This article analyses the specificity of subjective social well-being in the context of settlement inequalities. The empirical basis of the analysis is the data of all-Russian representative studies conducted by the Institute of Sociology of the Federal Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences. It is shown that over the past two decades, significant shifts have occurred in the mass consciousness of Russians in terms of perception of various indicators of social well-being. This has led to the formation of a stable and generally harmonious picture of subjective social well-being among residents of all types of settlements. It was also recorded that the indicators related to basic needs (assessments of food, clothing, housing conditions, material security and health) and the social microworld (assessments of family relationships, opportunities for communicating with friends, professional fulfilment, obtaining the necessary education, organising recreation during vacations, leisure time, as well as the situation at work) were perceived more positively by the majority of respondents than the components of social well-being characterising the specifics of the local community (assessments of the place of residence, the position occupied in society, the level of personal safety and the environmental situation) and the conditional "macroworld" (assessments of the availability of the Internet and digital technologies, the level of social security in the event of job loss, as well as opportunities for expressing political views, receiving the necessary medical care and influencing one's own life). The article shows that the subjective social well-being of villagers in comparison with city dwellers still differs for the worse, with the exception of the perception of the block of characteristics of social well-being associated with the specifics of the local community, i.e. place of residence. In this regard, according to the results of the 2023 study, rural residents outperformed city dwellers for the first time. In general, a noticeable trend was revealed towards smoothing out settlement differences in the perception of various aspects of social well-being, primarily due to higher rates of improvement in subjective assessments among rural residents. It was also noted that the problematic background in the perception of social well-being is formed due to the relative dissatisfaction of Russians with certain aspects of life. They are primarily associated with the skeptical assessment by residents of all populated areas of the level of social security of an individual in the event of job loss, dissatisfaction among the population of the centres of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation with the environmental situation there, as well as persistent problems with access to the necessary medical care in rural areas.

social well-being, subjective well-being, territorial inequality, settlement differentiation, Russian society

1. Voronin G. L. Ob’ektivnye i sub’ektivnye pokazateli obschestvennogo blagopoluchiya [Objective and subjective indicators of social well-being]. Sotsiologicheskiy zhurnal, 2009: 3: 41–54 (in Russ.). EDN: PBDQWH.
2. Gimpelson V. E., Kapeliushnikov R. I. Job structure evolution in Russia: Polarization, upgrading, stalemate? Voprosy ekonomiki, 2023: 1: 59–85 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2023-1-59-85; EDN: GMPYW.
3. Urban Development in Russia and China: Patterns of Modernization. Ed. by M. K. Gorshkov et al. Moscow, Novyy Chronograph, 2023: 720 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/monogr.978-5-89697-415-4.2023; EDN: UWCMGA.
4. Zubarevich N. V. Social differentiation of regions and cities. Pro et Contra, 2012: 16(4–5): 135–152 (in Russ.). EDN: VPJRCF.
5. Zubarevich N. V. Regions of Russia at the end of 2023: have they managed to overcome the crisis recession? Voprosy teoreticheskoy ekonomiki. 2024: 1: 34–47 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.52342/2587-7666VTE_2024_1_34_47; EDN: FLKGYM.
6. Zubarevich N. V., Safronov S. G. Regional'noye neravenstvo v krupnykh postsovetskikh stranakh [Regional inequality in large post-Soviet countries]. Izvestiya RAN. Ser. Geograficheskaya, 2011: 1: 17–30 (in Russ.). EDN: NSYFZJ.
7. Karavay A. V. Non-standard employment in modern Russia: Types, scales, dynamics. Socialno-trudovye issledovaniya, 2022: 48(3): 81–93 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.34022/2658-3712-2022-48-3-81-93; EDN: IVZMLT.
8. Kislitsina O. A. Approaches to measure the progress and quality of life (well-being). Ekonomicheskii analiz: teoriya i praktika, 2016: 10(457): 28–38 (in Russ.). EDN: WWYJUH.
9. Kolennikova N. D. The impact of the pandemic on the socio-psychological well-being and behavior of Russians. Informacionno-analiticheskij byulleten, 2021: 2: 18–32 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/INAB.2021.2.2; EDN: HAILWM.
10. Kolennikova N. D. Occupational structure in Great Russia and Little Russia: Outline, dynamics, and peculiarities. Terra Economicus, 2023: 21(3): 88–101 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.18522/2073- 6606-2023-21-3-88-101; EDN: YFLGZK.
11. Krasil'nikova M. D. Integral'nye pokazateli social'nogo samochuvstvija [Integral indicators of the social well-being]. Vestnik obshhestvennogo mnenija, 2011: 1: 109–117 (in Russ.).
12. Lappo G. M. Diversity of Cities as a Factor of Russia’s Successful Spatial Development. Izvestiya RAN. Ser. Geograficheskaya, 2019: 4: 3–23 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.31857/S2587-5566201943-23; EDN: GDYQJX.
13. Leontiev D. A. Quality of life and well-being: objective, subjective and agentic aspects. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal, 2020: 6(41): 86–95 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.31857/S020595920012592-7; EDN: MCILBM.
14. Mareeva S. V. Subjective well-being and ill-being zones in the Russian society. Vestnik RUDN. Ser. Sociologiya. 2018: 4(18): 695–707 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.22363/2313-2272-2018-18-4-695-707; EDN: YNAKEP.
15. Model of income stratification of Russian society: Dynamics, factors, cross-country comparisons. Ed. by N. E. Tikhonova. Moscow; St. Petersburg, Nestor-Istoriya, 2018: 368 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.317544469-1419-7; EDN: YSPCNF.
16. Nastina E. A., Almakaeva A. M. Aspiration Level and Social Comparison as Factors in Determining Life Satisfaction. Monitoring obschestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskie i socialnye peremeny, 2020: 1(155): 206–224 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.14515/monitoring.2020.1.09; EDN: WWIFEV.
17. Nemirovskaya A. V., Soboleva N. E. Subjective well-being determinants in Russia: a regional perspective. Vestnik instituta sotziologii, 2020: 2(11): 54–81 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/vis.2020.11.2.641; EDN: LIHOJU.
18. Society of unequal opportunities: the social structure of modern Russia. Ed. by N. E. Tikhonova. Moscow, Ves’ Mir, 2022: 424 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.55604/9785777708731; EDN: XJGBFE.
19. Ovcharova L.N., Popova D.O., Rudberg A.M. Decomposition of Income Inequality in Contemporary Russia. Zhurnal Novoj ekonomicheskoj associacii, 2016: 3(31): 170–185 (in Russ.).
20. Pishnyak A., Khalina N., Rogacheva N. Adaptation of the Middle Class to Changing Socio-economic conditions in Crisis. Zhurnal issledovanij social'noj politiki, 2023: 1(21): 121–136 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17323/727-0634-2023-21-1-121-136; EDN: IAKKCW.
21. Russian society and challenges of the time. Ed. by M. K. Gorshkov, N. E. Tikhonova. Book 7. Moscow, Ves’ Mir, 2024: 352 (in Russ.). EDN: OYVDFP.
22. Russian society and challenges of the time. Ed. by M. K. Gorshkov, N. E. Tikhonova. Book 6. Moscow, Ves’ Mir, 2022: 284 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.55604/9785777708984; EDN: GJITZD.
23. Salnikova D. V. The Reasons for Conflicting Results on the Relationship between Objective and Subjective Well-Being. Ekonomicheskaya sociologiya, 2017: 4(18): 157–174 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17323/1726-3247-2017-4-157-174; EDN: YPBZLW.
24. Sociological approaches to the study of social well-being. Ed. by M. F. Chernysh, Y. B. Epikhina. Moscow, FNISC RAN, 2021: 431 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/monogr.978-5-89697-377-5.2021; EDN: LHJSQX.
25. Surinov A. E, Luppov A. B. Income Inequality and the Cost of Living at the Sub-Regional Level. Estimates for Russia. Ekonomicheskii zhurnal VSHE, 2022: 4(26): 552–578 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17323/1813-8691-2022-26-4-552-578; EDN: ZCWPSJ.
26. Sushko P. E. Social well-being of the Russian population in the context of the availability of social benefits. Informacionno-analiticheskij byulleten, 2020: 1: 39–53 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/INAB.2020.1.3; EDN: VDUVXM.
27. Sushko P. E. Happiness and Social Well-being in the Russians’ Assessments: the Problem of Differentiation of Concepts. Sociologicheskaja nauka i social’naja praktika, 2020: 1(8): 48–62 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/snsp.2020.8.1.7094; EDN: YBPQUP.
28. Sushko P. E. Dynamics of Indicators of Subjective Social Well-being of Russians (2003–2023). Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2023: 12: 59–71 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.31857/S013216250029337-3; EDN: CHZYGR.
29. Tatarova G. G., Kuchenkova A. V. Indicators of subjective well-being as characteristics for typology building. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2016: 10: 21–32 (in Russ.). EDN: NSAODB.
30. Tikhonova N. E. Subjective stratification of Russian society model and its dynamic. Vestnik obschestvennogo mneniya. Dannye. Analiz. Discussii, 2018: 1-2(126): 17–29 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.24411/2070-5107-2018-00001; EDN: MFFBOH.
31. The human capital of Russian professionals: State, dynamics, factors. Ed. by. N. E. Tikhonova, Yu. V. Latov. Moscow, FNISC RAN, 2023: 488 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/monogr.978-5-89697-420-8.2023; EDN: XFSFHH.
32. Human potential: current interpretations and research results. Ed. by L. N. Ovcharova, V. A. Anikin, P. S. Sorokin. Moscow, VCIOM, 2023: 462 (in Russ.). EDN: ZHHTSU.
33. Shirokanova A. A. Trends of subjective well-being in Russia: 1998–2018. Vestnik SPbGU. Sociologiya, 2020: 1(13): 4–24 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.21638/spbu12.2020.101 (in Russ.). EDN: JXMNDE.
34. Binder M. Subjective Well-Being Capabilities: Bridging the Gap Between the Capability Approach and Subjective Well-Being Research. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2014: 5(15): 1197–1217. DOI: 10.1007/s10902-013-9471-6.
35. Diener E., Suh E. Measuring Quality of Life: Economic, Social, and Subjective Indicators. Social Indicators Research, 1997: 1(40): 189–216. DOI: 10.1023/A:1006859511756.
36. Easterlin R. A. Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In Nations and households in economic growth: Essays in honor of Moses Abramovitz. Ed. by P. A. David, M. W. Reder. New York, Academic Press, 1974: 89–125.
37. Graham C., Pettinato S. Frustrated Achievers: Winners, Losers and Subjective Well-Being in New Market Economies. Journal of Development Studies, 2002: 4(38): 100–140. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.285811.
38. Kahn R. L., Juster F. T. Well-Being: Concepts and Measures. Journal of Social Issues, 2002: 4(58): 627–644. DOI: 10.1111/1540-4560.00281.
39. Kwarciński T., Ulman P., Wdowin J. Measuring Subjective Well-being Capability: A Multi-Country Empirical Analysis in Europe. Applied Research Quality Life, 2024: 3–4(19): 2555–2593. DOI: 10.1007/s11482-024-10334-9.
40. Weber M. Economy and society. Ed. by G. Roth & C. Wittich. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1978: 1469.