CC BY
41
ТЕМА НОМЕРА
Г.Ю. Никипорец-
Такигава,
В.Н. Широбоков
МОЛОДЕЖЬ В РОССИИ: ВНУТРЕННЯЯ И ВНЕШНЯЯ МИГРАЦИЯ (ПО РЕЗУЛЬТАТАМ КАЧЕСТВЕННОГО АНАЛИЗА ДАННЫХ ИНТЕРВЬЮ)
Аннотация
Статья основывается на результатах исследования современного положения молодых мигрантов в Российской Федерации и молодежной политики РФ, которая рассматривает миграцию молодежи как важный компонент политической, экономической и социально-культурной жизни в России. Качественный анализ результатов глубинного интервьюирования мигрантов из национальных республик России (50 респондентов) и стран ближнего зарубежья (50 респондентов), позволяет сделать выводы о профессиональных ориентациях мигрантов и целях приезда в РФ, глубине интеграции мигрантов в российское общество; этнической, идеологической, религиозной, культурной самоидентификации мигрантов; факторах, способствующих и препятствующих адаптации и интеграции мигрантов в принимающее общество. Прогностическая и операциональная часть статьи фиксирует те особенности положения молодых мигрантов в Российской Федерации, которые требуют особого государственного внимания; обсуждает механизмы вовлечения молодежи в систему формирования российской идентичности, способы привлечения высококвалифицированных мигрантов в Россию и факторы, препятствующие этому процессу; уточняет инструменты влияния на ассимилятивные,
G. Nikiporets-Takigawa, V. Shirobokov
YOUTH IN RUSSIA: INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL YOUNG MIGRATION AND YOUTH POLICY (AS EVIDENCED BY THE QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF INTERVIEW DATA)
Abstract
The paper is based on the results of the ongoing study on the current situation of the young migrants in Russian Federation and the state youth policy which consider the migration as an important component of the political, economic and socio-cultural life in Russia. The qualitative analysis of the results of the in-depth interviewing of the migrants from the national republics of the Russian Federation (50 respondents) and the CIS countries (50 respondents) allows to draw conclusions about the professional orientations of the migrants and the purposes of coming to Russia, the 'depth' of migrants' integration into Russian society; ethnic, ideological, religious, cultural self-identification of migrants; factors that proliferate and disrupt the migrants' adaptation and integration in the host society. The prognostic and operational part of the paper captures those features of the situation of the young migrants in the Russian Federation, which require special state attention; discusses the mechanisms of involving young people in the process of Russian identity construction, the ways to attract highly qualified migrants to Russia and the factors that impede this process; clarify the instruments of influence on assimilative, integration,
интеграционные, или, напротив, дезинте-грационные стратегии и тактики поведения мигрантов, и, в конце концов, предлагает оценку эффективности российской молодежной политики в области успешной интеграции мигрантов, развития межкультурного и межэтнического диалога разных групп молодежи в многонациональной России, а также стратегии повышения ее эффективности.
Ключевые слова:
молодые мигранты, молодежная политика, Россия, оценка эффективности, межэтнический диалог, интеграция.
or, on the contrary, disintegrative strategies and tactics of migrant behaviour, and, at the end, offers an assessment of the effectiveness of the Russian youth policy in the field of the migrants' successful integration, the development of intercultural and interethnic dialogue between different youth groups in multinational Russia, and strategy to increase its effectiveness.
Key words:
young migrants, youth policy, Russian Federation, effectiveness evaluation, qualitative analysis, in-depth interview, integration.
The term "state youth policy" that was first mentioned in the scientific community in 1990s has become common today. It does not mean that such a policy was absent before. If a youth policy is understood as "the attitude of society, its various groups, class, social institutions to young people as a social group and also young people themselves to other social groups, social institutions, values of society" [18; 23], then such a policy existed and exists in any society.
In other countries, a goal-seeking state policy relating to young people began to develop at the turn of 1950-60s.
In the USSR, this policy was actively beginning to be carried out from the time of the origin of the Soviet state, however, without using the term "youth policy".
The importance of the state youth policy is because young people constitute a significant part of the population of the Russian Federation (21,5%, according to the Federal Agency for Youth Affairs in 2016) and is called upon to make a significant contribution to the implementation of social change. The interest in youth is so great that specialists start talking about the "new youth era" - an era when young people change the pattern of the global culture, and the most popular product of the "global supermarket" becomes the "idea of youth" itself. The term "juvenileisation", that is used to refer to social changes and innovations that are the result of youth activities, gets widespread usage [17].
Disputes about the essence, principles and models of this policy have not abated until now. Despite the numerous studies of the youth policy problems both in Russia and abroad, there is no common understanding of its essence, tasks and functions. The scientific approaches that have emerged in this wain
require generalization and theoretical reflection in order to allow developing the recommendations on the implementation of the state youth policy.
Young people are a strategic resource, the main carrier of the future, source of innovation and the most important factor of change, which requires an objective analysis of socio-political processes taking place in modern youth environment and the impact of state youth policy on these processes, as determined by a number of factors. The theoretical and practical analysis in the field of the youth policy becomes more and more crucial. The urgency of research of the state youth policy which is relevant to young migrants (some of the results of that we show in this paper), is determined by the importance in the formation of a new research paradigm of social and political activity of young people and to create an idea of the youth as a complex, multifaceted and contradictory phenomenon at the current stage of modernization in Russia.
Material and methods
In the framework of the study, 100 in-depth interviews were conducted with young migrants from the national republics of the Russian Federation and immigrants from the countries of the near abroad living in the Russian Federation. Territorial coverage and quotas for interviewing: Moscow (25), St. Petersburg (15), Novosibirsk Region (5), Krasnoyarsk Territory (5), Krasnodar Territory (5), Rostov Region (5), Samara Region (5), Primorsky Krai (5), the Tyumen Region (5), the Yamalo-Nenets AO (5), the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous District (5), the Moscow Region (5), the Irkutsk Region (5), and the Sverdlovsk Region (5). Among the respondents - 49 young women and 51 young men 17 to 30 years old.
Results
The analysis of contemporary academic discussions and legislative initiatives in the field of the youth policy has shown that there are conflicting views on the activity of the young people. Thus, according to a number of European experts, young people are diminishing the investment of their energy in the socio-political sphere of society and are showing little activity at the municipal level. The experts believe that the activity of socio-political organizations in involving young people in the system relations of modern society is not very effective. Similar tendencies exist in the Russian Federation [21; 22]. In this regard, the statement of the head of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Rus-
sian Federation O. Vasilieva at the final meeting of the board of the Federal Agency for Youth Affairs on May 17, 2017 seems to be relevant: "now our main attention should be turned to those young people who do not attribute themselves to leaders, initiative part of the society" [29].
Other experts believe that in the context of a globalizing postindustrial society, young people are less willing to be satisfied with the position of the object, the role of the passive statistician of the state's youth policy; they are increasingly claiming their political subjectivity. This tendency appears as universal and manifests itself among youth movements that position themselves in various spectra of political stratification: etatists and cosmopolitans, moderate centrists and radicals, liberals and national Bolsheviks [13; 16; 21; 22]. That is why special analysis and identification of the prevailing trend is required. Not only the future of mankind (this has already become a trivial phrase) depends on the direction in which young people are active, but also it is present.
Without these factors, it is impossible to implement an effective state youth policy.
The interviewing revealed that about 70% of the young people interviewed did not marry and have no children, and in the near future, they do not plan to. This suggests that among young migrants, predominate people who are not burdened with family obligations, choose migration to improve their social status in society and to obtain higher earnings or better education.
Despite the fact that among the respondents there were people from different countries of the near abroad and from the national republics of Russia, 31% of respondents identify themselves with Russian nationality. On the basis of such data, one can draw a conclusion about the high prestige of Russian nationality, and also about the fact that ethnically Russians continue to leave the national republics and neighboring countries due to discrimination based on ethnicity (some respondents directly pointed to the existence of strong discrimination for persons of non-titular nationality, such as the physicist who moved from Kazan to St. Petersburg, a graduate of Kazan University, who founded his own IT business in St. Petersburg with a monthly income of 300 thousand rubles and did not have that kind of opportunities in Tatarstan, where, in his opinion, "there is job only for the Tatars" [8; 9].
Considering the religion, 41% of the respondents were Orthodox, 35% professing Muslim and 8% - other faiths. Such results reflect a global trend in which the main and competing religions are Islam and Christianity and "by
2050, the world can develop a situation where the adherents of Christianity and Islam make up about 2/3 of the world's population (in 1900 - 47% in 2000 -52%, in 2010 - almost 55%). In the history of humankind there never was a period when two religions so dominated the world". At the same time, only 16% of the respondents are atheists.
More than 60% of respondents have higher education, or are in the process of receiving it. Some, in addition to receiving higher education, graduated from a secondary special institution (college). Among respondents who have a secondary education, the overwhelming majority are immigrants who came to Russia from the former Soviet republics. A third group of respondents who have only secondary education is also singled out, but the percentage of such young people is extremely small.
Among the respondents-immigrants, most of them are from Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan and Ukraine. Among the internal migration, the republics of the North Caucasus, Tatarstan and Bashkortostan occupy the leading positions on the outcome of the population.
Among the main reasons for moving from the national republics of the Russian Federation or from neighboring countries to large cities, respondents most often call the presence of prospects and opportunities for building a career, or simply the availability of work - about 40% of respondents think so. About 30% associate their moving to the city with the possibility of obtaining a better education.
There are also two groups of respondents who moved to megacities because of the family reasons or simply to change the background. It should be noted that many respondents answered that they already had relatives in their new place of residence, which can be interpreted as one of the main motivating factors for the decision to move.
Deep interviewing clearly showed that the majority of immigrants from the near abroad and most of Russian migrants (83% of all respondents), maintain contact with their countrymen and relatives after moving to a new place of living, communicating on the phone, in social networks, visiting native cities on holidays. Some attend themed events that gather groups of migrants from specific regions, such as forums, exhibitions, concerts, conferences and etc. They do not miss the opportunity to see each other when they visit their relatives. The number of people who lost contact with their countrymen in their homeland (17% of the total number of respondents) consists mainly of migrants aged 25-
30 from the national republics of Russia, while immigrants from the near abroad are in contact with friends, relatives from their home countries, as well as with other immigrants, helping each other in difficult life situations, in search of housing and work. When moving to a new place of residence, new acquaintances inevitably appear, and often they to some extent replace the constant need to maintain contact with the motherland, naturally integrating migrants into the host society. Some people consciously do not maintain contact with fellow countrymen in order to quickly join a new society or start a new life from scratch. These studies show that if a respondent considers himself to be Russian, coming from a national republic, contact with his or her home is at a lower level relative to those who identify with another nation.
Only 8% of the respondents started living with their relatives, including moving to their spouses, while 71% of people rented rooms or apartments, which testifies to the material status of those who have moved, sufficient for living in cities with a higher payment for housing relative to their home places. Only 30% of all respondents were given a place in the dormitory from an educational institution or from work, while 70% of interviewees were forced to rent housing. At the same time, respondents complain about high prices for housing in their new place of residence and, answering the question of what the Russian Federation could do to help migrants and immigrants in the process of relocation, the easing of housing expenses is often mentioned. At the same time, it follows from the testimonies of the respondents that people leave their native places and move, hoping financially, as a rule, only for themselves. The search for housing is usually carried out via the Internet, in some cases newcomers rely on the advice of relatives, if they already live in a new place. One respondent replied that the university had "given him a gift" by providing a hostel. This approach characterizes the lack of legal preparedness for relocation, in which the migrant must clearly understand the essence of the contractual relationship with the place of study or work before the move and check the range of his rights to provide housing and the availability of guarantees from the inviting party to provide accommodation for the newcomer.
Often, respondents sought work in the same way as housing, that is, on the Internet and after the move (to relatives). Some of the interviewees found work using the portals HeadHunter, Avito, etc. In general, if 42% of people found work through the site and independently searching for the employer, 58% of the respondents got work through family ties and acquaintances.
Of the total, 79% of respondents have jobs, while 48% of them work in the service sector. In the process of conducting the survey, the following trend was noted: the majority of respondents among the immigrants from the near abroad occupy the position of loaders, cleaners and low-skilled service personnel (mostly visitors from Asian countries), while migrants from various national republics of Russia find more prestigious and highly paid work. This fact confirms that the Russian employer is less interested in employees from the CIS countries, since the attraction of foreign labor from the point of view of the process of registration and further accounting is significantly different from the rules of registration of citizens of the Russian Federation [14; 15]. This is regulated by special labor and migration legislation [12, p. 145-146; 14; 15] and it leads to a fine for illegally attracting foreign labor if violated, while violation of statutory rules of migration accounting entails administrative penalties and other measures of influence, both for the employer and for the employee.
Most often, an employer who employs immigrant labor is fined for: lack of a full set of documents; violation of labor legislation; avoidance of the employment contract; violation of state regulatory requirements for labor protection; failure to conduct or incorrectly conducted an assessment of working conditions in the workplace; admission of an employee to perform his or her work duties until the completion of the processing procedure; failure to provide workers with personal protective equipment.
For these reasons, immigrants are forced settle for jobs that are not in high demand among Russians, where employment is not accompanied by complex bureaucratic operations.
Undoubtedly, the latent unemployment, which is typical for the current stage of Russia's development, also affects the insufficient number of jobs for immigrants [30]. In the context of the ongoing economic crisis, jobs are not enough for Russians, and the employers, especially in small and medium businesses, are forced to go to the gray zone to ease the tax burden for their business and provide workers with wages. In this situation, foreign labor becomes an even more burdensome factor of doing business, leaving no chance for the immigrants to find a job [30].
The question "Do you work in your professional field?" was the most relevant for all graduates of higher education institutions, in the overwhelming majority the answer was "no" or "partially", exceptions were made only by healthcare professionals and graduates of secondary vocational schools. This points
the fact that the highly skilled labor market in the large Russian cities is currently oversupplied in many sectors, and graduates from countries represented by interviewees are in a difficult situation, since the number of vacancies does not match the number of applicants.
Answering the question about the sufficiency of Russian language and Russian culture knowledge, the overwhelming majority of the interview participants (84%) noted a sufficient level of the Russian language and culture knowledge. Most people who know the language and culture, and also perceive them as native, are migrants from the national republics of Russia, as well as immigrants from Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, and Kazakhstan [23; 24]. Immigrants from other countries represented in the study who answered the question in the affirmative, mainly come from mixed by ethnicity families, or have lived in Russia for several years, or they have visited Russian schools and language classes in their homeland, which was announced with some pride. People say that a good knowledge of Russian language helps them find better paid jobs and more professional competencies. About 11% of respondents said they lack knowledge of the Russian language or culture of Russia and would like to fill in the missing gaps. Five respondents said they did not know Russian and Russian culture, had problems with interviews and understanding of a number of issues, despite the fact that initially they confirmed readiness for in-depth interviews and claimed that they knew and understood the problems of immigrants in Russia.
The majority of respondents who answered the question of whether they faced administrative or legal problems in a new location answered in the negative. 83% of the respondents said a decisive "no", but there were insignificant differences in the understanding of the issue: for example, one person replied that he had not been prosecuted, two people noted minor administrative offenses and various legal problems in the past, that now such difficulties are not experienced. Problems of an administrative or legal nature were among 14 respondents, most of who talked about the inconvenience associated with registering. There was also a rather weak understanding of the issue among those respondents for whom Russian is a problem (see above): for example, one respondent replied that he had problems with studying in Russia. 4 people could not answer, or answered that they "do not know", "do not remember", "do not understand" (one respondent from Kyrgyzstan) the question itself, which indicates an insufficient degree of proficiency in Russian among this category of respondents.
The respondents shared their answers to the question whether there was a need to seek medical help and how they assess its quality: almost half of the respondents (45 people) applied for medical care and were satisfied with its quality, but also almost half respondents answered that they did not apply for professional medical care. 13 respondents applied for medical help, but experienced some difficulties, including the unsatisfactory, in their opinion, quality of medical care. In all groups of respondents there are people who used private medical services (which did not cause any criticism of quality), because they were not satisfied with the quality of public facilities. 39 people have never sought medical help, and many of them highly assessed the level of medical care in their new place of residence, knowing this not from their own experience. Many evaluated based on a comparison with the state of medical services in their native places, indicating that they "have the same" (15 answers) or emphasizing that the new location is better (2 answers). Two respondents questioned this issue, and one interviewee did not understand the essence of the issue due to poor knowledge of the Russian language.
A significant division of respondents' opinions raised the question of the attitude of others towards immigrants in their new place of residence. The largest group consists of people who believe that the attitude is purely positive and did not note any discrimination both for themselves and for other immigrants. The participants of this group, judging by the answers, somehow identify themselves with Russian culture and the Russian-speaking community, constantly are using the state language for communication and, naturally, do not notice the lack of knowledge of the Russian language and Russian culture and stressing in their replies that there are no visible differences between them and the host population. Some respondents directly linked the attitude to them in a new place of living and their level of Russian language proficiency. The number of respondents, who evaluated the attitude of the host society to migrants as positive, was 39 people. The second largest group (35 respondents) is the one where people have identified the ambiguity of attitudes towards immigrants. Thus, the majority of this group of respondents believes that the attitude varies among local residents from sharp rejection to a positive perception of migrants. Many respondents also pointed out the role of migrants' behavior, their willingness to integrate into Russian society as a key factor that influences attitudes towards them. 18 people out of the total number of respondents named the attitude to immigrants as relatively neutral and indifferent. And only 9 people think that the
attitude is rather bad, they have faced a negative attitude towards themselves and other immigrants. For instance, one of the respondents stated that she noticed oblique glances and open dislike when she appeared on the street wearing a hijab. A young man who moved from one of the national republics noted a hostile attitude towards him only because he came expecting to find work, that is, he encroaches on jobs that are not enough for the locals themselves. The young man, however, stressed the fact that it was a long time ago when he was ill acquainted with local people, and after a year of life and study in a new place, he did not feel any negative attitude. There were also other respondents from these nine who faced negative attitudes from the host population. They said that it was just right after the arrival in a playful manner and did not become a serious problem for them. Regarding the attitude towards wearing the hijab, the respondent also stressed that "it was a long time ago" (she lives in Russia for four years), that is, she noted in her answer the situation that happened four years ago and could not recall more recent examples. According to the Russian Muslims, this corresponds to the current situation, where the hostile attitude toward this form of expression of their religiousness in the Russian Federation is improving.
Therefore, the overwhelming majority of migrants in Russia have never faced a negative attitude towards them due to their status as migrants, and those people who somehow encountered, noted that this did not become an obstacle to their new life and plans to stay in a new place of residence and were expressed in a playful manner.
All in all, about 10% of the respondents answered positively to the question "did you personally face a negative attitude towards yourself from others because of your immigrant status" which may be an indicator that at the present stage of development, Russian society shows loyalty to people who have changed their place of residence to big cities in Russia. This fact has a positive impact on the life of migrants, as the level of comfort of residence in the country largely depends on how one is treated by others. The desire to create favorable living conditions encourages migrants to integrate more quickly and more actively into the host society.
Most of the respondents plan to stay and work in a new place, but the duration of their stay largely depends on the availability of work and prospects for getting a better job. Some respondents found it difficult to answer the question about their residence in a new place, which was most often due to their unpre-
paredness at a young age and in the absence of a family to plan their future ahead of time, as well as an uncertain situation related to training or work. Nevertheless, it should be noted that many people are extremely interested in a long stay at their new place of residence and many avowed that they plan to stay in the new place forever. Only 3% of the respondents answered that they plan to stay in their new place of residence for not more than a year, but the conclusions regarding the reasons for leaving are difficult to make, since the respondents either found it difficult or refused to give an explanation for their decision. After analyzing the respondents' answers, it can be concluded that the vast majority of them consider their current residence as a promising option and plan to stay in the new place for as long as possible.
An important aspect in the process of integration and socialization of migrants into the Russian society is the availability of education or at least the desire to receive it. 90% of respondents positively answered the question about their plans to get an education in Russia. However, it is important to note that a significant part of the respondents (about 40%) are students at the moment and study is the main reason for their moving. People who came to Moscow and other large cities of Russia for work, generally, would like to study in the future, but at the moment they do not have spare time and financial opportunities. This statement is valid to 32% of respondents. Many point to the high tuition fee for an immigrant as an obstacle to continuing education, and are waiting for state help on this issue. The minority said that they do not plan to study. As practice shows, that kind of people come to Russia to earn and send home an amount of money that allows, for example, to buy a home in their homeland, then leave for home, but this short-term project is prolongs year after year. Having lived in Russia for five years, having settled down to marries life (as a rule, by helping the spouse from the motherland to move to the new residence), the immigrant does not return to his homeland, because he does not see the future there for himself and the children, but, on the other hand, he sees their new place of residence as more clear and perspective.
Discussion
Modern Russian youth is, in fact, the first generation that was born and formed in post-Soviet Russia. This generation grew in a complex situation of destroying behavioral stereotypes, rapid socio-economic and social transformation [31]. But in times of crisis, it is young people who are most exposed
to the collapse of ideals, exacerbation of nihilism, apathy, which leads to the loss of moral and spiritual health of some young people (and this is relevant to the youth globally, not only to Russian youth, see more on it in [6, p. 1228; 7; 16; 26; 27; 29]. This process imposes general characteristics peculiar to young people: activity, mobility, but also liability to radical, protest, and often extremist sentiments [11]. Recent political experience has shown that the youngest group (under the age of 20) does not actually have any civic identity and therefore is most inclined to protest forms of manifesting their interests: unauthorized rallies, demonstrations, strikes, hunger strikes, etc. [3, p. 56; 21, p. 311; 22; 25, p. 246-248]. The older group often takes an outsider position and does not show such a passionate desire for random "street-spontaneous" transformations. That is why the analysis of the differential approach to the youth policy in view of the diversity between various age groups of the young people is required (This approach is evident in the legislative documents which are related to the youth policy abroad [4; 14; 16; 20]. In the British 'Positive for youth' programme, for instance, young persons before 19 and young adults 19-25 are visibly divided in order to focus on their specific needs [2; 4; 26; 27; 32].
The social pressure on the Russian youth is increasing. Unfavorable demographic trends compel society to present increased demands to today's young people, because their work activity, to a greater extent than that of their parents, should become a source of funds for the social provision of the population. According to the Federal State Statistics Service, the coefficient of demographic burden (the number of not capable of working people for 1000 that are) increased in 2016, compared to 2005, by 20% and amounted to 709 people. Special research is required to develop measures to reduce this social burden.
At the first in the history of modern Russia parliamentary hearings of the Russian Federation youth policy held May 22, 2017, the State Duma Chairman V. Volodin had to admit the lack of a unified system approach in the field of legal regulation of the state youth policy and called for building its more effective model. The Minister of Education and Science of Russia O. Vasilyeva also called for formulating unified approaches to the state youth policy implementation [15].
Therefore, one of the most urgent issues of youth policy is the issue of reorienting immigrants from low-skilled workers to workers with secondary special
or higher education. But, as described above, today there is a shortage of jobs even for Russian citizens with higher education. That is why it is important to build a migration policy that could control necessary amount of immigrants entering the country for the sufficient development of the country's economy. This policy could also control the education level and qualifications enabling them to obtain the professions demanded in the Russian labor market. As for internal migration from the national republics of the Russian Federation, it follows from the respondents' answers that large cities of Russia are much more attractive for young people in terms of the quality of education and employment prospects, which suggests that Russian youth policy should be aimed at eliminating the regional disparity for that matter [12; 19].
Also during the survey respondents were asked a question related to political activity, aimed at identifying electoral activity. Historical experience proves that the lack of social or personal experience as well as competence in political issues among young people leads to its electoral passivity and lack of the capability for independent electoral choice.
Conclusion
The analysis of foreign legislative experience that is based on the two trends can help to solve these urgent problems: 1) many countries have laws on youth and youth policy (Germany, France, Sweden, Great Britain, etc.) and base their strategies and everyday activities strictly on the legislations (yet, the efficiency of these laws application requires a separate research) [1; 2; 4; 20; 32]; 2) in other countries with successful youth policies, there are no relevant laws, and regulation takes place at other legal levels [5; 9; 10].
A number of researchers, along with state youth policy, allocate public youth policy conducted by political parties and social movements, religious denominations, etc. Regarding this matter, the question of their work with young people effectiveness has to be answered. Should we juxtapose state and public youth policies? Does it make theoretical and practical sense to talk about the youth policy of individual political parties, social movements, and religious organizations?
As a result of the in-depth interviews, it was also revealed that for the majority of the migrants from other countries, the large cities of Russia, and Moscow especially, are not a place where immigrants feel comfortable to live and to work. About 70% advise their friends and relatives to move to Mos-
cow and other Russian large cities, indicating a high level of health and education service provision and a greater number of jobs. However, almost all respondents noted that they are experiencing great problems with employment, which is why even those who have higher education have to have the low-paid, unpopular among host society and required low skills vacancies.
The final stage of the interview was to find out the measures that, in the respondents' opinion, would facilitate the process of adaptation to a new place of residence for young people coming to Russia from different countries. The most popular answers of the respondents in order to improve the policy related to the migrants and to accelerate the adaptation of the immigrants into the host society of Russia are:
1. To increase in the number of educational exchange programs, organization of internships, grants for students from different countries;
2. To create more Russian language courses for immigrants and introduce them into the job placement system;
3. To hold the various festivals and events dedicated to establishing a dialogue between different nationalities, popularizing various national cultures and ethnicities;
4. To strengthen the illegal migration control; tighten penalties for employers who illegally take immigrants to work;
5. To simplify the procedure for obtaining registration and work patents.
6. To change the attitude of residents of the large Russian cities to immigrants through information policy, erasing stereotypes and stereotypical perception of the migrants from the national republics of Russia and from the near abroad states by positive media coverage with exposing in the media of the their willingness to join the host society and to serve for its good and prosperity;
7. To create more jobs for migrants;
8. To assist in the housing needs.
Such answers indicate that migrants and immigrants believe in their importance for the economic development of the large Russian cities, for the country attempts to attract more highly skilled immigrants. And they feel strongly that they have strong voice to ask Russian Federation to help and to provide them with the same rights as the rights of the host society. The migrants appear as not aware about the real economic situation in Russia with the high level of the unemployment, about the social consequences of migra-
tion, which grows if the low-skilled migrants move to the new place their whole families who do not intend to work afterwards - and this increase the pressure for local schooling and health system. Despite the complaints, especially from those who come from the post-soviet states, about the overprized housing and education, the majority of the immigrants receive what they move for - work they did not have at home or for which they received incomparably lower wages, threatened the survival of their families. Recognizing this, the immigrants demonstrate the understanding of the functioning of the Eurasian Economic Union, which is much more advanced than the political realities. The EEU, on the model of the EU, declares free movement of the workforce, but the implementation of this project is hampered by a large number of unresolved and legally unsettled issues. As a result, and it is very annoying for the host society, the migrants who enter the Russian Federation from the countries that are in the Eurasian Economic Union, are not obliged to speak perfectly the national language (this is very unlike the European Union [23; 24].
The state youth policy in relation to the young migrants requires the close relationship with the Russian Federation migration policy and many nuances of the migrants' identity and their life strategies. The age and gender differentiation of migrants is still not properly taken into account but should be addressed very carefully. This problem is clearly under-researched and requires urgently many efforts from the specialists in the field of the youth policy abroad and in Russia. The best practice of the foreign countries can be taken in to account in view to develop the best youth policy for the Russian Federation. Together the academics and professionals and the state institutions involved in the youth policy should provide the informative expert surveys regularly adapted to the nowadays context. An effective youth policy in this direction could facilitate the fastest adaptation of young migrants to the socio-cultural, economic and political realities of the Russian Federation.
References
1. Antipina N.L. Youth policy in Russia and ABROAD. Academic Herald. 2014. №2(28).
2. Buckland L. Positive for Youth: A critique. Infed. Accessed: URL: http://infed.org/mobi/positive-for-youth-a-critique/ (10 October 2017).
3. Chirun S.N. Networking youth policy and activism: real challenges and threats in the collection: value of the personality and collective interactions in the social progress ensuring process Peer-reviewed materials digest. 2016.
4. Council of Europe & European Commision. Country Sheet on Youth Policy - United Kingdom. 2013. URL: http://www.youthpolicy.org/mobi/positive-for-youth-a-critique/ (Accessed 29 July 2017).
5. Dialogue on equal terms. Available at: URL: https://fadm.gov.ru/news/35665?is_important=true (Accessed 29 July 2017).
6. Florence Lefresne. Youth unemployment and youth Employment policy. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Germany, 2012.
7. Jozwiak G. Youth leaders question future of youth innovation zones. Children & Youth People Now. URL: http://www.cypnow.co.uk/cyp/news/ 1077808/youth-leaders-question-future-youth-innovation-zones (Accessed 31 July 2017).
8. Kamaliev A.R., Kamalieva A.S., Sergeev S.A. Totalist policy of the Republic of Tatarstan: problems and solutions. Bulletin of Kazan Technological University. 2014. №17.
9. Kiseleva K.A. Youth politics in post-soviet In the collection: of articles on the materials of a scientific conference. otv. Ed. T.N. Artsybashev. 2016.
10. Kiseleva N.V. Federal agency for youth and youth policy in modern Russia. Bulletin of the Voronezh Institute of Economics and Social Management. 2017. №1.
11. Kolpakova M.G., Nikiporets-Takigawa G.Yu. Archetypical patterns of youth in Russia in the Continuum of socio-political formation. Contemporary Problems of Social Work. 2015. T. 1. №4.
12. Kulagin O.I. Youth policy of a small City (On the example of Petrozavodsk) Strategy of sustainable development of Russian regions. 2014. №23.
13. Lazarev A.D., Chirun S.N. Youth Policy in the Geopolitical Dimension. Vestnik KuzGTU - Bulletin KuzGTU. 2006. №2.
14. Legal regulation of youth policy in modern foreign states: a comparative legal analysis: an analytical note. Moscow: Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law at the Government of the Russian Federation, 2015. URL: https://fadm.gov.ru/docs?categoryId = 14&page=1 (Accessed July 29, 2017).
15. Legal regulation of youth policy in modern foreign states: a comparative legal analysis: an analytical note. URL: https://fadm.gov.ru/ docs?categoryId = 14&page=1 (Accessed 29 July 2017).
16. Loncle P. The history of youth work in Europe and its relevance for today's youth work policy. URL: http://pjp-eu.coe.int/en/web/youth-partnership/-
the-history-of-youth-work-in-europe-and-its-relevance-for-today-s-youth-work-policy- (Accessed 29 July 2017).
17. Lukov V.A. Juventization. Enciklopedija gumanitarnyh nauk - Encyclopedia of the humanities. 2009. No 1.
18. Lukov V.A. State youth policy: Russian and world practice of realizing the innovative potential of new generations in society. ed. V.A. Lukova. M.: Izd-vo Mosk. gumanit. un-ta, 2013.
19. Merkulov P., Eliseev A. Regional State youth policy: problems and prospects. Public administration. Electronic bulletin. 2015. №52.
20. National Youth policy overview. URL: http://www.youthpolicy.org/nationalyouthpolicies/ (Accessed 29 July 2017).
21. Nikiporets-Takigawa G. Protests 2.0: Through Networked Consolidation To Participation: Why Russian Manezhka Cannot Become Ukrainian Maidan. Russian Journal of communication. 2014. T. 6. №3.
22. Options For The Structure Of The Youth Policy Statement "Positive for youth" Great Britain, 2011. URL: www.education.gov.uk/positiveforyouth. (Accessed 29 July 2017).
23. Shane Blackman and Ruth Rogers eds. Youth marginality in Britain: Contemporary studies of austerity. Policy Press at the University of Bristol. 2017.
24. Smirnova E.V., Mitrofanova S.V. State Youth Policy: Regional Aspect, problems and prospects of the solution science and peace. 2014. T. 2. №4(8).
25. The responsibility issue should be constantly. URL: https://fadm.gov.ru/news/35553?is_important=true (Accessed 29 July 2017).
26. Tsiunik D.A. Problems of the post-Soviet space. 2017. Vol. 4. №1.
27. Velikanova E.V. Mechanisms of social integration of Russian youth as an element of federal innovative youth policy Scientific notes of the Tambov branch of the Russian Union of Artists. 2017. №7.
28. Youth of Russia 2000-2025: development of human capital: a report. URL: https://fadm.gov.ru/docs?categoryId=14&page=1 (Accessed 29 July 2017).
