ASU News

A student research team consisting of Ekaterina Gatiyatullina, Maria Gmizina, and Angelina Parazikhina, under the mentorship of ASU scholars Zaur Khachetsukov and Vyacheslav Nekhai, conducted a research project entitled "Philosophical and Sociological Measurement of Reproductive Expectations of Student Youth in Krasnodar Krai and the Republic of Adygea in the Context of the Prospects for Implementing the Demographic Policy of the Russian Federation." The project was funded by an intra-university grant from Adygea State University, which is awarded through the "Priority 2030" strategic academic leadership program.

The aim of the study was to assess the prospects for implementing the Russian Federation's demographic policy as perceived by student youth, using the Krasnodar Krai and the Republic of Adygea as examples. During the study, the team surveyed 200 students from Adyghe State University and the Kuban State University of Physical Education, Sports, and Tourism in February and March 2026. The researchers spent the remainder of the time analyzing the data and formulating recommendations. 

How many children should there be in a family?

The study found that a significant portion of respondents favor having many children. For example, 45.3% of respondents believe a family should have two children, 15% three, 4.7% four, and 2.3% five or more.

At the same time, there is a student contingent who prefers to have only one child (12.8%) or no children at all (15.1%), but these remain a minority overall. Based on the survey results, the potential total fertility rate (the total number of births per woman over the entire reproductive period) is 2.2, exceeding the lower threshold for simply replacing the previous generation (2.15).
 

Emotions or pragmatism?

An analysis of student reproductive behavior factors revealed the key barriers and priorities that contribute to having children. Most respondents cite material circumstances—owning their own home and a well-paying job (69.8% each)—as the primary reproductive determinants, taking precedence over psycho-emotional attitudes. Thus, 50% of students are prepared to have children if the family maintains a stable relationship between partners. Notably, love as a factor in reproductive behavior is cited by only a third of respondents (33.7%), indicating the prevalence of pragmatic considerations and material well-being among young people when choosing a reproductive model. This is explained by the fact that a significant portion of respondents prefer to postpone having children if financial and economic difficulties arise (37.2%) or forego having children altogether (17.4%). Moreover, almost half of students (44.2%) are prepared to have children regardless of their financial situation.

Moreover, the overwhelming majority of respondents (72.1%) believe family planning and reproductive behavior are necessary. Young people also believe that the choice of reproductive model should be made independently, regardless of the influence of family and friends (87.2%), which underscores a pragmatic rather than traditional demographic thinking, in which the immediate social environment is capable of determining the main parameters of reproductive behavior. This pragmatic trend is reinforced by the increase in the reproductive age of the population. While in traditional societies, the birth of the first child occurs at 18-20 years, according to the survey results, the majority of respondents consider it appropriate to have children at 21-25 years (38.4%), 26-29 years (32.6%), and 30-35 years (14%), which to some extent corresponds to the parameters of the marriageable age in Russia as a whole.

The value of family and humanism

The survey revealed that the vast majority of respondents (86%) have a negative opinion of abortion. Young people consider it only in extreme cases: when the mother's life is at risk (67.4%) and when pathologies are identified that will prevent the child from surviving (38.4%). At the same time, the willingness to have an abortion for financial reasons (lack of home ownership and/or low family income) by 16% of respondents raises concern. This circumstance suggests that, given favorable reproductive and financial conditions, a significant portion of student youth would be willing to have children rather than terminate a pregnancy. Moreover, the reproductive behavior of students is regulated not only by restrictive government measures in recent years banning abortion promotion and the so-called "childfree" model [1] , but also by the humanistic nature of Russian society, which has shaped the value of family and childhood as a fundamental principle of existence.     

The study revealed that a high level of pragmatism in reproductive behavior is combined with humanistic beliefs among student youth, the foundations of which are rooted in a system of traditional spiritual and moral values. Thus, 29% of respondents have a positive attitude toward the possibility of adopting children, and 8.1% expressed a willingness to adopt a child from an orphanage. Noting the importance of genetic kinship with children, 10.5% of students also consider the possibility of incorporating children from specialized institutions into their families, with the goal of eradicating orphanhood in Russia and achieving the maxim "every child should be raised in a family."

Parenting as a student?

Young people also view student status itself as a necessary foundation for obtaining an education and establishing a career path. In this case, student behavior prioritizes developing professional skills and entering the labor market, while starting a family and having children becomes a secondary benefit that arises from fortunate circumstances.

At the same time, amid today's demographic challenges, the government is taking practical measures to create favorable conditions to support those students who have decided to start a family and continue their family line. Thus, on October 30, 2025, Order No. 807 of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, "On Approving Recommendations for Supporting Student Families," came into effect. According to the study's authors, the document establishes two fundamental principles.

First, it defines a student family as "a category of young families in which both individuals, married in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, including those raising a child(ren), or a person who is the sole parent (adoptive parent) of a child(ren), aged 35 or younger, are enrolled in secondary vocational education programs and/or higher education programs." Second, the order establishes measures of social, material, infrastructural, housing, legal, informational, and psychological support, drawing on the resources of the state, the region, and educational institutions, that are pronatal in nature and aim to improve the living conditions of young people.

The range of government measures aimed at supporting student families deserves special attention. In March 2026, the office of Deputy Prime Minister Tatyana Golikova announced the introduction of a one-time cash payment of 200,000 rubles upon the birth of a child.

It appears that the implementation of the provisions of this order, coupled with the consolidated efforts of all entities supporting student families, will, in the foreseeable future, serve as an incentive for reproductive behavior and improve the quality of life of student youth. This is supported by the results of a study conducted, according to which student youth in Krasnodar Krai and Adygea expect specific support measures from state and regional demographic initiatives. As expected, most of the tools for stimulating reproductive behavior, as perceived by students and needed to be implemented in the near future, are financial, economic, and social in nature.

What do students lack to start a family?  

The survey showed that 59.3% of respondents consider increasing the amount of maternity capital as the main measures of state support, almost the same number (58.1%) consider improving housing conditions, and 40.7% consider providing additional benefits and subsidies. 

About a third of respondents expect development of children's infrastructure: the launch of free additional educational programs for children, the construction of new kindergartens and schools, the provision of free vouchers to sanatoriums and camps, and the full subsidization of transportation services for minors. 

Thus, the responses obtained correlate with the assessment of the main barriers to reproductive behavior and demonstrate that today's student population cites difficult financial circumstances and insufficient social support as the main obstacles to increasing the birth rate. Modernization of accessible educational and leisure infrastructure, which will free up a significant portion of financial and time resources for the upbringing and education of preschool and school-age children, is also identified as a priority tool for stimulating reproductive behavior.

Conclusions or what to do?

In terms of regional measures (the Republic of Adygea and Krasnodar Krai), the SNIK team highlights the following:

Regional measures are targeted. In Adygea and Krasnodar Krai, the measures are quite feasible, but they don't address the main factors of anxiety (the problem of acquiring housing and securing high-paying employment), and many of them are compensatory rather than preventive.

Looking back, an important pattern can be noted: by the 20th century, a pattern had become entrenched in Russia: early marriage, high birth rates as the norm, and low individual responsibility for the economic provision of children (state, community, landowner, etc.). Since the 1990s, there has been a sharp shift to individualized risks: housing, work, and income are personal issues. The demographic policy of the 2000s–2020s did not restore a sense of collective or state guarantees, but merely added benefits. Thus, young people have developed a rational and cautious type of reproductive behavior, which current measures have little impact on.

Based on our research, we offer a number of recommendations for improving demographic policy in modern Russia:

1. Shift the focus from “postnatal support” to “reducing risks before birth”

Introduce a housing certificate for young families under 25 (regardless of whether they have children), which can be used as a down payment on a mortgage or rent. The certificate is activated upon marriage and is partially redeemed after the birth of each child.

Create a "reproductive tax deduction"—a refund of personal income tax for 12 months before the birth of a child—to compensate for periods of instability (loss of income, maternity leave, sick leave).

Launch a pilot program called "Rental Housing for Young Families" with a fixed low rate (no more than 20% of total income) for up to 5 years with a purchase option after the birth of a second child.

2. Recognize the solution to the housing issue as one of the main factors of demographic development – ​​and act accordingly.

Expand the Family Mortgage program to include no down payment for families under 25 years of age (with a 30% state guarantee).

Introduce state co-financing for housing rentals for families with children under 7 years of age, if the income is below 2 regional subsistence minimums per person.

Revise the criteria for housing need: include all young families on the waiting list, regardless of their current square footage, if the family has a child under 3 years old and at least one parent is under 30 years old.

3. Adapt measures to informal and unstable employment of young people.

Introduce a “basic demographic benefit” for the birth of the first child, independent of income and employment (for example, 100,000 rubles in cash).

Allow the use of maternity capital for any housing expenses (including rent and utility bills), repayment of any family loans (not just mortgages), if they are supported by documents, treatment and rehabilitation of any family member (not just the child), and parental education (courses, retraining) - this indirectly improves the family's income, but leave the ban on pure "cash" without reporting (risk of abuse).

For young families under 25, the minimum income requirement for receiving a family mortgage and tax payment will be waived.

4. Bring back the element of collective responsibility (but in a market form)

Create a state-run "demographic savings account" for each child from birth. The state annually deposits an amount (for example, 50,000 rubles) into it, which can be used after age 18 for education, housing, or starting a business. This reduces long-term risks for parents.

Introduce mandatory social insurance for lost income at the birth of a child (similar to sick leave), covering at least 70% of average earnings for 18 months.

Launch the "Employer Demographic Certificate" program—a tax deduction for companies that provide employees with children with company housing, places in departmental daycares, or flexible working hours.

5. Reorient regional measures from image-based to critical ones

When redistributing regional budgets, rank measures based on their impact on childbearing decisions. Housing comes first, followed by a stable income, and then everything else.

Regions with low birth rates are advised to abandon targeted benefits (free medications, travel) in favor of larger monthly payments per child under 3 years of age in the amount of at least 15,000 rubles.

Introduce a federal subsidy to regions for each "prevented birth" based on survey data on reproductive intentions.

Proposed research development

The proposed axiological (value-motivational) system based on the generalization of socio-philosophical approaches to the assessment of reproductive attitudes can be used in the study of motivation and resource availability of demographic policy in Russia, taking into account regional characteristics.

The sociological questionnaire developed by the authors for studying the reproductive behavior of student youth can be used in the sociological examination of the demographic problems of the younger generation, as well as in the development of indicators for assessing the stimulating/disstimulating factors of fertility in student families in the context of the demographic transition.