Abstract: The object of the study are scientists, teachers, local historians and other progressive-minded residents of the Urals. The subject of the study is their perception of the well–being of their region through the activities of various actors to preserve monuments of industrial heritage. The chronological framework – the 1970s and 1980s – was not chosen by chance. During this period, the desire of a part of the Soviet population to identify and preserve the monuments of the industrial past of their region was emerging, which was expressed not only in publishing activities, but also in extensive practical work. The author identifies a number of functions that were laid down in Soviet times in the process of preserving monuments of industrial heritage: educational, cognitive, aesthetic, image-forming. The relevance and practical significance of the study lies precisely in the fact that these functions can and should be updated at the present time in order to preserve the remaining objects of the industrial heritage of the Urals. The research used materials stored in the central and regional archives, as well as published sources. The complex of scientific methods that were used to achieve the research goal consists of general scientific (analysis, synthesis, induction, analogy) and special historical (problem-chronological, historical-comparative). The author concludes that in the 1970s and 1980s, individual residents of the Urals (scientists, engineers, local historians, teachers) did not in vain begin to attract the attention of the general public to the need to preserve monuments of industrial heritage. They believed that these objects could be used to implement several functions: educational, cognitive, aesthetic and some others. The combination of these functions, or each one individually, can allow a person to feel happy. And this will contribute to the formation of a favorable image of the region. The author believes that the industrial heritage has a huge potential for shaping and maintaining the attractiveness of the region, and therefore the well-being of its happy residents through feelings of demand in the profession, pride in the history and achievements of previous generations. And this factor must be developed and strengthened at the present time, until the remnants of the industrial heritage of the Urals are finally lost.

Abstract: The object of the study is the section of monuments of science and technology of the VOOPIK. The subject is the activity of the section of monuments of science and technology for the identification, study, accounting, preservation and updating of the corresponding category of monuments. The purpose of the study is to reconstruct the history of the emergence and functioning of this structural unit in the 1960s-1980s. The territorial framework is limited to the Sverdlovsk and Chelyabinsk regions, the leading industrial regions of the Urals, on the territory of which there were a large number of monuments of science and technology, monuments of industrial heritage. The author studies the history of the formation of the section of monuments of science and technology, and also gives a description of various types of its activities on the materials of the Sverdlovsk and Chelyabinsk regions. The problem posed has not yet been the subject of special study, and has only been touched upon in the context of the study of history in general of the All-Russian Society for the Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments and its regional branches, in particular. This determines the scientific novelty of the article. The source material is represented by archival materials, many of which are being introduced into scientific circulation for the first time, for example, unique information about the project to create a Museum of the History of Science and Technology in Chelyabinsk. The author comes to the conclusion that there were both similar directions and significant differences in the activities of these sections. This was determined by several reasons. Of great importance was the personal factor, which also influenced the effectiveness of the functioning of the section of monuments of science and technology