The Moscow Suburbs: Specifics and Spatial Development of Rural Areas

Abstract

The specifics of and spatial trends in the development of rural areas in post-Soviet Moscow oblast, especially after the linear expansion of Moscow's territory, are considered. A combination of centripetal and centrifugal vectors of population mobility is shown, representing oppositely directed migrations: on the one hand, people are attracted to permanent residence and labor migrants stream into the capital and its suburbs from other regions of Russia and CIS countries; on the other, there is the drain of Muscovites to their dachas. The diversity of the suburban territory is shown with various degrees of remoteness from the capital. Highrise housing development beyond the city limits is characteristic of oblast municipalities closest to the Moscow Ring Road; therefore, the development around the capital continues in all directions like an oil spot. Nevertheless, housing construction activity in the southern and southwestern municipalities near Moscow, adjacent to New Moscow, has been higher in recent years, resulting in numerous insular bedroom suburbs whose residents work in Moscow. With a high density of the rural population and dacha dwellers, the emergence of areas of high-rise housing development creates many problems. The active expansion of housing development has led to a sharp reduction in agricultural land. Meanwhile, Moscow oblast, witnessing a severe decay of agriculture in many regions of the Non-Chernozem Zone, remains a powerful food producer, supplying not only the capital and its suburbs but also other Russian regions. All this makes Moscow oblast Russia's most successful region, as well as one of the most problematic.

Old-Developed Regions of Russia: The Main Evolutionary Outcomes

“…In the core of Russia, half of the 160 km journey remains outside the zones of population concentration and development, but people still live there. In the Central District outside the Moscow region, at least 10 large cities are missing to cover these gaps, and in the developed part of the whole of European Russia the shortage amounts to 64 cities (Nefedova, 2013). What about the USA, China, and other vast countries where large cities are separated by at least 100-150 km?…”

Nighttime‐lights satellite imagery reveals hotspots of second home mobility in rural Russia (a case study of Yaroslavl Oblast)

“…While official statistics and estimates have focused on the permanent population of rural areas, the scale and spatial and temporal patterns of second home mobility remain poorly known. As (Nefedova, 2018) noted, second home settlements have formed a parallel to the ordinary villages, a statistically unrecorded network of settlements with a significant population, albeit seasonal. All of the above highlights the need for (1) second home mobility research in Russian regions, and (2) a search for alternative sources of data that can shed light on seasonal movements of people.…”

“…While official statistics and estimates have focused on the permanent population of rural areas, the scale and spatial and temporal patterns of second home mobility remain poorly known. As (Nefedova, 2018) noted, second home settlements have formed a parallel to the ordinary villages, a statistically unrecorded network of settlements with a significant population, albeit seasonal.…”

From the agricultural station to a luxury village? Changing and ambiguous everyday practices in the suburb of Vinnytsia (Ukraine)

“…At the same time, local contribution to classical model is emphasised, in particular: new suburbs of large post-socialist cities are more compact, with higher densities and higher levels of social mix and mix of uses (Slaev and Kovachev, 2014). Moreover, western type suburbanisation is hindered by an insufficient number of jobs in the suburbs, poor road and social infrastructure, and low living standards (Nefedova, 2018). Thus, simplified model of the "western-type suburbanisation" cannot adequately explain the post-socialist changes in housing suburbanisation (Leetmaa, Tammaru and Anniste, 2009, p. 437).…”