INTRODUCTION

During the years of shocks (wars and crises), people partly use to leave large cities, spreading to the suburbs and remote villages and returning after the end of the difficult period. This happened in Russia more than once in the 20th century, including during the economic crisis of the 1990s. However, after painful times, the process of population concentration in the main cities and agglomerations was restored (Antonov and Makhrova, 2019; Karachurina and Mkrtchyan, 2016; Mkrtchyan, 2018; Nefedova and Treyvish, 2017; etc.).

The peculiarity of Russia is that it has historically formed a life in two houses: in the winter in the city, and in the summer, first in the family estates, then, in the dachas (Mezhdu …, 2016).Footnote 1 Dachas, which are owned by at least half of the country’s urban population, solved not only the problems of recreation, switching, self-realization, and raising children (Nefedova, 2015; Treivish, 2014), but also provided households with some food under their strong stratification (Smirnov, 2017). At the same time, the presence of a second house outside the city did not mean abandoning the city apartment in which the residents are registered, and if one leaves it temporarily, then it can be rented out.

The article discusses different types of dachas as second homes of citizens: old dachas around Moscow and St. Petersburg, typical of the early and mid-twentieth century, mass garden associations, cottage settlements, rural houses in villages bought by citizens. They are united by the fact that they are used by residents of cities temporarily in the summer and on weekends in addition to an apartment in the city (Nefedova and Pallot, 2013). All this slowed down the real suburbanization and de-urbanization, by covering the demand for proximity to nature in second exurban homes and on trips.

In 2020, city dwellers recognized and began to develop another function of dachas, as a shelter during the viral epidemic, with the ability to minimize unwanted contacts with people. A lot has already been written about the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on human behavior and the economy in Russia. First is the increase in the barrier role of the state border (Gerasimenko and Gerasimenko, 2020). The introduction of a ban on traveling abroad and the dangers of traveling across Russia by train and plane have sharply increased the importance of relaxing in one’s country house. The increasing poverty of the population (Druzhinin, 2020) due to the curtailment of businesses and the loss of many jobs inevitably enlarged agricultural activity at the dachas. The mobility of the population turned out to be a risk factor (Kaganskii, 2020), which forced the population to settle in summer cottages for longer periods. The uniqueness of the crisis caused by COVID-19 is associated with the suspension and even a huge decline in the activities of the service sector, including retail trade and small businesses, from which large centers were hit harder (Zubarevich and Safronov, 2020). Industrial enterprises also suffered due to a sharp contraction in demand. This also had a boomerang effect on other territories that supplied labor migrants from remote regions to large agglomerations. The feeling of being in danger of getting sick, coupled with a sharp drop in income and an increase in the number of unemployed people, led many in the spring and summer of 2020 and 2021 to turn to the dacha lifestyle and a home economy. However, if in the summer of 2020 the incidence began to decline in the deserted cities, by the summer of 2021 a new strain of the virus launched the third wave of the pandemic (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.
figure 1

Number of cases of COVID-19 infection at the beginning of each month in 2020 and 2021, units.

Full size image

It is all the more important to understand how stable the signs of population deconcentration were in the spring and summer of 2020, and what specific factors stimulate and depress Russian sub- and de-urbanization (Makhrova and Nefedova, 2021).

The countries of Northern Europe, where the role of dachas is also great (Second …, 2013, pp. 165–201; Second …, 2015), reacted to the dacha expansion of townspeople in an opposite manner to Russia (Hannonen and Pitkänen, 2021; Nikolaeva and Rusanov, 2020). The governments of Norway, Sweden, and Finland announced a strict ban on moving outside the city in the spring of 2020 for fears of the spread of the virus and the unpreparedness of rural medicine to to receive too many patients. The former socialist countries, on the other hand, encouraged the use of garden associations to reduce urban overcrowding. In Russia, after the transfer of part of the powers to combat the pandemic to the regions, the authorities of some of them, for example, in Vladimir oblast, closed the access of Muscovites to the most summer houses adjacent to the border with Moscow oblast. In the summer of 2021, with the beginning of the third wave, the regional authorities received more organizational powers from the center, but the population’s fatigue from prohibitions and the need to support business limited their real actions.

THE POSSIBILITIES OF REAL YEAR-ROUND SUB- AND DE-URBANIZATION IN THE CENTER OF RUSSIA

Can the experience of being forced to spend longer periods in dachas reinforce people’s attitudes towards the countryside and give villages and small towns a chance by changing them from a temporary seasonal shelter to a place of permanent residence outside large cities? Scientists have been asking these questions for a long time (Alekseev and Vorob’ev, 2018; Pokrovsky and Nefedova, 2013; etc.), which became especially relevant during the years of the pandemic (Pilyasov, 2020).

In this article, we will try to show, using the example of the regions in the northeastern sector of the Center of Russia, the reaction of dacha residents to the pandemic in 2020 and the possibility of seasonal dacha housing growing into real sub- and de-urbanization of the population (Makhrova and Nefedova, 2021). Three types of territories at different distances from Moscow were considered at different scale levels: (1) in Moscow oblast (Korolev, Pushkinsky, and, Sergiyevo-Posadsky urban okrugs), (2) in Yaroslavl oblast (Pereslavl-Zalessky urban okrug and Nekrasovsky district), and (3) in the east of Kostroma oblast (Manturovo urban okrug). All these areas were surveyed by the authors personally in the summer of 2018–2020 and the data for November 2020 were collected by telephone surveys of heads of administrations and, selectively, summer residents. To study the dynamics of the preferences and demands of the population for country houses during the pandemic, analytical materials of companies operating in the field of suburban real estate were used.

Mass departures from Moscow to dachas began in 2020 much earlier than the May holidays and were already observed in March after the government announced nonworking lockdowns. With the transfer of children and some workers to distance learning and employment, the number of summer residents increased even more. This was recorded by both road services and mobile operators. In the summer of 2020, the number of people who spent time in dachas was higher than in previous years, and they lived outside the city for longer.

The demand for suburban housing has also increased. According to CIANFootnote 2 data, in June–mid-July 2020, compared to the same period last year, sales of suburban housing increased by 1.8 times (Fig. 2). At the same time, the demand for rent, which was not very popular in recent years, increased even more significantly, by 2.5 times. This led to rapid depletion of the cheapest offers and an increase in prices.Footnote 3

Fig. 2.
figure 2

The dynamics of demand for certain segments of the real estate market, June–mid-July 2020 compared to the same period in 2019. Compiled from: Demidova, T., “We don’t have time to sell!”. Where in Russia is the rush demand for real estate. https://www.cian.ru/stati-ne-uspevaem-prodavat-gde-v-rossiiazhiotazhnyj-spros-na-nedvizhimost-308049/ (cited No-vember 10, 2020).

Full size image

The possibility of living in dachas is complicated by the housing and social conditions of life outside the cities. One of the most important indicators that determine the possibility of permanent residence in the country is access to paved roads and the availability of electricity and network gas (Fig. 3). An analysis of the 2016 agricultural census data shows that far from all gardening and dacha associations, not to mention remote villages, have access to paved roads. In many dacha settlements, especially on the periphery of the regions, there is no electricity, and power outages are typical for almost all dacha associations, even in Moscow oblast. Only some garden and dacha settlements located in cities or in the near suburbs of Moscow are connected to network gas, without which it is expensive to heat a house. All this significantly restrains sub- and de-urbanization.

Fig. 3.
figure 3

Infrastructural equipping of garden associations and dacha settlements with household amenities. Note: garden and dacha settlements are missing on the territory of Sudislavsky, Ostrovsky, and Kadyysky districts of Kostroma oblast (Makhrova, 2021). Compiled according to VSP-2016.

Full size image

MOSCOW OBLAST: COVID AND CHANGES IN DEMAND FOR COTTAGES

The role of dachas in Moscow oblast is especially great. The potential residential capacity of 11 400 garden and dacha settlements in the region with 1.4 million plots is 3.6 million people, and taking other types of dacha properties into account, it exceeds 4 million people (Makhrova et al., 2016; Makhrova and Babkin, 2018). After the introduction of the self-isolation regime in March 2020, the demand for the purchase or construction of a country house grew strongly here, despite the fact that Moscow oblast ranked third in terms of the incidence of coronavirus in the summer of 2020 after Moscow and St. Petersburg (Fig. 4). According to CIAN, the number of ad views of advertisements for the sale of houses in Moscow oblast in March increased by one-quarter and in April, by 90% compared to the corresponding period of the previous year. The peak of demand was reached in May, when the growth was by 2.8 times, and on some days the activity was four times higher.Footnote 4 In June, after the self-isolation regime was lifted, demand began to decline consistently, amounting to 115% in the first two weeks compared to the last year.

Fig. 4.
figure 4

The spread of COVID-19 infection in the districts of Moscow oblast as of June 12, 2020, the number of cases of infection. Compiled according to the Ministry of Health of Moscow oblast (covid.mz.mosreg.ru, accessed 09/25/2020).

Full size image

A CIAN audience survey showed that the pandemic affected plans for buying suburban real estate for almost 40% of the respondents. Two coronavirus-related reasons were identified as the most important: better living conditions outside the city during isolation (44%) and the spread of remote work (15%). More than half of the respondents are interested in suburban real estate as their main housing, but only about 40% of them intend to live in a country house permanently. The rest see it as a “second permanent home”: one-quarter intend to visit it regularly, and about 30% spend most of their time there.Footnote 5 Data from companies operating in the suburban real estate market show that the vast majority (70–80%) want to buy a house, townhouse, or cottage so that they can immediately live in it. However, due to the shortage of supply, 70% of buyers are forced to opt for plots without a contract to build a house, which increased the demand for the services of construction companies by 2.5 times, forming queues for several months in advance.Footnote 6

Favorable prospects for real suburbanization of Muscovites are associated with the high cost of Moscow apartments. According to CIAN, the average cost of a two-room apartment with an area of 52 m2 on the secondary market in a residential area of Moscow, on average, was comparable to the cost of a comfortable cottage with an area up to 200 m2. However, this money is not enough to buy a house in the near Moscow suburbs. When buying a house in the mid-suburban belt, there will be enough funds to purchase a cottage and possibly a car, while in remote areas of the Moscow urban agglomeration, one can buy two houses. Residents of the cities and towns of Moscow oblast have more modest financial opportunities to move to a country house. They will not have enough money from the sale of their apartment to buy a house nearby, and the additional payment will be from RUB 1.5 to 6.5 mln.Footnote 7

Opportunities are one thing, and the real readiness of summer residents to move out of town is another. Let us consider this based on the example of four municipalities located along the Yaroslavl highway at different distances from Moscow, where the level of urbanization varies from 100% in Korolev to 77% in Sergiyevo-Posadsky urban okrugs. There are 26 gardening associations in Korolev and 93 in Mytishchi. In the less urbanized Pushkinsky and Sergiyevo-Posadsky urban okrugs, the number of dacha settlements increases to 277 and 602, respectively.

Mytishchi and Korolev are two large urban okrugs with a population of more than 200 000 people each, located on different sides of the Yaroslavl highway.Footnote 8 The territory of these urban okrugs in the second half of the 19th–early 20th centuries had become a popular summer dacha retreat, retaining its demand in this capacity at the present time, despite the onset of high-rise buildings. Proximity to Moscow is combined with natural surroundings: the Pirogovsky Forest Park, Losiny Ostrov National Park, Klyazma Reservoir, the Moscow Canal, and the Klyazma River. Almost all holiday villages that are located directly within the boundaries of the cities of Korolev and Mytishchi, in addition to transport accessibility, are distinguished by the provision of social infrastructure, including the ability to connect to network gas. Many of the dacha settlements of the Soviet era have collapsed and dacha houses have become ordinary objects of urban real estate, although they are used as second homes of Muscovites, whose appearance is determined only by the preferences and financial capabilities of their owners. For example, the old dacha village of Valentinovka as an almost ideal place to live in a dacha, is located just 7–8 km from the Moscow Ring Road (MKAD) near the Klyazma River and Losiny Ostrov National Park, but is remote from the main highway. The train from the Yaroslavsky railway station takes about 45 min. In the “pre-Covid” period, the use of dachas for permanent residence was complicated only by the crowds at trains at rush hour and traffic jams at the entrance to Korolev. Many of the inhabitants of these places built or improved their houses in order to live here on a constant–periodic basis. In 2020, both the time of living in the countryside increased, including early spring and late autumn, and the number of those who live permanently or in two houses.

Approximately the same situation is typical for dachas in the Pushkinsky urban okrug with a population of more than 100 000 people. It is distinguished only by its longer distance from Moscow and, accordingly, its worse transport accessibility. Yet, in the Zavilovo garden partnership, 30 km from the Moscow Ring Road, there are also almost all the conditions for permanent residence: electricity, gas, summer water supply, and an asphalted entrance. There is neither main water supply nor sewerage, but many have autonomous systems (wells or boreholes and septic tanks). However, due to the high cost of connection (from RUB 1 mln), only half of the sites are gasified. Bus service is missing from here, to the center of Pushkino in 15 km or to the Zavety Ilyicha station in 1.5–2 km. To get to Moscow by train takes 50 min. A truck shop and a farmer come to the village, the nearest store is located 2 km away, and chain stores surround the area. Those living in dachas all year round drive/take their children to neighboring kindergartens and schools. Primary polyclinic and emergency inpatient medical care can be obtained in Pushkino, in difficult cases one needs to go to Moscow. During the warm season, 90% of the 175 households are used, including 20% of the plots where they live permanently; about the same number of families come on weekends regardless of season. In 2020, more people lived both in early spring and late autumn: this is clearly seen in the volume of garbage, for the removal of which additional containers had to be ordered. However, the number of permanent residents in November 2020 increased by only ten people. As in Moscow oblast as a whole, an increased demand for dachas was noted in the village, all plots that could not find buyers for many years were sold, and everyone who wished to rent empty dachas did. In addition to Muscovites, there were also residents of Pushkino among the buyers and this trend is also typical for other cities and towns near Moscow, whose population was prompted by the pandemic to purchase their own house on the outskirts of cities, allowing them to preserve their familiar surroundings, but live in their own house with a lawn. As other interviews and the already cited CIAN survey data have shown, the coronavirus has made it attractive to purchase country houses precisely along its path.

However, even not far from Moscow, one can see summer cottages with no amenity other than electricity. This is typical for settlements located on the borders of neighboring municipalities, for example, in the Vesna and Vesna-2 garden nonprofit partnership (SNT) in the Shchelkovo urban okrug on the border with Pushkinsky urban okrug. Both urban okrugs are covered with a network of garden–dacha and cottage settlements, forming “agglomerations” of dacha development (Shchepetkova, 2018). The intricacies of the borders of urban districts and settlements are also reflected in the composition of their owners, among whom are residents of Korolev, Shchelkovo, Chernogolovka, Fryazino, Sofrino and Moscow, although initially the plots were given to the residents of Fryazino. The villages are located about 35 km from the Moscow Ring Road, next to the Moscow Small Ring Road, but one has to go to Fryazino by bus, and 10 km to the railway station. The nearest shops are only 2 km away. Water in this area comes from a well or bore and in every fifth house there is stove heating. Just two houses are inhabited all year round. Another seven owners come to their dachas on weekends in the winter. In 2020, 10% more plots were actively used in summer than in previous years. In November, people still lived in four dachas, although the dwellers of the same two houses they were going to spend the winter here. There are no prospects for gasification and other communications, despite the fact that there is a cottage settlement with all amenities very close by. Thus, even in the Moscow suburbs, the development of the territory puts obstacles to real suburbanization.

Dachas located in Moscow oblast at a greater distance from Moscow, as a rule, have the worst infrastructure characteristics, and many have poor transport accessibility, which affects their demand. For example, the Dubininsky dacha-garden settlement in the Sergiyevo-Posadsky urban okrug can be reached in 1.5 h by car or by train and it takes 5 min to walk from the bus stop. Several ponds are nearby and three shops that were designed for residents of the village of Dubininskoye. However, as infrastructure there is only electricity, everything else is individual, which hinders the possibility of year-round living. Problems with infrastructure are also typical for other settlements and in some there are added problems with roads: it is almost impossible to drive a car to the dachas near the village of Spas-Torbeevo in the same urban okrug in rainy weather.

READINESS FOR DE-URBANIZATION BASED ON THE EXAMPLE OF MIDDLE-REMOTE AND REMOTE DACHAS

The Pereslavl-Zalessky urban urban okrug in Yaroslavl oblast adjoins Moscow oblast, and the city of Pereslavl-Zalessky (37 thousand permanent residents) is located 140 km from Moscow. The entire okrug and even its center are increasingly becoming Moscow’s dacha zone.

The number of citizens, who bought rural houses in the dictrict, is approximately equal to the number of local rural residents, but it is less than the number of inhabitants in the summer season of garden and cottage settlements (Fig. 5). However, with the end of the summer season, the situation changes dramatically. Usually, about 5% of the city dwellers who have houses in the villages remain, as well as about 7% of the owners of houses in garden associations and cottage settlements (Fig. 6). As well, even the stressful situation of 2020 did not change the general trend, although the number of those who decided to wait out the pandemic doubled in mid-November. The main obstacle is still the poor domestic conditions. The roads, except for the main highway Moscow–Yaroslavl, are poor. Gas is supplied to only 30% of the settlements, including 17% of the villages. However, due to the high cost of connecting individual houses, even where a pipe is connected, only 10–15% of households are gasified. A water supply main is available only in the centers of settlements and large cottage settlements. Local authorities complain that the Yaroslavl authorities, referring to the abundance of Moscow summer residents, have ceased to consider the district as their own territory, believing that Moscow itself should take care of its development.

Fig. 5.
figure 5

The number of rural residents and urban summer residents in different seasons of the year in 2018 and 2020 on the territory of the former Veskovsky administration of Pereslavsky district, pers. Source: (Makhrova and Nefedova, 2021).

Full size image
Fig. 6.
figure 6

A Dacha near Pereslavl-Zalessky in Yaroslavl oblast. Photo by T.G. Nefedova.

Full size image

The Nekrasovsky district of Yaroslavl oblast, Novodashkovskoye rural settlement. These dachas on the banks of the Volga (Fig. 7), despite the distance from Moscow (320 km) resemble those located not so far from it. The village of Novodashkovo between Yaroslavl and Kostroma is relatively large; in the 19th century it was local trade and craft center with small villages nearby. Now, 270 inhabited houses have been preserved here, although there are only 40 permanent local dwellers. In the summer, especially on weekends, the village is filled with urban residents who bought rural houses. By winter, it is empty and mostly old people remain. In November 2019, 19 citizens still lived here, normally single pensioners and only one family. This is 3% of the dacha population on weekends in July–August. The crisis of 2020 doubled the out-of-season stay of the townspeople at the dacha to 40 people, including several families with small children, but they were not sure that they could live there all winter (Fig. 8). Towards the center of the district, the urban-type settlement of Nekrasovskoye with a population of less than 6000 people is 9.5 km away and there is no regular bus. The village is supplied with gas, but the pipe was privatized by local businessmen. Connecting a house to the pipe costs RUB 1.3 mln, so only 11 houses are supplied with gas. Thus, there is no need to talk about de-urbanization, including because of living conditions.

Fig. 7.
figure 7

The Volga River near the village of Novodashkovo in Yaroslavl oblast. Photo by T.G. Nefedova.

Full size image
Fig. 8.
figure 8

The number of rural residents and urban summer residents and the number of inhabited houses in different seasons of the year in 2019 and 2020 on the territory of the Novodashkovo settlement in Nekrasovsky district of Yaroslavl oblast. Source: (Makhrova and Nefedova, 2021).

Full size image

The Manturovo urban okrug of Kostroma oblast. The former Ugory settlement is the most remote case. From Moscow to Manturovo it is 550 km, while from Kostroma it is 250 km. In the 20th century there was a very strong depopulation.Footnote 9 Besides, part of the local population is periodically working in Kostroma, Yaroslavl, and Moscow. On the other hand, villages on the high bank of the river are very popular with Moscow summer residents. The plots here are large (from 0.5 to 1 ha) and not fenced. Dacha residents make up to 30% of the real population in summer. They are mainly intellectuals, who can spend from 2 weeks to 2–4 months in well-preserved big blockhouses houses. By the end of the season, the townspeople stay for the winter in only four to five houses. Moreover, local old people leave for winter to children living in cities, and the villages becomes empty. The stressful situation of 2020 slightly increased in summer the number of citizens, and with the end of the season, by November, summer residents remained in nine houses in all the villages. Social conditions for de-urbanization are even more severe here. The heating is only wood-fired, the school was closed, the Internet is not reliable, it is 35 km to the district center, and it is 3–7 km to the post office in the former center of the Ugory settlement with a minimum set of products. Even having a car does not always help, since dirt roads are washed away in the autumn and spring, and in the winter they are rarely cleared to small villages.

CONCLUSIONS

Thus, in 2020, the countryside became a real refuge, relieving social and psychological stress during the pandemic. This affected mainly summer houses of citizens. However, with the mass character and variety of dachas, their use as permanent rather than seasonal housing largely depends on the distance from the city and on the equipment of the territory.

The most popular location as a refuge is Moscow oblast, where dacha suburbanization has long been developing into the permanent type and the COVID-19 pandemic has only accelerated the process. As in the surroundings of other largest cities, in 2020 there was an increase in demand for suburban real estate, which was considered both as a place of isolation in nature and as an investment in the face of economic crisis. This was facilitated by the spread of remote work and study. In Moscow oblast, especially the near one, the COVID-19 pandemic has led to an increase in the length of stay and the number of those who live permanently in the country or use it as a second home. However, due to the high cost of connection to gas system, even at a short distance from Moscow, only some households are gasified, which limits their use all year round. All this makes suburbanization patchy, while maintaining its seasonal form.

Outside Moscow oblast, in more remote dachas, even in such a difficult epidemiological period, living conditions and the capacities of social and transport infrastructure are slowing down the de-urbanization of citizens. This is especially true for dachas in small villages, where the store is far away, and it is difficult to get to the doctor, especially for lonely people. As well, remote work and children’s education are often limited by the capabilities of the local Internet. However, much depends on the presence of a leader who is able to organize a community in gardening and dacha partnerships. In the villages, only a few enthusiastic townspeople are ready to fit into local life. Most of them are pensioners. Local authorities cannot support the urban population who have rural homes (and often do not want to), at least in order to preserve the network of settlements and look for new ways to develop the territory.