, , ,

<<


 >>  ()
Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 9 | 10 ||

: ʖ , Ż ...

-- [ 11 ] --

, E. Todd [Todd, 1983, 1984], , . , . , , , , , . , : [Todd, 1984], . , , , , [Todd, 1999]. , , , , .

. , . ? Basile Kerblay [Kerblay, 1986] , , [Blum, 2003] :

? , ?. [Blum, 1994], , . ( , ), , , [Blum, 2003]. , , , ( ), .

: , , . , , , , , , , . , ( , , ), . . , [Esping-Andersen, 1990;

Lefvre, 1995, 2003]. : 1945 . , , .

, , 20042006 ., . 1990- . , , , , . , . , , , . , , . , . , . .

. , , - , .

1. . ( 1990- ) // . 2004. 3 (7). . 3544.

2. ., . : // .

2000. 4. . 2331.

3. . . : ? // SPERO. : , , . 2006.

4 (-). . 6690.

4. . .: , 2000.

5. . .: , 2008.

6. Blum A. Natre, vivre et mourir en URSS, 19171991. Paris: Payot, 1994 ( 2004 : Natre, vivre et mourir en URSS, 1917 2002. Paris, Payot, coll. Petite Bibliothque Payot, n. 480).

7. Blum A. Socialist Families? // D. Kertzer, M. Barbagli (eds.). The History of the European Family. Vol. 3: M. Barbagli. Family Life in the twentieth Century. New Haven, London: Yale University Press, 2003. . 198237.

8. Blum A., Guerin Pace F. Lillusion comparative. Les logiques dutilisation et dlaboration dune enqute internationale sur lillettrisme // Population. 1999.

Vol 54. 2. . 271302.

9. Boisselot P. Lvolution des opinions des Franais par rapport aux enjeux sociaux et la protection sociale entre 2000 et 2006 // Etudes et Rsultats.

DREES. 2006. 517. Septembre. 8 p.

10. David M., BVA Opinion. Lvolution des opinions des Franais sur les questions sociales entre 2002 et 2007 // Etudes et rsultats. DREES. 2008. 652. 8 p.

11. Dsert M., Rousselet K. (2004), Les rseaux dentraide familiaux en Russie post sovitique // Pascale Mlani (dir.). Famille et socit dans lespace europen et la CEI. Actes de colloque, Numro hors srie de Slavica Occitania, Specimina slavica tolosana XI. Toulouse, 2004. P. 139153.

12. Donsbach W., Traugott M. W. (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Public Opinion Research. London: SAGE Publications, 2008.

13. Doubine B. Un fardeau lger. Les orthodoxes dans la Russie des annes 19902000 // Revue dtudes comparatives Est-Ouest (Paris). 2005. Vol. 36. 4. P. 1942.

: 14. Dragadze T. Rural Families in Soviet Georgia: A Case Study in Ratcha Province. London, New York, Routledge, 1988.

15. Espagnol Ph. Lallocation personnalise dautonomie au 30 juin 2007 // Etudes et rsultats. DREES. 2007. 615. Dcembre. 4 p.

16. Esping-Andersen G. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge:

Polity Press, 1990. ( 1999 .: Les trois mondes de lEtat-Providence, PUF).

17. Galland O., Lemel Y. Valeurs et cultures en Europe. Paris: La Dcouverte, coll.

Repres, 2007.

18. Hajnal J. European Marriage Patterns in Perspective // D. V. Glass, D. E. C. Eversley (eds.). Population in History. London: Arnold, 1965. . 101 143.

19. INSEE. Femme et Homme Regards sur la parit. Paris, INSEE, oll.

Insee Rfrences, 2005. 237 p.

20. Ivaskaite-Tamosiune V., Lazutka R. Generational Aspects of Well-being // International conference New Family Realities: Challenges to Demographic Development and Policy. Vilnius, 2021 October. 2008.

21. Kerblay B. Familles socialistes // A. Burguire, C. Klapish-Zuber, M. Segalen, F. Zonabend (eds.). Histoire de la famille. 1986. . 2. Armand Colin. . 437 469.

22. Kohli M. Intergenerational Transfers and Inheritance: a Comparative View / M. Silverstein (ed.). Intergenerational Relations Across Time and Place // Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics. 2004. Vol. 24. . 266289.

23. Lamont M., Thvenot L. Rethinking Comparative Cultural Sociology:

Repertoires of Evaluation in France and the United States. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 2000.

24. Lazutka R. Pagyvenusiu zmoniu gyvenimo lygis. Lietuvos gyventoju politikos strategijos metmenys [Guidelines of the Lithuanian Population Policy] / V. Stankuniene. (Ed.). Vilnius: Socialiniu tyrimu institutas, 2004.

. 6266.

25. Lazutka R. Pension Reform in Lithuania. Pension Reform in the Baltic States/E. Fultz (Ed.). Budapest: International Labour Ofce, 2006. . 267350.

26. Lefvre C. Typologies et grilles de lecture des systmes de protection sociale:

quel enseignement pour la Russie et les Pays de lEst? // Revue franaise des affaires sociales. 1995. 4. . 197227.

27. Lefvre C. Systme de protection sociale et entreprises en Russie, hritages et transformation, 19872001, Thse de 3me cycle en Economie des Institutions. Paris: EHESS, 2003.

28. Lefvre C., Prokoeva L., Korchaguina I. Les differences dopinion entre la France et la Russie sur le soutien entre generations // Rgnier-Loilier (dir.). Portraits de famille. Lenqute Etude des relations familiales et intergnrationnelles. Paris: INED, coll. Grandes enqutes, 2009. . 515 536.

. , . , . .

29. Maslauskaite A., Stankuniene V. Seima abipus sienos: Lietuvos transnacionalines seimos geneze, funkcijos, raidos perspektyvos [Family Across Frontiers:

Genesis, Functions and Development prospective of Transnational Families in Lithuania]. Vilnius: International Organization for Migration and Institute for Social Research, 2007.

30. Meynaud H.-Y., Duclos D. Les sondages dopinion. Paris: La Dcouverte, coll. Repres / Sociologie, 2007. 38. 4- .

31. Ministry of Social Security and Labour. Vilnius, 2008, Social Report 2007 2008, Vilnius;

http: / www.socmin.lt 32. Nordic Social-Statistical Committee. Nordic / Baltic Social Protection Statistics 2000. Copenhagen: NOSOSCO, 2003;

http://nososco-eng.nom-nos.dk / 33. Ortalda L., Clment C., Vichnevskaia T. Rseax de sociabilit et dentraide au sein de la parent: Six contributions. Paris: Ined, coll. Documents de travail, 2001, 94. 110 p.

34. Ovtcharova L., Prokofieva L. Politiques sociales: entre hritages et transformations // La Revue Nouvelle. 2007. 8. . 3444.

35. Paugam S., Zoyem J.-P. Le soutien nancier de la famille: une forme essentielle de la solidarit // Economie et Statistique. 1997. . 187210.

36. Socialiniu tyrimu institutes. Lietuva stojant i Europos Sajunga: ekonomine, sociologine ir demograne padeties analize. Vilnius, 2004. . 31033.

37. Stankunene V. (ed.). Lietuvos gyventoju oilitikos strategijos metmenys. Vilnius: Socialiniu tyrimu institutas, 2004.

38. Stankuniene V., Jasilioniene A., Jancaityte R. Seima, vaikai, seimos politika:

modernejimo priestaros. Vilnius: Socialiniu tyrimu institutas, 2005.

39. Stoetzel J. Thorie des opinions. Paris: PUF, 1943.

40. Todd E. La troisime plante. Paris: Ed. du Seuil, 1983.

41. Todd E. Lenfance du monde. Paris: Ed du Seuil, 1984.

42. Todd E. Linvention de lEurope. Paris: Ed du Seuil, 1990.

43. Todd E. La diversit du monde: structures familiales et modernit. Paris: Ed du Seuil, 1999 ( 1983, 1984 .).

44. Valetas M.-F. Perception de politiques sociales publiques envers les personnes ges dans lUnion europenne // Retraite et socit. 2001. 34. P. 114131.

45. Vigour C. La comparaison dans les sciences sociales. Paris: La Dcouverte, coll. Repres, 2005.

46. Zalimiene L. Socialiniu paslaugu sektorius Lietuvoje // R. Lazutka, A. V. Matulionis, V. Stankuniene. Lietuva Europos sajungoje: pirmieji metai. Vilnius: Socialiniu tyrimu institutas, 2005. . 109116.

Abstracts Alain Blum, Ccile Lefvre, Pascal Sebille, Irina Badurashvili, Arnaud Rgnier-Loilier, Vlada Stankuniene, Oxana Sinyavskaya The family anyway: France, Georgia, Lithuatia, Russia Didier Breton, Daria Popova and France Prioux Family dissolution in France and Russia: Current situation and evolution of risks for the children The Generations and Gender Surveys (GGS) conducted in both France (2005) and Russia (2004) have been analyzed from the perspective of the children in separated families. As a comparison of the family situations of children of various ages shows, the frequency of single-parent families is higher in Russia where these children are more likely to live in multi generation households. The probability is increasing in both countries that the children born to couples living together (whether married or not) and especially the children born during the 1980s in Russia will, before they come of age, see their parents separate. In both countries, the parents of the children most exposed to the risk of separation share some characteristics: their mother formed a couple at a young age, her partner has at least one other child or is older, or she did not spend her whole childhood with both her parents.

In France, unlike in Russia, ofcially marrying and practicing religion (even seldom) are factors that signicantly lower the risk of parents separating.

Arnaud Regnier-Loilier, Marie-France Valetas, Irina Korchaguina, Lidia Prokoeva, Mare Baublyte and Vlada Stankuniene Children after their parents separation in France, Russia and Lithuania:

Differences in relations with the mother and father?

In Russia and Lithuania, as in France, conjugal trajectories have become increasingly complex in recent decades, leading to profound changes in childrens family situations and histories. In particular, union dissolution is becoming more frequent and, when separation occurs, child custody is most often granted to the mother. This article describes the relations (frequency Abstracts of meeting and degree of satisfaction with the relationship) between non cohabiting children and each of their parents and seeks to identify certain determinants of these relations: sex of children, age at separation, parent with custody, time since separation, parent who initiated the divorce, repartnering of a parent. The analyses reveal a certain number of similarities between countries (such as lower frequency of father-child relations, for example), but also divergences (the childs sex inuences relations in Russia and France but not in Lithuania).

Arnaud Regnier-Loilier, Irina Badurashvili and Shorena Tsiklauri Family situations, the timing of the move from the parents home and inter-generational relations in Georgia and France Unlike in France, Georgia is still a traditional country where cohabitation prior to marriage and consensual unions are very rare. Family traditions call for the young man, once married, to live with his spouse in his familys home.

In contrast, very few people at the age of 30 still live with their parents in France, unlike in Georgia (in particular for men). The quite different patterns of moving away from the parents home and forming a couple ultimately lead, in these two countries, to intergenerational relations that differ in terms of the frequency with which children and parents meet and the degree to which they conde in each other.

Alain Blum, Pascal Sebille and Sergej Zakharov Differences in the transition toward adulthood in France and Russia:

A generational perspective Since the mid-20th century, both France and Russia, despite different social, economic and political environments, have incentive-based demographic and family policies. The family and marital careers of their populations share some common features. In particular, marriage is no longer the only way to form a couple, and the age at the rst childs birth has risen.


Nonetheless, these apparent similarities conceal signicant differences.

Studying the timing of the rst events in adulthood completing education, leaving the parental home, nding a job, forming a couple for the rst time, and becoming a parent and the conditions underlying them reveals how transition toward adulthood evolved in both countries. It also brings to light Abstracts the complexity and diversity of changes that affected the generations born since the mid-1930s.

Vlada Stankuniene, Sergej Zakharov, Ausra Maslauskaite, Mare Baublyte and Arnaud Regnier-Loilier The transition toward new partnership formation patterns in France, Lithuania and Russia Changes in family formation strategies in France, Lithuania and Russia are analyzed to detect new partnership formation patterns along with the structural and cultural factors underlying this process. Each country has undergone quite different transitions during the 20th century: Frances has been consequent;

Lithuanias, delayed;

and Russias, distorted. In France, a single factor explains consensual union, namely the degree of religiousness.

In Russia and Lithuania, where new forms of couples have emerged more recently than in France, several structural and cultural factors characterize the persons harbingering these new unions.

Laurence Charton, Sergej Surkov, Mare Baublyte and Vlada Stankuniene Birth and fertility intentions in France, Lithuania and Russia The structural changes over several generations in the formation of families with one or two children are studied in France, Lithuania and Russia.

Data from the Generations and Gender Surveys about birth intentions of women and men with no children or one child at the time of the survey are analyzed, as well as factors affecting the desire to have a rst or second child. As the ndings show, the French more often express their fertility intentions than Lithuanian or Russians, but differently depending on whether it is the rst or second child. In all three countries however, most of the factors determining fertility intentions are similar.

Irina Troitskaia, Alexandre Avdeev, Irina Badurashvili, Eka Kapanadze and Vaida Tretjakova A comparative analysis of birth-control practices in Russia, Georgia, Lithuania and France Birth-control practices have evolved differently in western and eastern Europe. France legalized contraception and abortion more recently than Abstracts countries in eastern Europe. Its family planning network is dense, and contraception is the major method for preventing unwanted births. On the other hand, in the former Soviet republics, abortion, introduced much earlier and accepted by public opinion, is the key reproductive technique. These differences are conrmed by this comparison of contraceptive practices in France, Georgia, Lithuania and Russia based on the data collected during the rst wave of the Generations and Gender Surveys. Differences in the prevalence of contraceptive practices, the availability of various methods and the unmet demand for contraception are related not only to the sociodemographic characteristics of birth-control users but also to factors, such as legislation, demographic policy, the health system or sexual education in the schools.

Ariane Pailhe and Oxana Sinyavskaya The work of women in France and Russia: The impact of children and gender values How do children and gender attitudes affect womens labor force participation in Russia and France, two countries with different welfare states and different conceptions of gender roles? The determinants of womens participation in the labor force are compared by using data from the rst wave of the Generations and Gender Surveys conducted in both countries.

In Russia, the age of the youngest child is the key factor explaining the decrease in womens labor force participation rate. In France, the effect of having children is multidimensional;

and gender values, unlike in Russia, have a major impact. The broader range of possibilities for Frenchwomen (work full- or part-time, or not at all) accounts for the greater variety in their labor patterns.

Cecile Lefevre, Lidia Prokoeva, Irina Korchaguina, Vlada Stankuniene, Margarita Gedvilaite, Irina Badurashvili and Mariam Sirbiladze The role of family and society in intergenerational solidarity:

A comparison of opinions in France, Georgia, Lithuania and Russia Drawing on questions about values in the Generations and Gender Surveys, this comparative study focuses on differences between French, Georgian, Lithuanian and Russian opinions about solidarity between Abstracts generations. Two dimensions are analyzed: the relative involvement of both family and society in providing support to young and old, and the nature and forms of family solidarity. Should this solidarity be monetary or in kind?

How is intergenerational family support perceived? How does it change lives and lifestyles? Is it a legitimate grounds for modifying mens or womens place of residence or career? Methodological issues are raised about how to interpret the opinions detected through quantitative surveys and how relevant is comparativism in social sciences. Intergenerational solidarity is studied as an indicator of the different family structures, cultures and economic contexts in these four countries.

:

ʖ ..

.., ..

..

..

07.11.2010.

60901/16. Times. . . . . . 24.

750 .



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 9 | 10 ||
 
 >>  ()





 
<<     |    
2013 www.libed.ru - -

, .
, , , , 1-2 .