NONE20260531072543655Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal Universityno-reply@balticregion.kantiana.ruImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal UniversityBaltic Region2079-85552310-052405312026144Учет «фактора моря» в федеральном регулировании пространственного развития России: постсоветский опыт и современные приоритетыA.G.Druzhininhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1642-6335O.V.Kuznetsovahttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4341-0934Current geoeconomic and geopolitical transformations project on Russian society and its spatial organisation, highlighting the problems of spatial socioeconomic development and its governmental regulation. This article examines the theoretical and applied aspects of the incorporation into the national regional policy of the sea factor, understood as a combination of location and resources, which is determined by a country’s jurisdiction over coasts and waters, its maritime activities and coastalisation potential, including the economic, settlement-­related and psychological elements of the latter. The article describes the key influences of the sea factor on the spatial development of post-­Soviet Russia. The steadily growing impact of maritime activities on the spatial-­economic and settlement dynamics has been given a new impetus by the rising geostrategic, resource and transport-­logistic significance of the World Ocean, as well as its water and water-land substructures, amid increasing military-­strategic confrontation and geoeconomic regionalisation. The article presents a retrospective analysis of the role of the sea factor in Russia’s regional policy and identifies its stages. The authors emphasise the need for a synergy between maritime and spatial policies and proposes ways of achieving it.0531202641910.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-1https://balticregion.kantiana.ru/baltic_region/5246/39037/Kostinskiy, G. D. 1992, The idea of spatiality in geography, Izvestiya Rossiyskoy akademii nauk. Seriya geograficheskaya, № 6, p. 31—40 (in Russ.).Shuper, V. A. 2020, Self-organization at the trajectory turning point: сhallenges for Russia, Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya, № 1, p. 147—155, https://doi.org/10.31857/S2587556620010173 (in Russ.).Trenin, D. 2021, Novyy balans sil: Rossiya v poiskakh vneshnepoliticheskogo ravnovesiya [A new balance of power: Russia in search of a foreign policy balance], M., 471 p. (in Russ.).Druzhinin, A. 2019, The sea factor in the spatial and socio-economic dynamics of today’s Russia, Quaestiones Geographicae, vol. 38, № 2, p. 91—100, https://doi.org/10.2478/quageo-2019-0017.Druzhinin, A. G., Lachininskii, S. S. 2021, Russia in the World Ocean: Interests and Lines of Presence, Regional Research of Russia, vol. 11, № 3, p. 336—348, https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970521030035.Baklanov, P. Ya. 2018, Marine spatial planning: Theoretical aspects, Baltic Region, vol. 10, № 2, p. 76—85, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2018-2-5.Mikhaylov, A. S. 2019, Coastal agglomerations and the transformation of national innovation spaces, Baltic Region, vol. 11, № 1, p. 29—42, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2019-1-3.Druzhinin, A. G. (ed.). 2017, Transgranichnoe klasteroobrazovanie v primorskikh zonakh Evropeyskoy chasti Rossii: faktory, modeli, ekonomicheskie i ekisticheskie effekty [Cross-border cluster formation in the coastal zones of the European part of Russia: factors, models, economic and economic effects], Rostov-on-Don, 421 p. (in Russ.).Fedorov, G. M., Kuznetsova, T. Yu., Razumovskiy, V. M. 2017, The effect of the sea on the economic development and settlement structure in the Kaliningrad Region, Proceedings of the Russian Geographical Society, vol. 149, № 3, p. 15—31 (in Russ.).Druzhinin, A. G., Kuznetsova, T. Y., Mikhaylov, A. S. 2020, Coastal zones of modern Russia: delimitation, parametrization, identification of determinants and vectors of Eurasian dynamics, Geography, Environment, Sustainability, vol. 13, № 1, p. 37—45, https://doi.org/10.24057/2071-9388-2019-81.Kuznetsova, O. V. 2019, Problems of elaboration of spatial development strategy of the Russian Federation, Spatial Economics, vol. 15, № 4, p. 107—125, https://doi.org/10.14530/se.2019.4.107-125 (in Russ.).Mahan, A. T. 1890, The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660—1783. Little, Brown & Co. Boston, Repr. of 5th ed., Dover Publications, N. Y.Savitskiy, P. N. et al. 1921, Iskhod k Vostoku. Predchuvstviya i sversheniya. Utverzhdenie evraziytsev. [Exodus to the East. Premonitions and accomplishments. Approval of the Eurasians]. Book 1, Sofia, 135 p. (in Russ.).Slevich, S. B. 1988, Okean: resursy i khozyaystvo [Ocean: resources and economy], Leningrad, 315 p. (in Russ.).Gorshkov, S. G. 1976, Morskaja moshh’ gosudarstva [The sea power of the state], M., 416 p. (in Russ.).Druzhinin, A. G. 2020, Eurasian Vectors of Maritime Economic Activity of Russia, Geography and Natural Resources, № 41, p. 99—107, https://doi.org/10.1134/S1875372820020018.Volkhin, D. A. 2016, «Seaside factor» of socio-economik and demographic dimamics of the Crimea, Sotsial’no-ekonomicheskaya geografiya. Vestnik Assotsiatsii rossiyskikh geografov-obshchestvovedov, № 5, p. 154—169 (in Russ.).Vardomskiy, L. B. 2019, The Northern Sea Route as a mechanism for ensuring the connectivity of Greater Eurasia, Mir peremen, № 2, p. 129—140 (in Russ.).Romanenko, А. А. 2005, Seaports, transport fleet and shipbuilding of Russia, Morekhozyaystvennyy kompleks Rossii [Marine economic complex of Russia], St. Peterburg, p. 24—73 (in Russ.).Druzhinin, A. G. 2020, The strongholds of Russian coastal borderlands: economic dynamics amid geopolitical turbulence, Baltic Region, vol. 12, № 3, p. 89—104, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2020-3-6.Kolesnikova, M. L. 2017, The maritime policy of the European Union and its economic aspects, Sovremennaya Evropa, № 4, p. 78—86 (in Russ.).Zaucha, J., Gee, K. (eds.). 2019, Maritime Special Planning: past, present, future, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, 496 p., https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98696-8.Friess, B., Grémaud-Colombier, M. 2021, Policy outlook: Recent evolutions of maritime spatial planning in the European Union, Marine Policy, vol. 132, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.01.017.Ansong, J., Calado, H., Gilliland, P. M. 2021, A multifaceted approach to building capacity for marine/maritime spatial planning based on European experience, Marine Policy, vol. 132, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.01.011.Weig, B., Schultz-Zehden, A. 2019, Spatial Economic Benefit Analysis: Facing integration challenges in maritime spatial planning, Ocean and Coastal Management, vol. 173, p. 65—76, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2019.02.012.Myakinenkov, V. 2013, Key strategies of development of research tools and methods for marine spatial planning, Baltic Region, № 1, p. 99—115, https://doi.org/10.5922/2074-9848-2013-1-7 (in Russ.).Georgios, T., Nikolaos, R. 2017, Maritime spatial planning and spatial planning: Synergy issues and incompatibilities. Evidence from Crete island, Greece, Ocean & Coastal Management, vol. 139, p. 33—41, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.02.001.Panagou, N., Kokkali, A., Stratigea, A. 2018, Towards an integrated participatory marine/coastal and territorial spatial planning approach at the local level — planning tools and issues raised, Regional Science Inquiry, vol. 10, № 3, p. 87—111.Howells, M., Ramírez-Monsalve, P. 2022, Maritime Spatial Planning on Land? Planning for Land-Sea Interaction Conflicts in the Danish Context, Planning Practice & Research, vol. 37, № 2, p. 152—172, https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2021.1991656.Smith, H. D., Maes, F., Stojanovic, T. A., Ballinger, R. C. 2011, The integration of land and marine spatial planning, Journal of Coastal Conservation, vol. 15, № 2, p. 291—303, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-010-0098-z.Kidd, S., Shaw, D., Janssen, H. 2019, Exploring land-sea interactions: insights for shaping territorial space, Europa XXI, vol. 36, p. 45—58, https://doi.org/10.7163/Eu21.2019.36.5.Li, M., Luo, M. 2021, Review of existing studies on maritime clusters, Maritime Policy & Management, vol. 48, № 6, p. 795—810, https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2020.1802786.Экономика регионов России на Балтике: уровень и динамика развития, структура, внешнеторговые партнерстваG. M.Fedorovhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4267-2369The article explores the challenges encountered during the formation of the Baltic macro-region comprising Russia and eight EU countries (Germany, Poland, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia) in the context of the ongoing geopolitical and geo-economic changes. The article aims to assess the dynamics, level, structure and pace of economic development of three Russian regions located on the Baltic Sea (St. Petersburg, Leningrad and Kaliningrad regions) and analyse the intensity of their trade relations with countries of the macro-region. Russian Baltic regions have higher development rates compared to the national average. However, they experience difficulties in their economic development resulting from negative external factors. The article describes possible ways of overcoming these difficulties by improving the sectoral structure of the economy and diversifying international ties. In this context, the development of inter-regional cooperation and the formation of a spatially distributed territorial socio-economic system, including the three Russian Baltic regions, will be particularly beneficial. The period covered by the article is 1996—2021, with a special focus on 2014—2021. The study is based on the economic and statistical analysis of official data of Rosstat and the Federal Customs Service on the sectoral structure and dynamics of the gross regional product (GRP), volume and changes in foreign trade, and its commodity and geographical structure.05312026203810.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-2https://balticregion.kantiana.ru/baltic_region/5246/39038/Gutnik, А. P., Klemeshev, А. P. (eds.). 2006, Baltijskij region kak polyus `ekonomicheskoj integracii Severo-Zapada Rossijskoj Federacii i Evropejskogo soyuza [Baltic region as pole of economic integration of the Northwest of the Russian Federation and the European Union], Kaliningrad, 392 p. (in Russ.).Zaukh, Y. A., Fedorov, G. M., Limonov, L. E., Oding, N. Y. (eds.). 2008, Severo-Zapad Rossii v regione Baltiyskogo morya: problemy i perspektivy ekonomicheskogo vzaimodeystviya i sotrudnichestva [Northwest of Russia in the Baltic sea region: problems and prospects of economic interaction and cooperation], Kaliningrad, Izd-vo RGU im I. Kanta, 259 p. (in Russ.).Kivikari, U. 1996, The legacy of Hansa: The Baltic economic region, Helsinki, Otava, 159 p.Fedorov, G. M., Zverev, Yu. M., Korneevets, V. S. 2012, Rossiya na Baltike: 1990—2012 gody [Russia on Baltic: 1990—2012], Kaliningrad, 252 p. (in Russ.).Kisiel-Łowczyc, A. B. 2000, Bałtycka integracja ekonomiczna: stan i perspektywy do 2010 r. Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne, 286 p.Kivikari, U., Antola, E., 2004, Baltic Sea Region — A Dynamic Third of Europe, Turku, 2004. 35 p.Palmowski, T. 2011, Europa Baltycka — od idei do wspolczesnosci. In: Kurpiewski, P., Stegner, T., Morze nasze i nie nasze, Uniwersytet Gdanski, Gdansk, р. 563— 571.Palmowski, T. 2021, The European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and accomplishments, Baltic Region, vol. 13, № 1, p. 138—152, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2021-1-8.Palmowski, T., Fedorov, G. 2020, The Potential For Development Of Russian-Polish Cross-Border Region., Geography, Environment, Sustainability, vol. 13, № 1, p. 21— 28, https://doi.org/10.24057/2071-9388-2019-70.Schäfer, I. 2005, Region building and identity formation in thе Baltic Sea Region, IJIS, vol. 3. p. 45—69, https://doi.org/10.5278/ojs.ijis.v3i0.186.Stiller, S., Wedemeier, J. 2011, Wirtschaftsraum Ostsee: Städte auf Wachstumskurs, Wirtschaftsdienst, vol. 91, р. 572, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10273-011-1264-0.Studzieniecki, T. 2016, The development of cross-border cooperation in an EU macroregion — a case study of the Baltic Sea Region, Procedia Economics and Finance, № 39, p. 235— 241, https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30318-5.Maciejewski, W. (ed.). 2002, The Baltic Sea Region. Cultures, Politics, Societies, Uppsala, The Baltic University Press, 676 p.Timmermann, H. 2000, Die russische Exklave Kaliningrad im Kontext regionaler Kooperation, Köln: Berichte des Bundesinstituts für Ostwissenschaftliche und Internationale Studien, 29 p.Kosov, Yu., Gribanova, G. 2016, Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region: Challenges and perspectives of international cooperation, Baltiс region, vol. 8, № 2, p. 33—44, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2016-2-3.Mezhevich, N. M., Kretinin, G. V., Fedorov, G. M. 2016, Economic and Geographical Structure of the Baltic Sea Region, Baltic region, vol. 8, № 3, p. 11—21, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2016-3-1.Fedorov, G. M., Zverev, Y. M. 2020, Kaliningradskiye al’ternativy: 25 let spustya [Kaliningrad alternatives: 25 years later], Kaliningrad, Izd-vo BFU im. I. Kanta, 315 p. (in Russ.).Khudoley, K. K. 2019, The ‘сool war’ in the Baltic Sea Region: consequences and future scenarios, Baltic region, vol. 11, № 3, p. 4—24, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2019-3-1.Brauß, H., Rácz, A. 2021, Russia’s Strategic Interests and Actions in the Baltic Region, DGAP Report, № 1, 30 p.Escach, N. 2021, Baltic vulnerability and recomposition: The consequences of an insidious geopolitics, Mappemonde, № 130, https://doi.org/10.4000/MAPPEMONDE.5426.Kaljurand, R., Mälksoo, M. 2010, From de-securitisation to re-securitisation: Sub-regional multilateralism around the Baltic Sea, Tallinn, 2010. 17 p.Kretinin, G. V., Katrovskiy, A. P., Pototskaya, T. I., Fedorov, G. M. 2016, Geopolitical and geo-economic changes in the Baltic Sea Region at the turn off the XX—XXI centuries, Baltic region, vol. 8, № 4, p. 13—25, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2016-4-2.Kuznetsov, A. V. 2018, Russian direct and indirect investment in the Baltic Sea region Some recommendations for the policy-makers // BSR Policy Briefing series, № 7.Makarychev, A., Sergunin, A. 2017, Russia’s role in regional cooperation and the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (EUSBSR), Journal of Baltic Studies, vol. 43, № 4, p. 1—15, https://doi.org/10.1080/01629778.2017.1305186.Oldberg, I. 2013, Russia’s Baltic policy in an era of EU integration, In: Herd, G. P., Moroney, J. D. P. (eds.), Security Dynamics in the Former Soviet Bloc, London, Routledge, p. 44—60, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315016122.Wellmann, C. 1996, Russia’s Kaliningrad exclave at the crossroads: The interrelation between economic development and security politics, Cooperation and Conflict, vol. 31, № 2, p. 161—183, https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836796031002002.Klemeshev, A., Fedorov, G. 2004, Ot izolirovannogo jeksklava — k «koridoru razvitija. Al’ternativy rossijskogo jeksklava na Baltike [From an isolated exclave — to a “development corridor”. Alternative development strategies of the Russian exclave on the Baltic Sea]. Kaliningrad, Kaliningrad State University Press, 253 p. (in Russ.).Ivchenko, V. V. 2003, Programmno-strategicheskoye razvitiye primorskogo regiona Rossii: teoriya, metodologiya, praktika [Program-strategic development of the coastal region of Russia: theory, methodology, practice], Kaliningrad, Izd-vo Kaliningr. un-ta, 207 p. (in Russ.).Малые города Латвии: неравенство в региональном и городском развитииV.V.Voronovhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1022-3692The article reports on the results of an economic and sociological study conducted by the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences in collaboration with Daugavpils University (Latvia) in 2020—2021. The study aimed to identify the reasons for the disparity in the development of small towns in Latvia. A comprehensive approach was taken to integrate the results of territorial, spatial and socio-economic analyses. By employing the methodology of indexing and ranking large-scale empirical data characterising the development of all small towns in Latvia, the authors attempt to identify the reasons for the disparity in the development rate of small towns in Latvia. The index of territorial development of regions, cities and rural settlements was developed and has been tested by the State Agency for Regional Development of Latvia since 2013. The data collected were then analysed taking into account the geographical location of small towns. The research showed that the main factors influencing the development of small towns are the level of business activity and the role of local authorities in the provision of public funding. The article describes prospects for the polycentric development of small towns and analyses the ways of reducing disparities in their development in terms of the working and living conditions of their residents.05312026395610.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-3https://balticregion.kantiana.ru/baltic_region/5246/39039/Chernysh, M. F., Markin, V. V. (ed.). 2020, Prostranstvennoe razvitie malyh gorodov: social’nye strategii i praktiki [Spatial Development of Small Towns: Social Strategies and Practices], М., 523 p., https://doi.org/10.19181/monogr.978-5-89697-335-5.2020 (in Russ.).Bolinskis, G., Butkevičs, E. 2010, Rural-urban and regional approach comparing human values in Latvia, Research for Rural Development, № 2, p. 49—54.Mihnenoka, A., Senfelde, M. 2017, The impact of national economy structural transformation on regional employment and income: The case of Latvia, South East European Journal of Economics and Business, vol. 12, № 2, p. 47—60, https://doi.org/10.1515/jeb-2017-0015.Biegańska, J., Środa-Murawska, S., Kruzmetra, Z., Swiaczny, F. 2018, Peri-Urban Development as a Significant Rural Development Trend, Quaestiones Geographicae, vol. 37, № 2, p. 125— 140, https://doi.org/10.2478/quageo-2018-0019.Kuznetsova, O. V. 2021, National urban policy in Russia and the European experience, Balt. Reg., vol. 13, № 4, p. 7—20, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2021-4-1.Pule, B. 2014, Corporate income taxеs an instrument in promotion of Latvian regional development, Jelgava, LLU, 92 р.Blewitt, J. 2017, Understanding sustainable development, London, Routledge, 418 p., https://doi.org/10.9774/gleaf.9781315465852.Servillo, L., Hamdouch, A., Atkinson, R. 2017. Small and Medium Sized Towns in Europe: Conceptual, Methodological and Policy Issues, Journal of Economic and Human Geography, vol. 08, № 4, p. 365—379, https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12252.Valtenbergs, V., Fermin, A., Grisel, M. et al. 2015, Challenges of Small and Medium-Sized Urban Areas (SMUAs), their economic growth potential and impact on territorial development in the European Union and Latvia, Valmiera, Vidzeme University, 158 р.Nipers, A., Pilvere, I., Bulderberga, Z. 2017, Territorial development assessment in Latvia, Research for Rural Development, vol. 2, p. 126—134, https://doi.org/10.22616/rrd.23.2017.059.Zaluksne, V., Bulderberga, Z., Rivza, B. 2016, Latvian urban system in context of transformation of health care system in economic crisis period, International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM, vol. 3, p. 321—326, https://doi.org/10.5593/SGEM2016/B53/S21.041.Šipilova, V., Ostrovska, I., Aleksejeva, L., Jermolajeva, E., Oļehnovičs, D. 2017, A Review of the Literature on Smart Development: Lessons for Small Municipalities, International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, vol. 7, № 1, p. 460—469.Aleksejeva, L., Šipilova, V., Jermolajeva, E., Ostrovska, I., Oļehnovičs, D. 2018, Regional risks and challenges in smart growth in Latgale Region (Latvia), Journal of Security and Sustainability Issues, vol. 7, № 4, p. 727—739, https://doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2018.7.4(10).Rivza, B., Kruzmetra, M., Sunina, L. 2018, Changes in composition and spatial distribution of knowledge-based economy in rural areas of Latvia, Agronomy Research, vol. 16, № 3, p. 862—871, http://dx.doi.org/10.15159/ar.18.147.Lazdiņš, A., Popluga, D. 2017, Latvijas degradēto teritoriju iesaistīšanas tautsaimniecībā iespēju risinājumi, Sociālo Zinātņu Vēstnesis, № 2, p. 75—86.Libkovska, U., Ozola, I. 2019, Attraction of investment to degraded territory revitalisation for business development in Latvia, International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM, vol. 19, № 5.3, p. 77—84, https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2019/5.3/S21.010.Voronov, V. V., Ruza, О. P. 2020, Latvian Experience in Small Town Development: Opportunities and Barriers, In: Chernysh, M. F., Markin, V. V. (ed.). 2020, Prostranstvennoe razvitie malyh gorodov: social’nye strategii i praktiki [Spatial Development of Small Towns: Social Strategies and Practices], М., p. 422—448, https://doi.org/10.19181/monogr.978-5-89697-335-5.2020 (in Russ.).Visvaldis, V., Ainhoa, G., Ralfs, P. 2013, Selecting indicators for sustainable development of small towns: The case of Valmiera municipality, Procedia Computer Science, № 26, p. 21—32, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2013.12.004.Reinholde, I., Stučka, M. 2020, Urban Governance in Latvia: Feeling Urban and Thinking Rural, Urban Book Series, p. 75—94, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29073-3_4.Zemlianskii, D. Yu., Kalinovskii, L. V., Makhrova, A. G., Medvednikova, D. M., Chuzhenkova, V. A. Сomplex socioeconomic development index of Russian cities, Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya, vol. 84, № 6, p. 805—818, https://doi.org/10.31857/S2587556620060114 (in Russ.).Markin, V. V., Chernysh, M. F. (ed.). 2019, Malye goroda v social’nom prostranstve Rossii [Small towns in the social space of Russia], М., 545 p., https://dx.doi.org/10.19181/monogr.978-5-89697-323-2.2019 (in Russ.).Markin, V., Malyshev, M., Zemlianskii, D., 2020, Small cities of Russia: an integrative monitoring of development. Part 2, The Monitoring of Law Enforcement Journal, № 1, p. 61—74, https://dx.doi.org/10.21681/2226-0692-2020-1-61-74 (in Russ.).Latviete, I. 2010, Assets of the European union funds on the region development in Latvia, Research for Rural Development, № 2, p. 55—62.Komarova, V., Selivanova-Fyodorova, N., Lonska, J. 2020, Regularities of the performanceís differentiation of the internal regions of the European Union countries, Sociālo Zinātņu Vēstnesis, № 1, p. 30—54, https://doi.org/10.9770/szv.2020.1(2) (in Russ.).Voronov, V. V., Rachko, E. E., Biyzhanova, E. K. 2012, Ocenka konkurentosposobnosti regionov i upravlenie faktorami ee povysheniya (opyt Evrosoyuza na primere Latvii) [Assessment of the competitiveness of regions and management of factors for its increase (experience of the European Union on the example of Latvia)], Sociological Studies, № 5, p. 69—78 (in Russ.).Gribanova, G. I., Sootla, G., Kersten, K. 2020, Local government reforms in Estonia: institutional context, intentions and outcomes, Baltic region, vol. 12, № 1, p. 32—52, https://dx.doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2020-1-3.Oliņa, L. 2021, Pašvaldību finanses pārmaiņu priekšā un to izaicinājumi. Rīga: Latvijas Banka, 14 р., URL: https://www.makroekonomika.lv/pasvaldibu-finanses-parmainu-prieksa-un-izaicinajumi (accessed 05.05.2022) (in Latvian).Распространение интернета и межрегиональное цифровое неравенство в России: тенденции, факторы и влияние пандемииS.P.Zemtsovhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1283-0362K.V.Demidovahttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0061-6633D.Yu.KichaevThe demand for digital technologies has been growing due to a shift in the technological and economic paradigm. The need for online services has increased since the beginning of the COVID pandemic. There are significant disparities between Russian regions in the digital technology accessibility and the development of computer skills. In 2020, the Internet diffused rapidly in most regions, although previously, there had been a slowdown. As markets got saturated with digital services, the digital divide between Russian regions narrowed. Overall, the Internet use patterns are consistent with those of the spatial diffusion of innovations. Amongst the leaders, there are regions home to the largest agglomerations and northern territories of Russia, whereas those having a high proportion of rural population lag behind. Coastal and border regions (St. Petersburg, the Kaliningrad region, Karelia, Primorsky Krai, etc.) have better access to the Internet due to their proximity to the centres of technological innovations as well as the high intensity of external relations. Leading regions have an impact on their neighbours through spatial diffusion. Econometrically, access to the Internet depends on income, the average age and level of education, and its use depends on the business climate and Internet accessibility factors. Regional markets are gradually getting more saturated with digital services and technologies. The difference between regions in terms of access to the Internet is twofold, whereas, in terms of digital technology use, the gap is manifold. In many regions, the share of online commerce, which became the driver of economic development during the lockdown, is minimal. Based on the results of the study, several recommendations have been formulated.05312026577810.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-4https://balticregion.kantiana.ru/baltic_region/5246/39040/Abroskin, A. S, Zaitsev, Yu. K., Idrisov, G. I. et al. 2019, Jekonomicheskoe razvitie v cifrovuju jepohu [Economic development in the digital age, Moscow], 88 p. (in Russ.).Idrisov, G. I., Knyaginin, V. N., Kudrin, A. L., Rozhkova, E. S. 2018, New technological revolution: Challenges and opportunities for Russia, Voprosy Economiki, № 4, p. 5—25, https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-4-5-25 (in Russ.).Idrisov, G., Mau, V., Bozhechkova, A. 2017, Searching for a New Growth Model, Voprosy Economiki, № 12, p. 5—23, https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2017-12-5-23 (in Russ.).Gokhberg, L. M. (ed.). 2019, Chto takoe cifrovaja jekonomika? Trendy, kompetencii, izmerenie [What is the digital economy? Trends, competencies, measurement], M., Higher School of Economics, 82 p.Abdrakhmanova, G. I., Vishnevsky, K. O., Gokhberg, L. M. et al. 2021, Digital economy: 2021: a short statistical collection, M., Higher School of Economics, 124 p.Ponomareva, E. A. 2021, Digitalization as a driver of economic growth: Does only infrastructure matters? Journal of the New Economic Association, № 3, p. 51—68, https://doi.org/10.31737/2221-2264-2021-51-3-3 (in Russ.).Mirolyubova, T. V., Karlina, T. V., Nikolaev, R. S. 2020, Digital Economy: Identification and Measurements Problems in Regional Economy, Economy of region, vol. 16, № 2, p. 377—390, http://doi.org/10.17059/2020-2-4.The Global Risks Report 2021, 2021, World Economic Forum, available at: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_Global_Risks_Report_2021.pdf (accessed 04.07.2021).Lai, J., Widmar, N. O. 2021, Revisiting the digital divide in the COVID-19 era, Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, vol. 43, № 1, p. 458—464, https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13104.Avksent’ev, N. A. et al. 2020, Obshestvo i pandemija: opyt i uroki bor’by s COVID-19 v Rossii [Society and the pandemic: experience and lessons from the fight against COVID-19 in Russia], M., Printing house Pareto Print (in Russ.).Zemtsov, S., Chepurenko, A., Mikhailov, A. 2021, Pandemic Challenges for the Technological Startups in the Russian Regions, Foresight and STI Governance, № 15, p. 61—77, https://doi.org/10.17323/2500-2597.2021.4.61.77.Zemtsov, S. 2020, New technologies, potential unemployment and ‘nescience economy’during and after the 2020 economic crisis, Regional Science Policy & Practice, vol. 12, № 4, p. 723—743, https://doi.org/10.1111/rsp3.12286.Comin, D. A., Dmitriev, M., Rossi-Hansberg, E. 2012, The spatial diffusion of technology, National Bureau of Economic Research, № w18534, https://doi.org/10.3386/w18534.Akaev, A., Rudskoy, A. 2014, Synergetic Effect of the NBIC-Technologies and Global Economic Growth in the First Half of the 21st Century, Ekonomicheskaya Politika, № 2, p. 25—46 (in Russ.).Browning, L. D., Saetre, A. S., Stephens, K., Sørnes, J.-O. 2008, Rogers’ diffusion of innovations, Information & communication technologies in action: Linking theory & narratives of practice, p. 47—55, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203932445.Comin, D. A., Hobijn, B., Rovito, E. 2006, Five facts you need to know about technology diffusion, NBER Working Paper, № w11928, 55 p., https://doi.org/10.3386/w11928.Zemtsov, S. P., Baburin, V. L. 2017, Modeling of diffusion of innovation and typology of Russian regions: a case study of cellular communication, Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya, № 4, p. 17—30, https://doi.org/10.7868/S0373244417100024 (in Russ.).Baburin, V. L., Zemtsov, S. P. 2017, Innovacionnyj potencial regionov Rossii [Innovative potential of Russian regions], M., ID Universitetskaya kniga, 357 p. (in Russ.).Mikhaylov, A. S., Gorochnaya, V. V., Hvaley, D. V., Gumenyuk, I. S. 2020, Innovative development of Russian coastal regions: north-south divergence, Baltic region, vol. 12, № 3, p. 105— 126, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2020-3-7.Blanutsa, V. I. 2015, Spatial diffusion of innovations: the sphere of uncertainty and network model, Regional Studies, № 3, p. 4—12 (in Russ.).Attewell, P. 2001, Comment: The first and second digital divides, Sociology of education, vol. 74, № 3, p. 252—259, https://doi.org/10.2307/2673277.Norris, P. et al. 2001, Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet worldwide, Cambridge university press, 320 p., https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139164887.Ragnedda, M., Muschert, G. W. 2013, The digital divide: The Internet and social inequality in international perspective, Routledge, 344 p.Ragnedda, M. 2018, Conceptualizing digital capital, Telematics and Informatics, vol. 35, № 8, p. 2366—2375, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.10.006.Safiullin, A. R., Moiseeva, O. A. 2019, Digital inequality: Russia and other countries in the fourth industrial revolution, St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University Journal. Economics, vol. 6, № 12, p. 26—37, https://doi.org/10.18721/JE.12602 (in Russ.)Scheerder, A., Van Deursen, A., Van Dijk, J. 2017, Determinants of Internet skills, uses and outcomes. A systematic review of the second-and third-level digital divide, Telematics and informatics, vol. 34, № 8, p. 1607—1624, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.07.007.Volchenko, O. V. 2016, Dynamics of digital inequality in Russia, Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, № 5, p. 163—182, https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2016.5.10 (in Russ.).Auzan, A. A., Komissarov, A. G., Bakhtigaraeva, A. I. 2019, Sociocultural Restrictions on the Commercialization of Innovations in Russia, Ekonomicheskaya Politika, vol. 14, № 4, p. 76— 95, https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2019-4-76-95 (in Russ.).Podgorny, B. B. 2021, The population of the Kaliningrad region and the digital economy: a sociological analysis, Baltic region, vol. 13, № 3, p. 149—167 (in Russ.), https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2021-3-8.Grosso, M. 2006, Determinants of broadband penetration in OECD nations, Australian Communications Policy and Research Forum, p. 1—31, https://doi.org/10.1787/comms_outlook-2013-graph59-en.Lin, M. S., Wu, F. S. 2013, Identifying the determinants of broadband adoption by diffusion stage in OECD countries, Telecommunications Policy, vol. 37, № 4—5, p. 241—251, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2012.06.003.Haucap, J., Heimeshoff, U., Lange, M. R. 2016, The impact of tariff diversity on broadband penetration — An empirical analysis, Telecommunications Policy, vol. 40, № 8, p. 743—754, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2015.09.005.Lucendo-Monedero, A. L., Ruiz-Rodríguez, F., González-Relaño, R. 2019, Measuring the digital divide at regional level. A spatial analysis of the inequalities in digital development of households and individuals in Europe, Telematics and Informatics, vol. 41, p. 197—217, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.05.002.Szeles, M. R. 2018, New insights from a multilevel approach to the regional digital divide in the European Union, Telecommunications Policy, vol. 42, № 6, p. 452—463, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2018.03.007.Vicente, M. R., López, A. J. 2011, Assessing the regional digital divide across the European Union-27, Telecommunications Policy, vol. 35, № 3, p. 220—237, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2010.12.013.Pick, J. B., Sarkar, A., Johnson, J. 2015, United States digital divide: State level analysis of spatial clustering and multivariate determinants of ICT utilization, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, № 49, p. 16—32, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2014.09.001.Pick, J., Sarkar, A., Parrish, E. 2021, The Latin American and Caribbean digital divide: a geospatial and multivariate analysis, Information Technology for Development, vol. 27, № 2, p. 235—262, https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2020.1805398.Rachinskiy, A. 2010, Mobile telecommunications’ diffusion in Russia, Applied Econometrics, vol. 18, № 2, p. 111—122.Nagirnaya, A. V. 2015, The Development of the Internet in Russian Regions, Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya, № 2, p. 41—51, https://doi.org/10.15356/0373-2444-2015-2-41-51 (in Russ.).Zemtsov, S. P., Tsareva, Y. V., Salimova, D. R., Barinova, V. A. 2021, Small and medium-sized enterprises in Russia: In search of the employment growth factors, Voprosy Ekonomiki, № 12, p. 66—93, https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-12-66-93 (in Russ.).Brunn, S., Gilbreath, D. (ed.). 2022, COVID-19 and a World of Ad Hoc Geographies, Springer, 2721 p., https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94350-9.Kudrin, A. L., Mau, V. A., Sinelnikov-Murylev, S. G., Radygin, A. D. (ed.). 2022, Russian Economy in 2021. Trends and Outlooks. (Issue 43), M., Gaidar Institute Publishers, 604 p.Stepantsov, P. M., Tkacheva, K. A. 2021, Digital twist. Economic impact of the pandemic and new strategies, available at: https://cdto.ranepa.ru/digital_turn_research (accessed 05.07.2021).Audretsch, D., Belitski, M. (ed.). 2022, Developments in Entrepreneurial Finance and Technology, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 320 p.Трансграничная туристская мобильность в жизни местного населения карельского приграничья: ограничения пандемии COVID-19S. V.Kondratevahttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-8832-9182This article offers a new approach to evaluating the significance of cross-border tourism for residents of the border region of Karelia amid COVID-19 restrictions. The work draws on data of a municipal-level survey of the region’s population (575 people), conducted by the author in collaboration with Dr Ekaterina Shlapeko in 2021. Analysis of the survey results has confirmed the customariness of cross-border tourist mobility for the Karelians and the essential role it plays in their lives. These are manifested in regular trips to the neighbouring state, frequent contacts with Finnish travellers, marked preferences and a network of contacts with Finnish residents and organisations. The COVID-19 restrictions affected the routines of the residents of the Karelian borderlands more severely than those of people living in the inner municipalities or the regional capital. The findings of the study provide a comprehensive picture of the significance of cross-border tourist mobility (border tourism) and point to spatial differences in the perception of the study phenomenon by the residents of border, interior and urban municipalities. When applied in practice, the proposed approach gives an opportunity to widen the range of possible administrative decisions and can serve as a tool of regional economic policy on tourism.05312026799710.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-5https://balticregion.kantiana.ru/baltic_region/5246/39041/Więckowski, M. 2011, Cross-border mobility of Poles at the beginning of the 21st century, Hungarian Studies Review, № 1, p. 38—46.Pirozhnik, I. I. 2015, Tourist migration in cross-border region as a factor of enhancing economic cooperation (exemplified by Belarusian-Polish borderland), Security Problems of the Russian Society, № 2, p. 141ѕ3. Aleksandrova, А. Yu. 2017, Geography of tourist flows in the Russian Federation: statistics, trends, challenges, Science. Innovations. Technologie, № 1, p. 95—108.Mikhailova, E. V. 2021, Cross-Border Tourism on the Russian-Chinese Border in 2014—2019: Customization of the Service Sectors of Border Cities for Chinese Tourists, Reg. Res. Russ., № 11, p. 349—360, https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970521030096.Chow, C. K. W., Tsui, W. H. K. 2019, Cross—border tourism: Case study of inbound Russian visitor arrivals to China, International Journal of Tourism Research, https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2297.Stepanova, S. V. 2019, Cross border tourist mobility in borderland: theoretical and practical aspects, RUDN Journal of Economics, № 3, p. 563—575, https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2329-2019-27-3-563-575 (in Russ.).Stepanova, S. V. 2019, Czynniki rozwoju turystyki przygranicznej na rosyjsko-fińskim pograniczu, Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 91, № 4, p. 573—587, https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2019.4.7.Kolosov, V. А. 2016, Cross-border regionalisation and commuters: European experience for Russia?, Regional Studies, № 3, p. 83—93 (in Russ.).Tsapenko, I. P. 2018, Cross-border population mobility: format update, Vestnik RAS, vol. 88, № 11, p. 992—1002, https://doi.org/10.31857/S086958730002332-3 (in Russ.).Anisiewicz, R., Palmowski, T. 2014, Small border traffic and cross-border tourism between Poland and the Kaliningrad oblast of the Russian Federation, Quaestiones Geographicae, vol. 33, № 2, p. 79—86.Zaitseva, N. A., Korneevets, V. S., Semenova, L. V. 2016, Prospects for the Cross-Border Cooperation Between Russia and Poland in the Field of Tourism, International Journal of environmental & science education, vol. 11, № 14, р. 7166—7175.Studzinska, D., Sivkoz, A., Domaniewski, S. 2018, Russian cross-border shopping tourists in the Finnish and Polish borderland, Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift, vol. 72, № 2, p. 115—126, https://doi.org/10.1080/00291951.2018.1451365.Gumenyuk, I., Kuznetsova, T., Osmolovskaya, L. 2016, Local border traffic as an efficient tool for developing cross-border cooperation, Baltic region, vol. 8, № 1, р. 67ѕ14. Kropinova, E. G. 2020, The Role of Tourism in Cross-Border Region Formation in the Baltic Region. [In:] Baltic Region — The Region of Cooperation. Springer Proceedings in Earth and Environmental Sciences. Springer, Cham, p. 83—97, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14519-4_10.Manakov, A. G., Golomidova, E. S. 2018, Transboundary tourist-recreational regions in the adjacent territories of Russia, Estonia and Latvia, Geographical bulletin, № 2, p. 156—166, https://doi.org/10.17072/2079-7877-2018-2-156-166 (in Russ.).Manakov, A. G., Golomidova, E. S. 2018, Estimating the Development of the Latvian-Estonian-Russian Transboundary Tourism and Recreation Region, Baltic Region, vol. 9, № 1, p. 130— 141, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2018-1-8.Miroshnichenko, O. V., Ponkratova, L. A. 2011, International tourist migration as a factor of integration processes between Russian and Chinese regions, Upravlenie ekonomicheskimi sistemami: elektronnyj nauchnyj zhurnal, № 8, р. 1—42 (in Russ.).Honkanen, A., Pitkanen, K., Hall, M. C. 2016, A local perspective on cross-border tourism. Russian second home ownership in Eastern Finland, International Journal of Tourism Research, vol. 18, № 2, p. 149—158, https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2041.Jakosuo, K. 2011, Russia and the Russian tourist in Finnish tourism strategies ѕ20. Izotov, A., Laine, J. 2012, Constructing (Un) familiarity: role of tourism in identity and region building at the Finnish-Russian border, European Planning studies, p. 1—19, https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.716241.Lipkina, O. 2013, Motives for Russian Second Home Ownership in Finland, Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, vol. 13, № 4, p. 299—316, https://doi.org/10.1080/15022250.2013.863039.Laine, J. 2017, Finnish-Russian border mobility and tourism: localism overruled by geopolitics, In: Hall, D. (ed.), Tourism and geopolitics: issues and concepts from Central and Eastern Europe. Wallingford: CABI, p. 178—190, https://doi.org/10.1079/9781780647616.0178.Probirskaja, S. 2017, “Does anybody here speak Finnish?” Linguistic first aid and emerging translational spaces on the Finnish-Russian Allegro train, Translation studies, vol. 10, № 3, p. 231—246, https://doi.org/10.1080/14781700.2017.1289861.Gurova, О. Yu. 2012, A Study of Cross-Border Shopping: Why Inhabitants of St. Petersburg Prefer to Do Shopping in Finland?, Journal of Economic Sociology, vol. 13, № 1, p. 18—37 (in Russ.).Gurova, О., Ratilainen, S. 2015, “Eastern Tourist”: A Review of Images of Russian Consumers in Finnish Media, Journal of Economic Sociology, vol. 16, № 3, p. 26— 45 (in Russ.).Makkonen, T. 2016, Cross-border shopping and tourism destination marketing: the case of Southern Jutland, Denmark, Scandinavian journal of hospitality and tourism, vol. 16, Supp. 1, p. 36ѕ27. Shlapeko, E. A., Stepanova, S. V. 2018, Trends in the development of cross-border trade in the Russian-Finnish borderlands, Balt. Reg., vol. 10, № 4, p. 103—117, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2018-4-7.Björn, I. 2015, Border province: the main features of the development of North Karelia after World War II, Studia Humanitatis Borealis, vol. 5, № 2, p. 4—16 (in Russ.).Manakov, A. G., Kondrateva, S. V., Terenina, N. K. 2020, Development of cross-border tourist and recreational regions on the Karelian section of the Russian-Finnish border, Balt. Reg., 2020, vol. 12, № 2, p. 140—152, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2020-2-9.Lavrushina, N., Malmi, M., Tirri, S. 2021, Let’s write history of twinning between Karelian and Finnish municipalities, Nordic and Baltic Studies Review, № 6, http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j103.art.2021.2026.Kolosov, V., Więckowski, M. 2018, Border changes in Central and Eastern Europe: An introduction, Geographia Polonica, vol. 91, № 1, р. 5—16, https://doi.org/10.7163/GPol.0106.Shlapeko, E. A., Stepanova, S. V. 2018, Formation of cross-border socio-cultural space of Karelia (Republic of Karelia, Russia — North Karelia, Finland), St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University Journal. Humanities and Social Sciences, vol. 9, № 3, p. 39—48, https://doi.org/10.18721/JHSS.9304 (in Russ.).Miljukova, I. A., Terentyev, K. Yu., Takala, I. R. et al. 2017, Finland through the eyes of the residents of the republic of Karelia: survey 2017, Nordic and Baltic Studies Review, № 2, p. 504— 531, https://doi.org/10.15393/j103.art.2017.785.Luković, S., Stojković, D. 2020, COVID-19 pandemic and global tourism, Hotel and Tourism Management, vol. 8, № 2, p. 79—88, https://doi.org/10.5937/menhottur2002079L%20.Manakov, A. G., Krasilnikova, I. N., Ivanov, I. A. 2022, Towards a classification of transboundary tourist and recreation mesoregions in the Baltic region, Balt. Reg., vol. 14, № 1, p. 75— 89, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2022-1-5.Stepanova, S. V. 2019, Tourism development in border areas: a benefit or a burden? The case of Karelia, Balt. reg., 2019, vol. 11, № 2, p. 94—111, https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2019-2-6.Stepanova, S. V. 2019, The Northern Ladoga region as a prospective tourist destination in the Russian-Finnish borderland: Historical, cultural, ecological and economic aspects, Geographia Polonica, vol. 92, № 4, р. 409—428, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7163/GPol.0156.Беженцы из Сирии и Ирака в Швеции: особенности расселения в период миграционного кризисаThe vast increase in the number of forced migrants during the European migration crisis has compelled the receiving countries to concentrate on the issues of migrant reception and accommodation. This study aims to demonstrate how the patterns of settlement of Syrian and Iraqi migrants changed in 2014—2019. We propose a new methodology, building on the Her­findahl-Hirschman index, an indicator of the level and direction of the spatial concentration—deconcentration of migrants, and the Ryabtsev index, which is used to measure the proximity between the settlement structures of migrants and the Swedes. It is established there was a deconcentration of migrants during the crisis (espe­cially in its ascendant phase), carried out by the Swedish authorities. However a reverse process took place in the descendant phase, as a result of self-arranged migrants’ resettlement. The deconcentration of Iraqis and Syrians led to the convergence between the settlement structure typical of immigrants and the Swedes, whilst concentration resulted in divergence accompanied by the emergence of close-knit immi­grant communities on the outskirts of Sweden’s largest cities. The formation of such communi­ties, seen as vulnerable by the national authorities and marked by a high crime rate, impedes the integration of Syrian and Iraqi immigrants into Swedish society.053120269811210.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-6https://balticregion.kantiana.ru/baltic_region/5247/39042/Организации этнических меньшинств в России и Польше: методологические вызовы сравненияThis article proposes a framework for classifying ethnic minority organisations based on a broad combination of discursive and non-discursive criteria rooted in their political opportunities profile. One diasporic and one non-diasporic organisation were chosen for Russia and Poland, respectively. Diasporicity is understood according to William Safran’s criteria and Rogers Brubaker’s triadic configuration. The Russian study cases are Komi Voityr and the Russian Polish Congress; the Polish, the Silesian Autonomy Movement and the Belarussian House. The analysis of their status, activities, domestic and external political impact, localisation and role in the ‘triadic configuration’ has shown that the four cases are ethnic minority associations, and their legal status and scope of activities differ significantly. Their domestic political opportunities are rather scarce. Out of the four cases, just one organisation is an active part in Brubaker’s classical triadic configuration; its role is not traditional, ascribed to the respective ‘angle’. Although both Russian associations enjoy an official status, their activities are limited to the cultural, memorial and linguistic domains, primarily at the national level. In Poland, both associations act internationally as advocacy groups, and their activities are not confined to culture and language. Far from being universally applicable, the proposed classification framework can still add to the comparative ethnic politics toolkit.0531202611312810.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-7https://balticregion.kantiana.ru/baltic_region/5247/39043/Снести нельзя оставить: ключевые тенденции политики памяти стран Балтии в отношении советских памятников на местах массового насилияAnother round of the Soviet ‘monument fall’ in the Baltics, which began in the early 2000s, continued into 2022. This process, however, has not affected Soviet memorials at the sites of mass violence perpetrated during the German occupation of the Baltics. This article aims to investigate major trends in the Baltics’ politics of memory regarding Soviet monuments erected at sites of mass violence. The official policy of the Baltics towards these memorial sites has been largely shaped by the international agenda and the perception of the commemorated events. During the Euroatlantic drift, the concept of the Baltic States’ past incorporated the Holocaust narrative, recoding the symbolic space of Soviet sites remembering Nazi crimes against Jews and integrating them into the national culture of remembrance. Soviet memorials at sites commemorating the tragedy of local peoples were incorporated as is into the national memorial landscape. Yet, Lithuanian authorities viewed these memorials with greater suspicion because of the Soviet countermemory, which the sites preserved. Memorials to Soviet POWs, albeit perceived as ‘alien’, are protected by law in the Baltics. Nevertheless, it did not save the places of remembrance from acts of vandalism. Moreover, there are trends in the Baltics towards a revision of the laws protecting the monuments.0531202612814510.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-8https://balticregion.kantiana.ru/baltic_region/5248/39044/Демонтаж памятников как ключевая часть процесса «декоммунизации» на Украине и в Польше после 2014 г.Drawing on a wide range of sources (Polish and Ukrainian legal acts, Russian and international media), this study looks at the ‘monument fall’ in Ukraine and Poland as part of the post-2014 memory wars. The purpose of this article is to identify the main patterns associated with the demolition of Soviet and Russian monuments in the two countries. The ‘decommunisation’ of public space is an element of Ukraine’s and Poland’s politics of memory, enshrined in legal acts. Its driving force is the Institutes of National Remembrance, whose priorities include dismantling Soviet and pre-revolutionary Russian monuments, which came into full swing after the beginning of Russia’s special military operation to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine. The official narratives allot Poland and Ukraine the role of victims of ‘two aggressors’ in World War II, which found themselves under ‘communist occupation’. Therefore, the politics of memory of the two countries seek to get rid of the ‘Soviet legacy’ as the legacy of the ‘occupying country’. Whilst Poland pursues ‘residual decommunisation’ focused on dismantling the remaining memorials to Soviet soldiers-liberators, Ukraine is committed to transforming ‘decommunisation’ into full-scale ‘derussification’. At the same time, the process of ‘re-Sovietisation/Sovietisation’ has been launched in the liberated territories of Ukraine. It consists in restoring previously destroyed monuments or installing new ones.0531202614616110.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-9https://balticregion.kantiana.ru/baltic_region/5248/39045/Межрегиональные различия динамики численности сельского населения и хозяйства в Российской ФедерацииThe article presents data reflecting the territorial peculiarities of rural population dynamics and shows their dependence on external factors (primarily, the development of agriculture). The database includes 14 indicators of the regional spatial differentiation of rural population development in Russia between 2010 —2020. A typology of regions based on eight economic and ecological parameters is provided. The dataset covers the statistical indicators of 85 Russian regions from 2010 to 2020, published by the Federal State Statistics Service and the Unified Interdepartmental Information and Statistics System. The results are presented in seven tables and six maps. The dataset can be used by federal and regional authorities elaborating science-­based rural development programmes and strategies, as well as experts on rural development.0531202616218110.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-10https://balticregion.kantiana.ru/baltic_region/5249/39046/