Natural and Regulative-Imperative in the Spatial Development of Russia

Organic spatial development is possible under the condition of a reasonable combination of naturalness and regulation of spatially conditioned processes and phenomena. In different periods, the ratio of these principles is different. In Soviet times, spatial development was absolutely dominated by comprehensive directive state planning and management. In the 1990s of post-Soviet reforms, there was a sharp turn towards immoderate and spontaneous decentralization of the spatial organization of life. In the 2000s, counter-reforms began a rapid return to the strengthening of state regulation in this area, which in many respects turned out to be excessive in terms of tasks and costs and unjustified in expectations. The meaning and content, tools and planned results of the current state policy of spatial development are concentrated in the “Strategy of Spatial Development of the Russian Federation for the Period up to 2025”, which claims to be a doctrinal document of modern regional policy. Its development and adoption were accompanied by a multitude of expert comments – from unconditionally apologetic to acutely critical. As the deadline for the end of the strategy approaches, a comprehensive assessment of its effectiveness and effectiveness becomes relevant, especially in connection with the preparation of a new strategy until 2030. The authors see the cornerstone drawback of the current strategy in ignoring the systemic nature of the spatial organization of society, which should be interpreted as an anthropogenic megasystem with its inherent systemic features of integrity, structural organization, direct and reverse connections, with a powerful potential for natural self-organization and selfdevelopment, supplemented in the special transitional conditions of post-Soviet spatial transformations by the regulatory influence on them from the outside State. The authors also emphasize that due to the unprecedented post-Soviet transitional spatial realities, it is impossible to count on diligent study and direct borrowing of foreign experience, due to its inadequacy of the modern Russian situation.