Addressing sociocultural risks in contemporary Russia: the role of enterprises

Tyumen State University Herald. Social, Economic, and Law Research


2020, Vol. 6. № 3 (23)

Addressing sociocultural risks in contemporary Russia: the role of enterprises

For citation: Plotnikova E. B., Markova Yu. S., Plotnikova E. V. 2020. “Addressing sociocultural risks in contemporary Russia: the role of enterprises”. Tyumen State University Herald. Social, Economic, and Law Research, vol. 6, no. 3 (23), pp. 46-58. DOI: 10.21684/2411-7897-2020-6-3-46-58

About the authors:

Elena B. Plotnikova, Cand. Sci. (Hist.), Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Sociology, Perm State University;; ORCID: 0000-0003-3599-5215

Yulia S. Markova, Cand. Sci. (Soc.), Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Perm State National Research University;; ORCID: 0000-0002-6271-9403

Evgeniya V. Plotnikova, Doctor of Philosophy, PhD in Social Policy, Sociologist, Sociological Center, Perm State National Research University;; ORCID: 0000-0001-6492-8092


This paper analyses the academic literature on the role of enterprises in addressing sociocultural risks at the regional level in contemporary Russia. The studied literature was collected using two sources: the database of the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Science and the Russian Scientific Electronic Library “eLIBRARY.RU”. The search time­scale covered the period between 2000 and 2019. Two questions informed the literature search and analysis: 1) What sociocultural risks are identified in the literature? 2) What is the role of enterprises in addressing these risks?

The results show that the academic literature distinguishes between two categories of sociocultural risks. Firstly, the risks causing the dysfunction of socio-economic and political structures. Secondly, the risks related to the deterioration of moral values, cultural traditions and social identities at individual, community, and national levels.

The role of enterprises in addressing these risks is revealed in two areas. Firstly, these are the corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices: provision of social benefits to employees, supporting vulnerable groups in local communities, investing in educational and sport activities and events. Secondly, some enterprises introduce innovative instruments, such as sociocultural projects.

However, most studies of such projects refer to either small or non-industrial enterprises. Further analysis should focus on the implementation of sociocultural projects by the industrial enterprises at the regional level in Russia, since there is a lack of empirical studies in this area.


  1. Akberdina V. V., Sergeyeva A. S. 2015. “Industrial regions of Russia: comparative analysis”. Bulletin of the Transbaikal State University, no. 7 (122), pp. 98-117. [In Russian]

  2. Andrianova E. V., Davydenko V. A., Romashkina G. F. 2017. “Modernization and reindustrialization: discussion about ways of implementation”. Philosophical Sciences, no. 10, pp. 91-94. [In Russian]

  3. Chernysh M. F. 2004. “Business social responsibility and its impact on social differentiation”. In: Reforming Russia: Yearbook. Pp. 80-91. [In Russian]

  4. Chirikova A. E., Shilova L. S., Lapina N. Iu., Shishkin S. V. 2005. Business as a Subject of Social Policy: Debtor, Benefactor, Partner? Moscow: Independent Institute for Social Policy, HSE. 232 pp. [In Russian]

  5. Diatlov V. I. 2009. Cross-Border Migrations and Host Society: Mechanisms and Practices of Mutual Adaptation. Yekaterinburg: Ural University Publishing House. 396 pp. [In Russian]

  6. Dolgorukova I. V., Kirilina T. Iu., Mazaev Iu. N, Iudina T. N. 2017. “Social anxiety and social fears of the Russian population: sociological dimension”. Sociological Research, no. 2, pp. 57-66. [In Russian]

  7. Klimov I. A., Klimova S. G. 2015. “Modernization effects of social entrepreneurship”. Petersburg Sociology Today, no. 6, pp. 266-299. [In Russian]

  8. Kozlova I. V. 2018. “Disadaptation processes in the way of student youth’s life as a social problem”. Transbaikal State University Journal, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 68-76. DOI: 10.21209/2227-9245-2018-24-7-68-76. [In Russian]

  9. Kravchenko S. A. 2017. “The coexistence of riskophobia and riskophilia — an expression of ‘normal anomie’”. Sociological Research, no. 2, pp. 3-13. [In Russian]

  10. Lapin N. I. 2006. “Region, its status and functions in Russian society: theoretical and methodological foundations of the study”. Sociological Research, no. 9, pp. 25-34. [In Russian]

  11. Lapin N. I. 2018. “Hybrid transit and the need for ‘modernization for all’”. Bulletin of the Institute of Sociology, no. 27, pp. 105-136. [In Russian]

  12. McLennan Sh., Glenn B. 2019. “Reversing the lens: why corporate social responsibility is not community development”. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, no. 26, pp. 117-26.

  13. Moskovskaya A. A. (ed.). 2011. Social Entrepreneurship in Russia and in the World: Practice and Research. Moscow: HSE. 283 pp. [In Russian]

  14. Mozgovaya A. V. 2018. “Social sphere: vectors of change, risks, and adaptation resources (the results of all-Russian monitoring surveys).” RUDN Journal of Sociology, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 708-718. DOI: 10.22363/2313-2272-2018-18-4-708-718 [In Russian]

  15. Nadzhafova M. N. 2017. “On the social role of city-forming enterprises and the directions of their economic support in the Kursk Region . International Journal of Applied and Basic Research, no. 2-2, pp. 241-245. [In Russian]

  16. Rassadina T. A. 2013. “Russians in a ‘risk society’. Emotional and value aspects”. Sociological Research, no. 11, pp. 84-93. [In Russian]

  17. Semernik A. Z., Balahonskaia Iu. V. 2015. “Sociocultural risks as a subject of socio-humanitarian reflection and the phenomenon of modern societies”. Saint Petersburg University Bulletin Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, no. 2 (66), pp. 239-244. [In Russian]

  18. Shinkovsky M. Yu. 2008. “Glocalization as a subject of scientific research”. Polity, no. 2, pp. 46-57. [In Russian]

  19. Shlykova E. V. 2017. “The profile of the adaptive social well-being of the population in conditions of imposed risk”. Izvestiia TulGU. Humanitarian Sciences, no. 1, pp. 114-126. [In Russian]

  20. Utting P. 2007. “CSR and equality”. Third World Quarterly, no. 28 (4), pp. 697-712. DOI: 10.1080/01436590701336572

  21. Vittenberg E. Ia. 2011. Social Responsibility of Business in the Post-Soviet Space. Moscow: ITSRGGYU. 481 pp. [In Russian]

  22. Yanitskiy O. N. 2003. “Sociology of risk: key ideas”. Universe of Russia, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 3-35. [In Russian]

  23. Yanitskiy O. N. 2017. “Globalization and civilization risks”. Risk Management, no. 3 (83), pp. 48-56. [In Russian]

  24. Yanitskiy O. N. 2019. “Challenges and risks of globalization. Seven theses”. Sociological Research, no. 1, pp. 29-39. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250003745-2 [In Russian]

  25. Zorina A. E. 2015. “Social responsibility of business and environmental attitudes of the population (on the example of community at risk)”. Cand. Sci. thesis. IS RAN. [In Russian]

  26. Zubok V. I. (ed.). 2016. Risks of Transforming Habitats: A Research and Management Challenge. Belgorod: Epitsentr. 208 pp. [In Russian]