Theory and practice of civil identity formation: the experience of Rostov-on-Don and the Rostov Region

Sokolova Alla Nikolaevna Doctor of Art History Doctor of Art History, Leading Researcher of the Southern Branch of the Russian Scientific Research Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage named after D.S. Likhachev; Professor of the Adyghe State University 385008, Russia, the Republic of Adygea, Maykop, Pervomaiskaya Street 208, office #14 professor_sokolova@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Tretyakova Elena Yur'evna ORCID: 0000-0001-9715-7378 Doctor of Philology Leading Researcher, Southern Branch of the Russian Research Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage named after. D. Likhacheva 352000, Russia, Krasnodar Territory, Krasnodar, Krasnaya str., 28 drevo_rechi@mail.ru

Introduction. The problem of civic identity in Russia has been and remains acute and relevant. Probably, the discussion of this issue can be permanent, since, firstly, the very concept of "civil identity" does not have clear and generally recognized "boundaries", they are constantly being debated, the concept is fragmented into more and more clarifying elements and, secondly, it is proved that civil identity flexibly reflects on any political and socio-cultural changes in the country. Civil identity is often called "dormant", revealing itself in certain circumstances. Nevertheless, considerable financial investments are allocated annually for the formation and strengthening of civic identity in the country, and the effectiveness of the measures taken requires constant monitoring. This article will consider the theoretical issues of building a civic identity relevant to Rostov-on-Don and the Rostov region; federal and regional programs, as well as regulatory documents regulating practical work in this direction.

Content analysis of sociological research by scientists from Rostov-on-Don. In Rostov-on-Don, the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences has been studying issues of civil identity for quite a long time, often in cooperation with scientists from Adygea and Moscow (Yu.A. Zhdanov played a huge role in establishing strong permanent ties with the scientific world of the North Caucasus at one time). The array of publications of this collective is quite indicative for understanding the general situation with the scientific analysis of the problems of civic identity. For this reason, we found it necessary to analyze the most informative excerpts from the works of F. Barkov, K. Vodenko, Yu. Volkov, V. Gurb, I. Guskov, G. Denisova, S. Makushenko, V. Rodionova, A. Serikov, V. Chernous, G. Chikarova. We will also involve other works on the structure, types, mechanisms of formation, factors and determinants of civic identity.

The need to study the phenomenon and the request for "identity politics" (M. Gorshkov) do not weaken – moreover, in conditions of social and economic instability, it is becoming relevant. Various scientific institutions are commissioned to carry out research on a state order (for example, we find in open access articles on state assignment No. 122120200080-4 on the topic "Civil and ethnocultural identity of youth: value bases and determinants of formation in conditions of uncertainty") ^[1]. G. I. Chikarova explains the request for a theoretical and empirical understanding of the civil identity of Russian youth the high degree of migration intentions of young people and the fact that this socio-demographic group demonstrates a lower level of trust in government than older generational groups ^[2]. At the same time, in her opinion, the values are partially consonant with the ideals prescribed in the country's normative documents; the emotional component of civic identity has been formed. In the behavioral component of civic identity, civil and political motivation for the implementation of practices in the field of environmental conservation is fixed. The cognitive component of civic identity and the motivation of students to participate in civic and political activities are insufficiently formed. According to a survey of youth aged 16-24 (about 3,000 residents of Rostov-on-Don), researcher V.A. Fedotova states that a third of respondents do not know the Anthem of Russia, have not read the Constitution; more than half do not go to the polls, because they consider their results to be predictable ^[3].

The analysis of scientific articles shows that the scientific community is actively searching for measures to develop tools for assessing the levels and quality of formation of civic identity in society. By no means all authors are able to make a high-quality examination without replacing it with complimentary declarations or scribbling.

T. V. Bugaichuk and O. A. Koryakovtseva read about 24 parameters of civic identity, each of which begins with the words: readiness, desire, knowledge, intolerance, recognition, responsibility ^{[4, p. 8]}. It can be seen that the boundaries of the phenomenon and the hierarchy of the internal structure of the studied subject are somewhat blurred, which destroys the hierarchy of its structure. Why was the "feeling of belonging to the world community" previously named in the list as "feeling of belonging to a multinational Russian society"? Is it because the authors, building an abstract, abstract system, put forward the level of the "world community" and only after it mention the level of self-identification of the "Russian community", well, the third is called the level of "belonging to an ethnic group". As we can see, the proposed "priority ladder" proceeds from Western interpretations of the relevant issues and requires revision. At the same time, the search for real criteria for evaluating the subject under study is also obvious.

The marking characteristic of civic identity, as a rule, is patriotism. Rostov scientists have revealed that patriotism, in the opinion of modern Russians, is: "military service, unwillingness to leave Russia, love and pride for their country, support for the country's political leadership, active citizenship, conscientious work, participation in rallies, charity" ^{[5, p. 105]}. Offering different age groups of Rostov youth the question: "In your opinion, what values and principles unite all Russian citizens into a single nation today?", G. S. Denisova found that 37% of young people aged 18-24 and 40% of 25-29 years old noted patriotism in their answers ^{[6, p. 120]}. Russian citizenship, the author sums up, "is understood by young people simultaneously as the legal status of an individual (to be a citizen according to a passport), as personal involvement in Russian culture and as a personal professional contribution to the development of Russia (social activism)" ^{[6, p. 121]}. Other authors also emphasize the lack of a clear civic position among young people and insufficient knowledge about neighboring peoples and their cultural values ^{[5, p. 108]}. Back in 2013, a group of scientists from Rostov-on-Don categorically spoke about all the youth of the Rostov region: "... they are experiencing a serious vacuum of unifying social development goals, a shortage of positive identification symbols" ^{[7, p. 59]}.

Often, researchers, having constructed a reference image of a person endowed with citizenship, try to compare the standard with real data from sociological surveys. When compiling questionnaires, the structure of civil identity looks different, or civil identity is put on a par with professional, ethnic identity. Let's show this by the example of an article by Prof. G. S. Denisova. The researcher presented a survey of two age groups (18-24 and 25-30 years old). The author writes about "the dominance of the all-Russian identity in these two youth groups. As the main one, it was singled out by 70% of young people under the age of 25, 72% – under the age of 30" ^{[6, p. 118]}. Further in the article we read: "... it should be emphasized that the respondents of both groups indicated the very important and important importance of ethnic identity for themselves. The sum of these two responses for each group was 72 and 71%, respectively" ^{[6, p. 118]}. Based on the results of this survey, it was concluded that in their collective representations of the youth of the Rostov region, civil identity is understood in a multicomponent way: legally, culturally and actively ^{[6, p. 119]}. The dominance of ethnic identity over the all-Russian one in the North Caucasus is noted by almost all researchers of this problem.

Russian scientists L. M. Drobizheva ^[8] and D. V. Monastyrsky ^[9] consider it expedient to distinguish between state and civil identities. Picking up on this idea, Yu. Volkov and his associates put forward additional arguments in favor of such a distinction. They point out that state identity is formed "from top to bottom", and civil identity is formed from below, through self–organization ^{[1, p. 64]}.

T. Vodolazhskaya in the structure of the collective civic community calls the following the most significant: "1) common historical past (common destiny)...; 2) self-designation of the civic community; 3) common language...; 4) common culture (political, legal, economic)...; 5) the experience of joint emotional states by this community, especially those related to real political actions" ^{[10, p. 141]}.

The scientific group of Yu. Volkov uses the concept of "habitus of civic identity" and identifies three groups of factors of its formation among young people: "culture based on certain norms and values; patriotism and patriotic education of youth; historical memory" ^{[1, p. 60]}. On this basis, a cognitive model of the formation of a student's civic identity is built, where "the external aspect is social, transmitting norms, values and patterns of behavior, and the internal one is personal, responsible for their assimilation and demonstration, for the need to be recognized and accepted by any group" ^{[1, p. 64]}.

We have given a number of examples to show: dissecting the phenomenon of civic identity, researchers break it up into smaller and smaller components and "juggle" the data of opinion polls, which does not allow us to judge in a holistic format the formation / non–formation of civic identity - neither all-Russian nor regional. Rostov-on-Don scientists have developed several models for the formation and strengthening of civic identity in the region. A scientific approach in these processes must be used, but this requires not only festivals and holidays, but serious ideological work to create conditions for fraternal cooperation between peoples and instrumental support for their unity.

Analysis of the work of Ministries and departments responsible for interethnic relations and civil solidarity. On the official portal of the Government of the Rostov region there is a Resolution dated 10/19/2020 No. 100 On the approval of the state program of the Rostov region "Youth policy and social activity" (valid as amended on 11/20/2023) ^[11]. The state program is designed for two stages of implementation: the first (2021) and the second (2022-2030), the financing of which in 2024 will amount to 212 235.8 thousand rubles. Among the expected results by 2030, it is expected to form a stable and extensive youth policy infrastructure in the Rostov region. Three of its four Subprograms (Subprograms 2, 3 and 4) are directly aimed at fostering an active citizenship of the younger generations. As a result of its implementation, it is planned to increase the number of young people involved in patriotic projects, support youth initiatives, and actively develop volunteerism. At the same time, the document pays special attention to the fact that in order to increase interest in the issues of patriotic and civic education of young people, it is necessary to strengthen propaganda activities, especially using Internet resources.

This program document is formulated much more thoroughly than the "Concept of the formation of an all-Russian civic identity among children and youth of the Rostov Region" (hereinafter the Concept), approved by the Decree of the Government of the Republic of Tatarstan dated 02/19/2015 N 123 and effective as amended on 04/05/2021 ^[12]. One part of the tasks outlined in the Concept was assigned to government structures and public organizations, the other to the media, cultural, educational and educational institutions.

The role of the family and informal associations was practically not highlighted. Meanwhile, in the works of scientists from Rostov-on-Don (V. I. Rodionov, S. A. Makushenko), it was emphasized that all values, including civil ones, are formed primarily in the family and under the influence of family upbringing and family experience, family conversations, even if they are not directly addressed to a young person ^{[5, p. 105]}.

According to the Concept, the main areas of activity for the formation of an all-Russian civic identity among children and youth were: educational, cultural, educational, sports and recreation, tourism and local lore, socio-legal, information and communication. Among the criteria for evaluating effectiveness are the proportion (number) of children and youth who passively or actively participate in relevant events; the number of articles and reports in the media, including on the Internet. At the same time, it was unclear who exactly should conduct such calculations, analyze the quality of publications and reports; by what methods to identify the degree of their impact on the formation of the all-Russian civic identity. The Concept declared the need for "systematic monitoring of the effectiveness of this process at three levels: socio-psychological, socio-legal, moral and ethical," but did not specify what methods of correlating these levels, who and with what frequency will conduct this monitoring.

Along the way, we note that, for example, T. Vodolazhskaya sees it expedient to talk about elements, and not about levels. In the structure of civic identity, it designates three main elements: "cognitive – knowledge of belonging to a given social community, value – the presence of a positive or negative attitude to the fact of belonging – and emotional – acceptance or non-acceptance of the civic community as a membership group as a result of the action of the first two elements" ^{[10, p. 141]}.

Analyzing the "Decree of the Government of the Rostov Region dated 04.04.2019 No. 234 "On the Action Plan for 2019-2021 for the implementation of the Strategy of the State National Policy of the Russian Federation in the Rostov region for the period up to 2025", one had to be surprised by the wording: "Assistance in holding celebrations dedicated to the National Unity Day" (indicator for monitoring the implementation – at least 250 participants); "Assistance in holding celebrations dedicated to the Day of the National Flag of the Russian Federation" (at least 200). Such plans, in our opinion, do not contribute to strengthening civic identity, but turn this work into profanation, which ultimately discredits the government. The item "Ensuring the functioning of the system for monitoring the state of interethnic and interfaith relations and early warning of interethnic conflicts in the Rostov region" with the note: "funding is not required" raised questions. In this case, who will carry out monitoring or (as it is written in the document) "monitoring systems"? There is an unsubscription instead of a clear system of actions in one of the most important areas of work on the formation of all-Russian unity and mutual understanding. Some other points of the plan ("Holding public hearings, round tables, scientific and practical conferences on countering manifestations of xenophobia and strengthening interethnic harmony in the Rostov region") were also formulated loosely, and therefore it turned out to be quite difficult to verify their implementation.

We believe that the effectiveness assessment should be given by independent specialists, not engaged by the Rostov authorities, but by expert groups conducting systematic and consistent work on a reimbursable basis. The expected results of the implementation of the Concept are written in an unverifiable form (declaratively) and with a priori positive assessment.

Thus, in Rostov-on-Don, both the "Concept of the formation of an all-Russian civic identity among children and youth of the Rostov region" and the cognitive model of the formation of civic identity of youth (Yu. Volkov), in addition, several state tasks on this topic have been completed, a diagnosis of civil identity has been carried out, problems and the lack of formation of individual components of the civil identity of youth have been identified and named (G. Denisova). And yet, what government structures and non-profit organizations, educational institutions and the public as a whole are planning and doing is not enough to consider a civic identity formed. Moreover, we can talk about the integration of the self–determination of the regional community into the structure of citizenship of the all-Russian state.

For civic unity, there is no doubt that well-thought-out tools for the formation of interethnic harmony are needed. For this purpose, rallies, meetings, round tables, scientific conferences, festivals, celebrations of national cultures, excursions, contests, etc. are traditionally used. To a lesser extent, this topical topic is being developed and used in social advertising, documentaries and feature films, literature and visual arts. However, at the moment, government programs and regulatory documents do not focus on this group of instrumental opportunities for civic unity. Each type of such work requires considerable financial and human resources. To date, it is no less important to find mechanisms and tools to verify the effectiveness of the funds spent. Sociological research, of course, remains the most used forms of identifying the sentiments and opinions of the entire regional community and its individual groups. However, we see what sometimes contradictory and ambiguous answers sociologists receive, to what extent the answers depend on the wording of the questions in the questionnaires and their interpretation. Therefore, the search for mechanisms for obtaining feedback, the development of a system of criteria for assessing the level of formation of civic identity are currently relevant tasks for specialists developing theoretical approaches to the study of civic identity and strategies for interethnic and youth policy.