2020 Issue №1

The article presents the results of the sociological analysis of environ­men­tal awareness of the residents of a regional centre (the case of Kaliningrad) and a settlement (the case of Nivenskoye, the Kaliningrad region). The study is relevant for the federal authorities since environmental problems have beco­me a frequent cause of protest actions in Russia. The relevance of the study for the regional authorities is predetermined by social conflicts related to the con­st­ruction of a potassium-magnesium production facility in the village of Ni­ven­skoye. The study revealed a number of characteristic features typical of the en­vironmental consciousness of the two territorial communities. The analysis sho­wed that villagers are more trustful of all sources of information related to en­vironmental issues. They are more willing to spend money on envi­ron­men­tal protection. Villagers are more inclined to blame business for environ­men­tal problems, while Kaliningraders tend to blame the state. The author iden­tified common features of environmental consciousness of the urban and rural re­si­dents: distrust of the information on environmental risks coming from bu­siness and the unwillingness to sacrifice safe and clean environment for im­pro­ved living standards. The author offers recommendations to the Kalinin­grad region authorities and to large businesses on the prevention of social ten­sion associated with the perception of environmental risks.

This research aims to determine the characteristics of the perception of environmental risks using the case of a salt deposit in the Kaliningrad region as an example. To achieve this aim, the author analyzed the social and cultural determinants of the population. The grid-group analysis was used as a sup­porting technique for the identification of cultural determinants. The follow­ing cultural determinants were identified: individualism, hierarchism, fatal­ism and egalitarianism. Social determinants were factors related to the re­spondents' living environment — urban or rural. The main method of re­search was a focus group with subsequent processing of results using ATLAS.ti software programme. The study revealed that environmental risks are not a priority problem for the region. Rural residents are more concerned about en­vironmental risks. There are similarities in the assessments of environmen­tal conditions by urban and rural residents. However, the author identified some differences particularly regarding the development of the salt deposit. These differences can be explained by different cultural types: a negative atti­tude prevails among individualists and egalitarians, a contrasting position prevails among hierarchs. It has been established that there are socially deter­mined forms of communication regarding overcoming environmental risks, for in­stance, word of mouth and appeals to government institutions (villag­ers) and street protests (city residents). There are also differences in the choice of effec­tive methods of risk communication, depending on the respondent’s cultural type. Hierarchs prefer communication in social networks; egalitarians tend to organize petitions and appeal to the authorities; the fatalists do not ex­press their own opinion; individuals strive for greater control over the situa­tion and therefore prefer all possible forms of interaction.