ECONOMICALLY WEAKER SECTION OF RUSSIA

Submitted To, Submitted By

Ms Megha, Vinamar Jain

UILS, PUSSGRC, Hoshiarpur

 ABSTRACT
The Russian republic was a major player in the Soviet Union's economy due to its size and
abundance of natural resources. These resources enabled enormous economic progress
throughout the first decades of the Soviet government, including the quick development of
mining, metallurgy, and heavy engineering, the construction of the railway network, and a
massive rise in energy supplies. In this paper we will read about economically weaker section of
Russia and various interpretations by various organizations .

INTRODUCTION

RUSSIAN ECONOMY

Following the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Russian government implemented
a series of drastic reforms aimed at transforming the economy from one based on central
planning and control to one based on market principles. The privatisation of state-owned firms
and the establishment of privately owned industrial and commercial ventures (using both foreign
and Russian investment) were two major components of the reforms. To support privatisation,
the Russian government distributed vouchers to residents that allowed them to buy shares in
privatised companies, albeit these vouchers were commonly sold for cash and hoarded by
entrepreneurs. There was also the establishment of a commodity and stock exchange system.

However, the privatisation process was gradual, and many companies remained state-owned,
notably in the heavy sectors. In addition, there was a lot of discussion about purchasing and
selling land. The government authorised land sales in 2001, but only for urban dwelling and
industrial real estate, which together made up a small portion of Russia's overall land area.
Similar legislation was being considered for rural and agricultural communities around the turn
of the century. Despite the fact that the 1993 constitution allows for full private ownership of
property, the practise has yet to be applied. The transition to market-based agriculture was
delayed as a result of delays in enacting structural reforms, since many farmers clung to the old,
familiar collective structure.
 A- Defination of Economically Weaker Section

The economically weaker section (EWS) is the section of the society in India that belongs to the
un-reserved category and has an annual family income of less than 8 lakh rupees. This category
includes people that do not belong to the caste categories of ST/SC/OBC who already enjoy the
benefits of reservation.

According to the international AROPE methodology, a person is recognized as poor by relative

income criteria if his or her average per capita income is less than 60% of the median average per
capita income of the population as a whole (or the analysed population group) In 2021, the
average nominal salary in Russia was measured at approximately 56.5 thousand Russian rubles
per month, marking an increase by around 5.2 thousand Russian rubles compared to the previous
year

In 2021, the poverty threshold in Russia is 12,702 Russian rubles for the working-
age population, 11,303 Russian rubles for children, and 10,022 rubles for
pensioners. Russians whose income is below these figures are officially considered to
be poor or economically weaker section. . In the fourth quarter of 2021, over 12 million
people in Russia lived under the poverty line, marking a significant decrease compared to the
previous three months.

Of the groups studied, households with householders who were unemployed, women, people
under age 64 and the least educated were the most likely to live in poverty. The unemployed
were four times more likely to be poor than those with jobs in 1992. Among the characteristics
examined, households with female householders were a close second (3.7 times more likely than
their male counterparts), while households with householders under 64 followed (3.2 times more
likely than elderly householders)1.

1
CENSUS BRIEF-U.S. Department of Commerce
Economics and Statistics Administration
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS, | Issued September 1998
 I.Various Interpretations By-;

a.Courts-:

Russia has a weak justice systems. There is an absence of rule of law and civil society. The
notion of individual rights is still alien to many Russians. If someone defrauds you or doesn't pay
a loan you can't sue them. When the legal system is used it often seems like is used to find ways
to harass people than to protect or help them. Criminal Code of the RSFSR (Russian Soviet
Federative Socialist Republic) which was passed in the Soviet era in the 1960s remains the
fundamental law of the land,

Poor is a multifaceted issue, and the very definition of 'poverty' varies widely between and
within societies. Poverty can be measured in terms of absolute, relative, and subjective aspects,
in principle. The method used to assess poverty, on the other hand, is dependent on a variety of
factors, including data availability and comparability, a society's level of development, and, last
but not least, one's personal vision of a just society. It is a normative social policy act in and of
itself. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) utilises relative
income indicators to measure poverty, claiming that this technique takes into consideration
varied levels of well-being in a society and allows for comparisons of income circumstances
across countries. Information about relative earnings, Social welfare programs formerly were
funded by the central government, but in the 1990s employer-based social insurance and pension
funds, to which workers also contributed, were introduced. A major portion of the public welfare
budget funds free medical service, training, pensions, and scholarships. Russian workers and
professionals receive paid vacations of up to one month.

The landmarks in the evolution of poverty in Russia are intricately linked to the variouspost-
transition macroeconomic shocks and recessions the country experienced since the early1990s.
Indeed, although poverty in Russia was not a new phenomenon that can be attributed exclusively
to market reforms (Klugman and Braithwaite, 1998), price liberalization in the early1990s
resulted in sharply increased poverty compared to the late 1980s.4 The transition recessionin
1992-93 with continuing ruble inflation caused incomes to collapse when three out of trn
peoplewere estimated to be living in poverty. From its peak in 1992, the official poverty rate fell
from 33.5 percent to 22.4 percent in 1994 and then increased again after the financial crisis of
1994.

B. CONSTITUTION

Russia’s subsistence minimum and poverty rate are political thresholds, being central reference
points for government policies on alleviating poverty. Many means-tested welfare provisions, for
instance, refer to the minimum subsistence level as a threshold of need. However, the minimum
subsistence level is often criticised as being set too low, and for not reflecting the real costs of
everyday life (Tikhonova and Mareeva, 2016). This was revealed, for example, by a survey
conducted by the independent polling institute the Levada Centre. In this survey, respondents put
the perceived minimum subsistence level almost twice as high as the official poverty line.4
Taking this subjective subsistence minimum as the baseline, almost 40% of all people in Russia
lived in poverty in 2018.

In Russia, poverty takes many forms, and its complexity hinders widespread progress in poverty
reduction. That is why a business as usual approach will not suffice – instead, meaningful
reforms are critical if Russia is to meet its ambitious goal of reducing poverty by half by 2024, as
outlined in its National Development Plan.We know that economic growth is a pre-requisite for
reducing poverty, although growth alone is not enough. Strong growth from 2000 to 2011 helped
reduce poverty from about 30 percent of the population to just under 11 percent during the same
period, but the rate of poverty reduction has since stagnated.In fact, Russia’s poverty rate rose
again in 2017, to 13.2 percent, and is projected to only fall to 9.7 percent in 2024, far short of the
government’s target of 6.6 percent. To reach this target, the World Bank estimates that economic
growth would need to surge to 4.0 percent, which is unlikely given current forecasts

. Since then, more than 75 years have passed, Russian politicians still seem to play the
“reservation” card in pursuit of their political advantage, and russianss are still brawling for
quotas in educational institutions and jobs. A little while ago, in January 2019, the present
Government brought a new reservation policy granting 10% reservation of seats in government
jobs and educational institutions for economically weaker section (EWS).
 C. POLICY MAKERS

To begin, we advocate policies that encourage increased investment and production. Russia has
made significant progress, but there is still a lot more that can be done. For example, measures
that foster greater competition would aid in the reduction of public sector distortions; a stronger
business climate would protect minority investors and resolve insolvency; and a higher emphasis
on innovation would boost private R&D investment.

Furthermore, such policy improvements would boost SMEs and have a positive influence on
employment and salaries, both of which are critical for poverty reduction. Although the
importance of SMEs in Russia's economy has grown – they now account for 22 percent of GDP
and 25 percent of total employment – they still pale in comparison to OECD countries, where
SMEs account for 50-60 percent of GDP on average.

At the same time, we must recognise that quicker economic growth may not reach the most
vulnerable individuals and families. People who labour in the informal sector, have a low level
of education, or suffer from chronic ailments are more likely to be poor and unable to participate
in economic progress.Poor families with children have poverty rates that are far higher than the
national average, and they are the ones who need the most help. Targeted social assistance can
help accelerate poverty reduction when combined with economic growth, but reforms should not
be limited to transfers. The government must also actively avoid welfare dependency and
encourage recipients to engage in economic activity.

In Russia, poverty takes many forms, and its complexity hinders widespread
progress in poverty reduction. That is why a business as usual approach will not
suffice – instead, meaningful reforms are critical if Russia is to meet its ambitious
goal of reducing poverty by half by 2024, as outlined in its National Development
Plan.

Although difficult, accelerating growth is not impossible. Our estimates show that
Russia’s potential growth is around 1.5 percent – but implementation of the right policy
reforms could boost it to around 2.5 percent by 2024. Indeed, we have seen similar
growth accelerations in other middle-income countries in the past: Ireland in the early
1970s, South Korea in the early ‘90s, and Poland in the mid-2000s.

Figure 2: Poverty rates by family type in the Russian Federation (2018)

Each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. For some people, the biggest challenge is a lack
of job opportunities, or inadequate skills and training; for others, it’s access to affordable health
care, or child support.

What does this mean for Russia’s policy makers? It means giving special attention to areas of the
country utterly deprived of employment opportunities. It means ensuring everyone, young and
not-so-young, has access to high-quality education and skills training. It means providing health
care and child support that are accessible and affordable.

Russia has the resources – the budgetary means, as well as the administrative capabilities, to
implement the necessary reforms. What it needs now is a comprehensive, integrated policy
approach that leads to more inclusive growth for everyone in the country. After all – to borrow
again from Tolstoy – Spring is the time of plans and projects. The Flemish government adopted a
poverty reduction policy plan in 1989. The problem of poverty is viewed as a structural issue in
this text, with multiple facets.

There is provision for the establishment of a policy for the poor. Within this context, theIn the
same year, the Flemish Inter sectoral Committee for Poverty Reduction (VICA) was
created.representatives from government agencies, cabinets, and non-governmental organisations
working in this subject, and has been Since, it has served as an essential consultative forum. For
the poor and their representative organizations, as well as for the public administration
andpolicy-makers, these theme groups represented a means of learning about mutual differences
in logic and exploring how agreements can be reached. The “culture” of policy-making (e.g.
language usage, structures, channels) was also made more transparent to the poor and their
organizations who gained more insight into, and gained a better understanding of, this piece of
social reality. The representation of different “parties” in the working groups (administration,
cabinet, voluntary sector, social partners, associations and the poor themselves) was an important
factor in this. Around 40 associations get funding from the Flemish government, and most of
them meet three or more of these requirements. This assistance is meant to facilitate policy
collaboration, participation in working groups, and the provision of advice and assistance (e.g.,
child care costs).transport, and care). Poor people's organisations make sure that not only do they
have a voice, but they also make sure that not only do they have a voice, but that they have a
voice Working groups and consultations are attended by representatives as well as disadvantaged
people themselves.held in conjunction with the government

D. Govt. Rules And Regulations

The welfare state as it has developed in Russia reflects how our society has dealt with “social
problems” in the past and still does so today. Poverty was first seen as a matter of “personal
guilt” Later it was considered to be the result of a “personal accident”(such as illness, handicap).
Measures were of a repressive or charitable nature and were intended to discipline the poor.
Through a system of private insurance, citizens had to guarantee themselves against personal
risks such as illness or accidents. Later, social rather than personal factors were identified as
being the root cause of poverty (e.g. the economic climate). A “social accident model” emerged
and influenced the development of the Russia welfare state. The definition of poverty used for
the purposes of international comparisons, is: “the number of people living in families with less
than half the median equivalised family income”. Under this definition, in 1985 a total of 4.4 per
cent of the population lived in conditions of poverty in Russia.

In Russia, the social security system is based upon “labour”. Each working citizen pays a
National Insurance contribution, which is deducted directly from wages and salaries. The starting
point for this system is “compulsory” solidarity, upon which persons that are (temporarily)
incapable of working due to illness or retirement can count. On 7 August 1974, for the first time,
an income was guaranteed for all RUSSIAN citizens as a “subsistence minimum” and this
measure was, at the time, intended to be the cornerstone of the social security system (Seynaeve
and Simoens, 1995, p. 5). The implementation of that law was entrusted to the Public Centres for
Social Assistance (C.O.O.), which were replaced by the Public Centres for Social Welfare
(O.C.M.W.) in 1976. The Public Centres for Social Welfare are obliged to give a reasoned
answer to each request and as such cannot decide arbitrarily on the needs of those that ask for
assistance, or clients of the social services. Focusing attention on “human dignity” as an
autonomous value fundamentally implies an expression of respect towards people who ask for
assistance and their recognition as citizens. In executing the right to social care, criteria for
welfare, or criteria for “human dignity” can be established with the co-operation of the people
concerned (Claeys, 2000). People then no longer merely think in“material terms” (i.e. “asking
for assistance indicates material shortages”), but in terms of possibilities to become independent,
to be able to cope for oneself, to obtain psychological ease and a certain freedom of choice to
organise one's own life (Bouverne-De Bie, 1997).

As a result, the services provided by Public Centres for Social Welfare today go beyond poverty
reduction and (financial) support (Geldof and Luyten, 1998, p. 23). For example, they provide a
variety of services for senior individuals, as well as housing, medical care, legal aid, and job
search assistance to people living on a subsistence level.

Anyone with social, psychological, or physiological difficulties can now seek help from a Public
Centre for Social Welfare. However, following the law's passage, we've noticed that (financial)
help has once again taken centre stage. In many ways, the broader argument on welfare and
poverty has been reduced to a dialogue.

Moreover, for such reasons as high caseloads and limited capacity, the services of the Public
Centresfor Social Welfare are often restricted to offering individual assistance or else a
bureaucratic interpretation prevails (Bouverne-De Bie et al., 2000). The development of criteria
for human dignity and bringing these criteria into the social debate are not top priorities. The
fundamental significance of the law on the Public Centres for Social Welfare is increasingly
being pushed into the background.Consequently, the Public Centres for Social Welfare are in
danger of increasingly being considered as“poor relief institutions”, responsible for paying out
the subsistence minimum, rather than as localinstitutions that should guarantee all citizens their
right to welfare.Article 23 of the 1994 Constitution enshrined these principles by establishing the
following social rights:

– The right to labour and the free choice of professional work within the framework of a general

employment policy that aims at, among other things, securing the highest and most stable

employment level possible, the right to reasonable conditions of employment and reasonable

pay, as well as the right to information, consultation and collective action,

– The right to social security, health protection and social, medical and judicial assistance,

– The right to proper housing,

– The right to protection of a healthy environment.

– The right to cultural and social development.

The “enforceability” of these fundamental social rights entails that the government is assigned an

active task in this matter. The recognition of the right to a dignified life implies that one
objective is to ensure policy implementation that helps all citizens in a dignified way. This means
that policy implementation should be in line with the personal views and experiences of the
people concerned, and that these people should, in turn, be able to influence the implementation
of policy

E. CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY

The way governments and communities manage their affairs politically, as well as how power
and authority are exercised, is referred to as governance. The impact of good, or particularly
terrible, governance on the poorest and most vulnerable people's lives is enormous:
thegovernment institutions' inability to avert violence, provide basic security, or offer basic
services Services can be life-or-death, and a lack of opportunity can hinder generations from
succeeding. preventing disadvantaged families from escaping poverty; and the incapacity to
expand Countries might become locked in a cycle of aid dependency if they do not develop
economically and collect taxes. As a result, understanding government is critical to attaining
development and reducing poverty.conflict. During the 1990s donors came to realise that
development required better ‘governance’,and RUSSIAN CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY
recognised early on the need to work with the research community to identifyways of improving
governance for better development outcomes.

The Centre for Future States and the Citizenship ,Accountability and Participation Programmes
(Institute of Development Studies, Sussex); the Crisis States Research Centre(London School of
Economics); and the Centre for Research on Inequality and Ethnicity(CRISE, Oxford University)
have been funded by DFID over the past ten years. This paper provides a brief overview of what
these different programmes have told us about governance, fragility and conflict in the
developing world. The key message from all four research programmes is that to understand
developmentwe must understand the politics that shape it. Ultimately it is political decisions that
will shape whether or not the Millennium Development Goals are reached, revenues are raised to
fund investment, and growth occurs. The poor, more than any other group, rely on basic public
services. For vulnerablefamilies, access to education and healthcare are important routes out of
poverty.The politics matters: services work better for the poor when poor citizens participate in
reform of service delivery and the research looks at how this can be most effectively achieved. In
conflict affected states the provision of services is very sensitive. Service delivery targeting
excluded groups can reduce political tensions and improved security.