Khabarovsk Territory sports infrastructure: development trends

Фотографии: 

PhD, Professor V.P. Lepeshev1
Dr.Hab., Professor S.V. Galitsyn1
1Far Eastern State Academy of Physical Culture, Khabarovsk

 

Keywords: Khabarovsk Territory, sport infrastructure, positioning, Far Eastern Federal District, Russian Federation.

Background. Local physical culture and sport processes are largely determined by the regional specifics and lifestyles of significant influence on the physical development i.e. the motor domain formation and development process of the local residents. This holds true for the Khabarovsk Territory which is ranked among the most climatically and geographically challenging Russian regions by many analysts. The relevant regional specificity needs to be taken into account, in our opinion, when the relevant national and local sporting policies are designed – since the sport infrastructure development and maintenance costs may be inefficient in the low-populated areas and, hence, the policy inefficiency may largely hamper progress in the efforts to balance the national physical culture and sports sector development across the regions – including the progress of the projects launched under the Territory Physical Culture and Sports Sector Development Concept. A special emphasis in the project designs is to be made on fair assessments of the sport infrastructure development needs and public demand for the infrastructure versus the relevant social standards and actual demands for physical education and sports in the areas.

We believe, however, that studies of the sport infrastructure development trends – with the sport facilities being categorised by their types and missions – from only one viewpoint (i.e. in the context of the regional interests) with no consideration for the upstream interconnected development factors (the inter-regional and federal ones) may be at least inefficient for an objective rating of the sport infrastructure development situation and needs. The present study was initiated within the frame of the consolidated research project of Far Eastern State Academy of Physical Culture “Institutional, legal, resources and information provision for the local physical culture, sport and tourism sector”.

Objective of the study was to analyse the Khabarovsk Territory sport infrastructure development process trends in the period of 2001-2015.

Methods and structure of the study. For the purposes of the analysis, we processed statistical data from reports of the Russian Statistics Agency, namely 30 relevant Federal Statistic Reports #1-FK RF and #1-FK Khabarovsk Territory Reports for the period of 2001-2015 [1, 2]. We applied an integrative approach to assess the relative contributions of the Khabarovsk Territory sport infrastructure in the sport assets of the Far Eastern Federal District and Russian Federation.

Study results and discussion. On the whole, the study found a positive development trend as verified by the study data for the subject period of 2001-2015. Among other things, the total sport assets for the period of 2001-2005 were found to increase by 178 units (10.3%); and by the years of 2010 and 2015 the numbers increased by 703 units (40.8%) and 1163 units (67.5%), respectively, versus the starting (2001) level. The shares of the Khabarovsk Territory sport assets in the total assets of the Russian Federation in the years of 2001, 2005 and 2010 were estimated to grow to 0.86%, 0.98% and 1.02%, respectively, i.e. the contribution of the Khabarovsk Territory has been on a permanent rise. (It should be noted that population of the Khabarovsk Territory has always been second to the one of Primorsky Krai, and the share of its population in the Russian total has been on the fall for the whole period – from 1.0% in 2001 to 0.9% in 2015).

Contribution of the Khabarovsk Territory sport assets to the total sport assets of the Far Eastern Federal District was estimated at 19.3% in 2001 with the Territory being ranked third by this rate in the district after the Primorsky Krai and Amur Region. In the year of 2005 this rate dropped to 18.3% with the Territory being still ranked the third; and in 2010 the asset rate increased to 20.4% moving the Territory to the second place in the Far Eastern Federal District; and the growth continued till 2015 putting the Territory sport asset rate to 22.6%, with the Territory still holding the second place in the Far Eastern Federal District in this aspect. These data demonstrate the Khabarovsk Territory sport assets and their contribution to the national sport assets being on the rise for the study period.

Having analysed the growth trend of the categorised Khabarovsk Territory sport facilities, we found the following: the numbers of the 1500-plus-seat stadiums have dropped from 21 in 2001 and 2005 to 15 in 2010 (minus 28.6%) and 13 in 2015 (minus 38.1% versus the 2001 level). The shares of such Khabarovsk Territory stadiums in the FEFD total were estimated to vary from 19.6% in 2001 and 2005 (2-3 place in the FEFD) to only 14.0% in 2010 (the 4th place in the FEFD) and 13.3% in 2015 (still the 4th place in the FEFD). The shares of such Khabarovsk Territory stadiums in the RF total were estimated to vary from 0.99% in 2001 to 1.01% in 2005; 0.79% in 2010; and 0.69% in 2015. Therefore, these data are clearly indicative of the Khabarovsk Territory sport infrastructure contribution to the FEFD and Federal totals being on the fall for the period.

Having analysed the development trends of the Khabarovsk Territory surface sport facilities, we arrived to following growth statistics for the period: they grew by 147 units in 2005 versus 2001 (20.2% growth); by 585 units in 2010 (80.25% growth); and 2.2 times by 2015 versus 2001. The shares of the Khabarovsk Territory surface sport facilities in the FEFD total for the period were estimated to grow from 18.7% in 2001 (3rd place) to 18.4% in 2005 (3rd place); 22.3% in 2010 (2nd place); and to 24.7% in 2015 (2nd place). The shares of the Khabarovsk Territory surface sport facilities in the RF total for the period were estimated to grow from 0.75% in 2001 to 0.77% in 2005, to 1.01 in 2010; and to 1.07% in 2015. Therefore, these data are indicative of the Khabarovsk Territory surface sport infrastructure contribution to the FEFD and Federal totals being on the rise for the period, with the actual supply of the surface sport infrastructure versus the national standard estimated at 35.0% for the Khabarovsk Territory; 30.5% for the FEFD and 30.2% for the RF on the whole as of 2015.

Having analysed the development trends of the Khabarovsk Territory indoor facilities, we found the progress being contradictory at times. Thus, in the period of 2001 to 2005, the numbers of indoor facilities were on the fall by 13 or 2.7% followed by some growth in 2005-2010 by 33 or 7.0%; and further growth in 2010-2015 by 44 or 8.7% (versus 2001). On the whole, the number of indoor facilities in the Territory was estimated to grow by 64 units and 13.2% for the period of 2001 to 2015. The share of the Khabarovsk Territory indoor facilities in the FEFD total for the period was estimated at 15.9% in 2001 (the 4th place) and grew to 18.4% in 2005 (the 3rd place); followed by a drop to 13.3% in 2010 (the 4th place); and a growth to 14.6% in 2015, albeit it was still the 4th the place in the district. The share of the Khabarovsk Territory indoor facilities in the RF total for the period was estimated at 0.84% in 2001; 0.75% in 2005; 0.69% in 2010 and 0.76% in 2015. The actual supply of the indoor facilities versus the national standard was estimated at 49.7% for the Khabarovsk Territory; 73.3% for the FEFD and 60.5% for the RF on the whole as of 2015. These data are indicative of the Khabarovsk Territory authorities giving due priority to the indoor sport infrastructure development as compared to the other FEFD territories. The progress is further confirmed by the statistical contributions of the Khabarovsk Territory indoor sport assets to the RF total that was estimated at 0.87% in 2002 followed by 0.75% in 2005; 0.69% in 2010; and 0.75% in 2015.

The situation is somewhat different with the Khabarovsk Territory swimming pools. Having analysed their variation data for the period, we found that their numbers have grown from 40 to 63 for 2001-2015 (the growth of 23 or 57.5%). The share of the Khabarovsk Territory swimming pools in the FEFD total for the period was estimated at 31.5% in 2001 (1st place); 29.0% in 2005 (1st place), 25.1% in 2010 (1st place) and 30.0% in 2015 (1st place). The share of the Khabarovsk Territory swimming pools in the RF total for the period was estimated at 1.55% in 2002; 1.29% in 2005, 1.09% in 2010 and 1.21% in 2015. Despite some fall in the Territory share in the RF total for the period, the supply rate is still the highest for the district, with the actual supply of the swimming pools versus the national standard estimated at 13.4% (2nd place in the FEFD) versus 9.6% for the FEFD and 10.2% for the RF on the whole as of 2015.

Having analysed the data on the Khabarovsk Territory ski bases, we found the following negative development trend: their numbers have dropped by 14 in the period of 2001 to 2005; followed by further drop by 3 in 2005-2010. In 2015, there were only 18 ski bases in the Territory versus 35 back in 2001 that mean minus 17 bases or 48.6% fall. The share of the Khabarovsk Territory ski bases in the FEFD total for the period was estimated at 27.1% in 2001 (1st place in the FEFD) versus 17.9% in 2005 (3rd place). The share of the Khabarovsk Territory ski bases in the RF total for the period was estimated at 1.02% in 2002; 0.66% in 2005; 0.59% in 2010; and 0.61% in 2015; i.e. has been on the fall. The study data demonstrate that this negative development may be of hampering effect on the skiing sport progress in the Territory.

Having analysed the statistical data on the Khabarovsk Territory shooting sport facilities, we found the following development trend: in 2001-2007 their numbers sagged by 7 or 15.9%; followed by a growth of 45.9% in 2008-2015. On the whole, their number has grown by 10 or 22.7% for the period of 2001 to 2015. The share of the Khabarovsk Territory shooting sport facilities in the FEFD total for the period was estimated at 20.7% in 2001 (3rd place in the FEFD); 18.7% in 2005 (still the 3rd place); and 25.6% in 2010 (2nd place). The share of the Khabarovsk Territory shooting sport facilities in the RF total for the period was estimated at 0.43% in 2002; 0.40% in 2005; 0.65% in 2010; and 0.76% in 2015, i.e. has been on the rise.

Having analysed the statistical data on the Khabarovsk Territory sport facilities peaking throughput capacity, we found the following persistent growth trend: 6.5% growth in 2001-2005; and 82.5% growth for 2001-2010; and 2.1 times growth for 2001-2015. The share of the Khabarovsk Territory sport facilities peaking throughput capacity in the FEFD total for the period was estimated at 20.7% in 2001 (3rd place in the FEFD) versus 18.7% in 2005 (3rd place); 25.6% in 2010 (2nd place), and 26.9% in 2015 (1st place). The share of the Khabarovsk Territory sport facilities peaking throughput capacity in the RF total for the period was estimated at 0.97% in 2002; 0.92% in 2005; 1.34% in 2010; and 1.30% in 2015. These data are indicative of the Territory progress in this component confirmed by the actual supply of the sport facilities peaking throughput capacity versus the national standard being on the rise and estimated at 42.0% for the Khabarovsk Territory; 33.6% for the FEFD and 29.9% for the RF on the whole.

Conclusion. The study data and analyses demonstrate the generally positive Khabarovsk Territory sport infrastructure development trends, with its sporting positions in the FEFD and RF getting stronger with time. On the whole, the valid Khabarovsk Territory Physical Culture and Sports Development Strategy for the period up to 2020 may be successful in the local sport infrastructure development projects conditional on the following: due synergy of the governmental and communal sector management entities all over the region; more close and efficient cooperation in the local resource mobilisation for rehabilitation of the existing and construction of new sport bases and facilities; and supply of highly competent human resource to the sector.

References

  1. Svodnye godovye formy federalnogo gosudarstvennogo statisticheskogo nablyudeniya #1-FK «Svedeniya o fizicheskoy kulture i sporte» za 2001-2015 gg [Consolidated annual state federal statistical monitoring forms No. 1-FK "Information on Physical Culture and Sport" for 2001-2015].
  2. Svodnye godovye formy Khabarovskogo kraevogo statisticheskogo nablyudeniya #1-FK «Svedeniya o fizicheskoy kulture i sporte» za 2001-2015 gg [Consolidated annual Khabarovsk Territory statistical monitoring forms No. 1-FK "Information on physical culture and sport" for 2001-2015].

Corresponding author: galizin74@mail.ru

Abstract

The study was designed to analyse the regional statistical data reported by the Russian Statistics Agency to profile the Khabarovsk Territory sport infrastructure development process as verified by a variety of progress rates for the period of 2001 to 2015. We applied an integrated approach to obtain comprehensive data on the subject and expand our knowledge of the Khabarovsk Territory physical education and sports infrastructure situation and evolution in the relevant interregional (Far Eastern Federal District) and Federal (Russian) contexts.

The study has found some positive trends in terms of the growing numbers of major sport assets (sport grounds, indoor sport facilities, swimming pools, shooting ranges etc.) in the Territory; and in the peaking service capacity of the sport assets; plus a few negative trends in the numbers of the 1500-plus-seat stadiums and skiing sport bases. On the whole, however, the study found positive changes in the local communal demand for sport facilities being increasingly satisfied.

The authors make a conclusion that the valid Khabarovsk Territory Physical Culture and Sports Development Strategy for the period up to 2020 may be successful in the local sport infrastructure development projects conditional on the following: due synergy of the governmental and communal sector management entities all over the region; more close and efficient cooperation in the local resource mobilisation for rehabilitation of the existing and construction of new sport bases and facilities; and supply of highly competent human resource to the sector.