Participation in Cities in Sociological Discourse

Introduction. The social practice of participativeness, active participation in the transformation of urban space in the interests of residents, is gaining popularity among the urban population. The study of this phenomenon is interest for obvious integration with management decisions. Expanding the practice of implementing social activity of the population and studying the components of participativeness determine the goal of writing the paper-the formation of a theoretical and methodological basis for studying this phenomenon.

Methodology and source. The paper presents a review of classical and modern sociological theories that reveal the potential of empirical study of aspects of the manifestation of participation of urban residents. Among the mentioned by the authors are the theory of social action, social solidarity, phenomenology, social constructivism.

Results and discussion. The problematic nature of living in cities and the penetration of these problems into the daily interaction of citizens forms the origins of solidary participation of citizens-individual and private interests form collective actions-processes. Multiple individual forms of citizens' activity on urban improvement are transformed into participativeness – institutionalized joint activity. Its participants can take differentiated positions in the social structure of the urban community according to the criteria of having a diverse experience of interaction, i.e. exchange, with the urban environment and taking a position in the city management structure, which determines the level of regulated authority to make managerial decisions. The problems of urban life that are common to different categories of citizens and the typification of social activity to solve them order the interaction of participants, organize and “produce” the urban space.

Conclusion. In the process of reasoning, a theoretical model of the formation of participativeness is presented, which allows us to trace the transformation of activity of the urban population into the right to the city and the formation of a favorable urban environment.

1. Platonov, К.А. (2016), “The perception of environmental risks: expert assessments and public opinion”, Vestnik of St Petersburg Univ. Series 12. Sociology, iss. 1, pp. 102–110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu12.2016.110.

2. Maykova, E.Yu. and Simonova, E.V. (2015), “Potential of popular self-government in Russia’s regions (the case of Tver)”, Sociological Studies, no. 7, pp. 80–88.

3. Klimova, S.G. and Klimov, I.A. (2015), “Interactions of urban dwellers with powers: competent participation and problem of intermediaries”, Sociological Studies, no. 4, pp. 51–57.

4. Mikhaylenok, O.M. and Malysheva, G.A. (2019), “Political Effects of Social Networks in Russia”, Sociological Studies, no. 2, pp. 78–87. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250004012-6.

5. Trofimova, I.N. (2015), “Civic activism in Russian society: features of localization”, Sociological Studies, no. 4, pp. 72–77.

6. Gavriliuk, V.V., Malenkov, V.V. and Gavriliuk T.V. (2016), “Соntemporary models of Russian citizenship”, Sociological Studies, no. 11, pp. 97–106.

7. Shabanova, M.A. (2017), “Traditional and new solidarity practices in the universe of consumer goods and resources”, Sociological Studies, no. 8, pp. 31–44.

8. Nikiforov, A.A. (2019), “Trajectories of the urban protest agenda in modern Russia”, City Wednesday. Politics. 2018. Collection of materials of the scientific and practical conference, in by Gainutdinova, L.A. and Nevzorov, M.V. (eds.), Herzen Univ., SPb., RUS, pp. 20–24.

9. Efendiev, A.G., Balabanova, E.S. and Liubykh, Zh.S. (2014), “Russian employees’ participation in decision taking in domestic and foreign-owned companies”, Sociological Studies, no. 12, pp. 41–50.

10. Artjukhina, V.A. (2017), “Sociological interpretation of social protest: reviewing basic contemporary approaches”, Sociological Studies, no. 11, pp. 30–34. DOI: 10.7868/S0132162517110046.

11. Ushkin, S.G. (2014), “Consumers’ comments on protest actions in the Russian-language Youtube segment”, Sociological Studies, no. 6, pp. 127–133.

12. Shatalova, A.N. and Tykanova, E.V. (2018), “Informal practices of the public hearing participants (the case of Saint Petersburg”, The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, vol. XXI, no. 4, pp. 63–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2018.21.4.3.

13. Atanesyan, A.V. (2019), “The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology”, Sociological Studies, no. 3, pp. 73–84. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250004280-1.

14. Levashov, V.K., Sar’yan, W.K., Nazarenko, A.P., Novozhenina, O.P., Toshchenko, I.Zh., Sushpanova, I.S. and Salomatina, E.V. (2016), “Civil society in the networks of information and communication technologies”, Sociological Studies, no. 9, pp. 13–20.

15. Tykanova, E.V. and Khokhlova, A.M. (2014), “Trajectories of Local Communities Self-Organisation in City Space Contests”, Sociology of power, no. 2, pp. 104–122.

16. Tykanova, E.V. and Khokhlova, A.M. (2019), “Interaction configuration of St. Petersburg social movements organizations aimed at improving the urban environment quality”, Social Area, no. 5 (22), available at: http://socialarea-journal.ru/article/28395 (accessed 05.05.2020). DOI: 10.15838/sa.2019.5.22.7.

17. Vidiasova, L.A., Vidiasov, E.Y. and Tensina, Y.D. (2018), “Perception of the “Smart City” concept by active citizens in St. Petersburg”, Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Sociology, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 404–419.

18. Kolodii, V.V., Kolodii, N.A. and Chaika, Yu.A. (2017), “Activism and participation: social technologies of cooperation with urban population in the process of "production" of urban space”, Tomsk State Univ. Journal of Philosophy Sociology and Political Science, no. 38, pp. 175–185. DOI: 10.17223/1998863Х/38/18.

19. Trofimova, A.K. (2016), “Design quality public space based on the formation of the functional content (for example, Extreme Park in Perm)”, Sovremennye tekhnologii v stroitel'stve. Teoriya i praktika [Modern Technologies in Construction. Theory and Practice], no. 2, pp. 69–76.

20. Martynova, S.E. (2015), «Servisnaya» model' munitsipal'nogo upravleniya v sotsiologicheskoi interpretatsii [”Service” model of municipal management in sociological interpretation], Sotsial'nogumanitarnoe znanie, SPb., RUS.

21. Weber, M. (1990), Izbrannye sochineniya [Selected Works], Transl. by Levin, M.I., Filippov, A.F. and Gaidenko, P.P., in Davydov, Yu.N. (ed.), Progress, Мoscow, USSR.

22. Ochetova, Yu. (2011), “Khimki Forest – a Model for Conflict Resolution?”, ВВС NEWS. Russian service, available at: https://www.bbc.com/russian/russia/2011/05/110524_khimki_protest/ (accessed 05.05.2020).

23. Durkheim, E. (1991), De la division du travail social, Transl. Gofman, A.B., Nauka, Мoscow, RUS.

24. Garfinkel, H. (2007), Studies in ethnomethodology, Piter, SPb., RUS.

25. Abels, H. (2000), Interaktion, Identität, Präsentation, Transl. and in by Golovin, N.A. and Kozlovskii, V.V. (eds.), Aleteiya, SPb., RUS.

26. “Sixth Estate: City Activists” (2017), Byulleten' gorodov Rossii [Bulletin of Russian cities], no. 3, available at: https://media.strelka-kb.com/bulletin3-activists (accessed 05.05.2020).

27. Bourdieu, P. (1998), “Structure, habitus, practice”, Transl. by Shmatko, N.A., The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, vol. I, iss. 2, available at: http://www.old.jourssa.ru/1998/2/4bourd.html (accessed 25.05.2020).

28. Shmatko, N.A. (1998), “Habitus” in the structure of sociological theory”, The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, vol. 1, iss. 2, available at: http://www.old.jourssa.ru/1998/2/5chmat.html (accessed 25.05.2020).

29. Beschasnaya, A.A. (2016), Urbanisticheskoe detstvo: sotsiologicheskii analiz [Urban childhood: a sociological analysis], Asterion, SPb., RUS.

30. Portal “Our city is Moscow”, available at: https://gorod.mos.ru (accessed 05.05.2020).

31. Portal “Our city is St. Petersburg”, available at: https://gorod.gov.spb.ru (accessed 05.05.2020).

32. Park, R. (2011), “Suggestions for the investigation of human behavior in the city environment”, Izbrannye ocherki: sbornik perevodov [Selected Essays: Collection of Translations], INION RAN, Мoscow, RUS, pp. 19–56.

33. Lefebvre, H. (2015), La production de l'espace, Transl. by Staf, I., Strelka Press, Moscow, RUS.

34. Kak realizovyvat' «pravo na gorod»? [How to exercise the “right to the city”?] (2012), Yegor Gaidar Foundation, available at: http://club.gaidarfund.ru/articles/1162/ (accessed 25.01.2020).

35. Simonova, O.A. (2015), “Socio-Cultural Practices of Cohesion in Contemporary Societies: Characteristics and Research Strategies: An Introduction to the Topical Section”, Social sciences and humanities. Domestic and foreign literature. Series 11: Sociology, no. 4, pp. 5–27.

36. Iarskaia-Smirnova, E. and Yarskaya, V. (2014), “SOCIAL COHESION: DIRECTIONS OF THEORETICAL DISCUSSION AND PERSPECTIVES FOR SOCIAL POLICY”, The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 41–61.