This paper attempts to conceptualize the notion of “sociocultural security” using B. Glaser’s version of grounded theory. The initial material for conceptualization was the results of the first stage of a study on regional experience in participatory budgeting projects, which represent a new form of state funding for municipal development based on applications submitted by residents. This article continues the discussion on the quality of public administration initiated in 2019 by M. K. Gorshkov, who noted that project budgeting could be motivated by misplaced expectations and false values reflecting the logic of bureaucratic control rather than the real interests and practices of local communities. The concept of “sociocultural security,” proposed by the research group, is intended to denote these very interests and practices characteristic of the everyday life and culture of local communities, rather than those of external administrators and consumers of the outcomes of territorial social administration. Current external interventions in the development of local communities are often based on quantitative performance indicators and expectations of high tourist attractiveness and profitability of subsidized peripheral areas, which do not always align with the real needs and characteristics of these communities. The article is based on interviews with administration employees, volunteers, and activists in six municipalities of Perm Krai. This research aimed to identify and analyze the real needs and practices of local communities in order to more accurately define the parameters of sociocultural security and develop recommendations for improving the quality of public administration in this area. The article offers a new perspective on the issue of participatory budgeting and its impact on the development of local communities, emphasizing the importance of considering the cultural and social characteristics of each region.

Grounded Theory, state policies, proactive budgeting, local development

1. Atlas of modernization of Russia and its regions: socio-economic and socio-cultural trends and issues. Ed. by. N. I. Lapin. Moscow, Ves’ Mir, 2016: 360 (in Russ.).
2. Velikaya N. M., Tartygasheva G. V. Cultural crisis in Russia. Opinions of experts and people. Vestnik RGGU. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Iskusstvovedenie, 2020: 3: 64–75 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.28995/2073–6401–2020–3–64–75; EDN: ULJVMI.
3. Verminenko Yu. V., Ershov N. V. Cultural Security of Society and the State and its Main Threats. Upravlencheskoe konsultirovanie, 2017: 12: 111–119 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.22394/1726–1139–2017–12–111–119; EDN: XQVCRV.
4. Vershinina S. V. Sociocultural safety of the personality in the educational environment. Sotsiologiya, 2016: 3: 188–192 (in Russ.). EDN: XAFYTX.
5. Volkov Yu. G. Citizens' Perception of Historical Justice in the Modern Socio–Cultural and Political Contexts. Vestnik instituta sotziologii, 2024: 15: 4: 155–170 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/vis.2024.15.4.8; EDN: RYCUUI.
6. Voronina N. S. Motivating volunteers in emergencies. Vestnik instituta sotziologii, 2021: 12: 4: 87–107 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/vis.2021.12.4.752; EDN: ZAXXKD.
7. Gerasimova I. A., Ivakhnov V. Yu. The problem of preservation of cultural identity in conditions of globalization. Servis Plus, 2017: 2: 66–76(in Russ.).DOI: 10.22412/1993–7768–11–2–9; EDN: YRCEOX.
8. Gorshkov M. K. Social Outcomes of the Post–Soviet Transformations. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2019: 11: 3–17 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.31857/S013216250007445–2; EDN: NLCYDR.
9. Gorshkov M. K., Barash R. E. Historical memories of Russians today (History of the xx century Russia in the optics of families’ stories). Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2024: 9: 125–137 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.31857/S0132162524090119; EDN: MIDOFQ.
10. Zabaev I. V. Data analysis logic in grounded theory: B. Gleser’s version. Sociologiya: metodologiya, metody, matematicheskoe modelirovanie (Sotsiologiya: 4M), 2011: 32(0): 124–142 (in Russ.).
11. Zubok Yu. A., Chuprov V. I. Riskogenics of the sociocultural habitat as a factor of social sentiment formation. Vestnik TGU. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya, 2018: 43: 148–160 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17223/1998863Х/43/14; EDN: XWEBPV.
12. Kosygina K. E. On the Consolidation of Society in the Context of Geopolitical Tensions (Based on Research in the Vologda Region). Vestnik instituta sotziologii. 2023: 14: 4: 199–218 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/vis.2023.14.4.11; EDN: YJHWDA.
13. Lapin N. I. Anthroposociocultural evolutionism – a metatheorеtical principle of studying human communities. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2018: 3: 3–14 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.7868/S0132162518030017; EDN: YVQXQL.
14. Mayakova A. V. Analysis of socio–cultural risks of modern society. Vestnik VGU, 2019: 3: 120–127 (in Russ.).EDN: LAEQUD.
15. Narykov N. V., Skvortsov I. P. Socio–cultural aspects of national security. Filosofiya prava, 2020: 3(94): 25–31 (in Russ.). EDN: UFFDKX.
16. Podyachev K. V. The Role of Civil Society in Propagation of Patriotic Values: Experience of Russian Local Societies. In Sociology and Society: Social Inequality and Social Justice. Ed. by V. A. Mansurov. Yekaterinburg, ROS, 2016: 2312–2322 (in Russ.). EDN: WZSOMD.
17. Podyachev K. V. Development policy in the perception of social actors in the region (on the example of the Pskov Region). Vlast’, 2019: 27 (6): 63–69 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.31171/vlast.v27i6.6830; EDN: OEUQVV.
18. Sokolovsky M. L. Sociocultural safety concept in educational environment of univercity. Vestnik SKFU, 2018: 6: 241–247 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.37493/2307–907X–2018–69–6–241–247; EDN: YWPRYT.
19. Sorokin P. A. Social and Cultural Dynamics. Transl. from Eng. by V. V. Sapov. Moscow, Akadem. proekt, 2020: 988 (in Russ.).
20. Titov V. V. National security of modern Russia: humanitarian and sociocultural challenges. Obshchestvo: politika, ekonomika, pravo, 2020: 9(86): 16–19 (in Russ.).DOI: 10.24158/pep.2020.9.2; EDN: ELUCBA.
21. Shakirova E. Yu. Sociocultural and Axiological Aspects of Security. Vestnik PIU, 2015: 6(51): 155–161 (in Russ.). EDN: VHEHZZ.
22. Shapovalova I. S. Analysis of socio–culturalthreats of environment. Gumanitarnye, sotsial'no-ekonomicheskie i obshchestvennye nauki, 2015: 2(11): 127–134 (in Russ.). EDN: VHYBER.
23. Shestopal E., Selezneva A. Socio–Cultural Threats and Risks in Contemporary Russia. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2018: 10: 90–99 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.31857/S013216250002161–0; EDN: YOUXUT.
24. Abell P. Comparative Narratives: Some Rules for the Study of Action. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 1984: 14: 309–332. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5914.1984.tb00500.x
25. Andrews M., Kinnvall C., Monroe K. Narratives of (In)Security: Nationhood, Culture, Religion, and Gender. Introduction to the Special Issue. Political Psychology, 2015: 36(2): 141–150. DOI: 10.1111/pops.12224.
26. Bauman Z. Liquid Modernity. Cambridge, Polity Press, 2000: 264.
27. Beck U. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London, SAGE, 1992: 272.
28. Giddens A. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure, and Contradiction in Social Analysis. London; Basingstoke, Macmillan press, 1979: 294.
29. Giddens A. The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1990: 186.
30. Giddens A. Modernity and Self-Identity. Cambridge, Polity Press, 1991: 256.
31. Glaser B., Strauss A. An awareness of dying. Chicago, Aldine, 1965: 320.
32. Glaser B., Strauss A. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, Aldine, 1967: 284.
33. Glaser B. Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA, Sociology Press, 1978: 164.
34. Glaser B. Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs. forcing. Mill Valley, CA, Sociology Press, 1992: 129.
35. Glaser B. Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Mill Valley, CA, Sociology Press, 1998: 284.
36. Glaser B. The grounded theory perspective: Conceptualization contrasted with description. Mill Valley, CA, Sociology Press, 2001: 232.
37. Glaser B. The grounded theory perspective II: Description’s remodeling of grounded theory methodology. Mill Valley, CA, Sociology Press, 2003: 217.
38. Glaser B. The grounded theory perspective III: Theoretical coding. Mill Valley, CA, Sociology Press, 2005: 160.
39. Glaser B. Doing formal grounded theory: A proposal. Mill Valley, CA, Sociology Press, 2006: 121.
40. Glaser B. Doing quantitative grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA, Sociology Press, 2008: 92.
41. Kinnvall C, Mitzen J. Anxiety, fear, and ontological security in world politics: thinking with and beyond Giddens. International Theory, 2020: 12(2): 240–256. DOI: 10.1017/S175297192000010X.
42. Merton R. K. The unanticipated consequences of purposive social action. American Sociological Review, 1936: 1: 894–904. DOI: 10.2307/2084615.
43. Ryle G. The Concept of Mind. London & NY, Routledge, 2009: 314.
44. Saldaña J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, 2009: 368.
45. Šapkauskas V. Sociocultural vulnerability of the security of liberal democracy. Public security and public order, 2023: 35(2024): 299–314. DOI: 10.13165/PSPO–24–35–22.
46. Schegloff E. A. Goffman and the analysis of conversation. In: Erving Goffman: Exploring the interaction order. Eds. Drew P., Wootton T. Cambridge, Polity Press, 1988: 89–135.
47. Shapovalova I. S., Polukhin O. N. et al. Social and Cultural Threats and Risks of Russia. The Journal of Social Sciences Research, 2018: 5: 235–240. DOI: 10.32861/jssr.spi5.235.240.
48. Sørensen M.P. Interview med Ulrich Beck. Slagmark – Tidsskrift for idéhistorie, 2002: 34: 125–144. DOI: 10.7146/sl.v0i34.215.
49. Strauss A. Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1987: 336.
50. Strauss A., Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1990: 272.
51. Strauss A., Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications, 1998: 338.