Money is not the main thing: the scientist proved why St. Petersburg is the cultural capital

"St. Petersburg - the cultural capital of Russia" - a beautiful phrase, or a scientific fact? Scientists have shown this to be true.

As you know, the main consumers of culture have always been the wealthiest strata of the population, and Russia in this sense is no different from other countries, high incomes also serve as a powerful catalyst for the consumption of cultural goods, - found out in his work "Consumption of cultural goods in Russia: the scale , determinants, differentiation", published in the journal" Economic Sociology", Academician Rostislav Kapelyushnikov: "In the top decile (top 10%), about every second visit the cinema during the year, every third - in theaters or concerts, and about every fourth - in museums. Similar estimates for the bottom decile (bottom 10%) are around 20% for cinema and concerts and around 5% for theater and museums. In the “elite” forms of art, the gap between the extreme deciles turns out to be huge: 7 times for the theater and 5 times for museums. For "mass" types of art, cinema and concerts, it is less: "only" 2-3 times.

Cultural activity monotonously increases as the economic resources of households increase".

In the same place, the analyst proved that St. Petersburg (and not Moscow) rightfully bears the title of the cultural capital of Russia, since it is the record holder in terms of consumption of cultural goods. This applies to both the general probability of visits and the probabilities of visiting cinemas and theaters, and only in museums between St. Petersburg and Moscow, an approximate parity is maintained...”.

The analyst identified four main types of cultural goods - cinema, theater, concerts and museums, and for each of them the likelihood and regularity of its consumption were assessed, as well as the socio-economic and demographic characteristics of consumers were analyzed.

A record high demand for cultural goods is observed in both Moscow and St. Petersburg. Among the residents of both capitals, during the year, about every second goes to the cinema and every third or fourth to theaters, concerts or museums. The overall attendance rate reaches 70-75%. The share of regular viewers / listeners is also very high in them - about 30%.

However, the researchers note, by most indicators, the situation in St. Petersburg looks more favorable than in Moscow: in all types of art, Petersburgers are noticeably ahead of Muscovites.

Overall attendance rates correlate as 77% (St. Petersburg) versus 68% (Moscow).

A logical question arises, how to correlate the strict dependence of the level of interest in culture on the level of income (more money from people, more demand for cinema, theaters, museums and concerts), if the income of Muscovites is higher than the income of Petersburgers? Then why don't Muscovites lead in cultural consumption?

Another phenomenon known to economists can play a role here - “consumption of culture” (going to a museum, to a concert, to a movie) requires not only money, but also time. And here a high level of earnings can become an obstacle to a "cultural campaign" - for a highly paid employee "time is precious", and his "cultural activity" to the detriment of "professional (market) activity" turns into large losses of potential income for him.

“Even more unexpectedly, in terms of most characteristics of cultural activity, Moscow loses not only to St. Petersburg, but also to other major cities with a population of more than 500 thousand people. Perhaps this is due to the presence of a large number of recent migrants among Moscow residents, who are much more passive in cultural terms than native Muscovites... - the expert believes.