Precariat and higher education

Objective: to analyze institutional changes in higher education which form the modern labor market; to identify the factors of forming precariat with higher education.Methods: econometric modeling (logit- and probit regression models).Results: precariat and its institutionalized forms are an important factor of socio-economic development. The phenomenon of precariat makes researchers in social sciences change approaches to the analysis of employment and changes in working conditions, and rethink the traditional models associated with labor relations, both in economic theory and in sociology. The paper identifies the main factors of precariatization of labor resources, including the growth of informal employment, the development of technology, the decline in the role of trade unions, as well as the policy of companies to reduce costs and transfer them to employees. In the context of the analyzed scientific works in the modern Western and Russian discourse, it is also determined that precariat is also formed under negative trends in higher education, such as the bureaucratization of educational processes, leading to a shift of values from professionalism to the achievement of performance indicators of educational institutions. It is found that precariatization trends also include normalization of unstable work, marketization and introduction of competitive mechanisms in the public sector. The main reasons are determined which hinder the effective balance in the labor market between the needs of employers and the distribution of budget places. Based on econometric modeling and determining the main factors which affect the probability of entering the group of precariates with higher edu- cation (GRP per capita; unemployment rate, type of settlement, as well as gender, marital status, children under 18 years of age and work experience), the authors identified those which best reflect the probability of entering the group of precariates. Scientific novelty: consists in identifying the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of precarization in Russia in the context of technological and institutional changes, as well as in assessing the impact of the identified factors on the prob- ability of entering the group of precariat with higher education.

Socio-economic aspects of higher education development, Sphere of higher education, Precariat, Institutional changes, Labor market, Socio-economic policy

1. Standing G. The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2011.

2. Alonso A., Ferreira S., Alonso D. Middle Class Evolving To Precariat: Labour Conditions for the 21st Century // Social Work & Society. 2016. Vol. 14. № 1. Pp. 1-12.

3. Bessant J. Young precariat and a new work order? A case for historical sociology // Journal of Youth Studies. 2018. Vol. 21. № 6. Pp. 780-798. DOI: 10.1080/13676261.2017.1420762

4. Тихонова Н. Е. Прекариат и перспективы изменения социальной структуры российского общества // Социологические исследования. 2019. Т. 2, № 2. С. 167-173. DOI: 10.31857/s013216250004023-8

5. Volchik V., Maslyukova E. Entrepreneurship at the labour market: a case of precariat and informal employment // Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues. 2019. Vol. 6, № 4. Pp. 2095-2109. DOI: 10.9770/jesi.2019.6.4(38)

6. Тощенко Ж. Т. Прекариат: от протокласса к новому классу. М.: Наука, 2018. 350 c.

7. Вольчик В. В., Кривошеева-Медянцева Д. Д. Институты, технологии и возрастающая отдача // Journal of Institutional Studies (Журнал институциональных исследований). 2015. Т. 7, № 1. С. 45-58. DOI: 10.17835/2076-6297.2015.7.1.045-058

8. Muntaner C. Digital Platforms, Gig Economy, Precarious Employment, and the Invisible Hand of Social Class // International Journal of Health Services. 2018. Vol. 48, № 4. Pp. 597-600. DOI: 10.1177/0020731418801413

9. Tran M., Sokas R. K. The gig economy and contingent work: An occupational health assessment // Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2017. Vol. 59, № 4. Pp. e63-e66. DOI: 10.1097/jom.0000000000000977

10. Healy J., Nicholson D., Pekarek A. Should we take the gig economy seriously? // Labour & Industry: a journal of the social and economic relations of work. 2017. Vol. 27, № 3. Pp. 232-248. DOI: 10.1080/10301763.2017.1377048

11. Поланьи К. Великая трансформация: политические и экономические истоки нашего времени. СПб.: Алетейя, 2002. 320 c.

12. Bessant J. The Great Transformation: History for a Techno-Human Future. Routledge, 2018. 250 p.

13. Nelson R. R., Nelson K. Technology, institutions, and innovation systems // Research policy. 2002. Vol. 31, № 2. Pp. 265-272. DOI: 10.1016/s0048-7333(01)00140-8

14. Nelson R. R., Winter S. G. Evolutionary theorizing in economics // Journal of economic perspectives. 2002. Vol. 16, № 2. Pp. 23-46. DOI: 10.1257/0895330027247

15. Standing G. The precariat: from denizens to citizens? // Polity. 2012. Vol. 44, № 4. Pp. 588-608. DOI: 10.1057/pol.2012.15

16. Volchik V. Facilities of original institutional economics in research of institutional changes // Journal of Economic Regulation (Вопросы регулирования экономики). 2011. Vol. 2, № 4. Pp. 24-38.

17. Johannessen J. A. The Workplace of the Future: The Fourth Industrial Revolution, the Precariat and the Death of Hierarchies. Routledge, 2018.

18. Penprase B. E. The fourth industrial revolution and higher education // Higher education in the era of the fourth industrial revolution. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore, 2018. Pp. 207-229.

19. Volchik V., Klimenko L., Posukhova O. Socio-economic sustainable development and the precariat: a case study of three Russian cities // Entrepreneurship and Sustainability. 2018. № 6. Pp. 411-428. DOI: 10.9770/jesi.2018.6.1(25)

20. Gregory C. From public policy to pure anthropology: A genealogy of the idea of the hybrid economy // Engaging indigenous economy: debating diverse approaches. 2015. Vol. 26, № 1. Pp. 29-42. DOI: 10.22459/caepr35.04.2016.03

21. Volchik V. V., Posukhova O. Y. Precarity and professional identity in the context of institutional change // Terra Economicus. 2016. Vol. 14, № 2. Pp. 159-173. DOI: 10.18522/2073-6606-2016-14-2-159-173

22. Morgan G., Wood J., Nelligan P. Beyond the vocational fragments: Creative work, precarious labour and the idea of ‘flexploitation’ // The Economic and Labour Relations Review. 2013. Vol. 24, № 3. Pp. 397-415. DOI: 10.1177/1035304613500601

23. Mirowski P., Nik-Khah E. The knowledge we have lost in information: the history of information in modern economics. Oxford University Press, 2017.

24. Вольчик В. В., Корытцев М. А., Маслюкова Е. В. Институциональные ловушки и новый менеджеризм в сфере образования и науки // Управленец. 2018. Т. 9, № 6. С. 17-29.

25. Volchik V., Maslyukova E. Performance and sustainability of higher education: key indicators versus academic values // Journal of Security and Sustainability Issues. 2017. Т. 6, № 3. С. 501-512. DOI: 10.9770/jssi.2017.6.3(14)

26. Hayek F. A. The fatal conceit: The errors of socialism. Routledge, 2013.

27. Olson M. The devolution of the Nordic and Teutonic economies // The American Economic Review. 1995. Vol. 85, № 2. Pp. 22-27.

28. Holcombe R. G. Political capitalism: How political influence is made and maintained. Cambridge University Press, 2018.

29. Arthur W. B. Inductive reasoning and bounded rationality // The American economic review. 1994. Vol. 84, № 2. Pp. 406-411.

30. Arthur W. B. Complexity and the Economy. Oxford University Press, 2014.

31. North D. C. Understanding the Process of Economic Change, Princeton Universi, 2005.

32. Российский мониторинг экономического положения и здоровья населения НИУ ВШЭ (RLMS HSE), проводимый Национальным исследовательским университетом «Высшая школа экономики» и ООО «Демоскоп» при участии Центра народонаселения Университета Северной Каролины в Чапел Хилле и Института социологии Федерального научно- исследовательского социологического центра РАН. (Сайты обследования RLMS HSE: http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/ rlms и http://www.hse.ru/rlms).

33. Silvera R. Gender segregation in the labour market: roots, implications and policy responses in France // Economics and Management. 2008. Vol. 51.

34. Allen T. D. et al. Work - family conflict and flexible work arrangements: Deconstructing flexibility // Personnel psychology. 2013. Vol. 66, № 2. Pp. 345-376. DOI: 10.1111/peps.12012

35. Гасюкова Е. Н., Карачаровский В. В., Ястребов Г. А. Разный прекариат: об источниках и формах нестабильности социального статуса индивидов и групп // Общественные науки и современность. 2016. № 3. С. 48-63.

36. Siegmann K. A., Schiphorst F. Understanding the globalizing precariat: From informal sector to precarious work // Progress in Development Studies. 2016. Vol. 16, № 2. Pp. 111-123. DOI: 10.1177/1464993415623118

37. Rogan M., Roever S., Chen M. A., Carré F. Informal employment in the global south: Globalization, production relations, and “precarity” // Precarious Work. Emerald Publishing Limited, 2017. Pp. 307-333. DOI: 10.1108/s0277-283320170000031010

38. Lorenz C. If you're so smart, why are you under surveillance? Universities, neoliberalism, and new public management // Critical inquiry. 2012. Vol. 38, № 3. Pp. 599-629. DOI: 10.1086/664553

39. Lorenz C. Fixing the facts: The rise of new public management, the metrification of “quality” and the fall of the academic professions // Moving the Social. 2014. Vol. 52. Pp. 5-26.

40. Watts R. Public universities, managerialism and the value of higher education. Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2017.

41. Hardy J. A. (Re) conceptualising precarity: institutions, structure and agency // Employee Relations. 2017. Vol. 39, № 3. Pp. 263-273. DOI: 10.1108/er-06-2016-0111