network communities in the formation of social capital in the process of participatory design of the architectural and landscape space of the city, Regionologiya, 2019, vol. 107, no. 2, pp. 354–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Barney, J.B., Ketchen, D.J., Jr. and Wright, M., The future of resource-based theory: revitalization or decline?, J. Manag., 2011, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 1299–1315.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bell, A., Property as the right to be left alone, Legal Stud. Res. Pap. Ser., 2018, vol. 336, no. 18, pp. 1–58.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bederson, V.D., Zhelnina, A.A., Zaporozhets, O.N., Minaeva, E.Yu., Semenov, A.V., Tykanova, E.V., Khokhlova, A.M., Chernysheva, L.A., and Shevtsova, I.K., Goroda raskhodyashchikhsya ulits: traektorii razvitiya gorodskikh konfliktov v Rossii (Cities of Diverging Streets: Trajectories of Development of Urban Conflicts in Russia), Moscow; St. Petersburg: Inst. Sotsiol. Ross. Akad. Nauk, 2021.

  15. Belobragin, V.V. and Grosheva, L.N., The image of representatives of modern musical culture, Uch. Zap. Ross. Gos. Sots. Univ., 2015, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 77–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bin, Li., Axenov, K.E., and Golubchikov, O.V., Adaptive management of urban redevelopment: A comparative study of Guangzhou, China and St. Petersburg, Russia, Presentation at the BRICS Municipal Forum, November 11, 2021; Sponsored by Chinese National Natural Science Foundation, id: 41871154.

  17. Borisova, N.V., Sulimov, K.A., and Kovina, O.V., Coalitions in the cities of the Kama region: Factors in the formation and preservation of urban political regimes, Vestn. Perm. Univ. Ser.: Politol., 2011, no. 1, pp. 5–14.

  18. Bychkova, O. and Gelman, V., Economic actors and local regimes in large Russian cities, Neprikosnovennyi Zapas, 2010, vol. 70, no. 2, pp. 73–82.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Byron, A., Miller, Geography and Social Movements: Comparing Antinuclear Activism in the Boston Area, Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Capri, F. and Mattei, U., The Ecology of Law: Toward a Legal System in Tune with Nature and Community, Oakland: Berrett-Koehler Publ., 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cherepanov, K.A., Urban planning conflicts: Definition, causes and consequences, participants, resolution, Fundam. Prikl. Issled.: Probl. Rezul’t., 2013, no. 7, pp. 18–25.

  22. Della Porta, D. and Diani, M., Social Movements: An Introduction, Blackwell Publ., 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Dement’eva, I.N., Theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of social protest in foreign and domestic science, Monitoring, 2013, vol. 116, no. 4, pp. 3–12.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Dixon, M., Gazprom versus the Skyline: Spatial displacement and social contention in Saint Petersburg, Int. J. Urban Reg. Res., 2010, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 35–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Dowding, K., Explaining urban regime, Int. J. Urban Reg. Res., 2001, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dowding, K., Dunleavy, P., King, D., and Rydin, Y., Regime politics in London local government, Urban Affairs Rev., 1999, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 515–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Elkin, S., City and Regime in the American Republic, Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1987.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  28. Fainstein, S., City Builders: Property, Politics and Planning in New York and London, Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Fedotova, N.G., Symbolic capital of a place: Concept, features of accumulation, research methods, Vestn. Tomsk. Gos. Univ. Kul’turol. Iskusstvoved., 2018, no. 29, pp. 141–152.

  30. Galustov, K.A., Spatiotemporal models of the influence of environmental and ecocultural protest on the use of urban space using the example of Leningrad – St. Petersburg, Vestn. S.-Peterb. Gos. Univ. Ser. 7. Geol. Geogr., 2016, no. 3, pp. 163–176. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu07.2016.313

  31. Galustov, K.A. and Khodachek, I.A., Beyond statistics: A qualitative study of the transformation of the primary economy in the post-Soviet Russian Arctic, Arktika and Sever, 2021, no. 42, pp. 60–80. https://doi.org/10.37482/issn22212698.2021.42.60

  32. Gelman, V.Ya., Political elites and regional identity strategies, Zh. Sotsiol. Sots. Antropol., 2003, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 91–105.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gelman, V.Ya., Local regimes, urban governance and the “Vertical of Power” in modern Russia, Polit. Ekspertiza: Politeks, 2010, no. 4, pp. 130–151.

  34. Goldstone, J., States, Parties, and Social Movements, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Goodwin, J. and Jasper, J.M., Rethinking Social Movements: Structure, Culture, and Emotion, Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Gotham, K.F., Urban redevelopment, past and present, in Critical Perspectives on Urban Redevelopment (Research in Urban Sociology, Vol. 6), Gotham, K.F., Ed., Emerald Group Publ. Limited, 2001, pp. 1–31.

  37. Haggett, P., Geography: A Global Synthesis, Harlow; New York: Pearson Hall, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Harvey, D., The right to the city, Int. J. Urban Reg. Res., 2003, vol. 4, no. 27, pp. 939–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hughes, G., Urban revitalization: The use of festive time strategies. Leisure Stud., 1999, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 119–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ivanova, V.V. and Zykova, M.A., Urban architecture as a way of constructing and deconstructing the social practices of citizens, Vestn. Novosib. Gos. Univ. Ser.: Sotsial’no-Ekon. Nauki, 2017, no. 2, pp. 150–159.

  41. Jensen, P.A. and Maslesa, E., Value based building renovation. A tool for decision-making and evaluation, Building Environ., 2015, vol. 92, pp. 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Kaganskii, V.L., Landscape and culture, Obshchestv. Nauki Sovrem., 1997, no. 1, pp. 134–145.

  43. Karpov, Yu. V., Capitalist reconstruction of the historical center of Saratov: The evolution of power discourse, Zh. Sotsiol. Sots. Antropol., 2013, no. 3, pp. 124–136.

  44. Kessler, Z. and Wagner, R.E., Property rights within a theory of entangled political economy, George Mason University Department of Economics Working Paper, 2020, pp. 20–38.

  45. Klyukanova, L.G., Sustainable cities: Integrated development of urban areas and legal mechanisms to ensure the realization of citizens’ rights to a favorable environment, Evraz. Yur. Zh., 2019, no. 1, pp. 213–219.

  46. Kolodii, V.V., Kolodii, N.A., and Chaika, Yu.A., Activism and participation: Social technologies of cooperation with the urban population in the process of production of urban space, Vestn. Tomsk. Gos. Univ. Filos. Sotsiol. Politol., 2017, no. 38, pp. 175–185.

  47. Koroleva, M.N. and Chernova, M.A., Tactics for implementing urban projects in the context of modern management practices and legislation, Gorod. Issled. Prakt., 2017, no. 3, pp. 28–41.

  48. Koroleva, M.N. and Chernova, M.A., Urban activism: Management practices as a resource and barrier to the development of urban projects, Sotsiol. Issled., 2018, vol. 9, no. 9, pp. 93–101.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Ledyaev, V.G., Urban political regimes: Theory and experience of empirical research, Polit. Nauka, 2008, no. 3, pp. 32–60.

  50. Lifshitz, Y.R., Geometry of property, University of Toronto Law Journal, 2020. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3692258. Cited February 3, 2022.

  51. Logan, J. and Molotch, H., The city as a growth machine, in Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place, Berkley; Los Angeles: Univ. of California Press, 1988, pp. 47–61.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Martinaitis, V., Rogoža, A., and Bikmanien, I., Criterion to evaluate the “twofold benefit” of the renovation of buildings and their elements, Energy and Buildings, 2004, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. McAdam, D., Dynamics of Contention, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Medvedev, I. R., Right to the city, Zakon, 2015, no. 6, pp. 181–195.

  55. Medvedev, I. R., Problems of challenging public hearings (the case of Moscow), Arbitrazh. Grazhd. Protsess, 2016, no. 1, pp. 57–64.

  56. Orlova, I.A., Selikhov, V.S., and Chesnokov, N.N., Features of the design of urban public spaces, Nauka i Obrazovaniye, 2019, vol. 2, no. 1. http://opusmgau.ru/index.php/see/article/view/599/ 602. Cited February 13, 2022.

  57. Papadopoulos, A.G., Urban Regimes and Strategies: Building Europe’s Central Executive District in Brussels, Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Parchomovsky, G., Land burdens in the service of conservation, in Towards a Unified System of Land Burdens?, Parchomovsky, G. and Bell A., Eds., Oxford: Intersentia, 2006, pp. 137–162.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Park, R., City as a social laboratory, Sotsiol. Obozr., 2002, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 3–12.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Petrov, A.A., Analysis of priority factors for the development of the construction sector in Russia and identification of possible directions for neutralizing influences, Aktual’n. Probl. Ekon. Upravl., 2018, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 56–62.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Pustovoit, Yu. A., “Land” and “freedom”: Urban regimes and protest communities in Siberian cities, Vlast’ i Elity, 2018, vol. 5, pp. 295–330.

  62. Rudolph, R., Stadtzentren Russischer Grosstadte in der Transformation – St Petersburg und Jekaterinburg. Beitrage zur regionalen Geographie, Leipzig: Leibniz-Institut fuer Laenderkunde, 2001, vol. 54.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Samatareva, K.A., Methodology for studying an urban political regime, Polit. Kontseptol., 2017, no. 4, pp. 252–256.

  64. Savoskul, M.S., Mozgunov, N.A., and Pivovar, G.A., Socioeconomic transformation of small towns in the Non-Chernozem Area (the case of Kaluga oblast), Vestn. Mosk. Univ. Ser. 5. Geogr., 2014, no. 2, pp. 62–67.

  65. Shevtsova, I.K. and Bederson, V.D., The authorities’ point of view is silence: Interaction between initiative groups and local authorities in urban planning policy, Polit. Nauka, 2017, no. 4, pp. 111–136.

  66. Shmeleva, I.A., Problems of the global environment and development in modern Russian political discourse, Vestn. S.-Peterb. Univ. Ser. 6, 2008, no. 4, pp. 174–188.

  67. Stoker, G. and Mossberger, K., Urban regime theory in comparative perspective, Government and Policy, 1994, vol. 12, pp. 195–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Stone, C.N., Regime Politics: Governing Atlanta, 1946–1988, Lawrence: Univ. of Kansas Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Sýkora, L. and Bouzarovski, S., Multiple transformations: Conceptualising the post-communist urban transition, Urban Stud., 2012, vol. 49, pp. 43–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Tarrow, S., Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics, 3rd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  71. Ter-Voskanyan, O.Sh., Patterns of formation of the pedestrian environment in a city, Academia. Arkhitekt. Stroitel’stvo, 2018, 23, no. 3, pp. 94–99.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Tev, D.B., Political-economic approach in the analysis of local government. On the issue of the coalition ruling in St. Petersburg, Polit. Ekspertiza: Politeks, 2006, no. 2, pp. 99–117.

  73. Tkachenko, S.B., Zaryadye development concepts: From hotel to park, Izv. Vuzov. Investitsii. Stroitel’stvo. Nedvizhimost’, 2019, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 196–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Treivish, A.I., Geographical multi-scale development of Russia: City, region, country and world, Doctoral (Geogr.) Dissertation, Moscow: Inst. of Geography, Russ. Acad. Sci., 2006.

  75. Treivish, A., Brade, I., and Nefedova, T., Russian cities at a crossroads, GeoJournal, 1999, vol. 1, no. 49, pp. 117–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Trubina, E., Gorod v teorii: opyty osmysleniya prostranstva (City in Theory: Experiments in Understanding Space), Moscow: Novoe Liter. Obozr., 2011.

  77. Trumbull, N.S., Redevelopment and conservation in the built fabric of post-socialist St. Petersburg. Urban Geography, 2012, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 370–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Tykanova, E.V., The influence of urban political regimes on the course of contestation of urban space (the cases of St. Petersburg and Paris), Zh. Sotsiol. Sots. Antropol., 2013, no. 3, pp. 112–123.

  79. Tykanova, E.V. and Khokhlova, A.M., Conflict of property rights in a post-Soviet city (the case of demolition of garages in St. Petersburg), Zh. Sotsiol. Sots. Antropol., 2014, vol. 76, no. 5, pp. 109–126.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Tykanova, E.V. and Khokhlova, A.M., Urban political regime in St. Petersburg: The role of real and imaginary “Growth Machines” in the struggle for urban space, Zh. Issled. Sots. Politiki, 2015, no. 2, pp. 241–253.

  81. Vorobyev, D. and Shtiglitz, M., Industrial heritage issues in a conflict case: Okhta Center in St Petersburg, Russia, in Industrial Heritage Sites in Transformation, London: Routledge, 2014, pp. 120–135.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Weber, R., Extracting value from the city: Neoliberalism and urban redevelopment, Antipode, 2002, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 519–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Zakharova, E.E., Public spaces as factors in the sociocultural development of local territories, Vestn. Kul’tury i Iskusstv, 2017, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 122–127.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Zald, M. and McCarthy, J., Social movement industries: Competition and cooperation among movement organisations, in Research in Social Movements. Conflicts and Change, Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press, 1980, vol. 3, pp. 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Zamyatin, D.N., Political–geographical images. Representing geographical knowledge in models of political thinking, in Chelovek v zerkale geografii (Man in the Mirror of Geography), Smolensk: Smolensk. Guman. Univ., 1996, pp. 34–43.

  86. Zamyatin, D.N., Human geography: Space, imagination, and the interaction of the contemporary humanities, Sotsiol. Obozr., 2010, no. 3, pp. 126–138.

  87. Zamyatina, N.Yu., Models of political space, in Politicheskaya geografiya: Sovremennaya rossiiskaya shkola: khrestomatiya (Political Geography: Modern Russian School: Reader), Moscow: Aspekt Press, 2022, pp. 512–527.

  88. Zdravomyslova, E.A., Paradigms of Western sociology of social movements, Cand. Sci. (Soc.) Dissertation, St. Petersburg: Inst. of Sociology, Russ. Acad. Sci., 1993, pp. 190–192.

  89. Zhelnina, A.A. and Tykanova, E.V., Formal and informal civic infrastructures: Contemporary studies of urban local activism in Russia, Zh. Sotsiol. Sots. Antropol., 2019, no. 1, pp. 162–184.

Download references

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank I. Kotenko, A. Koskin, V. Krass, M. Manerov, D. Samoilov, and M. Alferova for their assistance in analyzing the cases of students and graduates of the Geourbanistics master program of St. Petersburg State University.

Funding

The study was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 41871154): Adaptive Governance of Urban Regeneration: Comparative Research between Guangzhou and St. Petersburg. The research results of parts 3 and 4 were supported by the Russian Science Foundation (grant no. 23-27-00034, https://rscf.ru/project/23-27-00034/).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia

    K. E. Aksenov & K. A. Galustov

  2. Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia, St. Petersburg, Russia

    K. A. Galustov

  3. North-West Institute of Management—Branch of RANEPA, St. Petersburg, Russia

    K. A. Galustov

Authors
  1. K. E. Aksenov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. A. Galustov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to K. E. Aksenov or K. A. Galustov.

Ethics declarations

The authors of this work declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note.

Pleiades Publishing remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aksenov, K.E., Galustov, K.A. Urban Regimes and Socially Significant Projects of Transformation of the Urban Environment in the Russian Federation. Reg. Res. Russ. 14, 25–37 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970523600312

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970523600312

Keywords:

Search

Navigation