Social Transition and Modernization of Eurasian Countries

1.1 Changes in Social Structure and Governance Challenges

Social transition typically involves structural changes, mechanism reconstruction, adjustments of interests, and conceptual shifts in the social domain. It also signifies a shift from a closed society to an open society. Although the specific circumstances, economic development levels, and progress in social reforms vary significantly among Eurasian countries, several common characteristics of social transition can be identified as follows.

First, the social structure has shifted rapidly. This had both positive and negative implications. The social structure, understood as the composition and relationship patterns of social members, underwent rapid changes post-independence, often without macro-level planning or response strategies. Significant changes in population structure and employment patterns directly impacted political stability and economic development.

Second, the process of ethnic nationalism restructured ethnic relations, favoring the dominant ethnic groups in language, culture, and education policies. Political preferences and support policies led to new inequalities, granting the dominant ethnic groups superior social status. While beneficial for consolidating national independence and sovereignty, this also generated conflicts between dominant and non-dominant ethnic groups, posing both political and social challenges.

Third, widespread religious revival led to a gap in collective identity. The early independence period saw the resurgence of traditional religions, encouraged by the authorities to restore historical and cultural traditions, and to strengthen internal social cohesion. This religious revival also aimed to reestablish traditional relations with the outside world and open diplomatic avenues. However, it introduced risks of extremism and politicization.

Fourth, social governance required extensive reform of the outdated social management system. Due to reduced fiscal investment in education, social security, and other sectors, market principles were applied to address related issues. Severe inflation further reduced actual incomes, increased burdens, and lowered living standards. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) rapidly developed, playing a vital role in grassroots management.

After experiencing “counter-urbanization” due to economic recession and emigration waves in the early independence years, urban populations in Eurasian countries began to increase with economic recovery and surplus rural labor. However, this process faced challenges in some countries due to inadequate public facilities and limited employment opportunities, which led to new social issues and necessitate measures to control urban population growth.

Data from Table 1 show that the urban population proportion in Eurasian countries saw minimal change between 2010 and 2019, with some countries still at low levels. These nations aim for steady urban population growth. For instance, Kazakhstan aimed to increase its urban population from nearly 58 % in 2019 to 70 % by 2050.^[2] As of January 2023, Uzbekistan’s urban population ratio remained at 51 %, unchanged from 2010.

1.2 Social Issues as a Source of Turbulence

The increasing mobility of the population, with a large influx of young adults into cities, has placed significant pressure on social management. According to United Nations predictions, by 2030 approximately 66 % of Kazakhstan’s population will reside in urban areas. Official data indicates that since 2009, about 60,000 people annually migrate from rural areas to cities in Kazakhstan. Coupled with higher birth rates in cities and stagnant rural population growth, urban populations have surged by 3 million over the past decade, primarily in major cities like Almaty and Astana. Despite the lack of basic amenities in big cities, experts in Central Asian countries believe that people are compelled to leave their hometowns because of limited opportunities for education and professional development in their rural areas.

However, the influx of migrants not only deteriorates urban security but also affects the character of religious observance for city residents. The new residents come from isolated rural areas, have lower educational levels, are less informed about the outside world, and possess stronger religious belief. If unable to integrate into urban life, they may turn to crime or even participate in radical anti-social and anti-government activities. Consequently, there have developed in some Eurasian countries so-called “radical zones” around major cities, creating favorable conditions for political opposition and the spread of extremism.

Eurasian countries frequently experience social unrest, some of which is politically charged. The “Color Revolutions” in Georgia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, and Armenia led to large-scale public demonstrations, as well as regime changes. Other unrest is triggered by policy injustices or unexpected incidents, often recurring in recent years and directly linked to intensified social conflicts. Large-scale disturbances that resulted in prolonged political instability in Kyrgyzstan, for example, have mainly involved participants from the radical zones around cities who harbor strong anti-government sentiments and are more susceptible to the influence of reactionary political forces. The January Riots in Kazakhstan in 2022 in which hundreds died, were centered in the largest city, Almaty, and showed similarities to the situation in Kyrgyzstan.

So far, the achievements of the Eurasian countries’ institutional transitions are primarily evident in the political sphere. The consolidation of a vertical administrative power system anchored on the presidency and a clear central-local relationship has helped stabilize the political landscape. However, the elite’s focus on power distribution and wealth allocation has led to oligarchic interference. In contrast, significant difficulties have emerged in the social and economic domains during the transition and established goals have failed to be met. The deterioration of the socio-economic situation in recent years, especially due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, has exposed the fragility and immaturity of the social management system. Insufficient government investment has hampered the implementation of social policies, substantial reductions in fiscal spending have exacerbated poverty issues, crime rates have increased, and drug smuggling has become rampant in some countries, posing a greater threat of social unrest. Recently, Eurasian countries have been modernizing their pension systems to reduce government fiscal expenditure, which has also triggered dissatisfaction among some social groups.

1.3 Addressing Challenges Through Traditional Organizational Methods

During their transitions, Eurasian countries have placed significant emphasis on maintaining social stability by leveraging traditional governance methods to alleviate conflicts and prevent crises. While grassroots social autonomy can reduce the state’s burden, it also presents challenges. Some countries have employed traditional resources. For example, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan support the development of Mahalla organizations in grassroots communities and villages, with Uzbekistan being the most successful and effective. Mahalla is a traditional civic self-governing organization with a long history in countries like Uzbekistan. Since 1992, Mahallas have been revitalized with the support and promotion of the government. Currently, Uzbekistan has over 10,000 Mahalla grassroots organizations, continually enhancing their unique social management functions.

First, traditional Mahalla organizational structures were reformed to better meet modern social management needs. Second, traditional ethnic culture, customs, and religious rituals were upheld and continued, including mediating family disputes, encouraging neighborly assistance, establishing special funds to help the elderly and disabled, and organizing various traditional ceremonies. Third, financial assistance was provided in the development of family workshops, skills training for the unemployed, and securing low-interest loans and subsidies. Fourth, illegal religious activities were monitored and prevented. Fifth, Mahalla organizations assisted government departments in political promotion, including conducting educational activities, imparting patriotism and dedication to the youth, and reducing juvenile delinquency.

As a non-governmental grassroots organization, Mahallas have diversified funding sources, primarily relying on state financial support, and also receiving donations from enterprises through a dedicated foundation.

Other Eurasian countries also encourage traditional social organizations to play a role. Leveraging their prestige, village and tribal elders mediate conflicts among residents and assist grassroots governments in maintaining stability. Some Soviet-era methods have been continued or revived. For instance, youth and women’s organizations play indispensable social roles. The number of women’s organizations in Belarus grew from 2 at independence to 23 by 2020. The Belarusian Women’s Union, a grassroots organization with 4,500 local offices, focuses on women’s lives, work, education, and family situations (Титаренко 2021). Turkmenistan has established an Elders’ Council, which not only uses its social prestige to consolidate power but also provides policy consultation for the state.

2.1 Social Transformation from the Perspective of Modernization

According to classical Western modernization theory, modernization is a comprehensive social transformation or revolutionary social change, encompassing two major shifts: from an agricultural society to an industrial society, and from an industrial society to a knowledge society. This transformation is reflected in aspects such as quality of life, lifestyle, cultural quality, educational level, social welfare, and social equity. The hallmark of achieving modernization is the formation of a “flexible society” capable of self-management and self-healing, avoiding severe conflicts and antagonisms. This is essentially an idealized state, as even in Western countries that have completed modernization and entered a post-modernization stage, social issues frequently arise that are closely related to conditions similar to economic and political development. For instance, at the end of 2023, French farmers launched large-scale protests; the United States has experienced severe social polarization and division in recent years.

The modernization of Eurasian countries is marked by more pronounced contradictions due to the unique paths chosen for economic and political transformation. The first social transformation occurred during the late Soviet period. After gaining independence, the original system was completely abandoned, necessitating a search for a suitable modernization model, which involved many setbacks. In the 1970s, American sociologist Alex Inkeles proposed ten basic indicators of social modernization. According to these indicators, most Eurasian countries can reach or approach modernization levels in urbanization rates, adult literacy rates, university enrollment rates, and average life expectancy. However, the deterioration of economic conditions post-independence led to a decline in social security levels, causing indicators such as healthcare, employment, and GDP per capita to fall increasingly short of the criteria of modernization.

Particularly in the three South Caucasus countries, Tajikistan, and Moldova, which experienced civil wars or ethnic conflicts in the early years of independence, there was an economic decline and a trend towards deindustrialization. Georgia’s GDP in 2000 was only half of what it was in 1991, with industrial output dropping from 29.1 % in 1991 to 14.0 % in 2012 (Вардомский, Пылин, and Соколова 2014). In 30 years since independence, the social transformation of Eurasian countries has in many respects demonstrated a return to tradition rather than moving closer to a modern society as per Western standards. In grassroots management, some methods from the 16th and 17th centuries have been restored, particularly in Central Asia and the South Caucasus countries. The state’s power is limited to regulating and controlling the various political and economic behavior of residents, lacking effective means in social organization and mobilization. This situation is directly related to the level of economic development. The economic crisis of the 1990s led to a drastic decline in living standards, with some Eurasian countries falling into the category of low-income countries, in effect requiring that they restart their modernization process from scratch. According to the standards of classical modernization theory, social indicators in these countries lag far behind those of developed countries.

Currently, the social issues that concern the public in Eurasian countries (and especially young people) are primarily prices, housing, wages, and healthcare, followed by wellbeing, wealth disparity, environmental protection, and unemployment. This indicates that people of different professions, ages, and regions are concerned with quality of life and a diverse set of demands. Education issues are relatively well-addressed, thanks to the foundation laid during the Soviet period and the high level of attention paid to the issue by respective governments, showcasing a distinct feature of Eurasian countries’ path to social modernization. To ensure smooth progress in social transformation, Kazakhstan has begun formulating the Social Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan in 2023, covering a broader range of areas to provide legal grounds for solving social problems and improving social services.

2.2 Distinctiveness Compared to Other Developing Countries

From the perspective of social changes, the transformations that have occurred in Eurasian countries over the past 30 years are similar to those in most developing countries, but also exhibit some unique characteristics. The urbanization process in Eurasian countries has experienced fluctuations but ultimately converged with other developing countries, concentrating a large population in capitals and major cities where government investment is higher and management is more effective. The urban development and educational foundation laid during the Soviet era have proved beneficial to the modernization of Eurasian countries in the social realm, partially mitigating the “big city problems” seen in many developing countries.

Relative to other countries, the literacy rate in Eurasian countries is higher and the states emphasize investment in education. In 2014, for instance, Uzbekistan had a literacy rate of 99.9 % among its 15–24 age group, with the education sector accounting for 34 % of its GDP. The Gini coefficient was 0.29, indicating a relatively even income distribution and smaller wealth disparities. These factors have ensured that most Eurasian countries have not experienced severe social conflicts even under difficult financial conditions. After having received appropriate skills training, surplus workers can easily find job opportunities in other countries, with remittances becoming an important source of income for many ordinary families. This reduces the intensity and frequency of social conflicts within Eurasian countries.

The path to modernization for Eurasian countries is uneven and unstable, accompanied by various social contradictions. Due to complex causes, these social contradictions are sudden, diverse, and political, making them difficult to resolve. Nation-building and ethnic identity formation in Eurasian countries are occurring simultaneously, with the former sometimes preceding the latter. This marks a clear difference from other developing countries. Therefore, achieving national and ethnic identity in these countries is challenging. In multi-ethnic countries, forming cultural unity is difficult, and top-down initiatives to this purpose may even lead to social division or serious opposition (Бижанов and Нурмуратов 2018).

In Eurasian countries, issues such as ethnicity, religion, poverty, and unemployment are often intertwined. Some collective incidents, although triggered by economic issues, frequently lead to severe social consequences and even political crises. For example, the tragic events in Zhanaozen, Kazakhstan, in December 2011 and the January Events in 2022 – the former was initially a protest by unemployed local oil workers dissatisfied with the lack of resettlement by companies and the government, and the latter was sparked by a rise in liquefied natural gas prices. In both cases, the protests were accompanied by extreme behavior, a situation exploited by anti-government forces which ultimately escalated into large-scale unrest. According to the then Kazakh President Tokayev, social problems need to be resolved through the rule of law (Silk Road New Observer 2022). Similarly, Moldova’s unrest in the second half of 2015 was closely related to poverty. In countries like Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Georgia, and Ukraine, similar incidents have occurred with some even leading to abnormal changes in government. This indicates that the social situation in these countries is very complex. Although they perform better than many developing countries on certain indicators, their social transformation has not been successful or has not reached a mature stage. Particularly, unemployment and poverty are widespread, and the younger generation lacks confidence in the future. Consequently, the various aftereffects risk undermining the achievements of national modernization.

2.3 The Challenge of Free Population Movement

Many Eurasian countries, characterized by young and growing populations, have abundant labor but limited employment opportunities. Consequently, their governments restrict the movement of labor from rural to urban areas, especially to the capitals. For instance, in February 2016, Turkmenistan’s President Berdymukhamedov signed a decree regulating internal migration and employment in Ashgabat. According to information published online, only those appointed by presidential order, elected representatives, and personnel from security departments can directly move to Ashgabat. Other outsiders wishing to work in the capital must formally register with the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection, obtain approval from an interdepartmental committee, and then receive a one-year residence permit.

Although there are no constitutional restrictions on interregional movement in practice, it is very difficult to work and live in the capital. To ensure the stability of Ashgabat, Turkmenistan prioritizes providing job opportunities to Ashgabat residents, forcing thousands of migrant workers to leave the capital. The lack of work and funds, combined with restrictions on going abroad for work and rising commodity prices, has led to growing public dissatisfaction. Many people express their anger openly online, prompting authorities to implement more control and punitive measures. Additionally, the low status of women and their difficulty in finding employment are salient issues in Turkmenistan (Байриева 2023).

Free mobility of the population is considered a key indicator of modernization. However, in Eurasian countries population movement is unidirectional, driven by insufficient employment and low incomes, causing many young workers to seek jobs abroad. This outflow from poor countries to relatively wealthier ones – such as young Central Asians going to work in Russia or young Ukrainians and Moldovans working in Europe – might stabilize the society, but negatively impacts the home country’s economic development. This results in a shift from labor surplus to a loss and shortage of skilled labor, creating new problems. Russian data from 2018 indicate that over 2 million Uzbek labor migrants went to Russia, along with over 1 million Tajiks, 350,000 Kyrgyz, nearly 120,000 Kazakhs, and about 3,000 Turkmen (Zhao 2019). Employment is a crucial indicator of a country’s social modernization level. The inability of many young adults to find work in their home countries clearly hinders economic growth. Some countries have introduced specific migration policy frameworks to enhance national regulation, ensuring that high-quality labor can find employment domestically and controlling the number of overseas labor migrants (Захватов 2024).

3.1 Achieving Basic Social Security and Social Equity

Market principles needed to be introduced, necessitating a restructuring of social security systems. Additionally, the serious social differentiation that emerged during economic transitions was not promptly addressed, with more wealth possessed by a small group of people. In some countries, the number of people living below the poverty line remained persistently high, despite efforts to alleviate it. This significant wealth gap, along with disparities between urban and rural areas, regions, industries, and even ethnic groups, has led to internal conflicts within Eurasian countries, becoming a critical threat to political stability. Modernization also brings about social differentiation, but this kind of differentiation is more often a result of changes in social division of labor and upgrades in industrial structure, which can increase social mobility. Effective institutional regulations can prevent societal polarization.

There has been an increasing awareness of the importance of social modernization, initiating reforms to improve the governance systems, and ensuring fairness and justice. Many recent reform measures in Eurasian countries include new social policies that prioritize the protection of vulnerable groups, aligning with deepened political and economic reforms. Reforms in the social sphere are often introduced in tandem with subsidies for vulnerable groups and improvements in the system for distributing these benefits to better reflect principles of fairness. Efforts are being made to reduce the number of people living in poverty, narrow the wealth gap, and create more employment opportunities. Azerbaijan, for instance, established a dedicated Entrepreneurship Development Fund, which had provided loans to over 2,500 projects by October 2023, with 97 % going to small and medium-sized enterprises (Commercial Office of the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in Azerbaijan 2023).

Over time, disparities and heterogeneity among Eurasian countries have become increasingly apparent in terms of economic development, political systems, or cultural diversity. Despite the establishment of regional cooperation organizations in Eurasia, e.g., the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) led by Russia, and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). These organizations have limited capacity to assist member states against the backdrop of conflicts like the Russia-Ukraine conflict. At the societal level, the free movement of people or significant immigration has not added momentum to regional integration. Most immigrants find it difficult to integrate into local societies and send a large portion of their income back home to support their families.

Although social modernization varies between early adopters and latecomers, there is no optimal model; rather, there are varying degrees of rationality in choices and diversity in paths. Due to differences in national conditions and the varying intensity of economic reforms, the social modernization of Eurasian countries is gradually diverging. While learning from and adopting experiences from other countries, each country recognizes the need to consider its own cultural traditions and social realities and choose modernization paths that best suit their national contexts.

3.2 A Period of Increasing Social Conflicts

Currently, most Eurasian countries are entering a phase characterized by heightened social conflicts. Issues such as widening wealth gaps, corruption among officials, persistently high unemployment rates, social stratification, lagging social security systems, and ethnic and religious conflicts imply that in the coming period, Eurasian countries’ social domains will face a series of complex challenges. The most significant among these are:

1. Inter-ethnic confrontations: This is a prevalent social issue in some Eurasian countries, often escalating to the political level. An extreme example occurred in June 2010 in southern Kyrgyzstan, where deadly clashes erupted between Kyrgyz and Uzbek ethnic groups. Similarly, in February 2020 in Jambyl Region, Kazakhstan, clashes between Kazakh and Tungani ethnic groups resulted in dozens of casualties. Local media attributed these conflicts to deliberate efforts by certain political forces and criminal gangs to exacerbate tensions among ethnic groups, aiming to undermine social harmony and stability.

2. Inter-sectarian conflicts: In Central Asia, where over 80 % of the population is Muslim, there are also significant numbers of adherents to Eastern Orthodoxy, Christianity, Judaism, and various Islamic sects, some of which have extremist tendencies. Some countries have hundreds of religious organizations with conflicts that are difficult to reconcile.

3. Conflicts among different social groups: As economic transition becomes more challenging, the social costs have correspondingly increased. Divisions and conflicts between social groups based on regional, occupational, or income disparities have become increasingly common.

4. Social conflicts due to state opposition: Conflicts arising from interstate tensions contribute to social unrest. For instance, the Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh has fueled mutual hostility among the populations of the two countries. The Russia-Ukraine conflict has also divided Eurasian countries, leading to societal divisions where older generations mostly support Russia while younger generations sympathize more with Ukraine.

According to statistics from the Eurasian Economic Union, countries like Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan face significant wealth disparities and high unemployment rates, posing considerable pressure on social stability. All three countries have experienced serious social unrest. To prevent severe social conflicts that could threaten political stability and even the legitimacy of ruling groups, some authorities in these countries have taken relatively straightforward methods such as suppression. Others strengthen dialogue between the government and the populace to mitigate larger political risks. However, authorities often assume a role more akin to a judge rather than a mediator, which can lead to direct confrontation with certain social groups. For example, in Central Asia there is a tough stance toward non-state religious organizations, placing some Muslims in direct opposition to the authorities.

3.3 Ensuring the Well-Being of the People as a Fundamental Goal

Eurasian countries prioritize improving the well-being of their populations as a crucial policy goal, backed by attractive medium-to-long-term plans. However, in practice, addressing the significant wealth gap is paramount to laying a solid foundation for comprehensive modernization. Take the region’s economic powerhouse, Kazakhstan, as an example: in 2020, the wealthiest 1 % of Kazakhstani citizens controlled 29 % of the national wealth, whereas the bottom 50 % only possessed 5.5 %. In 2021, Kazakhstan’s Gini coefficient stood at 0.29 according to World Bank data, though experts estimate it could be as high as 0.4–0.5 or more, highlighting the stark wealth disparity (CCPIT Representative Office in Kazakhstan 2022). Despite leading in GDP growth rates and per capita GDP among Eurasian countries, Kazakhstan still has a considerable distance to achieve its modernization goals.

Some Eurasian countries have fallen into a vicious cycle during modernization, primarily due to prioritizing economic growth over improving living standards. The increasingly polarized wealth gap undermines public confidence in fairness and justice, leading to accumulated dissatisfaction. Diminished consumer demand among residents further dampens domestic market vitality, thereby negatively impacting economic growth. This situation reduces the government’s capacity to provide social welfare, while growing public discontent threatens political stability.

Consequently, recent reforms in some Eurasian countries have garnered increasing social support, emphasizing the promotion of social modernization. Strategies such as the New Kazakhstan and New Uzbekistan development agendas focus on continuously improving social security systems. These include raising minimum wage levels, pension amounts, and unemployment relief standards. For instance, in 2019, Kazakhstan’s President Tokayev put into practice the concept of a listening state that shifts from “a state for itself” to “a state for the people”, with the aim of establishing a more just society (Путь Токаева, 2023). Following the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020, Kazakhstan increased retirement pensions by 10 % and waived taxes on small and medium-sized enterprises. The minimum wage in Kazakhstan was raised from 60,000 tenge annually to 70,000 tenge. For those in the social insurance system, unemployment allowance was increased to 45 % of average monthly income. Starting January 1, 2024, Kazakhstan launched the National Fund for Children program, transferring 50 % of annual investment income from the National Fund into special savings accounts for youth. This will enable them to use these savings for housing and education upon reaching adulthood.

In September 2022, Kazakhstan established the National Kurultai to facilitate dialogue and strengthen connections between the government and society, involving regional representatives, parliamentarians, government officials, industry representatives, and other public figures. New policies in education reform include expanding pre-school education coverage, constructing new schools, and improving the social status and compensation of educators. In July 2022, Uzbekistan issued a presidential decree on the Strategy for Social Protection, expanding the coverage of social assistance programs, enhancing mandatory social security levels, and increasing relief efforts for impoverished individuals and families.