Definition of the city in the legal aspect of urban development

Veretennikova Kseniia Vadimovna PhD in Architecture Associate Professor, Department of Urban Planning, Saint Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering 190005, Russia, Saint Petersburg, 2nd Krasnoarmeyskaya str., 4 xenyaver@gmail.com Other publications by this author

The Russian Federation is one of the highly urbanized countries, most of its population lives in cities. The degree of urbanization is usually characterized by the ratio between urban and rural populations. The recent All-Russian Census showed that urbanization continues in Russia: 74.8% of the country's population lives in cities in 2021, compared with 2010, the number of urban population increased by 1.3 percentage points ^[1]. By the end of 2020, Russia was in 67th place (out of 207) in the ranking of countries in the world in terms of the share of citizens in the total population ^[2].

The calculation of the population of Russia is carried out by the Federal State Statistics Service (hereinafter – Rosstat). According to their methodological explanations, data on the distribution of the population into urban and rural are considered at the place of permanent residence in urban and rural settlements, respectively ^[3]. At the same time, urban settlements are considered to be approved by legislative acts as urban-type cities and towns, where the designation "urban-type settlement" applies to working, resort and country villages. According to the latest population census, there are over a thousand cities in Russia (1118), and over a thousand (1179) urban-type settlements.

Currently, there are no criteria for classifying settlements as urban at the federal level in Russia. As in principle, there is no legislative consolidation of the concept of a city, along with the procedure for classifying a settlement into such a category. The territorial organization of the subjects of the Russian Federation is under the jurisdiction of the subjects themselves and is regulated through legislation on the administrative-territorial structure and through other regional normative legal acts. It follows that the criteria for the allocation of urban settlements and the conceptual apparatus of a territorial organization from subject to subject may differ quite significantly. The legislation on the administrative-territorial structure of subjects also contains unique terminology, which emphasizes the regional diversity of both forms of settlement and legislative approaches to their definition. Examples include the terms urban settlement (Leningrad, Krasnoyarsk regions), suburban settlement (Belgorod region, Stavropol Territory) as a variety of the urban-type settlement category. Even within one country at the regional level, the methodology for classifying settlements as urban may vary, and, consequently, their number and degree of urbanization of various subjects are not subject to correct comparison through the available official statistics.

It should be noted that before the signing of the Federal Treaty on March 31, 1992, issues of administrative and territorial structure in the Russian Federation were regulated at the federal level. However, when such administrative-territorial units as territories and oblasts became part of the Russian Federation already as subjects, the legal regulation of the administrative-territorial division of the subjects of the Russian Federation passed into the competence of the subjects themselves ^[4]. To date, the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR dated August 17, 1982 "On the procedure for resolving issues of the administrative-territorial structure of the RSFSR" is in force in the part that does not contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation, but it also does not contain clear criteria for urban development. In order to settle a single conceptual framework and highlight generally accepted criteria for determining urban settlements, there is a need to legislate the principles of administrative-territorial division of the subjects of the Russian Federation and create methodological guidelines for the development of regional laws on administrative-territorial structure. These issues are often considered in the context of legal, legal, economic and management studies ^[5;6;7;8].

From the perspective of socio-economic geography, there is also concern about determining the actual urbanization of the country. In the article by Balabeikina O. A. and Faibusovich E. L., devoted to the degree of urbanization of regions, the authors consider it insufficient to limit the percentage of urban population to determine the degree of urbanization. Therefore, three more indicators are proposed: "urban population density (the ratio of the population of cities in the region to the area of its territory); the density of the urban network (the number of cities per 10 thousand km2) and the average population of cities in the region" ^[9]. At the same time, the proposed methodology radically excludes urban-type settlements from the calculation, with reference to the limited urban functions in this type of urban settlements. Consequently, the study is also based on official statistics from Rosstat, using localities approved by legislative acts as such as cities. But the official status of a locality does not always reflect its actual state and is often a direct reflection of administrative management rather than the actual spatial structure.

 The very concept of a city in the legal field is blurred, its urban planning, spatial planning aspect is lost and replaced by conventional units, to which decision-making and the development of urban planning documentation are linked. Today, the territorial organization of the subjects of the Russian Federation is a subsystem in the general system of the territorial structure of Russia, which includes both administrative-territorial units and municipal territorial units – municipalities. On the basis of such units, which make up the territory of the whole country, state and local government bodies function. Administrative and municipal units of a similar level may or may not coincide in terms of borders and the composition of their constituent settlements. It should be noted that the administrative-territorial status or the status of a municipality does not always reflect the category of the population living in it: urban or rural. For example, in a municipal division, an urban district or urban settlement may include both urban and rural settlements, and urban–type settlements may be part of rural settlements. Thus, the administrative-territorial unit of the Sverdlovsk region with the name "Yekaterinburg city", in addition to the settlement – the city of Yekaterinburg, includes 18 rural settlements. The law "On the administrative-territorial structure of the Sverdlovsk Region" (No. 34-OZ dated 04/13/2017) does not separately disclose the concept of a city, only lists it along with urban-type settlements as a type of urban settlements. According to the municipal division, the above-mentioned settlements form a municipality with the status of an urban district called the city of Yekaterinburg.

Regardless of the administrative boundaries, an actual settlement system has been formed on the territory of the country, consisting of settlements that have arisen over the centuries under the influence of many factors: geographical, national, socio-economic, political, cultural and others. A locality, being included in the administrative-territorial and municipal structure, in itself, as a rule, is neither an administrative-territorial nor a municipal unit. According to regional legislation, such a territorial unit as a locality can be both administratively independent and administratively independent. During the analysis, several laws on the administrative-territorial structure were identified, classifying a settlement as an administrative-territorial unit (Vologda Region, Tomsk Region, Smolensk Region, Komi Republic, Krasnodar Territory), and urban–type cities and towns as administrative-territorial statuses.

Until recently, the definition of a settlement was also not fixed at the federal level, which gave rise to a variety of definitions within the framework of regional legal acts. In 2022, the federal document on standardization – code of rules 42.13330.2016 "Urban Planning. Planning and development of urban and rural settlements" (hereinafter referred to as the joint venture "Urban Planning") – the concept of a settlement was added as "a spatial planning formation of permanent residence of the population having residential and other buildings and structures necessary to ensure the vital activity of citizens, its own name and territorial boundaries established in the appropriate manner." This formulation summarizes and clarifies the definitions proposed in the laws of the subjects on their administrative-territorial structure, where a locality is classified either as a territorial unit or an administrative-territorial unit, and the spatial planning aspect is expressed in the characteristics of the environment: a populated area with concentrated buildings (Kursk, Lipetsk regions), a place of compact human habitation (Kemerovo region, Republic of Khakassia).

Despite the lack of a generally accepted term for a city, it is actively used in the legal field. Through the use of the term city, other definitions are interpreted, while the very concept of a city is not disclosed. Top-level regulations, such as the Urban Planning Code of the Russian Federation and the joint venture "Urban Planning", evasively affect this concept. Thus, in the Urban Planning Code (No. 190-FZ of 12/29/2004), the term city occurs only twice: in the definition of urban development activities as "activities for the development of territories, including cities and other settlements", and in the name of the subject – "city of federal significance". The Federal Law "On the General Principles of the Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation" (No. 131–FZ dated 06.10.2003) defines a municipal entity - an urban settlement as a city or settlement. The All-Russian classifier of objects of administrative-territorial division classifies cities as objects of classification, Rosstat considers statistics of constant population, including in relation to cities. In the joint venture "Urban Planning", the term city does not occur, instead the terms are used: urban settlements and municipalities such as urban settlements, urban districts and municipal districts. The set of rules reveals that an urban locality is a place where residents are mostly not associated with agricultural production and (or) processing of agricultural products. Thus, according to the set of rules, the criterion for classifying a settlement as a city is solely the nature of employment of the population. Interestingly, E. N. Zaborova in her article "Criteria for the allocation of a city as a type of settlement" speaks about the fairness of the idea of a city as a settlement with non-agricultural activities not for all cities. And he cites the example of the Ural cities, for which agricultural activity was the most important type of activity and residents at the stage of their formation ^[10]. Although modern cities are indeed characterized by the predominant employment of residents in non-agricultural areas, this criterion alone is not enough to fully determine the urban status.

The classification of cities, depending on the total permanent population, dividing them into the largest, large, large, medium and small, is currently presented in the joint venture "Urban Planning" (Table 4.1). However, the term city is not directly used in it, and the groups represented are tied specifically to the concepts of urban and rural settlements. Previously, this information was contained in the Urban Planning Code of 1998, in article 5 "Types of settlements of the Russian Federation", and then the term city could be found in the classification itself: largest cities, large cities, large cities and so on. Also in the code there was a division of settlements into urban and rural, where the first included cities and towns, and the second – villages, stanitsas, villages, hamlets, villages, villages, camps, zaimki and others.

The analysis of regional laws on administrative and territorial structure demonstrates the application of various approaches to the concept of a city. Most of the regions are limited to defining a city in terms of its administrative and territorial status: a city of regional/regional/district, district significance. In this case, the definition is given not for the city as a settlement in the meaning of a spatial planning formation, but for the city as a unit of administrative-territorial division. For example, in the Republic of Khakassia, even in the general definition of a city, it is considered as an administrative-territorial unit that allows the presence of several settlements within its borders.

Not all subjects define a city as a territorial spatial unit, and the proposed definitions vary significantly from subject to subject. Based on the analysis of the definitions of the city in the laws on the administrative-territorial structure, the following signs of classifying a settlement as a city are found: the population indicator and the prospect of its growth; the percentage of employment in the non-agricultural sphere of labor/industry; the presence/ development of social, engineering, transport, industrial infrastructure; the level of landscaping; the importance of the settlement as a cultural, the economic center; the nature and number of floors of the building; the prospect of economic growth. Based on quantitative indicators of the population, it is possible to trace how much the approaches of different subjects vary in defining the concept of a city. Thus, settlements with a population of 8 (Ivanovo, Voronezh regions), 10 (Astrakhan, Kemerovo regions, Republic of Kalmykia), 11 (Altai Territory), 12 (Novgorod, Rostov regions), 15 thousand people (Kostroma region) can be counted as a city. In the Stavropol Territory, this figure reaches a value of 20 thousand. Some subjects do not resort to numerical indicators, limiting themselves to a more abstract definition, and refer cities to economic and cultural centers of important industrial, socio-cultural and historical significance, the prospect of further economic development and population growth (Tyumen Region, Primorsky Krai). One of the most detailed definitions of the city is given in the Ivanovo region. Here, the sign of infrastructure development has acquired quantitative expression in the form of an area of retail facilities – over 400 sq. m. It is also of interest to clarify that the city should have "more than two objects of cultural and historical heritage of federal or regional significance."

In addition to the difference between the criteria outlined above, the difference in the interpretation of the concept of a city is reinforced by the blurring of trigger criteria, which are the basis for changing the category of a settlement ^[5]. Such a variety of numerical indicators and the vagueness of criteria for classifying a settlement as a city in various subjects call into question the reliability of conclusions about the degree of actual urbanization of Russia.

Analyzing the concept of a city in the legislation of the subjects of the Russian Federation on administrative-territorial division, one can notice its industrial character. The city is often considered as an industrial center. For example, in the Novgorod and Leningrad regions, an integral attribute of the city is the predominant employment of the able-bodied population in industry.  The continuity of documentation is obvious from the time of Soviet urbanization, when industrialization played a leading role in the emergence of new cities. New towns created around enterprises often had a settlement character and did not develop as multifunctional formations ^[11]. At the moment, this indicates the inadequacy of the existing legislative framework to the concept of a post-industrial city.

Doubts about the number of cities in the country established by Rosstat are also caused by cases of inconsistency between their real and administrative borders. In densely populated urbanized territories, especially in agglomerations, it can be difficult to accurately identify boundaries. Sometimes cities actually merge, but remain separated by administrative boundaries ^[12]. In other cases, actually two separate cities can be combined into one municipality or even into one locality. Thus, the boundaries of cities begin to be formal. For example, the administrative boundaries of Norilsk include the central district and two spatially torn urban areas – Kayerkan and Talnakh, which are located about 25 kilometers from the center to the northwest and southeast, respectively. Talnakh and Kayerkan are actually separate spatial structures, and until 2004 they had the status of separate cities. Each with its own history, causes and time of occurrence. According to the Resolution of the Council of the Administration of the Krasnoyarsk Territory dated 11/29/2004 No. 298-P on the unification of the settlements of Norilsk, Talnakh and Kayerkan were united as "actually merged with each other." There is no question of any actual spatial fusion, Talnakh and Kayerkan are undoubtedly two independent urban structures.

Presumably, the isolation of Norilsk from the "mainland", the lack of overland passenger traffic, forms a unique understanding of the spatial fusion of the urban structure. In the context of Norilsk, the paved road connection between Talnakh, Norilsk and Kayerkan is perceived as a much closer merger compared to similar conditions in central Russia. Perhaps this reflects the special regional specifics of the conditions of the far north, but this specificity is not enough to combine three cities into one from the perspective of considering the actual spatial structure. By a stretch, the city of Norilsk meets the definition of a settlement contained in the law on the administrative-territorial structure of the Krasnoyarsk Territory as "a territorial entity with concentrated residential development within the established border and used for human habitation." This law does not contain an interpretation of the concept of a city. Also, such a merger is a substitute for the concept of a city in administrative-territorial, municipal structures. At the local level, urban planning documentation is being developed for the municipal unit — the urban district "city of Norilsk", which probably erases the importance of spatial independence of individual territorial units. This case is not indicative of the recalculation of the degree of urbanization of the Russian Federation, since all the settlements under consideration are urban in any case. However, this affects the calculation of the number of cities in the country and demonstrates that ignoring spatial characteristics can lead to logical inconsistencies.

Conclusion

The concept of a city cannot be studied from the standpoint of a single discipline. The city is such a multifaceted entity that it is impossible to give a definition that would cover and reveal all its aspects. Urban space is a complex, multistructural formation that includes many components, the main of which is physical space ^[13]. However, in the legal field of urban planning, this concept is often understood in isolation from the spatial context. The city ceases to be considered as a real physical space and is replaced by administrative-territorial and municipal categories.

Currently, federal legislation does not provide a clear definition of the city and the criteria by which settlements should be classified as urban. Since the Rosstat methodology is based on urban-type cities and towns, determined on the basis of various criteria established by the legislation of the subjects of the Russian Federation on administrative and territorial structure, there is no uniformity in this issue. Without a single conceptual framework and criteria fixed at the federal level for classifying settlements as urban, it is difficult to analyze the real degree of urbanization of the country. The lack of complete data on her condition may negatively affect the quality of government policy decisions. It should be noted that the establishment of generally accepted criteria should help eliminate emerging logical inconsistencies, while not detracting from regional diversity, but on the contrary, taking into account regional climatic, cultural and economic characteristics.

Despite the fact that many books and scientific papers have been published about cities, many issues continue to be debatable and need further research: which settlements in modern Russia can be considered cities? What is the real degree of urbanization of the Russian Federation? How can we determine the number of cities in Russia based on their spatial and economic characteristics, and not on normative legal acts that use various criteria to classify them into this category? Is it advisable to take into account the characteristics of the spatial structure when assigning administrative boundaries of settlements and allocating administrative-territorial and municipal units? The development of a unified methodology for determining the criteria of an urban structure based on spatial characteristics could help answer these questions.