Study of the quality of life of the population in the Russian Federation. Standard of living of the population Economic indicators of the level and quality of life of the population

Kharitonova Tatyana Viktorovna, Masterskikh Inna Pavlovna"Economics and Entrepreneurship" Federal State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Russian State University of Tourism and Service"

Structure and content of the concept “quality of life”

In modern conditions, improving the quality of life of the population is an element of the state’s socio-economic policy, and measures to implement this policy are often programmatic in nature.

Let us dwell in more detail on the content of the concept of “quality of life”. It should immediately be noted that in a number of studies and programs the concept of “quality of life” is artificially narrowed and replaced by the concept of “standard of living.” This approach seems wrong to us, since the standard of living is primarily a socio-economic category, focused on quantitative assessment of the degree to which certain needs of people are satisfied (for example, food, clothing, housing, medicines, personal services, etc. ). Determining the standard of living is related to the amount of funds allocated by people to meet their needs, the level and structure of personal consumption. Therefore, this category is limited to estimates of its constituent indicators in monetary or natural units. UN documents note that the standard of living is calculated as the level of satisfaction of the needs of the population, provided by the mass of goods and services used per unit of time. Therefore, to determine the standard of living, it is necessary first of all to determine the degree to which the needs of the population are met.

The concept of “quality of life”, in contrast to “standard of living,” reflects the degree to which the entire range of human life needs is satisfied. Therefore, quality of life is considered as a system of quantitative and qualitative indicators that characterize the degree of implementation of people’s life strategies and satisfaction of their life needs. It is extremely difficult to directly quantify the quality of life of the population, since it integrates many aspects of people’s standard of living. In particular, individual needs, which are not recorded by any statistical values and practically exist only in the minds of people, in the form of their personal opinions and assessments.

Currently, there is no generally accepted scientific definition of the concept of “quality of life”, therefore each author, as a rule, focuses on one of the aspects of this concept.

A number of definitions of quality of life refer to the degree to which a person’s material, cultural and spiritual needs are satisfied. In others, more complete and specific, a direct comparison is made of the actual level of satisfaction of needs with the basic one. All comparison procedures can be divided into two main groups:

based on subjective self-esteem;
based on external objective assessment.

Let's consider definitions of quality of life based on subjective self-assessment.

Quality of life is people's perception of their position in life in relation to their cultural background and value system and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards and concerns. Obviously, this definition is based on the level of satisfaction with one's life. And this level is largely determined by the expectations of each individual person and depends on the standards accepted in the social microenvironment with which he associates himself.

As an example of defining quality of life based on an external objective assessment, we will give the definition given by specialists from the National Institute of Health P.P. Gorbenko and V.V. Lozhko. Quality of life is understood as a theoretical system consisting of objective conditions of existence and their assessment at the level of society and the individual. In accordance with this definition, the quality of life is assessed not by the subjective satisfaction of the person himself, but by a number of objective indicators by other people who have complete and reliable information and the necessary qualifications for this, i.e., a team of experts. The following can be considered as objective indicators of quality of life:

clean environment,
personal and national security,
political and economic freedoms,
ensuring the right to work, the opportunity for career growth and increasing professional and intellectual levels,
ensuring demographic growth of society,
creation of living conditions,
ensuring healthcare and improving the medical care system for the population,
providing food for the population.

All of the above indicators should be considered in accordance with international standards and regulations established by the UN.

The components of quality of life represent a complex system of classification of various indicators. This allows you to analyze the quality of life of the population according to the following constituent criteria:

quality of population,
welfare of the population,
quality of the social sphere,
quality of ecological niche,
natural and climatic conditions.

It is possible to highlight more detailed elements of the criteria for the quality of life of the population:

environmental component;
life safety;
political and economic freedoms;
working life and career opportunities;
the sphere of developing people's abilities and increasing their professional and intellectual level;
family life and ensuring the demographic growth of society, solving housing problems, creating a culture of healthy housing;
increasing the level of health and longevity of the population, improving the system of existing medical care to the population, expanding the list of free care, ensuring its effectiveness and quality, increasing the availability and mass availability of sanatorium-resort and health services to the population;
providing food to the population in accordance with international standards and regulations established by the UN;
implementation of a strategy for safe personal development. A more detailed description of individual elements of quality of life can be given using a system of indicators, such as the cost of living, the consumer basket, personal income, and the minimum wage. All of the above indicators are currently used in the system of strategic planning for the development of the national economy.

There are also specific indicators of quality of life. For example, when characterizing the quality of food, one cannot limit itself to assessing it only by nutritional value (calorie content, content in grams of proteins, fats). It is impossible to ignore such characteristics as regularity of nutrition, its variety, and taste. When characterizing the quality of working life, one cannot limit oneself only to indicators of employment, unemployment, length of the working day, week, year, and the level of industrial injuries. It is necessary to assess the compliance with the interests of workers of the content and nature of work, its intensity, relationships within the work collective, etc.

Thus, quality of life is the degree of development and completeness of satisfaction of the entire complex of needs and interests of people, manifested both in various types of activities and in the sense of life itself.

Changes in the quality of life of the Russian population have always been accompanied by differentiation of the socio-economic status of various population groups. Today Russian society is divided into social strata, each of which has its own economic interests and behavior patterns. A layer of people has formed that has a significant influence on many issues of public life, including government social programs, and inequality in the distribution of income and benefits has increased. That is why the quality of life should be understood and formed as a system of objective conditions for the existence, activity and development of a person and society, assessed by the degree of compliance of these conditions, the results of a person’s activity and development with the norms, standards and life values accepted in society.

Determining the structure and content of the quality of life category seems important for assessing its level.

Study of the dynamics of indicators of the quality of life of the population in the Russian Federation for the period 2002-2008

To study the quality of life, we will use the indicators most often used in international and national assessments. For convenience, they are combined into the following blocks.

Block 1. Socio-demographic indicators.
Block 2. Socio-economic indicators.
Block 3. Health system indicators.
Block 4. Socio-cultural indicators.
Block 5. Indicators of social and personal security.
Block 6. Social and living indicators.
Block 7. Social and environmental indicators.

Let's look at them in more detail.

The socio-demographic situation in the country largely reflects the quality of life of the population. One of the most important socio-demographic indicators is population size.

As you can see, since 1990, the population of the Russian Federation has been constantly decreasing (Fig. 1). During the period from 2002 to 2008, it decreased by 3,157,900 people, or 2.18%. The reasons for this are seen, first of all, in the excess of mortality over the birth rate, etc.

Analysis of average life expectancy is essential for studying indicators of the quality of life of the population. During the period 2006-2007, life expectancy of the population increased, which is a positive phenomenon (Table 1). It should be noted that the positive trend of increasing life expectancy continues to this day.

Table 1. Life expectancy, number of years

The dynamics of fertility and mortality in Russia are of undoubted interest.

Data indicate that the country is experiencing a process of population depopulation, characterized by an excess of mortality over the birth rate. However, since 2005, the birth rate has steadily increased (Figure 2). It is also worth noting that since 2005, the mortality rate across the country has had a steady downward trend. Unfortunately, population decline continues to this day in Russia. Based on the data presented, we can conclude that the value of this indicator is constantly decreasing.

Rice. 2. Crude birth and death rates (births and deaths per 1,000 population)

The institution of the family is in a difficult situation in the country (Fig. 3), although in recent years some positive trends have been observed, which primarily include an increase in the number of marriages.

Rice. 3. Marriages and divorces, thousand

The situation is somewhat improved by a slight decrease in the number of divorces, but in 2007 this figure increases again. As you can see, the number of marriages exceeds the number of divorces.

Thus, the considered demographic indicators of the quality of life of the population allow us to speak about the insufficiently favorable socio-demographic situation that has developed in the Russian Federation, but, nevertheless, positive trends in recent years should be noted in a number of indicators.

During the study, various statistical data characterizing the socio-economic indicators of the development of the Russian Federation were examined (Table 2).

Table 2. Main indicators of socio-economic development of the Russian Federation

It should be noted that the country is currently experiencing a gradual revival of the economic sphere, stabilization of the socio-economic situation, and a gradual equalization of the main socio-economic indicators of the standard of living of the population, as evidenced by the statistics provided.

One of the general economic indicators of the quality of life of the population is the volume of gross national product per capita. As you can see, the volume of GDP is constantly increasing. For the period under review, this indicator

increased almost 3 times. It should be noted that GDP growth leads to an increase in revenues of the country’s consolidated budget. Also, over the past few years there has been an increase in consolidated budget expenditures. Since 2002, spending has increased by an average of 25%. Thus, the budget surplus in 2007 is 6% of GDP.

The socio-economic development of the country over the past few years has been characterized by an increase in real monetary incomes of the population (Table 3).

Table 3. Population income and socio-economic differentiation

During the period under review, there has been a constant increase in disposable cash income. As you can see, real incomes of the population increase annually, but the growth rate of this indicator remains virtually unchanged. The dynamics of the living wage clearly illustrates the socio-economic situation. At the same time, there are positive trends in changes in the population with monetary incomes, the value of which is below the subsistence level. Since 2002, this figure has decreased by 16.7 million people.

An important indicator characterizing the quality of life of the country's population is the Gini coefficient, which reflects the degree of deviation of the line of actual distribution of total income of the population from the line of their uniform distribution. The value of the Gini coefficient can vary from 0 to 1, and the higher the value of the indicator, the more unevenly income is distributed in society (Table 4).

Table 4. Distribution of total cash income by 20 percent population groups

The data presented indicate an increase in the concentration of income among the wealthiest groups of the population. The indicators under consideration must be supplemented with an analysis of the dynamics of population distribution by average per capita income (Table 5).

Table 5. Distribution of population by average per capita monetary income, %

As can be noted, in the country during the period 2004-2007 there was an increase in the population with incomes above 10 thousand rubles and a decrease in the number of citizens with incomes from 2 thousand to 6 thousand rubles. The population with incomes of 15 thousand rubles and above has increased most significantly. In this regard, we can talk about the presence of certain positive trends in the socio-economic sphere.

One of the important components of the quality of life of the population is indicators of the sphere of labor and employment of the population. Statistical data indicate that the number of economically active population, employed and unemployed citizens has changed with positive trends in recent years (Fig. 4).

Rice. 4. Number of economically active population, thousand people.

As you can see, in the period 2002-2007, the number of citizens employed in the economy changed dynamically and ultimately increased by 4,548 thousand people, or 6.8%. The number of unemployed citizens during the study period decreased by 1,909 thousand people, or by 31%. At the same time, the number of economically active population in the country is increasing. So, over 5 years it increased by 2,639 thousand people, or 3.6%. Thus, we can say that along with the increase in the economically active population, there is a decrease in the number of unemployed citizens, which has a positive effect on the socio-economic situation in the Russian Federation, and consequently on the quality of life of the country’s population.

An analysis of the work of the public employment service allows us to draw conclusions about the low efficiency of solving problems of employment of unemployed citizens in the country (Fig. 5).

Rice. 5. Employment of citizens by state employment service institutions, thousand people.

Thus, in the period 2002-2007, 37,187 thousand people applied to the employment service, of which 24,033 thousand people were employed. Thus, employment services employed on average about 35% of those who applied to them. A way out of a difficult situation may be to develop cooperation with organizations and institutions that have vacancies, use new employment technologies, stimulate the creation of additional jobs, encourage various forms of self-employment, strengthen work on career guidance for youth, etc.

Thus, in Russia in 2002-2007, certain positive changes were observed in the economic sphere: an increase in GDP, an increase in real incomes of the population, a decrease in the unemployment rate, etc.

The study of the health care system involves the study of population morbidity rates for the main classes of diseases (Table 6).

Table 6. Morbidity rate of the population by main classes of diseases (patients diagnosed for the first time in their lives were registered)

An important indicator of poor public health is the number of HIV-infected people. Thus, at the end of 2007, 12,700 cases of the disease were registered in the Russian Federation, which is 32.3% more than in 2006.

The state of development of the healthcare system is also of great importance for assessing the quality of life of the population in the country. Let us dwell on the study of the dynamics of the number of individual healthcare institutions and medical personnel for the period under review (Table 7).

Table 7. Treatment and prevention institutions and medical personnel, at the end of the year

The presented data indicate a decrease in the number of hospital institutions by 34%, and outpatient clinics by 14.5%. At the same time, the country has noted an increase in the capacity of medical outpatient clinics by 3%: in 2002, patient visits per shift amounted to 247.8 people. per 10 thousand population, in 2007 this figure increased to 258.7. During the period 2002-2007, the number of hospital beds decreased by 4.2%. According to experts, given the high workload of hospitals, this is an unacceptable indicator. The number of medical personnel during the period under review increases by 3.6% or 24,900 people.

Thus, the data obtained indicate a rather complex situation related to public health in the Russian Federation.

The “Socio-cultural indicators” block includes indicators characterizing the country’s education and culture. During the study, a quantitative analysis of individual indicators in the education sector was carried out. It is of undoubted interest to consider the dynamics of the number of preschool educational institutions (PTEs) (Table 8).

Table 8. Performance indicators of preschool educational institutions

As you can see, the country is experiencing an annual decrease in the number of preschool educational institutions (by 6.5% over 5 years). There is also a constant increase in the number of preschool children, with only 565 places per 1,000 children. Thus, we can state a decrease in the number of preschool educational institutions with an increase in the number of children in the country.

Let's consider the dynamics of the number of other educational institutions (Fig. 6).

Rice. 6. Number of state and municipal educational institutions at the beginning of the school year, thousand units

During the period 2002-2007, the number of schools and other educational institutions in the country constantly decreased (by 14.2% over 5 years). The number of institutions of primary vocational education, as well as secondary specialized educational institutions, has also decreased over the past few years (by 10.9% over 5 years). At the same time, during the period under review, there was an increase in the number of higher educational institutions by a total of 6.6%. At the same time, the number of state universities has remained almost unchanged; in 5 years, only 3 new universities have appeared in the country. The increase in non-state higher educational institutions was 17.2%. This circumstance influenced the increase in the number of higher education students (Fig. 7). The share of students from non-state higher educational institutions in the total number of students in 2007 was 16.8%.

Rice. 7. Number of students in general and vocational education institutions (at the beginning of the academic year, thousand people)

The study also included an analysis of the number of students in general education institutions. As you can see, in recent years, in general education institutions, as well as institutions of primary and secondary vocational education, there has been a constant decrease in the number of students. The total number decreased by 60.5%. The number of students in higher education institutions, on the contrary, is growing every year.

Overall, over 5 years the growth was 25.4%.

During the study of socio-cultural indicators, an analysis of statistical data on cultural institutions was carried out. The dynamics of the number of different cultural institutions is presented in Table 9.

Table 9. Cultural institutions, at the end of the year

As you can see, there is a gradual increase in such cultural institutions as theaters (by 4%), museums (by 12.7%), and circuses (by 6.2%). Unfortunately, during the period under review, the number of libraries decreased by 6.9% and cultural and leisure institutions by 8.7%. Of interest is the analysis of the number of spectators and visitors to cultural institutions. Thus, the number of visits by the population to theaters decreased in 2004 to 196 people per thousand people (in 2002 it was 207 people), but by 2007 the number of theater visitors increased, reaching 206 visits per 1,000 people. A positive trend in the development of culture in Russia is the increase in such indicators as museum attendance. During the period under review, it grew by 7.3%.

Of no small importance for characterizing objective indicators of the quality of life of the population of the Russian Federation is the analysis of indicators of social and personal security, which involves studying data from the social security system of the population, as well as indicators characterizing offenses committed in the country.

An important area of activity of the social protection system in the Russian Federation is large-scale, systematic work to improve the functioning and expand the network of social service institutions for the population of the Russian Federation. The number of boarding homes for the elderly and disabled is changing (Table 10).

Table 10. Stationary social service institutions for elderly citizens and disabled people

It should be noted that there has been a steady increase in the total number of boarding homes for the elderly and disabled (by 27%). Due to this circumstance, the number of people living in inpatient institutions in the country increases every year. It can be noted that during the period 2002-2007 it increased by 9.6%.

Of no small importance when considering indicators of social security is the study of the number of institutions serving children. Until 2006, the figure increased annually, but by 2007 the number of boarding schools for disabled children sharply decreased by 7 institutions, which also led to a reduction in the number of children living in these institutions.

Also, during the period under review, the number of people on the waiting list for placement in inpatient facilities increased by 31.4%.

The country's social institutions also include social service centers. There are about 2,266 such centers and departments of social assistance at home in the Russian Federation. Since 2003, their number has increased by 16%. Pensioners and disabled people are provided with material, medical, social and domestic assistance, and advisory services from psychologists, lawyers, and pension specialists. Also, in recent years, costs for the implementation of social support measures for certain categories of citizens have been increasing (Fig. 8).

Rice. 8. Expenses for the implementation of social support measures for certain categories of citizens under the obligations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, million rubles

During the period under review, spending on social support in the country increased by a total of 26.1%.

As you can see, the social security system in the Russian Federation is actively developing. At the same time, the priority areas for further development are: improving the quality management of social services based on state standards and regulation; timely identification of citizens who find themselves in difficult life situations; implementation of comprehensive rehabilitation of families and children, improving their quality of life, resource provision and improvement of the current social service system, etc.

Consideration of social and personal security involves the analysis of data characterizing offenses committed in the country over the past few years (Table 11).

Table 11. Number of registered crimes, thousand

The dynamics of data on the number of various offenses in the country was studied. Thus, there is an increase in the total number of registered offenses by 41.8% over the period 2002-2007, which indicates a deterioration in the crime situation in the country. The number of robberies increased by 76.4%, the number of reported thefts across the country increased by 69.1%, and cases related to fraud more than tripled during the period under review (an increase of 204%). It should be noted that the number of violations related to drug trafficking is growing every year. The maximum value of the number of offenses was noted in 2006, when the number of crimes on almost all counts increased sharply. But still, in the last two years there has been a decrease in the number of offenses by 7%. There is also a downward trend in such articles as murder and attempted murder (by 31.3%), intentional bodily harm (by 19.1%), rape (by 13.6%), as well as violations of 70,000 traffic rules movement (by 55%).

Thus, an analysis of individual indicators characterizing the crime situation in the country allows us to note an increase in the number of crimes such as robberies, robbery, and fraud. Unfortunately, it should be noted that a significant number of crimes registered on the territory of the Russian Federation are committed by minors or with their complicity.

As part of social and living indicators of quality of life, the analysis of indicators characterizing the housing stock is of particular importance (Fig. 9).

Rice. 9. Housing stock and its distribution by type of ownership, million sq. m (total area of residential premises; at the end of the year)

Available data allow us to conclude that there has been a significant increase in the housing stock. Over 5 years, the increase in the total area of the housing stock amounted to 7.3%. Moreover, the volume of housing stock privately owned by citizens increases every year, while the volume of housing stock owned by the state and municipalities is gradually decreasing.

The dynamics of the housing stock area per inhabitant on average is increasing over the period under review (Fig. 10). The provision of one resident of Russia with total housing area increased by 8.6% (from 19.8 m2 in 2002 to 21.5 m2 in 2007), in urban areas by 9.2%, and in rural areas by 7.7% . This is an objective indicator of the increase in the housing stock in the country.

Rice. 10. Total area of residential premises per inhabitant on average (at the end of the year; sq. m)

During the study, an analysis of individual indicators characterizing the state of public utilities was carried out (Table 12).

Table 12. Improvement of the housing stock (at the end of the year; %)

Consideration of the improvement of the housing stock allows us to talk about the positive dynamics of this indicator. Thus, there is an improvement in such criteria as the availability of water supply, sewerage, heating, and provision of hot water supply. The supply of gas and floor-mounted electric stoves during the period under review remained virtually unchanged and remained at the same level. The provision of all the listed communications in the complex increased by 17.3%.

An analysis of indicators characterizing the state and development of public transport in the country was also carried out. An important aspect of the study was the consideration of data on passenger transportation for certain types of public transport (Table 13).

Table 13. Passenger transportation by types of public transport, million people.

Data shows that the volume of passenger transport by public transport is trending downwards. During the period 2001-2006 it decreased by 45.5%. The main decrease in passenger traffic is observed in the intracity category: over five years, the use of bus transport has decreased by 42%; taxi - by 33; tram - to 62; trolleybus - on 64; by metro - at 16; inland water transport - by 27%. This is primarily due to the increase in the number of personal vehicles among the population. At the same time, during the period under review, there was an increase in passenger transportation by sea and air transport - by 100 and 68%, respectively. This can be explained by the increase in consumption of tourism services. The volume of passenger transportation by rail remained almost at the same level (an increase of 0.7%).

In general, an analysis of social and living indicators in the country revealed a number of positive changes, including an increase in the housing stock, an improvement in the housing supply of the population, improvement of housing, an increase in air and sea transportation, as well as an annual increase in the number of car owners in the country. All this allows us to judge the growth of the population’s well-being.

An important role in assessing the quality of life of the population of the Russian Federation is played by consideration of socio-ecological indicators that characterize the impact of economic activities on the state of the environment (Table 14).

Table 14. Main indicators characterizing the impact of economic activities on the environment and natural resources Indicators 2002

Analysis of the presented data allows us to note positive trends. Thus, during the period under review, water intake from natural water bodies decreased by 3.6%, the discharge of contaminated wastewater decreased to 17.2 billion m 3 (by 13.1%), 31.8% more household waste was removed by special transport and twice as much household waste from industrial enterprises. At the same time, there is an increase in the amount of pollutant emissions both from stationary sources (by 5.6%) and from vehicles (by 12.5%). The situation with the removal of liquid waste also seems negative, since this figure decreases every year, and in 2007, 26% less was removed than in 2002.

A more detailed consideration of the problem of emissions of air pollutants allows us to note that a significant part of the emissions consists of substances such as sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide. The smallest amounts in total emissions are observed for substances such as volatile organic compounds and hydrocarbons. It should be noted that during the period under review there is a decrease in emissions of sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide; Nitric oxide emissions remain at the same level.

To study the environmental situation in the country, it is important to consider indicators characterizing measures to reduce the negative impact of human economic activity on the state of the environment (Fig. 11).

Rice. eleven. Commissioning of capacities to protect water resources and atmospheric air from pollution

Data analysis shows that every year the commissioning of capacities to protect water resources from pollution is increasing. It should also be noted that the capacity to protect atmospheric air, that is, installations for capturing and neutralizing harmful substances from exhaust gases, tends to decrease.

In conclusion, it should be said that the analysis of indicators characterizing the level of organization of the living space of the population of the Russian Federation, carried out during the study, generally revealed the presence of positive dynamics in the quality of life of the population, which is a consequence of the revival of economic activity and stabilization of the social situation in the country.

Existing approaches to assessing the quality of life of the population in Russia

The characteristics of the quality of life proposed by various authors take into account in one form or another the level, conditions and quality of life of the population.

One approach to assessing the quality of life of the population is the use of the Human Development Index (HDI). It is calculated based on three indicators:

longevity, measured as the average life expectancy at birth;
achieved level of education, measured as a combination of the adult literacy index and the aggregate enrollment ratio index;
standard of living, measured based on real GDP per capita in US dollars at purchasing power parity.

Calculations show that the HDI in Russia in 2008 was 0.806. According to this index, Russia ranks 73rd, which is a fairly high figure, but at the same time inferior to Belarus and Kazakhstan.

The index began to fall in the early 90s due to a decline in GDP and an increase in the mortality rate. In 1992, Russia ranked 52nd, in 1995 - 114th, in 2004 - 57th, in 2005 - 62nd, in 2006 - 65th, in 2007 - 67th. In general, modern Russia is characterized by a very low life expectancy and a declining level of education.

There are HDI data calculated for all countries of the world, but table 15 shows the countries with the highest and lowest values of the indicator.

Table 15. Countries with the highest and lowest HDI scores

A 2008 report shows that the HDI is rising in all countries of the world, with the exception of some countries in the post-Soviet space and Africa.

The HDI also varies greatly across Russian regions. According to the Independent Institute for Social Policy, in 2008, the highest HDI value among Russian regions was in the city of Moscow - 0.907 (which is comparable with countries such as Germany, Italy, etc.), the lowest index in the Republic of Tuva - 0.691 (comparable with Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and etc.). Most Russian regions belong to the category with an index value of 0.750 - 0.799, which is quite comparable with countries such as Kazakhstan, Ukraine, etc.

Due to the fact that in Russia there is no system of regular and representative quality of life surveys for all regions, necessary to obtain subjective assessments, the only possible approach to assessing the quality of life of the population is an objective (statistical) approach based on the use of regularly collected and available data. Within the framework of this approach, the study of quality of life is carried out on the basis of an integral indicator - the quality of life index.

The quality of life index presented below was calculated by employees of the Faculty of Geography of Moscow State University by order of the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of the Russian Federation. The index is intended for an integral assessment of the priority components of the quality of life in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and monitoring the social development of regions. Priorities in quality of life assessments were chosen taking into account the most pressing problems of the transition period. If in Soviet times differences were largely determined by living conditions (availability and provision of basic services, favorable living conditions in the region), then in modern conditions problems associated with income level and its differentiation, employment, and health of the population (especially children) have come to the fore. ) etc. These components are included in the “crisis” quality of life index, developed for an integral assessment of regional differences in the most problematic aspects of quality of life. Using such an index, it is possible to monitor and expressly diagnose the social situation in the regions.

To determine the quality of life index, statistical data for 2007 was collected and analyzed for the seven largest Russian cities - the capitals of the federal districts of the Russian Federation (Moscow, St. Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod, Rostov-on-Don, Yekaterinburg, Novosibirsk and Khabarovsk). Calculations of the “crisis” index confirm significant differences between these regions (Fig. 12).

To the greatest extent, the index depends on the standard of living, so the leaders are dominated by the most economically developed subjects of the Russian Federation - Moscow, St. Petersburg. Next comes a large metallurgical center - Yekaterinburg, then Nizhny Novgorod, the leading role in which belongs to enterprises in the mechanical engineering and metalworking industries. Fifth place is occupied by Rostov-on-Don, the largest manufacturer of modern agricultural machinery. Next comes Khabarovsk, the center of the Far East. And in last place is Novosibirsk, the third most populous city in Russia, on whose territory dozens of research institutes are located.

Let's conduct a more detailed analysis of the components of quality of life.

The first of the component indicators is the ratio of per capita cash income to the subsistence level. The higher this indicator, the better. 7 was chosen as the maximum value of the indicator. The indicator is closest to this value in Moscow, where the average per capita wage is 6.1 times higher than the cost of living. Novosibirsk occupies the last position, since wages there are only twice the cost of living.

The share of the population with incomes above the subsistence level in Moscow is 87.4% (100% was taken as the maximum value), and in Novosibirsk it is 81.8%, i.e. about 20% of the population is below the poverty line.

Moscow leads in terms of employment levels. Of the maximum 100%, 99.2% of the working population is employed in the capital. In this group, the lowest level of employment is observed in Rostov-on-Don, where only 93.2% of the population is involved in the economy.

Health indicators also influence the result. For example, Moscow and St. Petersburg have low infant mortality rates of 7 and 5 deaths per 1,000 population, respectively, as well as higher life expectancies of 72.5 and 70 years, respectively. The highest infant mortality rate is recorded in Rostov-on-Don, it is equal to 12.5 cases per 1,000 population, and the lowest life expectancy is in Khabarovsk, where the average life expectancy is 64.7 years.

The comparative analysis carried out allowed us to summarize the results as follows. Moscow and St. Petersburg are cities of federal significance, which are the largest political, economic, financial, transport and cultural centers of the country. All this determines the high places in the ranking. Using the example of Yekaterinburg, we can see how the availability of reserves of raw materials and the possibility of their export can positively influence regional development. In regions that do not have rich natural resources, but in which at the initial stage an active economic policy was pursued aimed at developing production and attracting investment, the average value of the quality of life index was achieved. These are the cities of the Volga and Southern Federal Districts, as well as the Far East. Novosibirsk ranks last in the ranking. There is no mining industry in this city, but it is a major scientific center not only in Russia, but throughout the world.

Thus, the results of the study made it possible to assess the influence of the economic and geographical position of the region on the level of regional development, as well as to identify the most significant factors influencing quality of life indicators.

Results of a study of the quality of life of the population in the Central Federal District of the Russian Federation

As noted earlier, an equally important component of assessing the quality of life of the population is the subjective assessment by individuals of their income, employment, level of education, level of protection from crime, degree of confidence in the future, etc. In this regard, when assessing the quality of life, it is impossible limited only to objective indicators, research is needed that reveals the subjective parameters of quality of life.

To analyze subjective indicators of the quality of life of the population, a sociological study was conducted to determine the components of the quality of life and, in accordance with the selected components, the degree of people's satisfaction with the quality of life. The basis of the study was a survey of respondents, which was carried out using a questionnaire. The volume of the general population was 165 people from various subjects of the Central Federal District (Moscow, Moscow region, Kostroma region, Tula region, Lipetsk region, etc.).

The social composition of those participating in the survey is as follows: 8% - population under working age; 80% - working age population; 12% - the population is over working age.

In the questionnaire, the questions were grouped into blocks: economic indicators, physical indicators, psychological indicators, sociocultural indicators, indicators of social security.

The “Economic Indicators” block contained questions characterizing the production and economic component of the respondents’ lives.

Table 16. Assessment of material wealth

The results of the data analysis show that a significant number of respondents assess their financial situation as average. The second most popular option was “secure, prosperous.” 9% of respondents live poorly, and do not deny themselves anything, while having significant financial savings, 7.7%, which is a good indicator. 2.3% live very poorly, i.e. 3-4 people out of 165.

The attitude of respondents towards changes in their financial situation recently was also revealed. To the question “How was life for you a year or two ago?”, respondents spoke as follows: in the main - better - 43.1%; also, without significant changes - 30%; much better - 21.9%; worse - 5%. It can be noted that 65% of respondents report positive changes in their lives, while only 5% report negative changes.

Taking into account the need to assess respondents’ opinions regarding hopes for a prosperous life, they were asked the question “What are your assumptions regarding changes in the level of your material wealth in the near future?” The answers are as follows: yes, I hope to get rich in the near future - 37.3%; I doubt that this is possible - 21.4%; I don’t hope - 17.8%; I am already rich and will be even richer - 13.6%; found it difficult to answer - 9.9%.

The “Economic Indicators” block also involved studying issues related to how concerned respondents are about economic problems. So, to the question “Do you feel a threat to yourself and your family?” - respondents answered as follows (Table 17).

Table 17. Respondents' assessment of threats to themselves and their family

The results obtained suggest that the threat of housing shortage and other housing problems worry the population most of all (20.3% of respondents). Almost the same percentage of respondents put the problems of hunger and poverty, as well as the threat of dismissal from work and unemployment, in second place. Next come problems related to health (14.4%), disasters and the environment (12.2%), and a decrease in the quality of education in the country (11.2%). Rounding out the row are political problems and threats of interethnic conflicts (6.7%).

Table 18. Respondent satisfaction rating, %

As the survey data show, more than a third of the population demonstrated fairly high satisfaction with the situation according to all of the above criteria, which is a good indicator.

As part of the survey in the “Physical indicators” block, respondents were asked the question: “Rate your satisfaction with your health on a five-point scale.” The health results are as follows: 15% of respondents feel great; good - 26.8%; satisfactory - 28.1%; 15.1% are dissatisfied with their health, and 9% have very poor health. As you can see, the majority of respondents (70%) note a fairly high degree of satisfaction with their health.

This block also included a question about how concerned respondents are about various problems related to health and medical care. Thus, when answering the question, the following results were obtained (Table 19).

Table 19. Threats related to health and medical care

Among the health-related threats, among the respondents who took part in the study, the direct threat of deterioration of health came first. In second place is the threat of deterioration in medical care. The threat of alcoholism, drug addiction and substance abuse is the least of the respondents' concerns. This is due to the fact that, according to respondents, these diseases are largely socio-psychological in nature and controllable by humans.

To the question “Would you like to change certain aspects of your life?” the following answers were received (Table 20). The results suggest that a third of respondents would like to change their place of work, and another third of respondents would like to change their place of residence. 18.7% of respondents show a desire to change their profession.

Table 20. Desire to change certain aspects in your life

The third block, allocated for the analysis of the population’s opinions regarding the quality of their life, was the “Psychological indicators” block. It included questions related to assessing the psychological subjectivity of respondents.

Of interest are data characterizing the general mood of respondents. To the question “In what words could you define your mood lately?”, respondents answered as follows: an optimistic mood prevails among 6.3% of respondents; mostly optimistic - 16.7%; the majority of respondents (52.7%) experience optimism and pessimism at the same time; tension and irritation - 6%; indifference, apathy and hopelessness - 5%; fear, pessimism and melancholy - 4%.

Table 21. Life satisfaction assessment

The results obtained show that 40.6% of respondents are satisfied with their lives in general, and 48.7% rate their quality of life highly.

Regarding the question “With what dominant feeling do you think about the future?” The respondents' answers were distributed as follows: I think with confidence - 23.3%; rather with confidence - 35.1%; rather with uncertainty - 22.9%; with anxiety - 17.3%.

As you can see, the main feelings that arise when thinking about the future are confidence in the future. At the same time, feelings of anxiety arise in 17.3%.

During the study, respondents were asked questions aimed at studying the quality of life indicators included in the “Sociocultural Indicators” block.

To assess the indicators of this block, respondents were asked the question “Which of the problems in Russia is the most acute and requires urgent intervention and solution?”

It is noteworthy that 32.7% of respondents answered that this is a problem of growing lack of spirituality and moral decay of people. This answer is the second most popular after the answer “problems of increasing crime, aggression and violence,” which was chosen by 44.1% of respondents. According to 7.7% of respondents, the problems of the Russian people, their culture, and sovereignty are today acute problems that require solutions. Also noted were such answers as “the underdevelopment of the legislative framework in Russia”, “problems of unemployment”, “weak organization of social protection”, etc. (total 15.5%).

The block also included a question to determine how concerned respondents are about sociocultural issues. Thus, to the question “Do you feel threats in sociocultural terms for yourself and your family?” respondents answered as follows: concerned about the threat of a decline in the level and quality of education, the lack of opportunity to provide themselves and their children with a decent education - 11.2%; exacerbation of interethnic or interethnic conflicts - 4.1%.

Consideration of the block “Indicators of social protection” is due to the fact that the level of social protection in a country largely reflects the quality of life of its population.

When answering the question “What forms of social assistance do you need,” respondents had to mark the 2-3 most significant ones. The results are presented as follows: human rights assistance - 41%; informational - 23.4%; consulting - 21.9%. Also mentioned were home help - 7.1%; assistance in vocational training - 3.6%; rehabilitation assistance - 3%.

It was interesting to consider the results obtained when answering the question “Who usually helps you solve life problems?” Family comes first - 81.3%; friends - 10.6%; sponsors - 2%; distant relatives - 1.8%; social service workers - 1.8%. These data allow us to note that the dominant role in solving life problems of respondents is occupied by family and friends. Only a small percentage of respondents involved medical and social workers in solving personal problems.

Thus, the study revealed that the study of the subjective assessment of the quality of life of the population allows us to talk about the predominance of positive assessments. The survey data also confirmed the presence of positive changes in the quality of life of the population over the past few years. Thus, there is an improvement in the financial situation of the population, which is expressed in an increase in real cash income; reducing the number of poor people; an increase in the level of employment of the population with a constant decrease in the unemployment rate, etc. The development of higher educational institutions is observed; increased population satisfaction with the quality of education; expanding the accessibility of individual cultural institutions. In the field of social and personal security, there is a dynamic increase in the quality of social services, as well as a decrease in the growth of crime (in certain areas). In the social and domestic sphere, one can note an increase in the area of dwellings per inhabitant on average, and positive dynamics in the improvement of the housing stock and home areas.

However, along with positive changes in the quality of life of the population of the Russian Federation, a number of negative factors are also noted. In the country's economy, there is an increase in the concentration of income in certain groups of wealthy citizens, and problems of housing affordability for certain categories of citizens remain. In the field of public health, there is an increase in the incidence of almost all groups of diseases.

The research results also allow us to conclude that in order to identify the dynamics of changes in the quality of life of the population of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to monitor the main indicators of the quality of life, which will increase the efficiency of choosing mechanisms to ensure and improve it. One of the effective tools for such monitoring can be a sociological analysis of the quality of life of the population. It allows us to identify a set of objective and subjective indicators that characterize changes in the vital forces of the population, its living space, as well as evaluate the mechanisms for ensuring quality of life in terms of their effectiveness.

This study was organized and conducted in 2009 with the direct participation of I.P. Workshops.

7. Qualitative characteristics of labor potential, the role of the education system in their development.

8. Vocational training, its types, forms, role in the formation of a system of continuous education.

9. Concepts about the economically active population and its employment.

10. Types and forms of employment, their development in Russia; flexible forms of employment.

11. Structure and main proportions of the distribution of employees, the main trends in their changes.

12. Indicators characterizing employment and unemployment.

13. Unemployment in Russia: types, forms, level.

14. Status of the unemployed in the Russian Federation, the concepts of suitable and unsuitable work.

15. Labor market: essence and main components.

16. Labor market segmentation; the relationship between internal and external labor markets.

17. Purpose and content of state employment policy.

18. Basic measures for the implementation of an active employment policy.

19. Federal State Employment Service (FSS) and employment centers, their goals, objectives, functions.

20. Social support for unemployed citizens, its forms.

21. Features of regulation of employment in countries with developed social-market relations.

22. Basic concepts related to assessing the effectiveness of labor activity (productivity, efficiency, labor productivity, economic efficiency of production).

23. The essence and socio-economic significance of increasing labor productivity.

26. The concept of conditions, factors and reserves for growth of labor productivity.

27. Indicators and methods for measuring labor productivity, features of their application.

28. Product development, its varieties and measurement methods.

29. Natural and labor methods of measuring production.

30. Cost method for measuring product output and its varieties.

31. Labor intensity per unit of production as an indicator of labor productivity, its varieties.

32. Level and quality of life of the population: concepts, relationships, significance of study.

33. System of indicators of the level and quality of life of the population, their characteristics.

34. Social standards of living standards of the population, their development and use.

35. The problem of poverty and low income in the modern world and Russia.

36. Directions and forms of social assistance to low-income people.

37. Remuneration for work: essence, types, requirements for the remuneration system.

36. Income of the population, their types, areas of spending; structure of monetary income of the population of the Russian Federation.

39. Indicators of differentiation of income of the population.

40. The essence and functions of wages in a market economy.

Salary functions

41. Wage regulation system and its elements.

42. State regulation of wages, its main directions.

43. Minimum wage (minimum wage), principles, procedure and significance of establishment.

44. Basic principles and elements of wage organization.

45. Contractual regulation of wage conditions.

46. Tariff system of remuneration, its purpose and components.

47. The economic essence of tariff rates (official salaries), the directions of their differentiation.

48. Tariff schedules, their purpose and main characteristics.

49. Unified tariff schedule (UTS), its purpose and construction.

50. Forms of remuneration, their types, conditions of application and development trends.

51. The essence, types and conditions of application of the piecework form of remuneration.

52. The essence, types and conditions of application of the time-based form of remuneration.

53. Bonus wage systems, their main elements.

54. Flexible and non-traditional remuneration systems.

55. Social partnership, its subjects, areas and levels of implementation.

56. Mechanism for implementing the social partnership system; the meaning and tools of its legal component.

57. International Labor Organization (ILO), its significance, structure and development.

58. Methods and areas of activity of the ILO.

Main tasks of the mot

Working methods of the mot

32. Level and quality of life of the population: concepts, relationships, significance of study.

Under standard of living most often it is understood as the degree of provision of the population with necessary material and intangible goods and services, the achieved level of their consumption and the degree of satisfaction of people’s needs for these goods. The concept of “standard of living” in its modern interpretation is very capacious, covering all aspects of human activity, giving an idea of the well-being of society as a whole and its individual members in particular. The standard of living of the population is the most important criterion for assessing the effectiveness of the state’s socio-economic policy. Its increase is the main goal of social development of the social state.

The quality of life- this is the unity and interconnection of objective characteristics standard of living, which determine the degree of satisfaction of the material and social needs of a person and society, and the sociocultural, socio-psychological, spiritual, moral and ethical parameters of people’s life.

Objective indicators of quality of life : natural and social.

Subjective indicators of quality of life : cognitive (assessments of overall life satisfaction and assessments of satisfaction with various areas of life) and affective (emotional) .

Main conditions that ensure quality of working life (QWL) are the following:

Fair and appropriate remuneration for work.

Safe, healthy and comfortable working conditions.

A direct opportunity to use and develop one’s abilities, the opportunity to satisfy the need for self-realization and self-expression.

Labor democracy and legal protection of workers.

Opportunity for professional growth and confidence in the future.

A worthy place to work in human life.

Social utility of work.

33. System of indicators of the level and quality of life of the population, their characteristics.

Indicators of living standards can be divided into four groups: income indicators, combined indicators, indicators of social participation, subjective indicators.

The standard of living of the population is determined, on the one hand, by the composition and amount of needs for various vital goods (food, clothing, housing, transport, various utilities and household services, education, medical care, cultural and educational events, etc.), with the other is the possibility of satisfying them, based on the supply of goods and services on the market and the real incomes of people, their wages. In turn, both the size of real wages and the standard of living of the population are determined by the degree of production efficiency based on the use of scientific and technological progress, the scale of development and quality of the service sector, and the educational and cultural level of the population. To analyze and assess the standard of living, various indicators are used, such as the value of gross and domestic product, national income and real income per capita, housing provision, the amount of trade turnover and the volume of services per capita, etc. The standard of living is also indirectly indicated by fertility indicators and population mortality, average life expectancy, etc.

Main indicators of the standard of living of the population.

Absolute	Relative
The volume of national income, w+m	Share of the consumption fund in national income, c/(w+m)
Nominal income of the population, w	Real income of the population w/i
Income from business activities, m	Average business income per capita, m/N
Volume of trade turnover, V	The value of trade turnover per capita, V/N
Volume of services performed, c-V	Volume of services per capita, (c-V)/N
The sum of all household deposits in savings banks, S	Average size of one deposit in savings banks, S/N
The size of the housing stock, F	Number of meters of living space per person, F/N
Salary fund, *Payroll=ChspSalary year**	Average and minimum wages per employee, SZ=FOT/N, minimum wage
The total volume of pension funds, *D=NZSZTZ*	Average pension SP=D/NP

c - consumption; w - wages; m - surplus value; i - inflation; N - population size; V - volume of trade turnover; S - savings of the population; F is the size of the housing stock; Chsp - the number of employees on the payroll; Salary year - the employee’s total salary for the year; D - income of the pension system; NZ - number of employees paying pension tax; SZ is the average salary of an employee paying pension tax; TZ - rate of deductions from wages; NP - number of pensioners; SP - average pension; Minimum wage is the minimum wage.

However, the full picture of the standard of living of the population cannot be revealed only on the basis of generalized and averaged values calculated for the entire population of the country as a whole. It is necessary to know the volumes and structure of consumption and income for various social, professional and demographic groups of the population. For example, it is important to know what the share of income in the total volume is for 10% of the population with maximum incomes and 10% with minimum incomes, what is the average wage for workers in various sectors of the national economy, for workers occupying various positions, etc.

Indicators and indicators of the standard of living of the population

Living standard indicators	Indicators
I. Satisfying basic physical needs
1. Health	Total mortality per 1 or 100 thousand population Number of children who died under the age of 1 year per 1000 births Life expectancy Morbidity with disability
2. Food
2. Food	2.1. Consumption of staple foods
3. Housing	3.1. Commissioning of the total area of residential buildings 3.2. Total area of dwellings 3.3. Housing improvement 3.4. Average apartment size
4. Household property	4.1. Provision of the population with cultural, household and household items 4.2. Sale of cultural and household items to the population
5. Paid services	5.1. Volume of paid services to the population 5.2. Structure of paid services to the population 5.3. Volume of household services
II. Satisfying Spiritual Needs
6. Cultural level of the population	6.1. Level of education of the population 6.2. Volume of books and brochures published 6.3. Volume of published magazines and other periodicals 6.4. Provision of the population with televisions
III. Satisfying social needs
7. Working conditions	7.1. Lost working time in industry (average per worker, days) 7.2. Changes in working conditions for workers 7.3. Injuries at work (the number of victims in accidents with loss of ability to work for one working day or more, and with death per 1000 workers)
8. Rest conditions	8.1. Number of children who spent their holidays in summer health camps
9. Social security	9.1. The ratio of average and minimum pensions and wages 9.2. The ratio of average amounts of benefits for children and their subsistence level 9.3. The ratio of pensions and the cost of living
10. Social and living environment	10.1. Total number of unemployed 10.2. Mortality from accidents, poisoning, injuries, murders, etc. 10.3. Strikes (number of man-days of lost working time, number of participants) 10.4. Number of registered crimes 10.5. Volume of contaminated wastewater discharge 10.6. Emissions of pollutants into the atmosphere
11. Income and expenses	11.1. Cash income of the population, incl. by type 11.2. Cash expenditures of the population, incl. by type 11.3. Average monthly salary of workers in the economy, incl. by industry, region and profession 11.4. Increase in household savings in deposits

A central place in quality of life research is given to the development of a methodology for assessing the quality of life, explaining the solution of such issues as constructing quality of life indicators, determining the values of these indicators, choosing methods for their assessment, resulting in a generalized judgment about the standard of living of an individual, a group of people, or a specific region or the country as a whole. Research gives reason to believe that the economic category “quality of life of the population” can be defined as “formed in the mass consciousness, a generalized assessment of the totality of characteristics of the living conditions of the population.”

These characteristics can be considered using seven integral properties of quality of life:

1. The quality of the population, integrating such properties as the ability to reproduce (fertility, mortality, morbidity, disability, life expectancy, etc.), the ability to form and maintain families (marriage rate, divorce rate), level of education and qualifications (proportion population enrolled in education in the relevant age groups, achieved level of education, etc.).

2. Well-being. The material aspect of well-being is characterized by indicators of income, current consumption and savings of the population (the amount of income in real terms, their distribution by areas of use and various socio-economic groups of the population, the structure of consumer expenditures of the population, the presence of durable consumer goods in households, the accumulation of property and valuables etc.), as well as such macroeconomic indicators as GDP per capita, actual household consumption, consumer price index, unemployment and poverty levels.

3. Living conditions of the population. The concept of “living conditions” includes the characteristics of housing conditions, provision of the population with health care, education, culture, use of free time, social and geographic mobility, etc.

4. Awareness of the population, characterizing accessibility to telecommunications and information infrastructures (mobile radio operators, information resources, Internet technologies, etc.).

5. Social security (or the quality of the social sphere), reflecting working conditions, social security and social protection, physical and property security.

6. Environmental quality (or the quality of an ecological niche), accumulating data on air pollution, water pollution, soil quality, level of biological diversity of the territory, etc.

7. Natural and climatic conditions, characterized by climatic conditions, frequency and specificity of force majeure situations (floods, earthquakes, hurricanes and other natural disasters).

Let's talk about indicators.

Indicators of quality of life are objective and subjective.

Objective indicators: natural and social. They reflect values such as per capita income, population migration, mortality rates, or phenomena such as crime, alcoholism, divorce, suicide, etc. Objective indicators are also relative, when the consumer’s financial situation is no longer determined by the absolute amount of his income, but by his relative position on the income scale, his position in society. A person may benefit from an increase in the absolute level of his income, but if the income of others increases in that proportion, he will ultimately regard his position as unchanged on the income-expenditure scale. The concepts of “necessary goods” and “luxury goods” become highly interchangeable over time, both when comparing countries with different levels of development, and when comparing different stages of development of the same country.

Subjective indicators reflect perception scores found in various surveys or public opinion polls.

There are a number of signs by which quality of life indicators can be grouped:

1. Depending on the hierarchical level. They are called macro indicators. They characterize the satisfaction of needs at the individual or family level. These include GDP, GNP; nominal or real income of the population; demographic indicators; length of the working week; free time; inflation rate and others.

2. Depending on the nature of the reflection of the essence of the category - standard of living. They are direct and indirect. Direct lines directly characterize the standard of living itself. For example, the level of food consumption.

Indirect indicators. Indirectly characterize the standard of living. These indicators include demographic indicators.

3. Depending on the nature of the calculation. These include level indicators, which show absolute values; structural, they are components of level indicators, as well as dynamic. They characterize changes in absolute indicators.

4. Depending on the group of needs, the satisfaction of which is characterized by one or another indicator. There are three main groups of needs: physical, spiritual (or also called intellectual) and social.

One of the most important indicators of quality of life is the HDI (Human Development Index). It is calculated annually and shows the standard of living, literacy and education of the population. It serves to compare the level and quality of life of different countries.

When calculating the HDI, 3 types of indicators are taken into account:

· Life expectancy -- estimates longevity.

· Literacy rate of the country's population (average number of years spent in education) and expected duration of education.

· Standard of living assessed through GNI per capita at purchasing power parity (PPP) in US dollars.

According to 2013 data, Kazakhstan’s HDI index is 0.8 and Kazakhstan ranks 69th in the list of countries with a very high development index.

World HDI map of UN members for 2013. [Appendices, map 1]

Also, to assess the satisfaction of various needs, various groups of indicators and their indicators are used [Appendices, table. 1]

There are also various systems of quality of life indicators. They are all different, as they cover only certain groups of indicators.

One of the very first, effective and famous indicator systems is the system developed in the USA. This system is called the "Social Indicators" system. It consists of 7 blocks (health, public safety, education, labor, income, housing, leisure). These blocks include 167 indicators. For example, in the “labor” block there are such indicators as job satisfaction, quality of work life and others. This system effectively reflects the quality of life in various spheres of life.

Also one of the well-known systems is the system developed by the UN European Commission. In this system, 8 groups were identified: health, quality of the workplace, quality of the physical environment, sense of social confidence, etc.

Thus, we see that there are different groups and systems of quality of life indicators. In general, it is quite difficult to collect all the indicators and standardize them all into one system. After all, the very concept of quality of life is very broad. It is possible, for example, to create a system of economic indicators of the quality of life that will give us the opportunity to assess the quality of life from an economic point of view. Or you can create a system of social indicators.

The structure of the indicators themselves is also varied - from several generalized ones, which cover only essential aspects of life, to multi-level systems, including detailed listings of various factors and components. All of them in their own way reflect the goals of the classifications and approaches to understanding the problem of quality of life.

Quality of life standards

A standard is a document, developed by consensus and approved by a recognized body, that establishes, for general and repeated use, rules, general principles or characteristics relating to various activities and their results.

Standards invariably influence the management of human quality of life.

High standards of quality of life are perceived as the only possible and justified throughout the world.

The standard of living is a complex indicator characterizing the well-being and quality of life of individuals, social groups, and the entire population of a particular country or territory. The standard of living is determined by current income, accumulated material property (including housing, durable and everyday items) and the number of social services provided by the state free of charge (education, medical care); The most important characteristic of the standard of living of an individual and family (household) is the volume and structure of expenses.

Quality of life is a comprehensive characteristic of the level, as well as objective and subjective living conditions of the population, which determine the physical, mental, sociological and cultural development of a person, group or community of people. The quality of life of the population of a given territory or state is determined by a number of economic, social, man-made, demographic, environmental, geographical, political and moral factors.

The selection of statistical and social indicators is made based on the essence of the main elements of quality and standard of living.

International Living Standards Statistics (UN, 1978) includes 12 main groups of indicators:

Fertility, mortality and other demographic characteristics of the population.

Sanitary and hygienic living conditions.

Consumption of food products.

Living conditions

Education and culture.

Working conditions and employment.

Income and expenses of the population.

Cost of living and consumer prices.

Vehicles.

Organization of rest.

Social Security.

Human freedom.

To characterize the level and quality of life, a system of indicators is used - integral and partial, natural and cost. To develop and solve current and strategic problems of income and wage policy, it is necessary to have information about the state, dynamics and trends in living standards, calculate them by region and socio-demographic groups of the population, and make international comparisons.

\r\n1. The list of integral indicators of living standards includes: real income per capita; real wages; income from secondary employment and from the sale of personal farm products; dividends (on stocks and bonds); interest on household deposits; pensions, benefits, scholarships. With their help, the level, dynamics and structure of income from various sources are studied and forecasted.

Integral indicators of quality of life include: human development index (human development index), index of intellectual potential of society, human capital per capita, population vitality coefficient.

For the majority of the population, the forecast for the level and quality of life for the coming decade is pessimistic. The main characteristics of the population's standard of living will be influenced by the following trends: public health, education, housing conditions, human rights, income and consumption, employment and working conditions.

The development of each group of countries, each country individually, each social group depends on the processes occurring in the global economy. Since the world is undergoing a process of globalization, and this is nothing more than the growing interdependence of countries around the world, this dependence (on the processes occurring in the world economy) is increasingly intensifying.

The impact of globalization on the socio-economic development of countries and on the level and quality of life of individuals and families is enormous and ambiguous. Information sources

Avraamova E. M., Kosmarsky V. L. Expectations of the population in a changing institutional environment // Social sciences and modernity. 2001.№3. With. 22

Biktimirova Z.Z. Forecast of the standard of living of the population in 2001-2010 // IVF. 2001.№7.p.5

Bolotin B. International comparisons: 1990-1997 // ME and MO. 1998.No.10. p.13

Borovikov V.P. Statistica program for students and engineers - 2nd ed. - M.: ComputerPress, 2001.- 301 p.

Gordon L. A. Poverty, well-being, inconsistency: material differentiation in the 1990s // Social Sciences and Modernity. 2001. No. 3.p.5

Didenko N. I. World economy. Contours of development. SPb.: Publishing house. St. Petersburg State Technical University, 2001, 100 p.

Illarionov A. Russia in a changing world. - M.: IEA, 1997. - 666 p.

McConnell Campbell R., Brew Stanley L. Economics: principles, problems and policies. Volume II M.: Republic, 1995. - 400 p.

Savchenko P., Fedorova M. Level and quality of life: the concept of indicators and current state // REJ. 2000. No. 7.s. 66

Sokolov I. GDP dynamics in the main groups of countries: sharp shifts in the balance of world economic forces (based on UN statistics) // REJ. 1997. No. 7 p. 60

Industry and Development. Global Report 1992/93. UNIDO.-Vienna, 1992. - p.185

The economist - 1996. - 26 October. - p.138

World Economic and Social Survey 1994. - NY.: United Nations, 1994

World Economic and Social Survey 1995. - NY.: United Nations, 1995

www.advtech.ru - Quality of life of the population

www.allworld.wallst.ru - Brazil, USA

www.aomai.ab.ru - City economic development strategy

www.demoscope.ru - Hypotheses for changes in fertility and mortality

www.marketingmix.ru - Motivation and its impact on the level and quality of life

www.mintrud.ru - Encyclopedia

www.mit.ru - Quality of living standards

www.mos.ru - Level and quality of life

www.ptpu.ru - About the concept of transformation

www.sci.aha.ru - Life expectancy

www.sima-ext.worldbank.org - World Bank website

www.strategy.ru - Living standards of citizens

www.trade-point.ru - Quality of life and quality of products

www.uni-dubna.ru - Concept of transition to sustainable development

www.akdi.ru - Dynamics of changes in living standards

www.canada.ru - Economics

www.globalarchive.ft.com - Latin America: many risks, few prospects

www.iet.ru - GDP dynamics and living standards

Study of the quality of life of the population in the Russian Federation. Standard of living of the population Economic indicators of the level and quality of life of the population

Structure and content of the concept “quality of life”

Study of the dynamics of indicators of the quality of life of the population in the Russian Federation for the period 2002-2008

Existing approaches to assessing the quality of life of the population in Russia

Results of a study of the quality of life of the population in the Central Federal District of the Russian Federation

32. Level and quality of life of the population: concepts, relationships, significance of study.

33. System of indicators of the level and quality of life of the population, their characteristics.

Quality of life standards

More on the topic Level and quality of life: