Living with Risk: Post-Soviet Welfare State & Daily Life Uncertainties in Russia 27 October, 2014 Welfare Cricis and Cricis Centres in Russia Docent Aino

Living with Risk: Post-Soviet Welfare State & Daily Life Uncertainties in Russia

27 October, 2014

Welfare Cricis and Cricis Centres in RussiaDocent Aino Saarinen

Aleksanteri-institute, Univesity of Helsinki(not to be distributed outside the class)

Saarinen 27.10.2014 1

Saarinen 27.10.2014

Research background

• Finnish-Russian-US umbrella project WGA – Welfare, Gender and Agency in Russia in the 2000-2010s (2008-2010/2012)

• Finnish-Swedish-Norwegian research project RWN - Russian Women as Immigrants in Norden: Everyday life, Social and Cultural Justice and Political Citizenship

(2004-2007)

• Nordic-NW Russian research and development project NCRB - A Network for Crisis Centres in the Russian Barents (and in the Barents region as a whole)

(1999-2002, 2002-2005)• Femina Borealis network in Barents (1993-1994 ---)

2

Saarinen 27.10..2014 3

Saarinen: Welfare Crisis and Crisis Centres in Russia Today, 2012

• In:• Carlbäck, Gradskova and Kravchenko (eds.): And They Lived Happily

Ever After. Norms and Everyday Practices of Family and Parenthood in Russia and Eastern Europe. Central European University Press 2012

• NCRB, WGA – publications (last slide)

Saarinen 27.10. 2014

Welfare crisis and crisis centres

• National policies• 1. Population – fertility crisis?• 2. Reproduction crisis? • 3. Gender violence crisis?

• Work against gender violance• - Crisis centre movement, NGOs, struggling for survival• - Etatization: public cricis centres

• Conclusions

4

Saarinen 27.10.2014

WGA project – ”inspirations”

• Debate in Idäntutkimus journal (Studies on Eastern Europe) 2006-2007 --- WGA project

• Arguments for men as loosers in transition:• Working-age men, averedge life expectancy 58 y (see

development countries)• Population forecasts:• 2006: 143 million; 2050: 112 million

5

Saarinen 27.10.2014 6

PART 1: CRISIS AND POLICIES

Saarinen 27.4. 2014

WHICH CRISIS? (feminist critics)

• De-population forecast:2006: 143 m; 2050: 112 m: • Mortality crisis (men)? Fertility crisis (women)?• Reproduction crisis? • Gender violence crisis?

• From whose perspective the problems (and prioritization) is defined, how they are ”framed”?

• Who and how to solve problems• Woman’s issue? Gender issue?

7

Saarinen 27.10.2014

SOURCES FROM MID-2000S, both from inside and outside

• Discourse approach --- knowlege and power• 1: UN (UNDP) development reports on Russia; both general

and gender reports (by Russia’s UNDP experts (Moscow), inside to inside)

• 2: Gender equality report for UN (implementation of Beijing programme 1995) (by the social ministry, outwards)

• 3: Critical views: Open Society Institute’s report 2007 (Soros Foundation) (by experts and activists, outside and inside)

10

Saarinen 27.10.2014

POPULATION CRISIS?

• Men’s life expectancy 58 y – as low as in developing countries (women: 71 y) (historically unic, cf even1930s)

• Priority problem, experts and Putin (annual speech 2006): high mortality of working-age men, Putin: ”catastrophic”, ”critical”)

• Internal (from inside to inside) documents list relevant factors: life style, diet, alcohol)

9

Saarinen 27.10.2014

Population crisis = FERTILITY CRISIS?

• How to solve it, by whom?• It is not about mortality crisis only but fertility crisis as well• IOW (in other words): Women have to solve the problem by rising

fertility (cf 2006 NGO seminar at Aleksanteri Institute: women must ”save men”)

• Pre- and post-natal problem

10


Fertility crisis -- cont

• In the Soviet Union: abortion a key method in birth control – at worst: 2 abortions / 1 birth

• In Russia: abortions decreased but maternal mortality still high (cf UNDP reports (2013): 7 x higher than in Finland)

• Birth rate decreased in 1990s in ”shock therapy” years; increased in 2000s (UNDP report (2013): at the same level as in EU-15 countries on average)

• However, in Moscow-experts’ reports, in mid-2000s, the UN indicators are ”reformed” (”local adaptations” in the reports)

• Contradiction: cost-benefit analysis: more beneficial to direct resources for men than combating maternal mortality

11

Saarinen 27.2. 2014 12

PART 2: REPRODUCTION CRISIS?

Saarinen 27.10.2014

To rise fertility, how to support women?

• Rights and services in welfare state• Birth control and abortion rights (sexual health) • Before and after delivery: maternity services; child welfare

clinics; maternity leave, allowance• Kindergartens (combining work and family)

• IOW: not only about fertility (pre-postnatal period) but in a longer perspective reproduction crisis

13


Maternity capital

• Initiative from above, Putin, annual speech, 2006: ”maternity capital” reform

• Money transfer for families for kindergarten costs for 2nd and 3rd child

• Available? Many kindergartens closed in 1990s: in early 2000s, shortage of 1 million places (UNDP, Mosocw, gender equality report 2006)

• What for women themselves? Money transfer to the pension fund (to be used 30 y later?) (Also, pension system worsened earlier in transition)

14

Saarinen 27.10.2014

In sum

• Reproduction: women’s major civic duty for the nation (in spite of mother-worker model)

• Men’s privileges not challenged (except in rport outwards to UN..); social fatherhood hardly discussed

• Link to gender violence: provocatively – will abused women ever become happy mothers to more children? Will birth rates rise without combating violence, protecting victims, punishing abusers? Masculinity/femininity ideals?

15

Saarinen 27.10.2014 16

PART 3: GENDER VIOLENCE


Gender violence (GV), global level, Russia

• UN Women’s conferences, Nairobi 1985: GV one of the 12 key issues

• UN General assembly 1994: GV is violation of women’s human rights --- this obliges all member countries to implement these decisions and regulations (norms and policies))

• UN Millennium Programme 2000 repeats this: GV one of central issues

• In Russia: GV extensive but silenced• Family violence, rape, prostitution,. Trafficking in women, symbolic

violence in media, harassment in work life…• IOW: of multiple kinds, difficult to make statistics (best: surveys!)

leet alone indexes (UNDP global welfare index report 2006)

17

Saarinen 27.10.2014

One reliable indicator

• Russia: women killed in close relationships: 14 000 – 15 000 / year (10-15-20 x Nordic countries)

• NGOs: informed about this before Beijing in 1995, confiremed by Ministry of Justice, end-1990s

• Cf. UNDP development index report 2006: GV should be part of welfare indexes

• How does gender violence and this ”detail” come up in the three kinds of reports?

18

Saarinen 27.10.2014

UNDP gender report, Moscow: own chapter in this report – ok?

• Note the term: gender aspect of violence• ”Men exposed to violence more often than

women”• Why? Because violence between men is

included to the figure• IOW:the indicator is distorted, does not

measure same phenomena as UN

19

Saarinen 27.10.2014

Analysis from outside: Open Society Institute (Soros) 2007

• ”Violence against Women in Russia: Does the Goverment Care in Russia?” (part of OSI’s global follow-up)

• As to Russia: special attention to family violence and ”murders” of women; violence in warfare, prisions; sex trafficking

• Conclusion: no equality machinery in Russia (closed 2003), no machinery for combating gender equality

20

Saarinen 27.10.2014

.. OSI-cont, Russia does not have

• No reform of legal norms in accordance with UN norms (Criminal Code)

• No instructions for new practices, follow-ups, actions plans• No funding for crisis centres and shelters; service and support for

victims• No training for officials, no information and awareness activities; No

research, statistics• Russia has: 7 federal and 5 local shelters, 1 place / 9 million

inhabitants; EU: norm: 1/10 000 inhabitants• OSI-conclusion: combating GV has been left to NGOs• What is the situation of NGOs established from early 1990s?

24

Saarinen 9.4.2014 22

PART 4: COMBATING GENDER VIOLENCE

Saarinen 27.10.2014

Crisis centre movement:1990--2013: ”rise and fall”?

• During transition support for women’s NGOs one priority in western ”democracy aid” and ”development industry” – especially combating gender violence through crisis centres

• Nordic-NW Russian NCRB – A Network for Crisis Centres in (Nordic-Russian) Barents, 1999-2001, 2002-2005 (funding: Nordic Council of Ministers, EU – Interreg, Norwegian Barents Secretariat) (both NGOs and the few public units)

• NCRB-survey 2000, 2004; WGA-survey 2008-09

23

Saarinen 27.10..2014

NGO-crisis centres – dual mission

1. Help to victims (3rd sector service units)• Hot lines• Councelling• Self-help groups

2. Political agency for change (civil society activists)• Information, awareness-raising • Political pressure, lobbying for changing legislations (UN) and

offering services• Mostly volunteers

24


Economic and political opportunity structures closing

• No more external support, resources go to new crisis areas• Little internal support: public funding directed to collaborative

social service-units, not to politically active units – NGOs into ”helpmates” of the state?)

• Important: new NGO legislation under Putinsä rule: 2006 + 2010, 2012

• 2012: NGOs receiving foreign funding = ”foreign agents” if they have ”political aims” (registration, accounting, to taken to court?)

• What is politics?• Number of autonomous units decrasing (NCRB + WGA surveys in

NW Russia) • RISE and FALL of this ”small crisis centre movement”

25

Saarinen 27.10.2014

Etatization --- new trend: increase of public crisis centres and shelters

• Not visible in OSI report2007• Part of building local welfare state• 1999 decree from Social Ministry on local ”complex social units”

including services for women & children in ”difficult life situations”• Implementation from mid-2000s, at the same time as opportunity

structures for autonomous NGOs were closing and the number of NGOs (especially politically active units) decreasing

• CASE ST. PETERSBURG: positive development when Valentina Matvienko as the governeur at turn of 2000s-2010s

• 1999-2005, NCRB: 1 public unit• 2010, WGA: 16 public units (one in almost each district), presently

some 20 ; coordinator for work

26


Public units - on which mission?

• WGA surveys, interviews 2008-2011• Public units: stress on family work• FRAME: familialism, women’s rights,

antifeminism • Political aim: reform of Criminal code (same as

for NGOs but less offensive methods) • These actors without experience of civic activism

= professional employees• Does it question male power? (Maija Jäppinen)

27

Saarinen 27.10.2014

PART 6: Conclusion

1. Thesis on depopulation-population crisis valid

--- but: it cannot be solved only pressuring women for giving birth (measures regarding sexual health, maternal mortality necessary)

2. A larger frame necessary: reproduction, combining work and family by

--guaranteeing day care for all children

--involving men for child care and home work --- changing ideas on ”masculinity” and family models more equal

3. Gender violence crisis is part of population crisis

--population crisis cannot be solved without combating violence -- ”seriously” --- as a gender problem ---

IOW: Russia does not implement UN norms and policies

FINALLY: women do not have political power at all relevant levels and, moreover, the political regime not ”democratic” --- SEE: WTR – Women and Transformation in Russia, Routledge 2014.

28

Saarinen 24.10.2014 29


LITERATURE• Johnson, Janet Elise & Saarinen, Aino (2011): Assessing Civil Society in Putin’s Russia: The Plight of Women’s

Crisis Centers. Communist and post-Communist Studies, 44, 1, pp. 41-52.

• Johnson, Janet Elise & Saarinen, Aino (2013): Twenty-First Century Feminism under Repression: Gender Regime change and the Women’s Crisis Centers Movement in Russia. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38,1, pp. 543-567

• Saarinen, Aino, Drachova, Irina and Liapounova, Olga (2003): Cricis Centres in the Barents Region – Questionnaire Report. In: Aino Saarinen, Olga Liapounova and Irina Drachova (eds.): NCRB – A Network for Crisis Centres for Women in the Barents Region. Report of the Nordic Russian Development Project, 1999-2002. Centre for women’s studies and gender research: Gender research: methodology and practice, Vol. 5. Pomor State University, Arkhangelsk, pp. 161-195.

• Saarinen, Aino (2012): Welfare Crisis and Crisis Centers in Russia Today (2012). In: Helene Carlbäck, Yulia Gradskova and Zhanna Kravchenko (eds.): And They Lived Happily Ever After. Norms and Everyday Practices of Family and Parenthood in Russia and Eastern Europe. Central European University Press , pp 231-250.

• Saarinen, Aino, Ekonen, Kirsti and Uspenskaia, Valentina (2014): Breaks and continuities of the ´great transformations´. In: Aino Saarinen, Kirsti Ekonen and Valentina Uspenskaia (Eds): Women and Transformation in Russia. Abingdon, RoutledGe, pp. 1-28.

30

Documents

Living with Risk: Post-Soviet Welfare State & Daily Life Uncertainties in Russia 27 October, 2014 Welfare Cricis and Cricis Centres in Russia Docent Aino