COMPARISON OF THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITION OF RURAL AREAS IN THE KRAS-NODAR KRAI WITH OTHER MUNICIPALITIES IN THE REGION

Key findings from this study

This research indicates that:

• Urban districts dominate economic indicators while rural municipalities frequently lead in social service provision, creating significant territorial polarization.
• Weighted coefficients derived from rural resident surveys enable assessment frameworks to reflect subjective importance of different life quality dimensions.
• Agricultural output concentrates in specific rural districts, with Kalininsky, Beloglinsky, and Shcherbinovsky achieving the highest production levels per capita.
• Industrial production and transportation services cluster in urban and coastal municipalities, leaving predominantly rural districts economically specialized but not diversified.

Overview

This study develops and applies an integrated assessment framework to evaluate the socio-economic condition of rural municipalities in Krasnodar Krai, Russia. The authors modify an existing methodology by incorporating empirically-derived weighted coefficients for 19 indicators, established through resident surveys to reflect subjective importance of different life aspects. The research analyzes 44 municipalities using a seven-stage process that standardizes indicators, calculates partial and integral indices, and classifies territories by socio-economic status. The framework examines both economic dimensions (industry, agriculture, finance, wages) and social dimensions (education, healthcare, social support, consumer services) to produce comprehensive territorial comparisons.

Methods and approach

The methodology proceeds through seven distinct stages. Stage one identifies 19 evaluation indicators across economic and social domains. Stage two establishes weighted coefficients through surveys of rural residents to capture subjective priorities. Stage three standardizes indicators and derives partial indices. Stage four calculates integral assessments for each territory incorporating the weighted coefficients. Stage five computes composite index scores by indicator group for each district. Stage six classifies territories by indicator groups. Stage seven generates overall socio-economic status indices and performs final typological classification of the 44 municipalities. The weighting approach distinguishes this framework from prior methodologies by Nikitina and Sushentseva.

Results

The analysis reveals substantial territorial polarization across Krasnodar Krai municipalities. Urban districts dominate economic indicators, particularly industrial production, where Seversky district achieves the highest score (0.879), followed by Slavyansky (0.841) and Abinsky (0.537). Among predominantly rural municipalities, Vyselkovsky ranks fourth (0.457) for industrial output. Agricultural production shows different leadership patterns: Kalininsky district leads (0.702), followed by Beloglinsky (0.681) and Shcherbinovsky (0.553). Urban districts like Gelendzhik, Sochi, and Apsheronsky rank lowest in agricultural indicators. Transportation and storage services concentrate in Novorossiysk (0.801), Temryuksky (0.544), and Tuapsinsky (0.176), with rural districts generally scoring below 0.06.

Social indicators present a more heterogeneous distribution compared to economic metrics. Rural areas frequently achieve leadership positions in social service provision, contrasting with their subordinate economic performance. The research identifies 44 municipalities across multiple socio-economic status types based on composite scoring. Detailed comparative analysis across the economic group (industry, agriculture, finance, wage levels) and social group (education, healthcare, social support, consumer services) demonstrates that territorial advantage varies considerably by domain. This mosaic pattern indicates that economic and social development do not uniformly correlate across municipalities in the region.

Implications

The documented polarization between urban economic dominance and dispersed social service leadership suggests that regional development strategies require differentiated territorial approaches. Urban districts concentrate industrial capacity and advanced service sectors, while rural municipalities retain agricultural specialization but lack diversified economic bases. Practical interventions must address these inter-territorial disparities through targeted support for agricultural sectors in rural areas and strategic modernization of social infrastructure. The weighted coefficient methodology provides regional authorities with a tool that reflects resident priorities rather than imposing uniform evaluation criteria, enabling policy adjustments responsive to local conditions.

The materials offer regional authorities empirical evidence for recalibrating spatial development strategies in Krasnodar Krai. The identification of specific municipalities excelling or lagging in particular indicator groups enables resource allocation aligned with territorial needs and capacities. Reducing inter-territorial disparities requires simultaneous investment in rural economic diversification and maintenance of social service quality where rural areas currently perform well. The framework's applicability extends beyond Krasnodar Krai to other regions seeking to balance economic growth with equitable social development across heterogeneous municipal landscapes. The survey-based weighting methodology demonstrates how subjective resident assessments can inform objective comparative analysis.

Scope and limitations

This summary is based on the study abstract and available metadata. It does not include a full analysis of the complete paper, supplementary materials, or underlying datasets unless explicitly stated. Findings should be interpreted in the context of the original publication.