Social participation of Russian and Polish students in urban development

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Poznan University of Economics and Business

Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia

B.N. Yeltzin

Social participation of russian and polish students in urban development

E. Kazmierczyka, M.V. Pevnayab, E.A. Shuklinab, A.N. Tarasovab



Abstract

This paper is devoted to the problem of engaging youth in the formation of sustainable urban environment. A particular focus is on the role of universities as research and educational centres in this process. The problem was analyzed from two perspectives. On the one hand, an analysis was carried out to assess the activity of students as the actors contributing to the formation of urban environment, as well as the level of their involvement in constructive social practices and readiness for social and cultural participation in urban life. On the other hand, specific institutional and socio-cultural features of urban environment, which determine the social activity of youth, were investigated. Russia and Poland were selected as the objects of analysis, mainly because these countries share a common socio-cultural, ideological and historical heritage. The research methodology involved a secondary analysis of published data and a survey among Russian and Polish university students. The respondents were selected using the method of targeted sampling and included 465 and 248 respondents from Russia and Poland, respectively. As a result, a number of differences between the countries were identified. In Poland, a shift towards non-formalised social practices and non-institutionalised forms of participation is evident. Russia, however, shows the opposite trend, which involves formalisation and bureaucratisation of youth social participation through centralisation of programmes and projects, as well as unification of approaches used to encourage youth activity. Polish youth demonstrates a higher social activity and a higher level of trust in NPOs, as well as orientation towards democratic values. For Russian students, a submissive position with respect to the city authorities as the main subject of urban development was found to be more typical. Although, in general, Russian and Polish students demonstrate similar patterns of participation in urban development, the former are more focused on its collective forms, while the latter are oriented at individualisation. The obtained results provide for a deeper understanding of the nature of youth participation in the socio-cultural development of cities. Our findings can be used in practice for the development of university strategies aimed at promotion of student social engagement.

Keywords: social participation, social engagement, student volunteering, social partnership, third mission of universities, urban cultural policy, urban development



Introduction

Urban environment is increasingly becoming an experimental site, where young citizens realise their new projects and activities. Rapid changes require urban governance institutions to adequately respond in a timely manner. However, Russian city administration tends to solve the problems relying on the support of the private companies rather than involving its citizens. As a result, the huge potential of socially active youths to be drivers of change remains underestimated and underemployed.

According to M. Bochanov and E. Chernukhina [1, p. 74], the readiness of young people to engage in the activities of public and political organisations, to work as volunteers, as well as to join street rallies and actions, is rapidly increasing in a number of post-Soviet countries. Youths are actively participating in the development of their hometowns. Thus, as E. Omelchenko [2] showed, the past twenty years in Russia have witnessed the formation of a youth space, which is characterised by a wide social and cultural involvement of young people in urban life, as well as by the diversity, marginalisation and peripheralisation of subcultural groups and youth communities. The desire to act by changing the life of the country and the hometown is increasingly becoming the basis for the social participation of young citizens.

Universities play a decisive role in attracting young people to projects aimed at developing urban areas. Students, as a rule, are motivated for creativity and criticism of current events, having the desire and constructive intentions to change the world here and now. Universities as scientific and educational centres perform the function of organising youth initiatives and creating appropriate social and educational environment for constructive transformation of urban space [3].

Universities provide students with the opportunity to participate in socially significant projects and to gain valuable experience of civic engagement [3, 4]. Such skills will help students to become socially responsible and active citizens in their future urban communities. World's leading universities implement institutional initiatives to facilitate the development of students' social behaviour patterns and support their volunteering initiatives. Attention is being increasingly focused on the role of students as volunteers making significant contribution to the community and the urban environment where they live and work [4, p. 171-178].

It should be noted that the type of social engagement practices in a particular society is determined by the society's historical traditions, culture of charity and specifics of the education system. In Russia, the process of social participation formation is just beginning to take shape. For comparison, youth work in Eastern European countries was intensified at the end of the 20th century following the political agenda of the European Union [5, 6]. The experience of EU countries provides some important results, particularly in regard to the problems and difficulties determining the characteristics of youth social participation in such former socialist countries as Poland.

In this research, the social participation of students in the development of urban areas is considered from two perspectives. On the one hand, the subjects of such participation (students) are analysed in order to reveal their potential of engaging in constructive social participation practices, i. e. in various forms of urban volunteering. On the other hand, the specifics of the institutional and socio-cultural urban environment is examined in order to understand, how the interaction between the institutions of civil society, government and education contribute to the formation of a certain institutional infrastructure, social practices and patterns of youth behaviour in the compared countries.

This article aims to identify the features specific to the student social participation in Russia and Poland as countries with a common socio-cultural, ideological and historical heritage and the role of universities in the formation and promotion of a culture of social participation among urban youth.



Student social participation

Cross-country comparative studies devoted to the problem of youth have been gaining higher popularity all over the world [7]. Those studies are focused on the issues of youth mobility [8] associated with macro-level social processes creating infrastructural and cultural environment for the formation of youth discourse in various cities and countries. According to sociologists, a transition to comparative research and spatial sociology of youth is becoming increasingly relevant. The studies are particularly sensitive to processes occurring in different societies and permit a deeper understanding of the conditions and circumstances, in which young people live, study, work and make decisions [9]. Another research trend is to investigate local practices of youth response to social change [10].

European researchers investigate the potential of volunteering activities as a tool for promoting patterns of social engagement among young people in EU countries and forming pan-European identity. As mechanisms for implementing these ideas, youth exchange programmes aimed at social integration [3, 11] and solving the problems of social exclusion of disadvantaged people [12] are broadly applied. In addition, the effects of non-formal youth education are being studied [13]. According to researchers, international volunteer programmes for young people serve as an instrument of insight, making the participants go beyond initial expectations in their positive assessments of the consequences of social participation [14].

In recent years, comparative sociological studies have been carried out to assess the course of development of a single pan-European youth policy. A particular focus is on the initiatives aimed at enhancing the social participation of young people in post-socialist European countries, which experience political and economic difficulties in transition to democratic principles due to weak civil society institutions [5, 15].

The questions of youth citizenship and the empowerment of young people through their personal contribution to various aspects of civil society are widely discussed. The types of social engagement are investigated by comparing the activity of European youth in countries with different levels of democrati- sation and sociocultural traditions of participation [16]. Thus, various aspects of youth social wellbeing, their preferences and perceptions of integration processes in post- socialist countries are analysed [17-19].

Almost all contemporary studies examine the problems of the student youth in the context of creating opportunities for their self-realisation in higher education, civic education and integration into the social and political life of local communities, cities and countries. The role of young people in the socio-cultural development of small settlements and provincial regional centres remains to be the topic of acute interest. Among the most significant issues are those associated with unleashing the potential of urban youth communities in the development of depressed territories, models of their social participation and cultural practices ensuring the effectiveness of urban innovations contributing to the formation of cultural policies at the municipal level.

Methods

A secondary analysis of the data obtained from the World Values Survey wave 6 (WVS) and the Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) was carried out to assess civic and social student activity in post-socialist countries, to analyse existing approaches to the effective implementation of youth policy and to compare the culture of youth social participation in Russia and Poland Data from the website of the CAF Charity Fund for the Development of Philanthropy Data of the 6th wave in research of the World Values Survey (World Values Survey Wave) 2010-2014.

In addition, the empirical data obtained during a survey among students in Russian cities situated in a large region (Sverdlovsk Oblast) and Polish cities situated in the Greater Poland, Masovian and Lubusz voivodships were analysed. The survey was conducted using an online questionnaire in 2019. An invitation to answer the questionnaire was posted on youth thematic social networking groups aiming to bring together students from different cities and universities. The targeted sampling method was used to select 465 and 248 respondents from Russia and Poland, respectively.

The choice of regions for analysis was determined by the following reasons. First, Russia and Poland are the countries sharing a common cultural and historical background, largely due to the socialist past. Secondly, the universities, whose students were surveyed, are located in large cities comparable in terms of size. These cities can be considered as the centres of attraction for young people from small and medium-sized nearby towns. The sample of Russian students included young males and females from 47 Ural towns studying in the cities of Ekaterinburg and Nizhny Tagil. Polish respondents were from 32 towns studying in Warsaw, Poznan and Zielona Gora universities.

The questionnaire was aimed at assessing the respondents' experience of social participation, as well as their readiness to act as «direct» actors or be involved in various practices (from informed to volunteering participation in the life of the city, where they study, and in the city, where they were born).

The respondents' readiness for constructive social participation in the development of their cities was assessed using the following questions: «Are you ready to join groups of citizens participating in community work days, city celebrations and social events?», «Are you ready to help organise exhibitions, fairs, public events, where the citizens and city guests can spend their time responsibly?» and «Are you ready to participate in social projects on urban topics, for example, to tell children and teenagers about the culture, history and architecture of your city?» The respondents answered the questions using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from «disagree» to «completely agree».

A two-stage cluster analysis was used to construct an empirical typology of student social participation in urban development for the countries under study. To this end, in both sub-groups of respondents (Russian and Polish), two clusters were formed, i. e. students demonstrating either a greater or lesser willingness to participate in socially significant projects. The statistical significance of the differences between the clusters was evaluated using non-parametric estimation methods (Pearson's chi-square and Cramer's V tests). The described approach allowed us to characterize Russian and Polish student groups in terms of the social participation degree.

Institutional environment for youth social participation in the development of Russian and Polish regional cities

The quality and nature of the institutional environment is an important condition determining the formation of a culture of youth social participation. In this section, the institutional environment will be considered by comparing the activity of civil society institutions (in particular, the development of the nonprofit sector) in Polish and Russian cities. Further, the national specifics of the youth policies, as well as the culture of charity and its changes in the youth environment in both countries will be described.

Let us analyse specific features of the non-profit sector, which is considered as the foundation of civil society and a basis for the implementation of youth social participation [20]. According to a number of researchers, the present-day Poland has developed a civil society characterised by a high level of organisational consolidation and ideological plurality, with all major interests and identities of social actors being represented [21]. In 2016, the number of active non-profit organisations (NPOs) in Poland amounted to 91.8 thousand [22]. By 2017, this number increased to 92.7 thousand, including associations, social funds, social and faith-based entities, organisations of economic and professional self-governance. This number increased by 12.6 % compared to 20102. In 2018, Poland registered 117 thousand associations and 26 thousand funds, covering a total of 143 thousand organisations. However, according to the portal of Poland non-governmental organisations, only 65 % of these organisations are active Website data of the Main Statistical Office of the Republic of Poland (Cooperation of non-prot organizations with other entities in 2017. Statistics Poland, Warszawa, Krakow, 2019, pp. 21), available at: Data from the portal of non-governmental organisations in Poland (NGOs in Poland. Research report 2018), available at: https:// fakty.ngo.pl/raporty (accessed: 20.09.2019)..

In the past decade, Polish researchers have observed a turn towards non-formalised (informal) social activity in various cities of the country. Throughout the country, lower non-institutionalised and non-for- malised initiatives aimed at transforming urban areas have been taking place. Such forms of urban activism developed as a response to the «professionalisation» of NPO activities, ignoring (thus far) the whole range of possible forms of collective organisation [23]. In their studies, D. Polanska and G. Chimiak showed that institutionalisation is not always the goal of collective action; thus, the Polish civil society has recently gone «beyond the scope of NPO-visation» and turn to «non- formalisation» [6]. It was shown that the expansion of social participation of Polish citizens is focused on self-organisation and restoration of local communities. Urban non-formalised practices of social participation represented a reaction to the loss of social cohesion in cities as a result of the state's refusal to provide public goods and the fact that «capitalist urbanisation is constantly striving to destroy the city as a public, political and liveable heritage» [23]. As a result, citizens are actively forming communities that value spontaneity, flexibility and voluntary membership/participa- tion, and are focusing on local issues.

Since 2005, in Russia, new structures of civil society - institutions of public control - aimed at providing communication between the state and civil society have begun to appear. These structures are organised centrally from the top. Around the same time, the government intensified the support of NPOs through state funding [24] and the development of all-Russian network social movements, thus forming an organisational infrastructure for the social participation of Russian citizens. At the beginning of November 2017, more than 223 thousand NPOs were listed in the register of the RF Ministry of Justice Report of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, 2018..

The development of the third sector in Russia and Poland was determined by two important factors. The first was the complex context of the relationship between the state and the civil society. The second one was due to a decreased involvement of foreign institutions that supported NPOs and determined their independent status from governmental institutions. As a result, excessive bureaucratisation and professional- isation of NPOs, their orientation towards public services, along with financial dependence on the state, led to the widespread interpretation of civil society as the NPO sector, excluding other types and forms of population activity from the discourse [25].

Let us turn to analysing the national specifics of youth policy in Russia and Poland. In accordance with the principle of EU subsidiarity, ensuring youth work and non-formal education in the non-profit sector remains to be mainly a matter of national or local importance. Poland as an EU country tends to synchronize its national youth policy with the directions of development in other EU countries, including improved access to higher education, problems of youth employment, expanding volunteering opportunities and developing youth work practices [26]. The signs of centralisation in the development and implementation of youth policy are absent in public administration of modern Poland. Among the government ministries of Poland, there is no department substantively responsible for youth policy. This leads to the lack of common conceptual and strategic framework determining youth policy, including in the non-profit sector. Nevertheless, according to studies [20, 23], the country as a whole possesses a strong and varied experience of working with youth at local and organisational levels. Youth organisations claiming to be institutions for acquiring new competencies or skills are financed on a project basis, which requires justification of achieved results in accordance with the stated goals [27].

In contemporary Russia, the practice of youth organisations with mass membership, inherited from the Soviet period, has received a new round of development since mid-1990s. The key role in this model belongs to networking movements and state youth organisations. Non-governmental organisations are practically excluded from state assistance, except for a small number of pro-state structures entrusted with the task of educating young people [28]. The conceptual foundations of youth policy are documented in a national directive covering the period up to 20255. Youth policy, organisations and initiatives are funded centrally along three main directions: development of the youth's awareness of the possibilities of self-development and various research, creative and socio-political activities; support of talented and proactive youth; civic education and patriotic education [29].

Such a centralised approach fails to account for the diversity of youth groups and take into consideration regional and local youth problems [30]. At the moment, youth policy in Russia is realised under the auspices of the Education national project. This project has been initiated from the top and is largely aimed at involving youth in the activities of public associations, which are formed in schools, colleges and universities. The key goal is to involve young people in national and regional projects, as well as in mass volunteer movement Order of the Government of the Russian Federation November 29, 2014 No. 2403-r «Fundamentals of the state youth policy of the Russian Federation for the period until 2025» National projects: targets and key results. Created in 2018, the autonomous non-profit organisation «Russia - the Land of Opportunities» consists of 17 centrally organised projects aimed at engaging talented youth in social networking and educational events Website of the projects «Russia - the Land of Opportunities».

Another research issue was the development of the culture of charity in the Poland and Russia. According to researchers, citizens in almost all postsocialist countries were limited in their desire and ability to be included in constructive charity practices, namely in the activities of non-profit organisations, voluntary associations and charity projects [14, 28]. It is evident that the situation is slowly changing. In this respect, Russia and Poland demonstrate a number of similarities and differences. According to a 2018 CAF Foundation study, Poland and Russia ranked 112th and 110th in the World Giving Index, respectively. Thus, in Poland, 34 % of the population helped strangers free of charge, 24 % donated money to charity and 15 % worked in NPOs as volunteers. In Russia, 44 % helped strangers free of charge, 21 % donated money and 11 % Data from the website of the CAF Charity Fund for the Development of Philanthropy spent their time working in NPOs.

However, according to the World Values Survey, Polish young people aged 15-29 demonstrate some specific features concerning charity practices. For example, the level of trust in charitable foundations and socially-oriented NPOs among young Poles appears to be much higher than among Russians (see Table 1).

Table 1 Distribution of answers to the question: «How much do you trust charitable foundations and NPOs providing humanitarian assistance?» (% of respondents in the age group under 29 years old)*

Trust level	Poland, 2012 n=200	Russia, 2011 n=629
I trust completely	12 %	6 %
I trust	53 %	35 %
I do not quite trust	23 %	25 %
I do not trust	4 %	13 %
I do not know, no answer	8 %	21 %
Total	100 %	100 %

Compiled according to the data of the 6th wave of research of the World Values Survey (WorldValuesSurveyWave) 2010-2014

The indices of youth involvement in various public organisations and associations also differ in Russia and Poland. In Poland, these values tend to be significantly higher (see Table 2).

The data show that the institutional environment supporting youth social engagement has different characteristics in Poland and Russia and the gap is quite significant. The post-socialist past, while continuing to affect the practices of social participation in the form of reduced social activity and lack of basic participation values, is gradually levelled out through legal regulations, providing more democratic freedoms for Polish youth and limiting the possibility of real impact on cultural policy for Russians.

Table 2

Youth membership in public organisations and associations, Russia and Poland (% of respondents in the age group under 29 years old)

Answer options	Poland, 2012 n=200	Russia, 2011 n=629
Membership in sports and leisure organisations
Passive members	13.4 %	7.5 %
Active members	15.5 %	5.5 %
Membership in organisations of culture, education, art
Passive members	11.7 %	2.8 %
Active members	17.5 %	1.9 %
Membership in environmental organisations
Passive members	7.8 %	1.1 %
Active members	2.9 %	0.7 %
Membership in charity organisations and socially-oriented non-profit organisations
Passive members	7.6 %	0.8 %
Active members	6.4 %	1.6 %

Compiled according to the data of the 6th wave of research of the World Values Survey (WorldValuesSurveyWave) 2010-2014

Social participation of Russian and Polish students in urban development

This section describes Russian and Polish practices of student social participation in the development of urban areas from the standpoint of the respondents' self-assessment.

A two-stage cluster analysis was carried out using Russian and Polish sub-samples. A typology of student social participation was created on the basis of 3 indicators measuring:

respondents' readiness to participate in urban educational projects (culture, city history);

respondents' readiness to participate in urban cultural and leisure projects (organisation of free time for citizens);

respondents' readiness to participate in urban social orientation projects (community work days and other city events).

In either of sub-samples, two clusters were formed consisting of students demonstrating more or less willingness to participate in social projects aimed at developing their cities.

The Russian sub-sample. Cluster sizes: «passive» students - 66.2 %, «active» students - 33.8 %; the cluster size ratio - 1.96. The quality of the clusters is average.

The Polish sub-sample. Cluster sizes: «passive» students - 58.2 %; «active» students - 42.0 %; the cluster size ratio - 1.38. The quality of the clusters is average.

The importance of predictors dividing student youths into clusters varies between Russia and Poland. For Russia, the greatest impact is exerted by the indicator of readiness to participate in urban social projects (community work days and other urban events) with the importance equal to 1. Significantly lower levels for the indicator of participation in cultural and leisure (0.25) or educational (0.19) type projects were observed. In Poland, participation in educational projects on urban topics (importance equal to 1) takes the first place, followed by indicators of participation in social (0.84), cultural and leisure projects (0.66). The difference between the countries is not only in the order of importance for the predictors, but also in the structure of their influence (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Importance of predictors determining student distribution into clusters in terms of their readiness to participate in social projects aimed at the development of regional cities



It is quite logical that the readiness to participate in various kinds of city development projects differs between clusters; however, this difference is less pronounced in Russia (Table 3). This indicates that civil culture in Russia has not formed yet. Although students in Russia demonstrate readiness to participate in individual city projects, no clear trend of social participation has thus far been observed.

In general, the structure of cluster distribution for Russian and Polish students tends to be similar. Nevertheless, by modelling this typology authors were able to identify a number of cross-country differences.

The first feature involves quantitative differences. Thus, the cluster of conditionally «active» students in Poland (42 %) outnumbers that in Russia (33.8 %). In addition, the level of Polish respondents' readiness to participate in various types of urban projects is significantly higher (see Table 3). It can be assumed that Polish students are more «mature» in terms of social participation practices, while the process of forming a participation culture among students in Russia is still underway. Moreover, Russian youth appear to be not only generally less active, but also less differentiated into conditionally “active” and “passive” participants.

Table 3 Respondents' readiness for participation* (% of cluster size)

	Russia	Poland
	Active cluster	Passive cluster	Active cluster	Passive cluster
Readiness to participate in urban educational projects	73 %	42 %	91 %	11 %
Readiness to participate in urban cultural and leisure projects	85 %	50 %	98 %	36 %
Readiness to participate in urban social projects	100 %	62 %	100 %	45 %

The answers «yes» and «rather yes» were combined.

The second feature involves differences in the perception of Russian and Polish students concerning the main subjects of the socio-cultural urban development.

Table 4 presents the perception of Russian students about who should take the lead in the transformation of cultural and historical urban places. The obtained data indicate the submissive position of Russian youth in relation to city authorities as the main actor of urban development. In general, this position characterises both socially active and socially passive students.

In general, Russian students are ready to recognise the citizens of the city as full and effective actors of its development. According to more than half of socially active students, the participation of citizens in urban development is almost as significant as the activities of municipal officials. The differences between active and passive student clusters in terms of assessing the role of urban activists, volunteers and cultural intelligentsia are statistically significant. Active students recognise their role in the improvement of cultural and historical urban areas. However, the participation culture of passive students is based on more traditionalist ideas. It should be noted that, in contrast to Polish students, Russians do not consid er the business community and philanthropists as the main actors in the city development process.

Perceptions of Polish students concerning the actors of change differ significantly from the Russian sample. Thus, socially active students recognise the fundamental role of citizens in the city develop ment (67 %), rather than city officials (51 %) and the business community (46 %). Compared to Russians, Polish socially active students gave more importance to the representatives of the business community and cultural intelligentsia (see Table 5).

The above-presented information additionally confirms that a well-formed participation cul ture based on democratic and libertarian values is characteristic of Polish socially active students. A comparison of the Russian and Polish socially passive clusters showed that these students are similar in terms of being submissive to authorities. Both Russian and Polish passive students consider municipal authorities to be the main factor in the socio-cultural development of the city.



Table 4 Who should initiate and implement urban transformations: perception of Russian students (% of the cluster size)*

	Russia
	Active cluster	Passive cluster	In total
City administration	60 %	58 %	59 %
All citizens	54 %	43 %	47 %
City activists and volunteers**	29 %	20 %	23 %
Cultural intelligentsia and specialists***	29 %	16 %	20 %
Business community	17 %	18 %	18 %
Patrons and philanthropists	15 %	13 %	14 %

Сумма ответов больше 100 %, поскольку допускался выбор нескольких вариантов ответов респондентом.

Pearson Chi-Square = 7.880, Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) = 0.005; Cramer's V = 0.150

Pearson Chi-Square = 4.157, Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) = 0.041; Cramer's V = 0.109

Table 5 Perceptions of Polish students concerning who should initiate and implement urban transformations (in % of cluster size)*

	Poland
	Active cluster	Passive cluster	In total
All citizens**	67 %	47 %	55 %
City administration	51 %	59 %	55 %
Business community	46 %	33 %	39 %
Cultural intelligentsia and specialists	38 %	29 %	33 %
City activists and volunteers	37 %	32 %	34 %
Patrons and philanthropists	25 %	20 %	22 %

Сумма ответов больше 100 %, поскольку допускался выбор нескольких вариантов ответов респондентом.

Pearson Chi-Square = 5.645, Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) = 0.018; Cramer's V = 0.194

The third feature of the social activity of Russian and Polish youth is represented by the activities that students are ready to undertake for the development of their cities.

Table 6 compares the forms of social participation typical of Russian and Polish students. social cultural urban

In general, the participation structure of Russian and Polish students tends to be similar, which is confirmed by the rankings of their preferred activities aimed at developing the urban environment. Moreover, the character of social participation for Russian students is characterised by a number of differences due to certain institutional and socio-cultural peculiarities. Thus, the participation is seriously limited by the youth's disbelief in the possibility to significantly affect the situation associated with solving urban problems through the institutional mechanisms of public activities (for example, by signing petitions) (see Table 6). This is explained by the fact that such a form of citizens' collective appeal to authorities as petition is not regulated by the federal legislation. Petitions perform «decorative» functions, rather than act as a real tool of the population's social participation in decision-making processes.

Russian youth is characterised by collective, rather than individual, forms of social participation implemented with the direct organisational engagement of municipal authorities (assistance in organising city celebrations, cleaning parks, planting flowers, etc.). This indicates, on the one hand, the increased activity of the municipal government in encouraging the participation of young people in urban development and, on the other hand, excessive regulation limiting the freedom to choose those forms of participation adequate to the needs of young people.

Table 6 Types of social activity undertaken by Russian and Polish students (% of respondents having answered the question)*

	Survey Country
	Russia	Rank	Poland	Rank
I am ready to sign a petition in defence of monuments or natural sites in my city	40 %	1	71 %	1
I am ready to donate my time to cleaning parks and planting flowers	30 %	4	35 %	4
I am ready to donate money to the restoration of a church	13 %	6	19 %	5
I am ready to help in organising a city celebration	33 %	3	37 %	3
I am ready to tell the city guests about its history	18 %	5	23 %	6
I am ready to show visitors the city sights	34 %	2	45 %	2

Сумма ответов больше 100 %, поскольку допускался выбор нескольких вариантов ответов респондентом

In general, the readiness to take part in various activities related to the city development is evidently lower among Russian students (see Tables 7, 8).

Table 7 Types of social participation preferred by Russian students (% of cluster size)

Types of activity	Russia
	Active cluster	Passive cluster
I am ready to donate my time to cleaning parks and planting flowers*	51 %	20 %
I am ready to help in organising a city celebration**	47 %	30 %
I am ready to sign a petition in defence of monuments or natural sites in my city	46 %	37 %
I am ready to show visitors the city sights	34 %	37 %
I am ready to tell the city guests about its history	20 %	18 %
I am ready to donate money to the restoration of a church	14 %	13 %

Pearson Chi-Square = 35.114, Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) = 0.000;

Cramer's V = 0.319

Pearson Chi-Square = 9.931, Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) = 0.002; Cramer's V = 0.169

For Polish students, the principles of direct democracy are implemented through signing petitions. This trend refers to the entire student community, regardless of the character of their social participation (see Table 8).

In Poland, active students are more inclined to participate in social city development projects (assistance in organising city celebrations, working with visitors, cleaning parks, planting flowers). Interestingly, there is practically no difference between the clusters of active and passive students in the areas of social activity requiring insignificant effort and time (signing a petition, donating money). In Russia, active students are more involved in collective forms of participation (community work days, cleaning up the territory, organising city celebrations). However, no statistically significant difference is observed between the clusters of active and passive Russian students in terms of individual activity (showing visitors the sights, telling about the history of the city).

Therefore, it can be concluded that Polish students are more focused on individual forms of social participation, such as showing the city sights to visitors, participating in organising celebrations and cleaning city parks.

Discussion and conclusions

Our analysis of the institutional environment supporting social engagement of young people in Russia and Poland showed that the forms of civic activity in these two countries are characterised by different trends. In Poland, a shift towards non-formalised social practices and non-institutionalised forms of social participation is clearly seen. This trend is manifested in youth social activities aimed at changing urban areas. In Russia, the opposite trend is observed,

e. formalisation and bureaucratisation of youth social engagement by means of centralisation of targeted programmes and projects, as well as the «channel- ling» youth activity into mass social movements and associations.



Table 8 Types of social participation preferred by Polish students (% of cluster size)

Types of activity	Poland
	Active cluster	Passive cluster
I am ready to sign a petition in defence of monuments or natural sites in my city	70 %	70 %
I am ready to show visitors the city sights*	68 %	31 %
I am ready to help in organising a city celebration**	64 %	21 %
I am ready to donate my time to cleaning parks and planting flowers***	48 %	25 %
I am ready to tell the city guests about its history****	41 %	13 %
I am ready to donate money for the restoration of a church	19 %	19 %

Pearson Chi-Square = 20.338, Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) = 0.000;

Cramer's V = 0.368

Pearson Chi-Square = 28.227, Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) = 0.000; Cramer's V = 0.434

Pearson Chi-Square = 8.046, Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) = 0.005; Cramer's V = 0.232

Pearson Chi-Square = 16.114, Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) = 0.000; Cramer's V = 0.328

The role of educational institutions, including universities, in the aforementioned processes also varies. In present-day Poland, in compliance with youth policies, universities act as equal partners with civil society institutions in implementing projects and programmes of non-formal education, urban transformation and integration of different youth groups in the social life of communities. In Russia, universities have become the key actors performing the function of organising mass youth activity, which entails the risks of losing the diversity and variability of social participation practices.

The described trends are related to the specifics of youth policies in both countries. Public administration in contemporary Poland is characterised by the absence of centralisation in the development and implementation of youth policies. For example, none of the Polish ministries has a specialised department on youth policies. As a result, youth practices at local and regional levels show a high level of variability. In Russia, a centralised approach to the formation of youth policies prevails, regulating the variability of youth initiatives and communities in solving regional and local social problems.

The culture of youth participation in Russia and Poland is similar in many respects. The differences exist in the degree of social participation and the level of trust in non-profit organisations. Compared to Russians, Polish students demonstrate higher scores on both of these indicators.

Polish students are also more active in the support of urban development initiatives. Their perceptions of socio-cultural urban development are based on democratic values, compared to Russian students, who share a submissive position with respect to city authorities as the main subject of urban development.

The structure of the types of social participation in urban development was found to be similar for Russian and Polish students; however, Russian students are more focused on collective forms of participation.

Both Russian (66%) and Polish (58%) socially «passive» students constitute more than half of all students. In general, these groups are similar in terms of their social participation preferences. These students should be considered as the potential that can become a factor in the development of urban areas. The potential of this student group can be unleashed through competent management of youth policies implemented by municipal authorities, public organisations, educational institutions, etc.

Universities play a significant role in the development of a culture of social participation not only through the process of educational activity, but also through active collaboration with regional companies, cultural sector and municipal government. It is at universities where young people gain valuable volunteering experience. The majority (61 % and 63 % in Russia and Poland, respectively) of young people having volunteer experience reported receiving it through participation in campaigns and projects initiated by their educational institutions. At the same time, managerial goals should be focused on creating a culture of youth participation, which is based on democratic values and institutional norms ensuring the diverse, proactive and mature character of social participation, as well as its adequacy to present-day realities.

Future research should consider the development of university strategies facilitating the formation of a culture of student social participation and the integration of these strategies with state youth policies, thus contributing to the institutional structure of civil society and establishing a sustainable dialogue with the municipal and regional governance system.



References

1. Bochanov M. A., Chernukhina E. E. Volonterskoe dvizhenie-Rossiiskii opyt i mirovaya praktika [The volunteer movement - the Russian experience and world practice], Scientific notes of Orel State University, 2015, No. 2(65), pp. 70-75. (In Russ.).

2. Omelchenko E. L. Unikalen li rossiiskii sluchai transformatsii molodezhnykh kul'turnykh praktik? [Is the Russian case of the transformation of youth cultural practices unique?]. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, No. 1, 2019, pp. 3-27.

3. Kazmierczyk J. Activity in student organizations (on the example of studies in economics). Studia Oeconomica Posnaniensia, 2012, No. 240, pp. 140-149. (In Polish).

4. Bryer T. A., Pliscoff C., Connors A. W. Student Engagement. In: Promoting Civic Health Through UniversityCommunity Partnerships. Rethinking University-Community Policy Connections. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 2019, pp. 171-178.

5. Flere S., Hurrelmann K., Klanjsek R., Lavric M., Reimbold H., Taleski D. Lost in democratic transition? Political challenges and perspectives for young people in South East Europe; results of representative surveys in eight countries. Hurrelmann K., Weichert M. (Eds.) Sarajevo, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 2015, 152 p. (In Eng.).

6. Polanska D. V., Chimiak G. Organizing without organizations: Unexpected and unexplored dimensions of social activism in post-socialist context. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 2016, No. 36, pp. 662-679.

7. Handbook of the sociology of youth in BRICS countries / edited by Tom Dwyer (University of Campinas, Brazil), Mikhail K. Gorshkov (Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia), Ishwar Modi (University of Rajasthan, India), Chunling Li (Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, China), Mokong Simon Mapadimeng (University of Limpopo, South Africa). World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. 2018, 1074 p. (In Eng.).

8. Cairns D. C. Mapping the Youth Mobility Field. In: Lange A., Steiner C., Schutter S., Reiter H. (eds.) Handbuch Kindheits- und Jugendsoziologie. Springer NachschlageWissen. Springer VS, Wiesbaden, 2015, pp. 1-16. doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-05676-6_34-1 (In Eng.).

9. Nilan P. Youth Sociology Must Cross Cultures, Youth Studies Australia, 2011, No. 30(3), pp. 20-26. (In Eng.).

10. Farrugia D. Towards a spatialised youth sociology: the rural and the urban in times of change, Journal of Youth Studies, 2014, vol. 17, Issue 3, pp. 293-307.

11. Cairns D. Researching social inclusion in student mobility: methodological strategies in studying the Erasmus programme, International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 2019, vol. 42, Issue 2, pp. 137-147.

12. Devlin M., Kristensen S., Krzaklewska E., Nico M. Learning mobility, social inclusion and non-formal education. Access, processes and outcomes. Editor-in-Chief Maurice Devlin. Council of Europe publishing, 2017, (Youth Knowledge 22), 208 p. (In Eng.).

13. Garbauskaite-Jakimovska J. Education with Youth: Searching for the Quality of Youth Non-formal Education, Social Theory, Empirics, Policy and Practice, 2014, No. 9, pp. 64-80.

14. Roman M., MuresanL.M., Manafi I., Marinescu D. Volunteering as international mobility: recent evidence from a post-socialist country, Transnational Social Review, 2018, No. 8(3), pp. 258-272.

15. Schild H. (ed.), Connolly N. (ed.), Labadie F. (ed.), Vanhee J. (ed.), Williamson H. (ed.). Thinking Seriously about Youth Work: And how to prepare people to do it. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing, 2017, (Youth Knowledge; 20), 446 p. (In Eng.).

16. Helve H., Wallace C. Youth, Citizenship and Empowerment. London, Routledge, 2018, 346 p.

17. Narbut N. P., Trotsuk I. V. The social well-being of young people in post-socialist countries (on the example of Russia, Kazakhstan and the Czech Republic): a comparative analysis of value orientations (part 1), Bulletin of the RUDN University. Series: Sociology, 2018, № 1, pp. 131-155.

18. Narbut N. P., Trotsuk I. V. The social well-being of young people in post-socialist countries (on the example of Russia, Kazakhstan and the Czech Republic): a comparative analysis of value orientations (part 2), Bulletin of the RUDN University. Series: Sociology, 2018, № 2, pp. 284-302.

19. Karabchuk T. S., Poplavskaya A. A. Analyzing the dynamics in the attitudes of youth in the post-Soviet countries towards CIS integration processes, Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, 2019, No. 1, pp. 153178.

20. Schmidt J. Development of non-governmental organizations: theory and practice. Warsaw, Sedno Academic Publishing House, 2012, 176 p. (In Polish).

21. Ekiert G., Kubik J., Wenzel M. Civil Society and Three Dimensions of Inequality in Post-1989 Poland, Comparative Politics, vol. 49, No. 3, 2017, pp. 331-350.

22. Mironska D., Zaborek P NGO-Business Collaboration: A Comparison of Organizational, Social, and Reputation Value From the NGO Perspective in Poland, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 2019, vol. 48(3), pp. 532-551.

23. Polanska D. V. Going against institutionalization: New forms of urban activism in Poland, Journal of Urban Affairs. 2018.

24. Mersiyanova I. V., Ivanova N. V. Partnerstvo gosudarst- va i blagotvoritel'nykh fondov kak strategiya povysheniya resursnoy obespechennosti nekommercheskikh organizat- siy [Partnership of the State and Charitable Foundations as a Strategy for Increasing Resources of Nonprofit Organizations], Public Administration, No. 1, 2018, pp. 29-46 (In Russ.).

25. Drazkiewicz-Grodzicka E. `State Bureaucrats' and `Those NGO People': Promoting the idea of civil society, hindering the state, Critique of Anthropology, 2016, vol. 36 (4), pp. 341-362.

26. Cammaerts B., Bruter M., Banaji S., Harrison S., Anstead N. Youth Participation: Theoretical Positioning and Methodology. In: Youth Participation in Democratic Life. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2016, pp. 17-47.

27. Kochetkov A. V., Kuzmina O. V. Gosudarstvennaya molodezhnaya politika Rossiiskoi Federatsii: stanovlenie i razvitie [State youth policy of the Russian Federation: formation and development]. 1992-2017. The space of open opportunities: publication on the 25th anniversary of modern state youth policy and the National Council of Youth and Children's Associations of Russia / ed. G. V. Petushkov. Moscow, National Council of Youth and Children's Associations of Russia, 2017, pp. 18-48. (In Russ.).

28. Silvan K. Youth Policy Practice in PostSoviet Russia and Belarus: Past and Present, World of Russia, 2019, vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 161-171.

29. Chirun S. N. Gosudarstvennaya molodezhnaya politi- ka Rossiiskoi Federatsii: problemy realizatsii i protivorechi- ya metodologii [State youth policy of the Russian Federation: problems of implementation and contradictions of methodology], Politics and Society, 2017, No. 1, pp. 16-32.

30. Vishnevsky Yu. R., Narkhov D. Yu., Silchuk E. V. Novye yavleniya v molodezhnoi srede i Aktual'nye zadachi molodezhnoi politiki [New phenomena in the youth environment and Actual problems of youth policy], Bulletin of PNIPU. Socio-economic sciences, 2016, No. 4, pp. 8-17. (In Russ.).

Размещено на Allbest.ru