Sustainable Development of Cities of Russia

Aybika I. Beksultanova

, Tamilla L. Magomadova

and Madina A. Barzaeva

Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia

Grozny State Oil Technical University named after academician M.D. Millionshchikov, Grozny, Russia

Keywords: Sustainable Development, Cities of Russia, Pandemic.

Abstract: Today, amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the sustainable development agenda is in focus from a new perspective.

The issues of inequality, social development and the environmental agenda, on the one hand, as well as the

topics of transparency, effective interaction of various interested parties to overcome common global

challenges, on the other hand, are becoming more and more relevant. The purpose of the work is to identify

leaders and outsiders of sustainable development among Russian cities to distinguish promising areas of their

growth, to identify the most balanced among them in the development of the economy, social area and ecology.

The characteristics of cities are given in five main blocks: economic development, urban infrastructure,

demography, social infrastructure, ecology. The main sources of information for compiling the Ranking were

the data of state statistics presented on the Internet resources of Rosstat, EMISS and the municipal

administrations' websites, the results of various Rankings/indices of cities and regions of the Russian

Federation. Based on the results of the Ranking, appropriate conclusions were made and key directions for

the development of regions were proposed.

1 INTRODUCTION

Urbanization and the formation of large urban

agglomerations are among the most important trends

in world development. Every year, the world's urban

population is increasing by tens of millions of people

and will reach 60% of the world's population by 2030.

Cities produce most of the world's GDP, concentrate

the main financial and human resources, and are

centers for the development of science and

innovation, modern technologies.

The development of urbanization processes leads

to an aggravation of a number of social and economic

problems of large cities associated with

overpopulation, growing economic inequality, the

gap between the rates of population growth and

infrastructure development, the need to ensure

employment of the population in cities in the context

of technological progress and structural economic

changes. At the same time, modern urban ecosystems

are sources of large-scale negative impacts on the

environment. The urban population of almost 3.5

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2885-3294

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0146-8989

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9581-7763

billion people occupies only 3% of the earth's land

area and consumes more than 70% of all energy,

forms about 70% of carbon dioxide emissions.

At the beginning of the second decade of the XXI

century, the global economy was hit by two crises at

the same time: the coronavirus pandemic and the

collapse in hydrocarbon prices, primarily crude oil

(Dynkin and Telegina, 2020). The imposition of a

double external shock - the coronavirus pandemic and

the global economic downturn - on the problems and

contradictions that have accumulated in the world

makes it necessary to evaluate the justified and

unjustified ideas and solutions of the past with

particular care (Fituni and Abramova, 2020). A

number of economically developed countries

associate the possibilities of overcoming the

consequences of the crisis caused by the pandemic

with the development of a low-carbon economy and

a "green" agenda. Thus, one of the key priorities of

the EU economic recovery plan, approved in July

2020, is the development of a "green" economy and

the implementation of the European Green Deal. This

plan calls for a reduction in carbon emissions to zero

298

Beksultanova, A., Magomadova, T. and Barzaeva, M.

Sustainable Development of Cities of Russia.

DOI: 10.5220/0010589702980304

In Proceedings of the International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure (ISSDRI 2021), pages 298-304

ISBN: 978-989-758-519-7

by 2050. Note that the implementation of the "green"

agenda has become popular not only in Europe, but

also in countries such as Canada, South Korea, and

other leading world economies. In 2021, the

implementation of the "green" agenda in the United

States has noticeably intensified. The development of

a low-carbon agenda was also updated at the level of

international associations of cities, such as the C-40

group (only Moscow is included in the group out of

all the Russian cities).

In September 2020, 12 cities in this group signed

the Declaration to refuse fossil fuels and invest in a

sustainable future. Signatory city governments have

pledged to phase out fossil fuel companies and have

advocated increased sustainable investment in

climate solutions, including job creation, to accelerate

economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.

At the UN Conference in Rio de Janeiro

(“Rio+20”), it was stated that the Sustainable

Development Goals: - are a useful tool to focus efforts

on achieving specific development results within the

overall development vision; - aimed at defining

national priorities and mobilizing interested parties

and resources to address common challenges; -

should facilitate the full implementation of the

decisions of all major summits on economic, social

and environmental issues; - serve as the basis for

United Nations development activities.

The monitoring and reporting system for the

implementation of the SDGs in Russia is currently at

the formation stage. The collection of data on most of

the national SDGs indicators is provided only at the

federal level so far. Therefore, the regions and cities

lack the motivation, as well as the qualifications of

public servants and the experience to draw up such

reports. Thus, the first regional report on progress in

achieving the SDGs in 2019 in Russia was compiled

in the Rostov region. It was prepared on the initiative

and with the support of a leading regional bank

actively promoting the sustainable development

agenda and ESG in its activities. Also in 2019, within

the framework of the UN international forum, the

report of the Republic of Tatarstan on the SDGs was

presented.

As international practice shows, the development

of the SDGs agenda at the local level is possible

according to two main scenarios - as part of a unified

monitoring system enshrined in national legislation,

or as a “from below” initiative by the city

administration based on discussions with key

interested parties and taking into account an external

demand.

Note that in Russia the business community is the

key vehicle for the sustainable development agenda.

Large Russian companies - business leaders integrate

the goals of the Agenda-2030 into their strategies and

reflect aspects related to the implementation of the

SDGs at the program and project level. Disclosure of

information is one of the most important tools for

companies to interact with interested parties and

contributes to increased transparency and image

improvement, attracting investment. The logic of the

process development and the use of tools of the non-

financial reporting system of companies can be used

for cities as well.

2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

To draw up the Ranking, an integral indicator was

compiled - the Urban Sustainable Development Index

(USDI). This index was calculated on the basis of 43

statistical indicators characterizing the development

of the city in five main blocks: economic

development, urban infrastructure, demography,

social infrastructure, and ecology. The methods of the

performed research contain theoretical and empirical

parts, description methods. This research is supported

by graphical methods of illustrating the data.

3 RESULTS OF RESEARCH

Leading cities of the Ranking

The three leaders of the SD Ranking for 2019 include

Moscow, the capital and largest economic center of

Russia, and the two most dynamically developing

regional centers - Krasnodar and Tyumen. Krasnodar

in 2018 in terms of population reached the mark of 1

million inhabitants. Tyumen is characterized by high

population growth rates and is approaching this mark

faster than other Russian cities. The unevenness of the

spatial distribution of the leading cities of the

Ranking across the territory of the country should be

noted. In the Center of the European part of Russia,

in the Volga region and in the Urals, there are

noticeably more of them than in the South of the

country, in Siberia, and in the Far East. The

composition of the cities leading in the Ranking -

TOP-30 - has remained practically stable over the

past 4 years, although the positions of specific cities

within this group may vary within several points

(Figure 1).

Sustainable Development of Cities of Russia

299

Figure 1: Leading cities of the SD Ranking in 2019.

In the group of Russian leading cities, one can

conditionally distinguish four groups of cities, each

of which has its own characteristics of development:

capitals and million-strong cities;

 regional centers;

 cities of the Moscow region;

 centers of the oil and gas industry.

Among the leaders of the Ranking, large cities

prevail, for which the determining factor of

leadership is the balance in the development of all

areas of city life: economic, social and environmental,

and not the population as such. In turn, a number of

million-strong cities (Novosibirsk, Volgograd,

Chelyabinsk, Omsk), despite the high values of some

basic indicators of economic development, did not

even make it to the TOP-50 cities of the Ranking due

to negative demographic trends, environmental

problems and low assessments of the state of urban

infrastructure. Let's analyze the main factors that

determine the high positions of cities in each group.

Million-strong cities

The list of million-strong cities included in the

TOP-30 cities of the SD Ranking has not changed

over the past four years. This group includes 9 out of

16 Russian million-strong cities: the capitals

(Moscow, St. Petersburg), the largest cities of the

Urals (Yekaterinburg), Central Okrug (Voronezh),

two cities of the Southern Okrug (Krasnodar, Rostov-

on-Don), and three cities of the Volga Federal Okrug

(Kazan, Ufa, and Perm).

The leading positions of the two capitals in the

Ranking are quite natural and can be explained both

by their special status (these are not only cities, but

also are federal subjects), and economic and

administrative resources. Moscow and St. Petersburg

are several times ahead of other Russian million-

strong cities, primarily in terms of population and

financial capabilities. Of all Russian cities, they are

the most consistent with the criteria of a “global city”

and are comparable to European and world capitals in

terms of social and economic development.

Let's designate the key factors that determine their

high positions in the SD Ranking of cities:

 relatively high investment attractiveness;

 high potential for the development of modern

high-tech industries and digital services;

 availability of budgetary opportunities to

maintain and modernize urban and social

infrastructure;

 attractiveness for intraregional and

interregional migration (with the exception of

Voronezh, Perm and Ufa);

 a diversified labor market - the presence of both

large industrial enterprises and a developed

service sector;

 relatively high rates of housing construction

and renovation of the housing stock; the

possibility of obtaining high-quality secondary

and higher education;

 relatively high purchasing power of the

population.

Distribution of leading cities of the SD Ranking

by federal districts

ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure

300

In each federal district, cities can be distinguished,

characterized by a balance of economic, social and

environmental development, which attract people

from other cities and regions. They can be both large

and medium-sized in terms of population (Table 3).

Table 3. Distribution of leading cities of the SD Ranking by federal districts.

Federal district Grou

s of cities b

ulation

more than 500 thousand

le 250-500 thousand

le less than 250 thousand

Cit

Ran

Cit

Ran

Cit

Ran

Central

Moscow 1 Krasnogorsk 7 Odintsovo 9

Voronezh 23 Mytishchi 10 Reutov 12

Tambov 28 Belgorod 17 Domodedovo 15

Northwestern

St. Petersburg Kalinin

rad 5 Ukhta 68 8

Syktyvkar 54

Vologda 58

Volga

Kazan 6 Yoshkar-Ola 65 Almetyevsk 19

Ufa 18 Nizhnekamsk 36

Cheboksary 22 Novokuibyshevsk 60

Ural

Tyumen 2 Surgut 13 Nefteyugansk 8

Yekaterinburg 16 Nizhnevartovsk 14 Tobolsk 21

Novy Urengoy 25

Siberian and Far

Eastern

Khabarovsk 42 Yakuts

44 Yuzhno-Sakhalins

Krasnoyarsk 48 Blagoveshchensk 59 Petropavlovsk-

Kamchatsky

Tomsk 52

South and North

Caucasian

Krasnodar 3 Stavropol 20 Anapa 53

Rostov-on-Don 26 Novorossiysk 51 Nazran 67

Sochi 56

Cities at the bottom of the Ranking

In general, the composition of the group of cities

closing the SD Ranking (25) has remained relatively

stable for several years, although some changes are

taking place within this group. Twenty-five positions

in the lower part of the SD Ranking are occupied by

ten industrial centers of the Urals and Western

Siberia, which have the status of mono-cities

(Prokopyevsk, Kiselevsk, Pervouralsk, Serov,

Belovo, Leninsk-Kuznetsky, Miass,

Mezhdurechensk, Zlatoust, Sarapul); a number of

cities without the status of a mono-city, but with

similar social and economic problems

(Novoshakhtinsk, Rubtsovsk, Shakhty, Murom,

Kopeisk, etc.) and several cities of Crimea (Yalta,

Feodosia, Evpatoria). Of all the regional centers, this

group includes only the capital of Buryatia, Ulan-Ude

(Figure 2).

The main factors that determine the low positions

of the outsider cities in the Ranking are the same for

most of them:

 high subsidization of local budgets;

 low investment attractiveness, lack of financial

opportunities to upgrade communal and social

transport infrastructure, low incomes of the

population, limited employment opportunities;

 low diversification of the economy (for mono-

cities - poor development of the service sector,

for Crimean cities - poor industrial

development);

 natural decline, mass outflow (with the

exception of Ulan-Ude and Crimean cities),

aging of the population;

 poor quality of the urban environment, a high

degree of deterioration of the urban

infrastructure;

 underdevelopment of modern industries,

innovations, digital services;

 low quality of secondary education, limited

opportunities for obtaining higher education.

Sustainable Development of Cities of Russia

301

Figure 2: Lowest 20 Cities in the SD Ranking in 2019.

In these cities, there are practically no large

companies that pay great attention to social

investments in the territory of their presence. For

most cities-outsiders, the low purchasing power of the

population and stable depopulation determine the low

rates of housing construction. Although, we should

note that specifically in 2019, housing

commissioning in most cities of this group has

increased, which can be partly explained by the

success of federal mortgage programs. In the cities of

Crimea, where the rate of housing construction on

average, on the contrary, has been significantly higher

in recent years than in other cities of this group,

housing commissioning has noticeably decreased in

2019 (especially in Yalta - by 60% and in Yevpatoria

- by 40%), the exception was Kerch.

Most of the industrial centers that occupy the

lowest positions in the Ranking are characterized by

acute environmental problems caused by the

activities of their 21 city-forming enterprises, first of

all, we are talking about metallurgical centers and

cities of the coal industry. For non-gasified cities of

Eastern Siberia and the Far East, the use of non-

environmentally friendly fuels plays an important

role in air pollution. Cities such as Ulan-Ude, Belovo,

Novoshakhtinsk, Prokopyevsk, Shakhty and a

number of others received one of the lowest rankings

in terms of urban space greening in the Urban

Environment Quality Index.

If we talk about the cities of Crimea, the air

quality in them, on the contrary, is much better than

the national average, and Crimea as a whole is among

the most environmentally friendly and tourist

attractive regions of the country. At the same time,

every year in the cities of Crimea, problems with

water resources are aggravated. Note that this factor

is not directly taken into account in the Ranking.

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Thus, we can conclude that the TOP-5 leading cities

of the SD Ranking for 2019 did not change and

includes Moscow, Krasnodar, Tyumen, St.

Petersburg, and Kaliningrad. The group of leaders

consists of four types of Russian cities: million-strong

cities, successful regional centers, cities of the

Moscow region, and centers of the oil and gas

industry. Almetyevsk, Lipetsk and Tambov returned

to the TOP-30 leaders of the Ranking in 2019, while

Obninsk, Orenburg and Khimki left it.

There is a high degree of correlation between the

development of regional centers and major cities and

the level of development of the regions in which they

are located. Most of the cities from the TOP-30

Ranking are located in regions with a high level of

social and economic development, and the regional

centers with the lowest positions in the SD Ranking

ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure

302

are located in the most depressed regions of the

country.

The result analysis of the Ranking indicates the

importance of the quality of education and the

development of human capital for the development of

cities. Cities with a high level of higher and secondary

education occupy high positions in the Ranking and

have a higher potential for sustainable development

and migration attractiveness in the medium term.

In a year, no more than 15% of 185 cities change

their position in the Ranking by more than 30

positions. A significant change in the positions of

cities is determined by 3-5 indicators from various

blocks (economic development, urban infrastructure,

social infrastructure).

The lowest positions in the Ranking are occupied

by single-industry cities, old industrial centers, and a

number of Crimean cities. All of them demonstrate

the absence of stable positive dynamics, allowing

them to get out of the ranks of outsiders in the

Ranking.

The results of the Ranking in 2019 allow us to

assess with what parameters of development Russian

cities approached the economic crisis of 2020. In the

context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance

of assessing social infrastructure and the level of

digitalization of cities has grown. The public demand

for a new quality of the urban environment is

growing, in which the priority of the criterion of its

safety, as well as the availability of infrastructure and

the development of effective communication

systems, is increasing.

Preliminary data on the state of the economy of

Russian cities for 2020 show that the largest negative

impact of the economic crisis caused by the COVID-

19 pandemic has had on the largest cities of the

country (capitals, cities with a population of over one

million). At the same time, this group of cities, due to

their scale, have the resources for a faster economic

recovery. At the regional level, the best economic

dynamics during the crisis period is demonstrated by

the most developed regions, which have accumulated

a greater margin of safety due to balanced

development.

Important drivers of the development of Russian

cities in the new realities will be:

 the formation of new high-tech industries;

smart technology adoption and digital

transformation; improving energy efficiency;

 development of modern systems of education

and health care;

 improving human capital; improving the

quality of the urban environment.

The development of remote forms of employment

in Russia will contribute to a certain reformatting of

migration flows within the country and the

consolidation of the population in cities with a high

quality of life, developed urban and social

infrastructure, even if the local labor market is poorly

developed in these cities. New factors on the external

agenda and expanding the horizons for the

implementation of National Projects until 2030 create

new challenges for the strategic planning of Russian

cities in general and necessitate adjusting the existing

strategies for social and economic development at the

regional and city level, taking into account the

sustainable development agenda.

5 CONCLUSION

It is difficult to single out any goals in the area of

sustainable development, all goals and objectives are

important. Moreover, they are interconnected -

sustainable development presupposes the unification

of all three aspects of the population's life - social,

economic, environmental. As the analysis of

materials for the preparation of the Russian Voluntary

National Review of the Implementation of the 2030

Agenda for Sustainable Development has shown,

there are so-called "points of growth" for each SDG.

These are the tasks that need to be solved in order to

further achieve the goals set at the international level.

For example, this are both the acceleration of the

growth of labor productivity, and the elimination of

differences in the distribution of incomes of the

population, including in the regional context.

In recent years, Russia has shown significant

progress in achieving these SDGs.

The Russian government has proposed and

implemented a number of state support measures to

minimize damage from the pandemic in the main

industries and the social area.

According to the Recovery Plan, in 2020-2021, it

is planned to allocate about five trillion rubles to

support the national economy and population. On

July 14, 2020, the presentation of the first Russian

Voluntary National Review of the Implementation of

the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development took

place. During this presentation, the Minister of

Economic Development of the Russian Federation

Maxim Reshetnikov informed that 3.26 trillion rubles

out of this amount are provided for social support of

the population; support for small and medium-sized

businesses, as well as backbone companies and

enterprises from the most affected sectors of the

economy; to provide government guarantees; to

Sustainable Development of Cities of Russia

303

support and balance the budgets of the subjects of the

Russian Federation.

REFERENCES

Budushcheye v gorodakh (2017). Elektronnyy resurs.

Rezhim dostupa

/https://www.vedomosti.ru/partner/articles/2017/05/24

/691328-buduschee-gorodah

Dynkin, A., Telegina, Ye. (2020). Pandemicheskiy shok i

mir posle krizisa. Mirovaya ekonomika i

mezhdunarodnyye otnosheniya, 64(8):5-16.

https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2020-64-8-5-16.

Fituni, L., Abramova, I. (2020). Razvivayushchiyesya

strany v politicheskoy ekonomii postkoronavirusnogo

mira. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnyye

otnosheniya, 64(9):5-14.

https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2020-64-9-5-14/

O komplekse indeksov RSPP po ustoychivomu razvitiyu,

KSO i otchetnosti. Elektronnyy resurs. Rezhim dostupa

https://media.rspp.ru/document/1/e/5/e50e1e6c17d557

96f2af2336a6d363d6.pdf

Prezentatsiya dlya investorov ESG Banking: sdelano v

Rossii. 2020. Elektronnyy resurs. Rezhim dostupa

https://www.centrinvest.ru/files/about/presentations/20

19.pdf

Regiony Rossii i tseli ustoychivogo razvitiya OON.

Elektronnyy resurs. Rezhim dostupa

https://una.ru/region_evolution

Report of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable

Development 126 p. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 20–22 June

2012. Elektronnyy resurs. Rezhim dostupa

http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/814UN

CSD%20REPORT%20fi nal%20revs.pdf (accessed

14.03.2021).

Rostovskaya oblast' –dvizheniye k tselyam ustoychivogo

razvitiya. Elektronnyy resurs. Rezhim dostupa

https://education.southofrussia.ru/stamp.pdf

Sredstva massovoy informatsii (2020). Elektronnyy resurs.

Rezhim dostupa

https://www.c40.org/press_releases/cities-commit-

divest-invest

Tseli ustoychivogo razvitiya vklyucheny vo vnutrennyuyu

politiku Rossii (2020). Elektronnyy resurs. Rezhim

dostupa https://rg.ru/2020/09/20/celi-ustojchivogo-

razvitiia-vkliucheny-vo-vnutrenniuiu-politiku-

rossii.html

Yevropeyskaya zelenaya sdelka (2021). Elektronnyy

resurs. Rezhim dostupa

https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-

2024/european-green-deal_en

ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure

304