| Article |
|---|
| Article name |
Geoecological Significance of the Siberian-Far Eastern Amphitheater in the Formation of the Territorial Identity of the Inhabitants of the Transbaikal Territory |
| Authors |
Novikov A.N. doctor of geographical sciences, associate professor, geonov77@mail.ru |
| Bibliographic description |
Novikov A. N. Geoecological significance of the Siberian-Far Eastern amphitheater in the formation of the territorial identity of the inhabitants of the Transbaikal Territory // Transbaikal State University Journal. 2025. Vol. 31, no. 4. P. 40–50. DOI: 10.21209/2227-9245-2025-31-4-40-50 |
| Category |
Earth and Environmental Sciences |
| DOI |
913 |
| DOI |
10.21209/2227-9245-2025-31-4-40-50 |
| Article type |
Original article |
| Annotation |
Awareness of territorial identity by residents of the Transbaikal Territory in geoecological situations is
impossible without a scientifically substantiated image of the region as a model of interaction between the
various transboundary continental structures within its territory. The problem of fragmented perception of the region and self-awareness within it hinders territorial identity. The object of this study is models of geoecological
situations of the transboundary continental Siberian-Far Eastern amphitheater. The goal of the study is to develop
an understanding of the influence of geoecological situations on the formation of the territorial identity of
residents of the Transbaikal Region. The objectives of the study are: to uncover the geoecological phenomenon
of the Siberian-Far Eastern amphitheater; to develop logical patterns of self-identification of residents of the
Transbaikal Territory in the geoecological situations of this amphitheater. Territorial synthesis (generalization) is
the leading method. The amphitheater is formed by mountain systems, and at its center is the eastern junction
of the state borders of Russia, Mongolia, and China. Transbaikal Region, as one of the three sectors of the
amphitheater, possesses two dialectical types of geographical location: intracontinental and transboundary,
creating unique geographic conditions, including geoecological ones. Intracontinental location is detrimental to
the region’s residents: low precipitation, droughts and fires, and specific diseases. The transboundary nature of
continental structures (natural, ethnic, and political) through their interpenetration increases regional diversity
in various spheres, exerting a positive influence. Due to its relative isolation, the amphitheater amplifies both
the negative and positive effects of these two types of location. The negative impact is enhanced by containing
the penetration of moist air masses, which has consequences for agriculture, hydropower, and public health.
The positive impact is enhanced by providing a relatively “closed regional arenaˮ for a unique combination of
transboundary components of continental structures. This dialectical model must be understood to formulate
regional development strategies and ensure adequate self-identification of residents in this territory. Territorial
identity is the awareness of residents of their involvement in geoecological processes in physiological, economic
and emotional terms, taking into account positive and negative aspects. |
| Key words |
border position, continental transboundary, dialectic, geographical amphitheater, geographical
boundaries, geographical image, junction of the borders of three countries, model, relief, territorial identity |
| Article information |
|
| References |
1. Maehler D. B., Hernández-Torrano D. Identity development research: a systematic review of reviews.
Self and Identity. 2025:2-36. DOI: 10.1080/15298868.2025.2549770
2. Crocetti E. Identity formation in adolescence: The dynamic of forming and consolidating identity
commitments. Child Development Perspectives. 2017;11:145-150. DOI: 10.1111/cdep.12226
3. Nedeshev AA. Regional Economic Region. Novosibirsk: Nauka; 1975. 162 p. (In Russian)
4. Tishkov VA. Identity - a resource for social development. Vestnik Rossijskoj Akademii Nauk. 2025;(2):94-
103. DOI: 10.31857/S0869587325020106. EDN: AGKDGN. (In Russian)
5. Khauskhofer K. Geopolitics: Political Significance of Geographical Boundaries. Moscow: Sotsium;
2022. 460 p. (In Russian)
6. Tomskikh AA. Intermountain basins of Transbaikalia: geographical aspects of development and
environmental protection: monography. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo SO RAN; 2006. 153 p. (In Russian)
7. Tomskikh AA. On the issue of nature management in mountain countries (global and regional aspect).
Transbaikal State University Journal. 2022;28(3):28-35. DOI: 10.21209/2227924520222832835. (In Russian)
8. Konopleva NA, Povetkina AA. Territorial and ethnic identities as forms of self-identification and
representation of regional culture (on the example of Primorsky krai). Human. Culture. Education. 2024;(3):82-
103. DOI: 10.34130/2233-1277-2024-3-82. EDN: GEMWFQ. (In Russian)
9. Filimonova TA, Sekerin VD. Territorial identity: emergence, development and peculiarities of construction.
Drukerovskij Vestnik. 2024;(6):201-207. DOI: 10.17213/2312-6469-2024-6-201-207. EDN: WPULZK. (In
Russian)
10. Sharipov MF, Lobanov AE. Territorial identity of athletes at the Olympic games: history and modernity.
Scientific and Sports Bulletin of the Urals and Siberia. 2021;(4):48-51. EDN: RTQZSV. (In Russian)
11. Akkieva SI, Temmoev IYu. Territorial (regional) identity: approaches to issues research. Actual Problems
of Our Time: Science and Society. 2021;(4):8-16. EDN: WRJNXE. (In Russian)
12. Capello R. Interpreting and understanding territorial identity. Regional Science Policy & Practice.
2019;11(1):141-159. DOI: 10.1111/rsp3.12166. EDN: WXIXXD
13. Castellano-Álvarez FJ, Robina-Ramirez R. Relevance of Territorial Identity in the Rural Development
Programs - The Case Study of Tajo-Salor (Extremadura, Spain). Economies. 2024;12(2). DOI: 10.3390/
economies12020034. EDN: RDRGHY
14. Dominelli L. Complex identities in ethical social work practice and research. China Journal of Social
Work. 2022;15(3):250-261. DOI: 10.1080/17525098.2022.2107142. EDN: VBKPYY
15. Alekseev AI, Morozov BN. Development of the Russian Far East (late 19th century – 1917). Moscow:
Nauka; 1989. 224 p. (In Russian)
16. Agadzhanyan NA, Gomboeva NG. Adaptation, Ecology, and Health of the Population of Various Ethnic
Groups in Eastern Transbaikalia: scientific publication. Novosibirsk: IPREHK SO RAN; 2005. 152 p. (In Russian)
17. Bezrukov LA. Continental-Oceanic Dichotomy in International and Regional Development. Novosibirsk:
Geo; 2008. 369 p. (In Russian)
18. Kosmachev KP. Pioneer Development of the Taiga: Economic and Geographical Problems. Novosibirsk:
Nauka; 1974. 143 p. (In Russian)
19. Naprasnikov AT. Hydroholoclimatic Systems: Geoecological Analysis. Irkutsk: Institut geografii SO
RAN; 2003. 143 p. (In Russian)
20. Pavlenko Yu. East Transbaikal astrobleme. Transbaikal State University Journal. 2021;27(8):48-60.
DOI: 10.21209/2227924520212784860. EDN: VKXIZJ. (In Russian) |
| Full article | Geoecological Significance of the Siberian-Far Eastern Amphitheater in the Formation of the Territorial Identity of the Inhabitants of the Transbaikal Territory |
