Social protest in the Altai Territory: research experience in the methodology of social conflict


2020, Vol. 4. № 4 (14)

Social protest in the Altai Territory: research experience in the methodology of social conflict

For citation: Nagaytsev V. V., Shrayber A. N., Artyukhina V. A. 2020. “Social protest in the Altai Territory: research experience in the methodology of social conflict”. Siberian Socium, vol. 4, no. 4 (14), pp. 41-53. DOI: 10.21684/2587-8484-2020-4-4-41-53

About the authors:

Victor V. Nagaytsev, Cand. Sci. (Soc.), Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Empirical Sociology and Conflictology, Altai State University (Barnaul, Russian Federation);

Angelina N. Shrayber, Cand. Sci. (Soc.), Associate Professor, Department of Empirical Sociology and Conflictology, Altai State University (Barnaul, Russian Federation); ORCID: 0000-0001-5846-1297;

Valentina A. Artyukhina, Cand. Sci. (Soc.), Associate Professor, Department of Empirical Sociology and Conflictology, Altai State University (Barnaul, Russian Federation);


This article studies the phenomenon of social protest in the Altai Territory. The authors present the data from a sociological study on this issue conducted in 2018-2020. The main method of empirical research was a survey of the population in various territories of the region, which revealed the real and potential level of protest activity of citizens. This article considers the process of formation and development of protest as a special form of social conflict, studying the influence of a complex of factors on the formation of protest moods, as well as the real protest behavior of the population. The authors show the social nature of protest, which is based on contradictions in the interests of various social groups in the regional society. In the authors’ understanding, the protest behavior is represented as individual or collective actions of subjects demonstrating dissatisfaction with the existing situation in society. The significance of the research lies in the understanding of social protest as a form of conflict. This article deals with problems related to various scientific interpretations of the essence and content of social protest, traditional and non-classical methodological approaches to determining its essence and content. Attention is paid to the functions of protest, the constructive orientation of some protest actions of civil activists, and the extent to which the protest behavior of the population affects various aspects of the life of the regional society. In the course of the research, the following components of social protest in the region were analyzed: the real and potential level; causes; and the forms of manifestation, among others. As it turned out in the course of the study, social protest actions in regional society are one-time and situational in nature, and they can be prevented and regulated. The authors conclude that the lack of effective mechanisms for managing the protest behavior of social actors in regional society can lead to the most unfavorable social consequences — an increased conflict between different levels of subjects, increased tension, aggravation of social problems and other crisis phenomena in society. The conclusions are also formulated, according to which the reason for the protest is the rejection of certain subjects of the current social situation in society, dissatisfaction with various aspects of their life.


  1. Baranova G. V. 2012. “Methodology of analysis of protest activity of the Russian population”. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, no. 10, pp. 143–152. DOI: 10.7868/S0132162517110046 [In Russian]

  2. Vavilina N. D., Kotov D. A. 2018. “Regional peculiarities of protest potential in the conditions of social tension”. Idei i idealy, vol. 2, no. 1 (35), pp. 176-186. [In Russian]

  3. Gaba O. I. 2015. “Young people as a subject of protest sentiment”. Znanie, ponimanie, umenie, no. 1, pp. 144–151. Accessed 20 September 2020. [In Russian]

  4. Kaira Yu. V. 2017. “Social tension and protest activity of the region’s population”. Srednerusskiy vestnik obshchestvennykh nauk, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 20-28. [In Russian]

  5. Kostyushev V. V. 2011. “Social protest in the political field: potential, discourse (experience of theoretical understanding and empirical verification)”. Polis, no. 4, pp.144-157. [In Russian]

  6. Kuchukyan A. V. 2017. “Sociostructural determinants of the influence of virtual networks on the protest activity of modern youth”. Cand. Sci. (Soc.) diss. Stavropol. 183 pp. [In Russian]

  7. Marin E. B. 2018. “Youth protest moods in Primorsky Krai (on the example of students)”. Vestnik Instituta sociologii, no. 26, pp. 63-82. Accessed 17 September 2020. DOI: 10.19181/vis.2018.26.3.524 [In Russian]

  8. Panichkina E. V. 2019. “”Protests in the social and political space of the region (on the example of the Kemerovo region). Teorii i problemy politicheskih issledovanij, vol. 8, no. 6A, pp. 53-63. DOI: 10.34670/AR.2020.46.6.101 [In Russian]

  9. Salavatova A. 2019. “Non-political protest in the regions: structure, dynamics and opportunities for politicization. Analytical report”. Agentstvo politicheskih i ekonomicheskih kommmunikatsiy. 29 October. Accessed 25 September 2020. [In Russian]

  10. Sokolov V. A., Zagrebin V. V. 2019. “Social protest in the context of the Russian region (the case of the Yaroslavl Region)”. Sotsialnye i gumanitarnye znaniya, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 108-116. [In Russian]

  11. Khadzhalova Kh. M. 2017. “Potential for social protest in the Republic of Dagestan”. UEPS: upravlenie, ekonomika, politika, sociologiya, no. 4, pp. 27-35. [In Russian]

  12. Chuvashova N. I. 2013. “Social protest at the regional level”. Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federalnogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnye i sotsialnye nauki, no. 4, pp. 40-47. [In Russian]

  13. Chuprov V. I., Zubok Yu. A. 2009. “Extremism among the youth”. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskie i sotsialnye peremeny, no. 1 (89), pp. 146–166. [In Russian]

  14. Adler R., Goggin J. 2005. “What do we mean by ‘Civic engagement’?”. Journal of Transformative Education, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 236-253.

  15. Arnold M. 2007. “The concept of community and the character of networks”. The Journal of Community Informatics, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 327-355.

  16. Boulding K. E. 1962. Conflict and Defence: A General Theory. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers. 349 рp.

  17. Bесk U. 2000. Thе Brаvе Nеw Wоrld. Саmbridgе, MA: Роlity Prеss. 543 рp.

  18. Cоllins R. 2004. Intеrасtiоn Rituаl Сhаins. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 439 рp.

  19. Davies J. 1970. When Men Revolt and Why. New York, N.Y.: The Free Press. 357 рp.

  20. Davis J. 1959. “A formal interpretation of the theory of relative deprivation”. Sociometry, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 280-296.

  21. Ehrliсh T. 2000. Сiviс Rеsроnsibility. Nеw Yоrk, NY: Rоwmаn & Littlе-fiеld. 450 рр.

  22. Ekman J., Amna E. 2012. “Political participation and civic engagement”. Human Affairs, vol. 22, pp. 283‑300.

  23. Goffman I. 1957. “Status consistency and preference for change in power distribution”. American Sociological Review, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 275-281.

  24. Gurney P., Tierney K. 1982. “Relative deprivation and social movements: a critical look at twenty years of theory and research”. Sociological Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 33-47.

  25. Gurr T. R. 1970. Why Men Rebel. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 420 рр.

  26. Inglehart R., Norris P. 2004. Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide. Саmbridgе, MA: Cambridge University Press. 424 рр.

  27. Nagaytsev V. V. 2019. “Conflictness in society: definition and causes”. 21 Сentury: fundamental science and technology XXI: Proceedings of the Conference. Vol. 10, pp. 129-132. Morrisville, NC.