The Social and Spatial Dimensions of Soviet Housing Policy

  • Gregory D. Andrusz
Part of the Studies in Soviet History and Society book series


As early as 1919 the Programme of the VIII Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolshevik) adopted a resolution to the effect that the emancipation of women should not be limited to the achievement of formal (i.e. political and economic) equality with men. Emancipation was taken to mean much more than this; it referred in particular to their being freed from the burden of domestic work, including childminding, both by building communal blocks of flats (doma-kommuny) with public dining-rooms, laundries and crèches and also by establishing a system of pre-school facilities.1 Female emancipation had two very closely related goals: one was to liberate women from household drudgery and the other to draw them into productive labour, thereby offering them economic independence.2 Translating intent into reality required changes in the physical and cultural environments.


Spatial Dimension Nuclear Family Housing Policy Domestic Work Cultural Revolution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 10.
    L. M. Sabsovich, Goroda budushchego i organizatsiya sotsialisticheskogo byta (Moscow, 1929).Google Scholar
  2. 12.
    L. M. Sabsovich, ‘O proektirovanii zhilykh kombinatov’, Sovremennaya arkhitektura, no. 3, 1930, p. 7.Google Scholar
  3. 13.
    M. A. Milyutin, ‘Osnovnye voprosy zhilishchno-bytovogo stroitel’stva SSSR’, Sovremennaya arkhitektura, no. 1, 1931, pp. 2–4.Google Scholar
  4. 18.
    M. A. Okhitovich, ‘Ne gorod — a novyi tip rasseleniya’, in Goroda sotsialisma (Moscow, 1930).Google Scholar
  5. 38.
    Cited by R. Nisbet, in The Sociological Tradition (London, Heinemann, 1970), p. 40.Google Scholar
  6. 39.
    See, for instance, C. Buci-Glucksmann, Gramsci and the State (London, Lawrence & Wishart, 1980).Google Scholar
  7. 57.
    V. T. Efimov, G. I. Mikerin, ‘Avtomobilizatsiya v razvitom sotsialisticheskom obshchestve’, Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, no. 1, 1976, pp. 128–138.Google Scholar
  8. 62.
    A. G. Kharchev, V. G. Alekseeva, ‘Sotsial’naya Breda i vospitanie’, Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Nauchnyi Kommunizm, no. 6, 1973, p. 46.Google Scholar
  9. 69.
    R. G. Vartanov, ‘Klassy ili osnovnye sloi?’ in Problemy izmeneniya sotsial’noi struktury sovetskogo obshchestva’ (Moscow, 1968).Google Scholar
  10. R. Galetskaya, ‘Demograficheskaya politika: ee napravleniya’, Voprosy ekonomiki, August 1975, no. 8, pp. 149–152.Google Scholar
  11. 78.
    V. Perevedentsev, Literaturnaya gazeta, no. 33, 13 August 1975.Google Scholar
  12. 82.
    P. Grossman (Central Intelligence Agency) ‘Labour Supply Constraints and Responses’, in H. Hunter (ed.), The Future of the Soviet Economy: 1978–1985 (Boulder, Colorado, Westview Press, 1978), p. 155.Google Scholar
  13. 99.
    O. N. Yanitskii, ‘Simposium po problemam urbanizatsii’, Voprosy filosofii, no. 10, 1969, p. 143.Google Scholar
  14. 101.
    B. Brandenburg, ‘Novyi tip gorodskogo zhilishcha dlya semei iz trekh pokolenii,’ Arkhitektura SSSR, no. 9, 1979, pp. 44–49.Google Scholar
  15. 110.
    M. A. Sidorov, ‘Nekotorye voprosy razvitiya zhilshchnogo stroitel’stva na perspektivu’, Zhilishchnoe stroitel’stvo, no. 4, April 1979, p. 13.Google Scholar
  16. 112.
    Ya. E. Dikhter, ‘Dom novogo byta’, Gorodskoe khozyaistvo Moskvy, no. 1, 1979, p. 11.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Gregory D. Andrusz 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gregory D. Andrusz
    • 1
  1. 1.Middlesex PolytechnicUSA

Personalised recommendations