The paper examines the place of urban geography in the scientific legacy of V.V. Pokshishevsky (1905–1984) and the main areas of urban studies that interested him for more than half a century from the late 1920s to the 1980s. The dynamics of publications devoted to urban topics, the evolution of the scientist’s approaches and views on the city and, subsequently, on urbanization processes are shown. Among main areas of V.V. Pokshishevsky’s urban research, the article examines in more detail the early (pre-war) period of his interest in cities, even before the emergence of urban geography as a separate field of science. During this period, the author worked in various urban planning research organizations and interacted with architects, so his publications were devoted to issues of urban planning and architectural appearance of cities. At this time various researchers consider V.V. Pokshishevsky’s works devoted to individual cities as his contribution to the development of urban geography as an independent field of human geography. These works were completed by the scholar during his active period in geography (the late 1940s–1980s). They addressed both theoretical, methodological, and applied aspects of the emerging field of urban geography, and regularly analyzed research conducted by other scholars (reviews of other authors’ works, overviews of monographs and dissertations on cities, etc.). Attention is drawn to the scholar’s research related to the interaction of the city with its environment (including the development of satellite towns), the role of cities in forming the supporting framework of settlement, the process of urbanization, and the development of cities and urban settlement systems in foreign countries (including their relationship with ethnic issues in individual countries). An important contribution of V.V. Pokshishevsky to urban studies is his publications on the popularization of knowledge about the cities of the Soviet Union. Such publications were published both in popular scientific journals and encyclopedic editions, as well as in national newspapers and magazines. V.V. Pokshishevsky’s books and numerous articles on urban topics not only reflect the development of geographical studies of cities in Soviet geography, but also remain highly sought after by contemporary researchers decades later.

The dynamics and territorial differences in the level of urbanization in the context of 34 provinciallevel administrative regions and 337 cities in China according to Yicai Global business attractiveness for 2000–2023 are analyzed in the article using a set of methods (mathematical and statistical, cartographic, geographical systematization, cluster analysis), GIS tools and SPSS Statistics 27 and ArcGIS10.8 software. The analysis of the dynamics of the urban population’s share in China for 1950–2020 period made it possible to establish, in the context of the theory of “urbanization transition,” that the country passed through two phases during this period, adolescence and youth, and the onset of the phase of urban maturity since 2011. The analysis of the annual population growth rates in China, performed for the first time in the context of city classes by population for 1950–2022 period, indicates the manifestation of stages of differentiated urbanization. It has been proven that the annual urban population growth rate in China has decreased from 4.8% in the late 1980s to 2.4% in 2010–2022, the population growth rate in large cities (over 5 mln people) has decreased, and the growth rate has increased in small cities (less than 0.5 mln people) in 2000–2020. The spatial differentiation of administrative regions by share, annual urban population dynamics, population concentration in large cities and economic power established at the mesogeographical level made it possible to identify three types of provinces in China by the level of urbanization: (1) agglomerated large-city with a high level of urbanization and high economic power, represented by municipalities under central jurisdiction; (2) medium-sized city with medium level of urbanization and medium economic power, which formed the central-eastern coastal zone; and (3) smallsized city with medium and above average level of urbanization with low economic power, represented by the vast north-eastern, western-central and southern zones, the dominant structure (53% of provinces).

The main purpose of the article is the analysis of a Single list of core settlements as one of the main innovations and one of the main mechanisms for the implementation of the Spatial Development Strategy of Russian Federation for the period up to 2030 and with a forecast up to 2036. It is shown that the Single list of core settlements is largely based on the existing municipal structure of the country: in most subjects of the Russian Federation, not only the principle of “one urban/municipal district—one core settlement” is implemented, but also the administrative centers of municipalities are chosen as core settlements, which means the need to organize access to social services in core settlements for residents of the territories adjacent to them are precisely within the boundaries of municipalities. At the same time, regions have been identified that have moved away from this principle towards both a reduction (11 federal subjects) and an increase in the number of core settlements. It is also shown that more than 87% of Russian cities have received core settlement status, so the risks of underfunding under government policy relate primarily to rural settlements and urban-type settlements. The problems of the proposed classification of core settlements are indicated, including the lack of multifunctional core settlements, the inaccuracy of classifying core settlements as urban agglomerations, the lack of a hierarchy of core settlements of different population sizes and status in terms of providing services of varying complexity to the population. It is said that it is necessary to solve the problems of the delimitation of settlements, the importance of finding ways to economically develop service delivery centers and working out mechanisms for interaction between core settlements and adjacent territories.

The article provides a comprehensive analysis and systematization of methods for determining the boundaries (delineation) of urban agglomerations (conceptually close to metropolitan areas or functional urban areas in international practice) and their cores (urban areas). In Russian and international practice. The research objective is to determine the applicability of various methods and criteria for delineation at the stages of identifying minimum statistical units, forming urban areas, as well as potential and developed agglomerations. Seven methodological approaches used in determining the boundaries of agglomerations are considered: administrative, morphological, functional, network, economic, cognitive, and demographic. Each of them is characterized by its underlying assumptions, scope of application, and limitations. It is shown that the morphological approach is most suitable for identifying urban areas, the functional approach is best for determining the boundaries of potential and developed agglomerations, and the administrative approach—for subsequent adjustment of urban cores and agglomerations. The application of the systemic-structural paradigm made it possible to establish a correspondence between the stages of delineation and forms of settlement pattern: a minimum statistical unit is an element of the settlement pattern network, an urban area is a settlement pattern node, a potential agglomeration is part of the territorial structure, and a developed agglomeration is a territorial system. As a result of the research, the scope of application and limitations of each methodological approach at different stages of delineation were determined. Key problems arising in the practical application of criteria have been identified and analyzed. These include the appropriateness of using different administrative-territorial units at different stages of urban agglomeration delineation, the choice of reference points and means of transport for measuring distances and travel times, and the problem of “self-potential” in gravity models. Solutions to these problems are proposed. It is shown that the choice of the delineation goal—identifying an area with potential for joint development (potential urban agglomeration) or a territory with already established intensive connections (developed urban agglomeration)—is decisive for the final boundaries of the agglomeration. The obtained results provide a basis for developing unified approaches to identifying urban agglomerations and their cores In Russia.

The evolution of the Moscow region, coupled with the growing complexity of socioeconomic ties, increasing spatial contrasts, and expanding dacha suburbanization, is changing traditional approaches to studying the metropolitan area and demands the development of fundamentally new approaches to analyzing its internal structure. Today, the Moscow urban agglomeration is one of the largest settlement structures in the world. Its core—Moscow—serves as the undisputed dominant feature, guiding thousands of urban and rural settlements. However, the apparent homogeneity of the suburban zone conceals a wide variety of local settlement patterns emerging within it, the examination and typology of which is the focus of this article. The author’s methodology utilizes a graph-analytical approach to examining mobile operator databases on commuter flows. Using the Leiden clustering algorithm, the authors identified objectively formed settlement clusters and identified them with different morphological settlement structures: small urban agglomerations and autonomous centers. This detailed decomposition aims to shed light on the internal structure of the second tier of settlement systems, which has been underestimated by contemporary Russian geo-urban studies. Furthermore, the authors’ proposed approach helps move beyond the traditional center-periphery view of the Moscow urban agglomeration, focusing on the socioeconomic ties within the suburban zone that shape its potential for polycentric development.

The purpose of the paper is to understand the specific features of shrinkage of urban space In Russia and Kazakhstan during the post-Soviet period. Research methodology combined analysis of changes in number and population of shrinking cities, studying timeline of shrinkage across regions, identification of typical trajectories and factors contributing to their decline, and trends in current dynamics. Analysis conducted using census data and based on average annual population decline index (1% or more) in 1989–2025 revealed that urban shrinkage in these two largest post-Soviet states had both common features driven by a high share of single‑industry towns and sparse settlement patterns, and differences related to natural population change (growth or decline) and migration. In Russia, after a slowdown between 2010 and 2021, processes of urban shrinkage have tended to expand spatially, while in less urbanized Kazakhstan, shrinkage has gradually become localized in a limited number of centers in the northern and eastern regions. Analysis of shrinkage trajectory types shows that both in Kazakhstan and Russia, cities located within urban agglomerations also used to occasionally fall into this group. In both countries the general situation is improving for most regional centers, in Kazakhstan this improvement is faster due to natural population increase. Stagnant decline is experienced mainly by towns, many of which are district centers and industrial single‑industry towns.

Small cities are a popular object of contemporary geographical research, most often focused on demographic and economic aspects of their functioning. This article examines the spatial transformations experienced by small cities in the post-Soviet period. By interpreting satellite imagery for 190 small cities outside the capital region in Central Russia, the study analyzes changes in built-up area between 1989 and 2023, finding that 85 out of 190 towns expanded their built-up footprint by more than 10%. This spatial growth primarily stems from the development of new areas of individual housing, dachas, and industrial facilities. Towns in the southern parts of Central Russia and those situated near major urban agglomerations show the most active expansion. Comparing population dynamics with built-up area growth reveals five spatial development types: (1) towns with both population and spatial growth (classic sprawl), (2) slight population decline with significant spatial growth, (3) severe population loss (more than one-third) with substantial spatial expansion, and two further types featuring stagnating built-up area with either moderate or extreme population loss. A prominent adverse effect of this expansion is falling population density, which increases costs for municipal utilities; this allowed the identification of the most problematic towns in that regard. Spatial growth models identified based on new development locations include perimetral growth (irregular edge expansion), radialaxis growth (along transport corridors), and exclave growth (detached clusters of development). The study also addresses the merging of small cities with adjacent rural settlements, giving rise to new rural–urban landscapes. The investigation yields key insights into the nature of spatial transformations among small cities in Central Russia during the post-Soviet period.

The article examines the geographical differences in the distribution of direct federal financial support, implemented through the system of inter-budgetary relations, among Russian municipalities, which include cities. Based on data from the Federal Treasury, a database of consolidated budgets of Russian municipalities for 2020–2024 has been created. Of all municipal budget revenues, only those received as a result of the provision of federal support measures in the form of targeted inter-budget transfers have been considered. It has been established that support in general is distributed among municipalities proportionally to their population size, but less populated territories are a bit more prioritized. Smaller amounts of support are received by the largest cities and middle-sized municipalities with a population of 50 to 100 thousand inhabitants. There is no clear priority for rural areas in comparison with cities. The factor of having the status of a regional capital is not significant in the distribution of federal support. The sectoral structure of support funds varies significantly between urban municipalities with different population sizes: in small cities support is shifted in favor of environmental solutions, in large cities the focus is shifted to the development of education, transport infrastructure, and environmental policy. Geographically, priority is given to geostrategic territories and cities located in regions with lower levels of budget provision.

Of the four basic urban paradoxes suggested by G.M. Lappo, the author of this article considers the one according to which cities strive to preserve their antiquities, but they cannot refuse to implement the newness that crowds out the oldness. The latter is regarded as a tangible heritage in stone (conditionally and collectively as “cultural stones”) that affects people, their minds, assessments, and behavior no less than the creators, transformers, and destroyers of cities affect them. Similarly, antiquity affects novelty, which imitates, frames, rejects, or destroys antiquity, and there are many examples of how it happens. The text is based mainly on examples of Russian cities (12 in total) of different ages, sizes, status, and destinies. Questions are raised about what is better for the city, its old and new “stones,” permanent residents and guests: either conservation of authentic stones even in ruins or their return to the living urban fabric; either protection of worn-out buildings or their renovation and modernization; which urban type is more convenient in this context — storing at least in its core features of an era of relatively rapid creation (simultaneous city) or full of different-time layering and restructuring (palimpsest city). A change in type cannot be spoken, although it definitely has an effect on the conflict of interest and how it is resolved. One of the conclusions is that the advantages of a historic city should not interfere with its current life, development and comfort of townspeople. However, crude and tasteless imitation of antiquity, as well as neglecting it, are also extremes, and the barbaric destruction of cultural memory in stone is simply ugly and unacceptable.

The processes of desovietization of toponymy In Russian cities intensified again in the 2020s. This is accompanied by a surge in protest activity and political competition. The study analyzed media coverage of several dozen such conflicts over the past five to seven years and revealed their spatial features. It also showed a significant change in the motivation of their participants compared to previous periods of post-Soviet history. Although ideology remained the primary motivation of those who initiated the Soviet urban name change, its importance began to decline. Historical and cultural motivation, as well as marketing and other pragmatic factors began to significantly compete with it. Pragmatic motives clearly pushed ideology into the background in the arguments of the opponents of the renaming. Following 2022, both de-Sovietization supporters and opponents began to use arguments related to the Special military operation. The traditional cast of actors in toponymic conflicts began to blur and become more complex. The identified spatial patterns describe how the intensity of conflicts depends on factors such as center-periphery, spatial competitiveness, location transfer, the spatial diversification of motives, the locality of symbols, memoriality, and the function of the place. It has been shown that it is the effect of these overlapping patterns that complicates both the structure of motivations of the parties to conflicts of desovetization of urban toponymy In Russia and the geographical differences in their outcomes. The latter have become less dependent on regional combinations of the ideological orientations of the population and the political orientations of the ruling elite. This was facilitated by the increased importance of non-political motivations and the diversification of local combinations of the described spatial patterns.

The article invites the reader to look at the social life of the Moscow River in the Strogino district of Moscow through the prism of B. Latour’s actor-network theory. Social geographers do not often turn to this theory, so one of the objectives of the article is to attract the attention of geographers and urbanists to the use of this theory to consider urban processes. The article provides a brief description of actornetwork theory, indicating the basic concepts of actor-network theory. The geographical object of the study was the Moscow River and a park on the riverbank in the Strogino district in the north-west of the Russian capital. The river bank belongs to the Moskvoretsky natural-historical park, the boundaries of which are wider than the boundaries of the district. The area is located on a peninsula formed by the river and Stroginsky Bay. The river plays an important role in shaping the identity of the area’s residents. The main method of collecting empirical data for writing the article was the author’s regular observations of the river and its bank, starting in 2007. During this time, the park and the river bank have undergone significant transformations, as described in the text. The park’s functions are being expanded. The river bank becomes not so much a natural recreational object, but rather a space of consumption, part of the urban environment. The text discusses the stages of capitalization of the space of the study territory, using the approaches of Н. Lefebvre and D. Harvey. The text also shows the seasonal rhythms of life in the park and examines the social life of the river, its agency and the social life of the park from the point of view of the basic concepts of actor-network theory: sociotechnical web, translation centers, etc. the affordances (one of the concepts of actor-network theory) of the river and its banks are presented. In conclusion, the pros and cons of transforming the river bank for the natural area and the river itself and for the residents of the area are considered.

The article proposes a methodology for delineating and assessing the urban fringe of Kazakhstan’s millionplus cities. These fringes emerge as a result of the chaotic expansion of the urban core and the persistence of inherited features—both natural, which contribute to improving the environmental situation, and anthropogenically transformed, exhibiting varying degrees of environmental stress. At the first stage the urban fringe was delimited as the zone between the administrative boundaries of the city (adjusted for actual built-up areas) and the inner boundary identified using the land use diversity index (Shannon entropy). At the second stage, a combined typology of composite indices for social infrastructure density and environmental conditions was developed. This typology revealed asymmetric development between the fringes and central districts of Kazakhstan’s million-plus cities where areas with a low level of one indicator are often compensated by a high level of the other. More than 70% of the fringe territory (50% of the population) is characterized by favorable environmental conditions but underdeveloped social infrastructure. In central areas, high levels of social infrastructure predominate, surrounded by fragmented zones where environmental stress is determined by industrial and transport influence, while social infrastructure remains insufficiently developed. Industrial impacts are generally declining; however,  industrial zone disintegration is actively progressing in Almaty, has only recently begun in Astana, and has not yet started in Shymkent. Polarization of the composite social infrastructure density index is characteristic of the fringes in Almaty and Astana, whereas in Shymkent it is more homogeneous and minimally different from the urban core. The greatest diversity is observed in newly and rapidly developed areas of Astana and the least—in the integrated former suburban areas of Shymkent. Improvement of the composite environmental index from the center toward the periphery, along with substantial variation in environmental well-being levels from very low to very high, are universal features of the urban fringe.

The article examines the historical and geographical features, changes in the functions and location of food markets in Moscow. Despite significant changes in the economy, social perception and architectural aspect, Moscow markets continue to play an important role in the city infrastructure and maintain cultural and historical value, reflecting the centuries-old traditions of the capital as a trading city. As a result of the analysis of the spatial dynamics of the trade and market system of Moscow, patterns of gradual shift of markets from central territories to the periphery were identified. This is due to both increased competition with retail and the policy of government bodies on redevelopment of urban areas. However, in parallel, new types of market spaces are being formed in the format of public and business clusters. The examples of Danilovsky and Cheremushkinsky markets clearly demonstrate how proper architectural and functional renovation allows returning the market to the status of the core of public life of both the area of location and the city as a whole. The developed methodology for assessing markets includes not only reliance on regulatory documents and historical and geographical methods, but also an expanded empirical approach (field observations and the widespread use of geoinformation analysis). This made it possible not only to record the distribution of markets, but also to understand what functions they perform in practice. From the point of view of urban development, markets have the potential to perform the functions of centers of attraction both within districts and on a city scale. This is confirmed by data on transport accessibility and inter-district coverage of markets, identified during the GIS analysis and the introduced centrality rating.

The strong socioeconomic contrast between Moscow and St. Petersburg requires a comprehensive approach to its study, which includes an interconnected multi-scale analysis of past and present demographic, migration, and economic trends. The article demonstrates the degree of intraregional demographic and economic contrasts in the regions between Moscow and St. Petersburg, with a more detailed examination of the Tver, Novgorod, and Pskov oblasts. The dynamics of urban and rural population, the balance of intraregional, interregional, and international migration at different distances from regional centers are associated both with the current spatial specifics of the macroregion’s economic development and with the accumulated population losses over the past half-century. This has allowed us to show the changes in settlement patterns since 1959, as well as in the background sectors of the economy from 1990 to 2023–2024, and the current spatial contrasts. The study identifies both the underlying problems of macroregion and the potential consequences of current trends. The study shows the impact of modern enterprise transformation on the location of the population and its employment. It identifies relatively successful and most problematic territories and demonstrates the weakening role of many municipal centers due to their depopulation and partial economic degradation, including the settlements proposed as supporting in the Spatial Development Strategy of the Russian Federation adopted in 2024. The study relies on the multi-scale statistical analysis of regions, municipal districts, and settlements. The use of maps and graphs, including the showing the degree of remoteness from the main regional centers, allowed us to identify and try to explain the existing intraregional socioeconomic contrasts.

The dynamics of population size in settlements are determined by a wide range of factors, among which, as research shows, is the availability of educational and healthcare institutions (i.e., basic social infrastructure) within close proximity to homes of residents. A bidirectional relationship can be assumed: a decline in population size leads to a reduction of the attached contingent in schools and medical institutions, which in turn results in the optimization of walkable social infrastructure. Conversely, the closure of basic social infrastructure facilities fosters population outflow from such settlements and contributes to an overall decline in their population size. This article, based on a 10-percent sample of Russian municipalities (226 units, encompassing 16.7 thous. settlements according to the 2021 population census), evaluates the provision of basic educational and healthcare services. Provision levels are examined in relation to settlement size, whether settlements belong to the suburbs of large cities, and the characteristics of the patterns of settlement. The methods applied include descriptive statistics, regression modelling, clustering, and cartographic analysis. The results show that, contrary to expectations, the availability of educational and healthcare institutions in settlements is practically unrelated to population dynamics during the last intercensal period (2011–2021). Moreover, for comparatively large settlements (with more than 1000 residents), a significant inverse relationship was observed between population dynamics and the presence of schools and medical institutions. The only exception is kindergartens, for which no such relationship was found. The findings demonstrate that in the 2010s the population dynamics of settlements depended not on the provision of social infrastructure, but primarily on their position within the center-periphery system and on the characteristics of the patterns of settlement. The article discusses the limitations of the calculations performed, the reasons for the observed relationships, and outlines directions for further research.

Objective of the study is to assess the provision of all settlements in four regions of the Russian Near North (Vologda, Kostroma, Kirov, and Yaroslavl oblasts) with social infrastructure facilities and to analyze whether the migration balance of settlements is associated with varying levels of provision of these facilities. The study is based on data collected from open sources on the availability of educational and healthcare institutions in all settlements as of mid-2024. The analysis also utilized information on population size from the All-Russian Population Censuses of 2010 and 2020, as well as depersonalized individual data on internal migration for 2011–2020 across all settlements in these regions. The provision of settlements with different types of social infrastructure was assessed depending on their administrative status (district centers, rural settlement centers, former rural settlement centers) and population size. Based on the provision with different types of social infrastructure facilities, net migration (gain or loss) was calculated by migration type for groups of settlements, including detailed age groups. Using descriptive analysis methods, the relationships between migration and the presence of various social infrastructure facilities, as well as the overall provision of residents with these facilities in their settlement, were examined. A relationship was traced between the migration of people in the youngest working ages (youth at school-leaving age, families with children) and the presence of schools. At the same time, no visible relationship with the presence of healthcare facilities was identified. Settlements located in the suburbs of large cities and even district centers deviate from the general patterns, as their residents primarily use social infrastructure not in their own settlements.

The concept of a reviving village can be interpreted in different ways, depending on which “revival” is being considered. The fundamental feature for using this characteristic is a period of prolonged depopulation preceding a settlement’s revival, which can include cases of complete extinction. For this study, settlements categorized as “without a population” were selected as the initial group. The study area encompassed eight regions within the Non-Chernozem Zone. They were selected on the basis of their similar natural conditions, shared developmental history, and proximity to Moscow and St. Petersburg. This advantageous location has placed them within a zone of intensive recreational development driven by residents of both capitals. The method of identifying villages coming to life is based on a phased reduction of the group of settlements “without a population” as a result of non-compliance with the developed criteria. The following geographical factors of revitalization were selected: proximity to a regional or district center, transport accessibility, proximity to large rivers and reservoirs, and proximity to a large rural center. At the first stage, 4500 out of 14200 settlements “without a population” were selected based on the specified situational features. The subsequent phase involved analyzing satellite imagery of the pre-selected settlements to identify those with preserved buildings. This filtering reduced the number of study sites to 2900. In the final stage, the sites were checked for demarcated cadastral plots as a key revitalization’s indicator. The final count of reviving villages was 1900. The developed methodology has pronounced regional specificity, influenced by objective geographical conditions. However, subjective factors also play a role, stemming from peculiarities in statistical accounting and varying approaches to the abolition of settlements. Furthermore, the prevalence of land surveying may be influenced by institutional factors and the accessibility of cadastral services. However, the study found that the revitalization potential is highest in villages possessing a combination of advantageous geographical features.