The location and specialization of agricultural production and the level of development of rural areas of the Siberian macroregion are determined by various historical, demographic, geographical, climatic, and infrastructural factors. The harsh natural and climatic conditions are one of the causes of the rise in the cost of life and economic activity compared to the European part of Russia, and the features of Siberian agriculture are also associated with them. However, in recent years, this sector of the economy has been developing here at a fast pace, playing an increasing role in the life of the macroregion and the country in general. The greatest growth in agricultural production is noted in Altai and Krasnoyarsk krais and Omsk and Novosibirsk oblasts.

The share of the Siberian Federal Okrug (SFO) in Russia’s gross agricultural production is 12%; at present, the region has a predominantly industrial specialization, and the urban population exceeds the rural population in nine out of ten subjects [1]. The diversity of agroclimatic conditions provides a clear specialization: in the north, people are mainly engaged in beef cattle breeding and fishing, while in the southern regions, they focus on crop production and meat and dairy cattle breeding [2]. Regional advantages are actively used, which makes it possible to develop not only traditional industries but also breeding of the Siberian red deer, breeding for reindeer meat, gathering of wild plants, etc.

The territory of Siberia is also heterogeneous in other characteristics. For example, in the south—in Altai krai and the Altai and Tyva republics, the rural population makes up almost half of the total population. In Central Siberia, it is concentrated mainly around large cities, which are located at a considerable distance from each other.

The all-Russia tendencies towards a decrease in the rural population, an increase in the unemployment rate, and a decrease in the standard of living have affected Siberian villages as well. The SFO rural population has decreased by 13% since 1990 and amounted to 4.4 mln people in 2019. The largest reduction occurred in Omsk oblast (‒23.4%), Krasnoyarsk krai (‒21.7%), and Novosibirsk oblast (‒16.7%). In the Altai Republic and the Republic of Khakassia, the rural population increased by 9.4 and 3.9%, respectively (Table 1).

Table 1. Dynamics of the rural population in the subjects of the Siberian Federal District, thousand people
Full size table

The highest unemployment rate in the rural areas is observed in the Tyva and Altai republics, and the lowest, in Krasnoyarsk krai and the Republic of Khakassia (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.
figure 1

Rural unemployment rate in 2018, %.

Full size image

The average per capita incomes are highly differentiated; for example, in Krasnoyarsk krai, they are two times higher than in the Tyva Republic (Fig. 2). In all the regions, the average per capita income of the rural population is 15–30% lower than that of the urban population.

Fig. 2.
figure 2

Average per capita income of the rural population in 2018, rubles/month.

Full size image

Most subjects see an annual migration outflow of  the population. Only in Novosibirsk oblast is there a gain in the rural population (Table 2).

Table 2. Migration gain/loss in the resident rural population, people
Full size table

Over the past three decades, 319 rural settlements have ceased to exist in the Siberian Federal Okrug. The Siberian village, on average, has the following characteristics: the area is slightly over 100 ha, and the size of the population is, on average, 524 people. The villages are unevenly distributed over the territory, and the distances between them can reach about 100 km in the north and 2‒3 km in the south. The average annual budget revenues of a rural settlement are about ₽9 mln [1].

According to the correlation analysis, where the size of the rural population was chosen as the resulting indicator, the most significant factors in the development of rural areas are the commissioning of housing and roads, investment in fixed assets, the availability of schools, the availability of hot water supply and running water, and the presence of cellular communications and the Internet, as well as the level of remunerations (Fig. 3). Thus, the more financial resources are invested in the development of agricultural production, fixed assets, and engineering infrastructure in a region, the higher the earnings in the agricultural sector are, which, in turn, enhances the attractiveness of the rural area.

Fig. 3.
figure 3

Distribution of correlation coefficients between the factors of development of rural areas and the size of the rural population.

Full size image

The key cause of the existing negative trends is the systemic underfunding of the countryside, determined, on the one hand, by the scarcity of the tax base of rural budgets and, on the other, by the lack of internal development incentives that could contribute to the formation of a stable economic base.

At the same time, certain advantages are enjoyed by settlements where commercially attractive resources are concentrated: agricultural and building lands in demand among the population and business, natural landscapes, water bodies, and forest lands that can bring income from sale or lease. However, local authorities often do not control them, or else they often have no proper legal registration.

Because of the decline in the tax base, a significant part of the budget in small rural settlements began to go to the maintenance of the administration. A kind of vicious circle is forming: the current lack of funding reduces the attractiveness of the village for young people and undermines the possibility of earning income in the future [3]. A sociological survey conducted by scientists from Novosibirsk State Agrarian University showed that the most important conditions for the return of young people to work in the countryside are the level of renumeration and the availability of affordable housing [4].

The above-mentioned features and factors of the development of rural areas of the Siberian Federal Okrug determine the standard of living of the local population. According to the ratingFootnote 1 compiled by the Nikonov All-Russia Institute of Agrarian Problems and Informatics, Novosibirsk oblast, which has achieved the best result in the quality of life of the rural population in the Siberian Federal Okrug, is ranked 20th in Russia by this indicator [5]. The first place in this rating is taken by Lipetsk oblast.

By the example of Novosibirsk oblast, one can single out rural areas with sufficient conditions to ensure a high standard and quality of life, necessary conditions, and not even the minimum necessary conditions. Sufficient conditions for a high standard and quality of life are available in five districts of the oblast, concentrated mainly around Novosibirsk and included in the agglomeration of the same name, which creates infrastructural and economic conditions for the intensive development of agriculture. The necessary conditions are observed in the territories adjacent to the previous group of districts and, as a rule, are located near the oblast’s capital (up to 100 km). Most of the municipal districts (60%) do not have even the minimum necessary conditions for comfortable living.

In turn, municipalities competing for access to public goods enter this struggle from far from equal starting positions. The winners are the heads of those administrations that prepare in advance to participate in large projects cofinanced from higher budgets and involving, for example, gasification of settlements, repair of water supply systems and roads, construction of sports and children’s facilities, etc. In addition to improvement projects, rural administrations expecting to receive investment funds must draw up documents of title for the objects they owe and approve the master plan of the settlement in advance. All this requires serious financial costs [3].

Financial and legislative support for the development of rural areas in subjects of the Russian Federation is implemented through the state program Comprehensive Development of Rural Areas for the Period 2020–2025, which replaced the earlier program Sustainable Development of Rural Areas for 2014–2017 and for the period until 2020, as well as through other federal, regional, and departmental programs. Siberian regions, based on the existing institutional framework, have worked out their own programs for the integrated development of rural areas, aimed at creating comfortable living conditions. However, the amounts of funds allocated for these programs are insignificant and cannot provide a high level of development of the territories. For example, to achieve some of the targets for the period up to 2030, it is necessary to increase the total amount of funding in Khakassia by 6.5 times and in the Altai Republic, by 6.8 times (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4.
figure 4

Relation of the amount required and the actual amount of financing for agriculture and rural areas, mln rubles.

Full size image

To respond adequately to the global challenges of our time, additional measures are required, and they sometimes depend not so much on financial investments as on changes in the established mentality of the rural population. Based on empirical analysis and best practices studied [6–9], the following important factors can be identified that contribute to changes for the better: the formation of a positive attitude to the countryside and rural lifestyles; improvement of vocational training programs for rural youth and youth of indigenous peoples; the development of agritourism and agricultural consumer cooperatives; training farmers; mastering modern technologies necessary in a knowledge-based economy, as well as increasing the general educational level and leadership skills among the rural population; and finally, in areas with difficult natural conditions, managing agricultural production on a rotational basis.

The “prosperity” or “backwardness” of rural areas depends on many diverse factors: the financial viability and economic potential of the regions, their location relative to large cities and other points of growth (including railways and highways), the sectoral structure and the level of development of the local economies that determine the specifics of the local labor market, natural resources, and the demographic and ethnic composition of the population. The personal qualities of the head of a rural settlement, such as managerial skills and knowledge, life experience, and involvement in socioeconomic processes, are extremely important in the “success story” [10].

It seems that the further development of rural areas in Siberia should proceed in the following main directions:

• the formation of agglomerations of rural settlements around large cities and clustering according to the territorial principle, which will create points of growth that will give impetus to the development of nearby rural areas;

• support for small businesses based on agricultural consumer cooperatives (an example is Lipetsk oblast, the leader in the rating of Russian regions in terms of the quality of life of the rural population);

• development of agritourism and ecovillages to preserve and spread the values of the traditional way of life of Siberian peasants;

• expansion of agricultural production in remote and northern rural areas on a rotational basis.

Thus, we can conclude that the historical, harsh climatic, and other features of Siberia largely affect not only the development of agricultural production but also the diversification of the rural economy, the creation of incentives for the growth of initiative projects of rural residents, and provision with social and engineering infrastructure. In this respect, state agrarian policy should take into account the wide diversity and regional specifics of rural areas in Western and Eastern Siberia and provide for increased funding for the measures under implementation.