Sociocultural specifics of Russia’s regions: common features and differences

There is abundant evidence of the correlation between culture (or sociocultural characteristics, by which we mean here values and behavioral attitudes shared by a certain community and changing slowly over time) and economic and innovation development. At present most studies have been carried out at national level. At the same time, sociocultural differences within the countries with a large territory and significant socio-economic and ethnic diversity (Russia, in particular) are understudied. The subject of the research is the differences in socio-cultural characteristics between Russia’s regions. The purpose of the paper is to determine the presence or absence of differences in socio-cultural characteristics according to G.Hofstede between the regions of Russia. The empirical basis for the study is data from representative polls, collected by the Russian Venture Company and the Institute for National Projects in 14 regions in 2018–2020. Econometric analysis (ecological approach) and univariate disperse analysis shows the existence of sociocultural heterogeneity between Russian regions measured with Hofstede characteristics: individualism and power distance (more pronounced differences) and uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation (less pronounced differences). Statistical differences between regions in masculine dimension are non-existent. Regions tend to form sociocultural clusters that are not explained by geographic, socio-economic or ethnic factors separately. The results are useful for the analysis of sociocultural drivers and barriers for regional development, as well as for institutional design, raising efficiency of formal institutions by harmonizing them with regional culture.

1. Antonov, E. V., Auzan, A.A., Bryzgalin, V.A., Voronenko, V.A., Zolotov, A. V., Nikishina, E. N., Pripuzova, N.A., & Trukhachev, S.A. (2019). Sociocultural factors of population innovation activity. Moscow: Institute for National Projects; Russian Venture Company.

2. Auzan, A.A., Avdienkova, M.A., Andreeva, D.A., Bakhtigaraeva, A.I., Bryzgalin, V.A., Butaeva, K. O., Weber, S., Davydov, D. V., Zolotov, A. V., Nikitin, K. M., Nikishina, E. N., Pripuzova, N.A., & Stavinskaya, A.A. (2017). Sociocultural factors of innovative development and successful implementation of reforms. Moscow: Center for Strategic Research.

3. Auzan, A.A., Bakhtigaraeva, A.I., Bryzgalin, V.A., Zolotov, A. V., Nikishina, E. N., Pripuzova, N.A., & Stavinskaya, A.A. (2020). Sociocultural factors in economics: Milestones and perspectives. Voprosy economiki, 7, 75–91.

4. Auzan, A.A, & Nikishina, E. N., (2021). Cultural economics: how culture affects the economy, and the economy affects culture: a course of lectures. M.: Economic faculty MSU M. V. Lomonosov.

5. Bryzgalin, V.A., & Nikishina, E. N., (2020). Is there a regional culture in Russia? Opportunities of using a sociocultural approach in economics. Voprosy economiki, 7, 108–126.

6. Grigoriev, L. M., Zubarevich, N. V., Khasaev, G. R., Ivanov, D. S., Kondratyev, S. V., Salikhov, M. R., ... Shastitko, A.E. (2011). Russian regions: economic crisis and problems of modernization. LLC “TEIS”.

7. Dubitskaya, V. (2015). Сopied capitalism: Illusions of effective managers. Moscow: Alpina Pablisher.

8. Zubarevich, N. V. (2012). Modern Russia: Geography with Arithmetic. Otechestvennye zapiski, 46(1), 55–64.

9. Lapin, N.I., Belyaeva, L.A., Boyko, I.I., Kasavina, N.A., Kogai, E.A., Pasovets,Yu.M.,... & Nemirovskaya, A. V. (2016). Atlas of Modernization of Russia and Its Regions: Socio-Economic and Socio-Cultural Trends and Issues. Moscow: Ves Mir.

10. Latov, Yu. V., & Latova, N. V. (2007). Findings and paradoxes of ethnometric analysis of Russia’s economic culture according to Hofstede. Mir Rossii, 4, 43–72.

11. Latov, Yu. V., Latova, N. V., & Nikolaeva, S.I. (2005). Routine shadow economy and national economic mentality in modern Russia: Relationship between Hofstede indices and indicators оf shadow economy activities. Moscow: Direktmedia Publishing.

12. Lebedeva, N., & Yasin, E. (2009). Culture and Innovation: Towards a Problem Statement. Foresight, 3(2), 16–26.

13. RVC, INP (2020) Public attitudes towards new technologies during the coronavirus crisis. Research report (Fragment). https://www.rvc.ru/upload/iblock/fd8/RVC_attitudes_to_technologies_report2020_fragment.pdf.

14. Yadov, V.A. (2002). Sociological foundations for the forecast of the Russian future society. Rossiya Reformiruyushchayasya, 2, 349–363.

15. Albert, S. M., & Duffy, J. (2012). Differences in risk aversion between young and older adults. Neuroscience and neuroeconomics, 1.

16. Algan Y, & Cahuc P. (2010). Inherited trust and growth. American Economic Review, 100(5), 2060–2092. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.5.2060

17. Algan Y, & Cahuc P. (2014). Trust, Growth, and Well-Being: New Evidence and Policy Implications. Handbook of Economic Growth, 2, 49–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53538-2.00002-2

18. Beugelsdijk S, & Maseland R. (2010). Culture in economics: History, methodological reflections and contemporary applications. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511761539

19. Beugelsdijk S, Maseland R, & Van Hoorn A. (2015). Are Scores on Hofstede’s Dimensions of National Culture Stable over Time? A Cohort Analysis. Global Strategy Journal, 5(3), 223-240. https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1098

20. Beugelsdijk S, & Welzel C. (2018). Dimensions and dynamics of national culture: Synthesizing Hofstede with Inglehart. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(10), 1469–1505.

21. Chen Y, Podolski E J, & Veeraraghavan M. (2017). National culture and corporate innovation. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 43, 173–187. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2017.04.006

22. Gorodnichenko Y, & Roland G. (2011). Which dimension of culture matter for long run economic growth? The American Economic Review, 101(3), 492–498. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.3.492

23. Gorodnichenko Y, & Roland G. (2021). Culture, institutions and democratization. Public Choice, 187, 165–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-020-00811-8

24. Hofstede G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors and organisations across nations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

25. Hofstede, G., Hofstede G. J., & Minkov M. (2010), Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. Revised and expanded 3rd Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill USA.

26. Hofstede, G. (2013). Replicating and Extending Cross-National Value Studies: Rewards and Pitfalls — An Example from Middle East Studies. AIB Insights, 13(2), 5–7.

27. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (eds.) (2004).

28. Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Sage publications. Hofstede G., Garibaldi de Hilal A. V., Malvezzi S., Tanure B., & Vinken H. (2010).

29. Comparing regional cultures within a country: Lessons from Brazil. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 41(3), 336–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022109359696

30. Maklasova, E., & Tatarko, A. (2019). The Interaction Of Climate And Economy As A Factor Of Collectivism In The Regions Of Russia. Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BRP, 109.

31. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological review, 98(2), 224.

32. Minkov, M, Bond, M H, & Blagoev V. (2015). Do different national samples yield similar dimensions of national culture? Cross Cultural Management, 22(2), 259–277.

33. Minkov, M, Bond, M H, Dutt, P, Schachner, M, Morales, O, Sanchez, C, … Mudd, B. (2018). A Reconsideration of Hofstede’s Fifth Dimension: New Flexibility Versus Monumentalism Data From 54 Countries. Cross-Cultural Research, 52(3), 309–333. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397117727488

34. Minkov, M. (2018). A revision of Hofstede’s model of national culture: old evidence and new data from 56 countries. Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, 25(2), 231–256. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-03-2017-0033

35. Montgomery, D. C. (2013). Montgomery Design and Analysis of Experiments Eighth Edition. John Wiley & Sons.

36. Naumov, A., & Puffer, S. (2000). Measuring Russian culture using Hofstede’s dimensions. Applied psychology, 49(4), 709–718. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00041

37. Obradovich N, Özak Ö, Martín I, Ortuño-Ortín I, Awad E, Cebrián M, … Cuevas Á. (2020). Expanding the measurement of culture with a sample of two billion humans. National Bureau of Economic Research.

38. Rajh, E., Budak, J., & Anić, I.-D. (2016). Hofstede’s culture value survey in Croatia: Examining regional differences. Drustvena Istrazivanja, 25(3), 309–327. https://doi.org/10.5559/di.25.3.0

39. Shane, S. (1993). Cultural influences on national rates of innovation. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(1), 59–73. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(93)90011-S

40. Smith, P.B, Peterson, M. F, & Schwartz, S. H. (2002). Cultural values, sources of guidance, and their relevance to managerial behavior: A 47-nation study. Journal of crosscultural Psychology, 33(2), 188–208.

41. Taras, V., Kirkman, B. L., & Steel, P. (2010). Examining the impact of Culture’s consequences: a three-decade, multilevel, meta-analytic review of Hofstede’s cultural value dimensions. Journal of applied psychology, 95(3), 405. Taylor, M.Z., & Wilson, S. (2012). Does culture still matter? The effects of individualism on national innovation rates. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2), 234–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.10.001

42. Varsakelis, N. C. (2001). The impact of patent protection, economy openness and national culture on R&D investment: a cross-country empirical investigation. Research policy, 30(7), 1059–1068.

43. Williams, L. K. & McGuire, S. J. J. (2005). Effects of National Culture on Economic Creativity and Innovation Implementation. The Institution of Market Exchange 2005. Conference proceedings, Barcelona, International Society for the New Institutional Economics.