We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 November 2018
Despite the fact that the former Soviet Union was perhaps the most multinational state in the world, until recently data were not available to undertake a systematic investigation of patterns of nationality population, distribution, redistribution and segregation within Soviet cities. However, nationality data were recently published for the 32 rayons of Moscow for the last two census years of 1979 and 1989.
* The author would like to thank Jane Rowland for her excellent typing. He would also like to thank Lee Schwartz and Tim Heleniak, then at the Center for International Research at the United States Bureau of the Census, for providing the data from the 1989 census of Moscow.Google Scholar
1. Goskomstat RSFSR, Moskovskoe Gorodskoe Statistiki (Mosgorstat), Itogi Vsesouiznoi perepisi naseleniia 1989 g.po g. Moskve: demograficheskaia, natsional'naia, kultur'naia, sotsial’ no-ekonomicheskaia kharakteristikanaseleniia, chislo i sostav semei (Moscow, 1990).Google Scholar
2. Shifts are computed by subtracting the percentage share distribution of a given nationality in a given rayon in 1979 from the corresponding percentage share in 1989. The shift can be either positive or negative, which, in turn, is a function of the relative growth rate of that nationality in that rayon. A positive shift means that the growth of a nationality in a particular rayon was more rapid than its growth for Moscow as a whole, while a negative shift means that it was growing less rapidly.Google Scholar
3. The dissimilarity index compares the percentage regional distribution of two populations, here nationalities, specifically by subtracting the respective percentages for one group from those of the other. It can be based on either the summation of the positive differences or by a summation of the absolute values of all the differences and a division of that summation by two (the latter is used here). The coefficient of redistribution is calculated in the same way as the dissimilarity index, but instead it compares the percentage distribution of one nationality at two different points in time. See Taueber, Karl E. and Taueber, Alma F., Negroes in Cities (Chicago, 1965); Shryock, Henry S., Siegel, Jacob S. and Associates, The Methods and Materials of Demography (Washington, 1971), pp. 232–233, 262; Lewis, Robert A., Rowland, Richard H. and Clem, Ralph S., Nationality and Population Change in Russia and the USSR (New York, 1976), pp. 56–57.Google Scholar
4. Another problem is that the 32 rayons are radial in nature and many existed both in the central area of the city and also extended outward (Figure 1). See Richard H. Rowland, “Regional Population Trends in the City of Moscow During the 1979–1989 Intercensal Period,” Post-Soviet Geography, Vol. 33, No. 3, 1992, pp. 151–153.Google Scholar
5. For example, nationality data from the 1897 census of the Russian Empire are available by districts (ranging from 7 to 17 in number) of the four largest cities of Moscow, St Petersburg, Warsaw and Odessa, and allow for a study of nationality distribution and redistribution. See Tsentral'nyi Statisticheskii Komitet, Pervaia vseobshchaia perepis’ naseleniia Rossiiskoi Imperii, 1897 g . (St Petersburg, 1899–1905), separate parts of Volumes 24, 37, 47 and 51. In addition, nationality data are available by districts of St Petersburg in 1869 and 1910 and have been used by Bater to derive segregation indexes. See James H. Bater, St. Petersburg: Industrialization and Change (Montreal, 1976), pp. 197–201, 375–379. Also, Zipperstein and Herlihy have touched upon Jewish population and residential patterns in nineteenth-century Odessa, although specific distribution and redistribution indexes are not used. See Zipperstein, Steven J., The Jews of Odessa: A Cultural History, 1794–1881 (Stanford, CA, 1985), pp. 34–40, 116–118; and Herlihy, Patricia, Odessa: A History, 1794–1914 (Cambridge, MA, 1986).Google Scholar
6. Rowland, , “Regional,” pp. 153–159.Google Scholar
7. Although absolute data are available for 1989 they are not presented for 1979 in the 1989 census. However, the ratios between the 1989 population and 1979 population are presented. Therefore, 1979 nationality populations were estimated by “backward projecting” the respective 1989 populations to 1979; that is, by dividing the 1989 population by the 1989–1979 ratio.Google Scholar
8. Rowland, Richard H., “Selected Urban Population Characteristics of Moscow,” Post-Soviet Geography, Vol. 33, No. 9, 1992, p. 576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Rowland, , “Regional,” p. 160.Google Scholar
10. Sidorov, Dimitry A., “Variations in Perceived Level of Prestige of Residential Areas in the Former USSR,” Urban Geography, Vol. 13, No. 4, 1992, pp. 355–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Rowland, , “Selected,” pp. 578–579.Google Scholar
12. Ibid., pp. 572–573; United States, Central Intelligence Agency, Moscow (1987).Google Scholar
13. Gitelman, Zvi, “Recent Demographic and Migratory Trends Among Soviet Jews,” Post-Soviet Geography, Vol. 33, No. 3, 1992, pp. 142–143; Heitman, Sidney, “Soviet Emigration since 1985,” Nationalities Papers, Vol. 22, No. 1, 1994, pp. 247–261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Taueber, Taueber and, Negroes in Cities', Ko, Chyong-Fang, “Less Ethnic Segregation and More Variation: Los Angeles County, 1980–1990,” Sociology and Social Research, Vol. 76, No. 3, 1992, pp. 127–130.Google Scholar
15. French, R. A., “The Individuality of the Soviet City,” in French, R. A. and Hamilton, F. E. I., eds, The Socialist City (New York: Putnam, 1979), pp. 97–98.Google Scholar
16. Ibid.; Bater, James H., “Privatization in Moscow,” The Geographical Review, Vol. 84, No. 2, 1994, p. 214.Google Scholar
17. French, , “The Individuality,” pp. 97–98; Sidorov, , “Variations,” pp. 355–356.Google Scholar
18. Lewis, , Rowland, and Clem, , Nationality, pp. 45–46.Google Scholar
19. Rossii, Goskomstat, Chislennost’ naseleniia Rossiiskoi Federatsii po gorodam, rabochim poselkam i raionam na I Yanvarya 1993 g . (Moscow, 1993), p. 128; Rossii, Goskomstat, Moskovskoi Gorodskoi Komitet po Statistike, Moskva, administrativnye okruga v 1992 g. (Moscow, 1993), p. 6.Google Scholar
20. At the more gross level, it consists of nine rayons or “administrative districts,” including a central one surrounded by eight others in a rough pie-shaped pattern with standard compass directions; for example, West, North West, etc. (this excludes the detached tenth administrative district of Zelenograd, which is not contiguous to Moscow per se but still is officially part of Moscow). This system has the advantage of the central area being singled out, as opposed to being subdivided by numerous rayons as in the past in 1979 and 1989. In addition, each of these nine grosser rayons is subdivided into many “territorial administrative units,” which number roughly 130 for the city. See All Moscow Joint Venture, All Moscow: Information and Advertising Yearbook (Moscow, 1993).Google Scholar
21. See note 20.Google Scholar
22. Rossii, Goskomstat, Moskva, pp. 7–8.Google Scholar
23. Heleniak, Tim, “The Projected Population of Russia in 2005,” Post-Soviet Geography, Vol. 35, No. 10, 1994, pp. 608–614.Google ScholarPubMed
24. Tereshchenko, Vladimir, “You Have to Pay for a Moscow Residence Permit,” Current Digest of the Post-Soviet Press, Vol. 46, No. 20, 1994, pp. 20–21; Efron, Sonni, “In Russia, Fertile Soil for Racism,” Los Angeles Times, 18 April 1995, pp. A1, A10–A11.Google Scholar
25. Rowland, Richard H., “Recent Trends in Urbanization, Urban Growth and Metropolitan Growth and Decline During the 1980's and Early 1990's,” paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, San Francisco, April 1995.Google Scholar
26. Bater, , “Privatization,” pp. 214–215.Google Scholar
