Alihanov M.

Student, North Caucasian Federal University, Stavropol

P'yanov A.

PhD in Sociology, Assistant Professor,

North Caucasian Federal University, Stavropol

SOME ASPECTS OF EMPLOYMENT AND YOUTH MIGRATION IN RUSSIA AND THE WORLD

All variety of socio-economic forms of migration can be represented by such forms of territorial movements as an academic, labor, commercial, travel, escape from the country, seek asylum, the departure of the adverse living conditions (psychological, economic, social), migrations due to violent expulsion and repatriation. Almost all of these types of migrations except for tourism can carry both voluntary and forced. For Russia, with its huge regional differences caused in large part by severe climatic conditions, migration has always been of great importance, both for demographic and economic development of its individual territories and regions, and in certain periods of development and for the country as a whole.

Redistribution of the labor force and population between countries and regions within a country is a prerequisite for social and economic development of nations.

The mechanism of such redistribution in favor intercountry and interregional migration, designed to mitigate the significant territorial differences and better use of labor shortages in the region. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that the qualification of the indigenous population in the region does not always meet the requirements of the modern labor market in the priority sectors of the economy. All this leads to the need for active government policies aimed at efficient use of local manpower, reducing tensions on the regional labor market by regulating regional migration processes. In turn, for the development of effective migration policy requires information on the socio-economic factors and causes of regional migration.

The problem of migration of young people in today's world is one of the most important to date. The number of young migrants in the developed countries of Europe and North America is increasing with each passing day. There are many reasons for this phenomenon.

The first reason is significant differences in the countries in terms of growth / decline in population due to the presence of different modes of its reproduction. People living in countries with high birth rates; immigrate to countries where the birth rate is low. It is easier to find work, receive training, and so on.

The second reason is the differentiation of countries in terms of economic development. Young people who are deprived of social prospects in the country go out of their poorest countries in the more developed countries.

The third reason is the process of an aging population in the developed countries of Europe accelerates. According to some projections, it can be assumed that by 2025, 47 % of these are pensioners. And in Asian and African countries have the advanced mode of reproduction and the proportion of young age in the total population and the population is growing younger. This suggests that people immigrate to Europe, as there are an aging labor market and a high level of social protection [1, p. 446].

A key factor in the constructive development of any society is the existence of effective mechanisms of formation and realization of the potential of new generations. Under the conditions of mixing of different cultures in a social space, including as a result of migration processes require search of fundamental principles of the social interaction between different social groups, including representatives of different cultures. Allocated system of principles to be universal and to ensure the continuity of generations, offsetting the possible generational conflicts that may occur at the micro-, macro- and global levels [2].

Youth migration is a separate independent area of research, primarily because of its connection with education. In this case the focus is gradually shifting to the youngest age – to the age period, when the initial decision is taken on migration with the purpose of education. This solution has a tremendous influence on subsequent life as a young man, and as a whole on the spatial distribution of human capital [3]. Competition for the best young people becomes an essential factor in the development of regions [4].

Every other young man in the Russian Federation at the age of 14 – 30 years of studying. The majority of pupils of comprehensive secondary schools at their end reflect on admission to higher education institutions, one in eight of the contingent – in the primary or secondary special vocational educational institution [5, c. 272]. In the short term, almost as many young people are going to get a job.

In contrast to the young people of western countries, in Russia, the age range of entry into adulthood objectively increases. Russian young people have to grow up early and join in the socio-economic relations in the labor market. At the same time, one should consider the fact that employers take professionally unprepared young people are extremely reluctant to [6, p. 144].

Migration policy of any country should be based on quantitative targets. Over the past few decades, political, financial, social and demographic changes in many parts of the world have broken many people in their native places and stimulated migration to the big cities and abroad. The growth of trade volume, the most affordable and faster vehicles and easier communication have led to a huge number of youth migration, both within their country and across national borders.

Migration in the age of the student is directed not only to the big cities, but also in university centers, which may be located at a distance from the largest metropolitan areas [7]. This migration of youth is different from the migration of members of other age groups [8]. In the complex process of formation of migration flows school graduates have an extremely high significance such factors as the quality and reputation of the university [9]. The economic prosperity of the region also has a significant impact on youth migration solutions [10]. However, this effect becomes dominant later, when the migration of graduates [11; 12]. Thus, the migration of young people to get an education is subject to special laws and requires careful study.

The migration component of population change in the individual age groups or the entire population of the region is due to the inter-regional and international migration. International migration, in the framework of our mission statement, we are interested in a lesser degree. Of course, there is a redistribution of in-country contingent of international migrants. But the documented part of these flows take into account the inter-regional migration statistics, and we can only guess not documented migration. The vast majority of international migrants come to Russia not for education and for employment. The magnitude and direction of these flows of international migrants have a separate topic of research.

In Russia, too high unemployment rate among young people aged 16 – 26 years. Among the officially registered unemployed youth share in the past 5 years is 35 % or more [13, p. 109]. Employment of graduates rests not in their demand on the labor market. Employers are reluctant to take them to work as an intern has no practical experience. Employers prefer to hire a person with existing practical experience since the employee does not require additional training and consequently the financial costs of training.

The positive effects of labor migration of youth are that migrant’s benefit and economy of Russia and their economies. The Russian workers do not fill skilled and low-paid jobs in the labor market. Use earned money in Russia, migrants support their families. When sending money to their families, they support their country's economy.

The negative consequences of labor migration are that arriving in another country, migrants bring with them their customs, religion and traditions. They differ from the traditions of the country in which migrants come, so misunderstanding is formed between the indigenous population and newcomers ethnic groups. Over time, this lack of understanding is growing and can develop into social and ethnic conflicts.

Migration has become a big problem for the EU. These countries are a lot of workers, pay those social benefits, trained profession and took on the job. But over time, the ever-increasing migration flows to developed and prosperous European countries became uncontrollable. This is primarily due to the exodus of people from the Middle East and Africa where there are military conflicts.

At present, many measures taken to migration as youth and adults was fully controlled by the EU. In addition, these countries pursued migration policy focused on the integration of migrants into the local cultural environment. The EU carried out a variety of projects: create additional training for migrants and acquisition of language culture of the host country; working library for immigrants, where people can use the book to teach their native language. Simplified system of citizenship. As you know, before you need a foreigner have resided in the country for about 15 years to get citizenship. Now the term is 8 years. In some countries, such as Germany, the child born in this country will automatically receive citizenship.

To avoid conflicts between the indigenous people and migrants, it is necessary that the first and second to treat each other with respect, a positive attitude to the culture of each other. Especially for young people at the present time, there are so-called schools for the exchange. They allow the teenager to go to another country without their parents, helping them learn self-reliance and responsibility. Teenager studying foreign languages, to meet children from other countries and at the end of training can already be sure exactly how he cope with the difficulties of migration.

In recent years, a positive balance of migration remained the only source of growth in the total number of population of Stavropol Territory, offsetting the natural decline in population. In 2015, for the first time in many years, the number of births by 1.4 thousand higher than the number of deaths. As of January 1, 2017 the number of resident population of the region amounted to 2,805,800 people, and increased by 3,8 thousand people over the past year. More than 60 % of the total population growth rate takes migration balance.

The main source of growth in the number of edges of the population remains international migration. The migration exchange significant excess was observed with the CIS countries on the number of arrivals retired members (almost 10 times), with other foreign countries by 4,5 times. The share of international migrants in Stavropol Territory on the former residence of the countries in 2015 is shown in Table 1.

Table 1

The share of international migrants Stavropol Territory on the previous country of residence in 2015 (net migration,%)

Countries	Years
	2014	2015
Kazakhstan	3,8	5,2
Ukraine	10,0	9,7
Azerbaijan	10,6	12,4
Armenia	45,9	43,1
Kyrgyzstan	2,1	2,1,
Moldavia	1,9	1,9
Tajikistan	1,9	2,1
Turkmenistan	2,1	1,4
Uzbekistan	8,8	8,3
Georgia	6,5	7,1
Others	6,4	6,8

Source of information: materials of the Federal State Statistics Service of the Stavropol Territory. – URL: http://stavstat.gks.ru/

Analysis of the data presented in Table 1 shows that in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan and Georgia accounted 58.6% of the total volume of migration. The coefficient of efficiency of the external migration of the population of Stavropol Territory was 2,7 % in 2015. Coefficient of intensity migration turnover was 8,1 ppm. In 2014 these figures were respectively – 4,3 % and 10,4 ‰.

Distribution of earlier arrivals of migrants registered in the Stavropol Territory since the beginning of registration as of January 1, 2016 is presented in Table 2.

Table 2

Distribution of migrants registered in the Stavropol Territory since the beginning of registration as of January 1, 2016

Total number of people	including those who came from:
	Kyrgyz stan	Kazakh-stan	Azerbaijan	Georgia	Uzbekistan	Tajikistan	Turkmeni stan	Armenia	Others
1030	712	101	67	41	60	22	12	3	12
in % of total number of people
100.0	69.1	9.8	6.5	4.0	5.8	2.1	1.2	0.3	1.2

Source of information: materials of the Federal State Statistics Service of the Stavropol Territory. – URL: http://stavstat.gks.ru/

The most intense exchange of migrants from Stavropol Territory by going to the neighboring North Caucasian Federal District territories (31,0 % of gross migration within Russia), Krasnodar Territory and Rostov Region (20,8 % overall). The high level of migration exchange occurs between the Stavropol Territory and the Central Federal District (20,7 %).

Since 2014, in the Stavropol region observed migration outflow. The most common (more than 60%) change of residence are reasons personal and family circumstances. Other causes of displacement are work, study and return to their former place of residence

During 2015 the migration outflow of the population of Stavropol region because of work-related in 2394 was human; because of related studies – 1573 people. The leaders of the reception of migrant workers remain Krasnodar and Krasnoyarsk Territories, Tyumen and Moscow Regions (in total 3,3 thousand retired people). The main points of the training of migration from the Stavropol Territory in 2015 were – Rostov-on-Don (921 people), Moscow (725 people) and St. Petersburg (676 persons).

There is still a negative migration balance is added to the Central Federal District (6221 people). During the analyzed period, the Moscow Region and the city of Moscow moved to 5564 resident of the Stavropol Territory.

Migration in Russia, as in other countries, has expressed age features. Because of this, it has a selective effect on the composition of the population of the country, its regions, cities and districts. The age-sex structure of migrant’s greatest mobility of different persons of working age – more than 70 % of the total migration (of them women – 52,3 %). Positive net migration form two age groups: those aged over working (60,.8 % of total growth) and aged 0 – 15 years (52,9 %). Saved migration outflow from Stavropol Territory men of working age (528). The age and sex composition of migrants in the Stavropol Territory in 2015 is presented in Table 3.

Table 3

The age and sex composition of migrants in the Stavropol Territory in 2015

	Total number of people	including those who came from:
		6 – 15 years	of working age	in % of total number of people	of those aged 16-17 years	in % to the number of able-bodied	working age
Both sexes	1030	32	603	58,5	21	3,5	395
Men, persons	328	18	210	64,0	10	4.8	100
in %	31,8	56,2	34,8	x	47,6	х	25,3
Women, persons	702	14	393	56,0	11	2.8	295
in %	68,2	43,8	65,2	х	52,4	х	74,7

Source of information: materials of the Federal State Statistics Service of the Stavropol Territory. – URL: http://stavstat.gks.ru/

The impact of migration on the population of the country, its regions and individual settlements not only limited influence on the number of their inhabitants. No less important is that as a result of migration is changing the age structure of the population as the inflow area and outflow, and this influence can be multilateral. As shown in this article, the influx of migrants in some cases can lead to population aging, while the outflow can slow the aging process of inhabitants of individual regions. However, in most cases, everything happens on the contrary.

Since the migration of the population in Russia has expressed age characteristics, adverse changes in the age structure, reaching from the beginning of the current decade, the population of Russia, are already having an impact on the migration activity of the population, for example, a reduction in the population share of young people in the most migratory activity age reduces the volume of population redistribution between regions, cities and districts of the country.

The attraction for migrants not only to the regional capitals, and their suburbs is a consequence not yet in full force declares them the processes of suburbanization. Researcher’s record the positive trends are vital in the suburbs of major cities and link them with the influx of population in active reproductive age.

Having analyzed the youth migration patterns based on the data for different periods obtained from different sources (census data, registration data and the ratio of full-time university enrolments to the number of high school graduates), we can assess migration attractiveness of regions and regional higher education systems for young people. We have produced a ranking of regions that reflects the years-long evolution of their education systems and the summary of decisions made by young people (and, maybe, their parents) regarding the preferred destinations for higher education.

The above analysis of youth migration trajectories may serve as a benchmark in strategic planning designed to advance the national and regional education systems. The possibility of attracting student migrants from other regions offers a crucial advantage to universities and is a powerful factor in their socioeconomic development.

References

1. Fatihova L., Sarvarova R. (2014) K voprocu o probleme migracii molodezchi. Molodoy uchenyi, no. 21, pp. 445–447.

2. Chudnovskaya M., Kolk M. (2015) Educational Expansion and Intergenerational Proximity in Sweden. Population, Space and Place. DOI: 10.1002/psp.1973

3. Faggian A., McCann P. (2009) Universities, Agglomerations and Graduate Human Capital Mobility. Tijdschrift voor Economischeen Sociale Geografie, vol. 100, no. 2, pp. 210–223.

4. Findlay A. M. (2011) An Assessment of Supply and Demand-Side Theorizations of International Student Mobility. International Migration, vol. 49, no 2, pp. 162–190.

5. Mancerova O. (2012) O roli frontira v socialnoi mobilnosti. Gumanitarnye issledovaniya, no. 4 (44), pp. 270–274.

6. Hudaverdyan V. (2012) Molodezchnaya migraciya v sovremennom mire: prichiny i sledstviya. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie, no. 2, pp. 142–148.

7. Cooke T. J., Boyle P. (2011) The Migration of High School Graduates to College. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, vol. 33, no 2, pp. 202–213.

8. Dustmann C., Glitz A. (2011) Migration and Education. Handbook of the Economics of Education. Amsterdam: Elsevier, vol. 4, pp. 327–439.

9. Plane D. A., Henrie C. J., Perry M. J. (2005) Migration Up and Down the Urban Hierarchy and Across the Life Course. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 102, no 43, pp. 15313–15318.

10. McHugh R., Morgan J. N. (1984) The Determinants of Interstate Student Migration: A Place-to-Place Analysis. Economics of Education Review, vol. 3, no 4, pp. 269–278.

11. Baryla Jr E. A., Dotterweich D. (2001) Student Migration: Do Significant Factors Vary by Region? Education Economics, vol. 9, no 3, pp. 269–280.

12. Beine M., Noël R., Ragot L. (2014) Determinants of the International Mobility of Students. CESIFO Working Paper, no 3848.

13. Kashnitsky I. S. (2015) Youth Migration Drives the Depopulation of Periphery. Proceedings of the XV April International Academic Conference on Economic and Social Development (Moscow: Higher School of Economics, April, 1–4, 2014), vol. 3, pp. 103–113.