to a decrease in project activity of CATU, the actual
curtailment of the nuclear project at the level at which
it was implemented in the USSR [... the nuclear
power plant was practically curtailed under the
START agreements, there is no talk of any capacity
conservation, especially about increasing
productivity. Rosatom enterprises have reduced their
staff by a multiple ... AEC is in fact a side direction,
but it is not developing as well as we would like ...],
[... Russian-style nuclear power plants have demand
in the market, but Americans and Europeans are not
eager to let us go there, they have their own
technologies and their own fuel elements ...], [...
CATUs are in crisis, specialists are fleeing, unity and
the spirit of cohesion are less and less, mainly among
old-timers ...], etc.
The respondents' assessment of the ways of
development of the CATU is, as noted earlier, an
indicator that "allows us to understand what results,
what new meanings the concept of the existence of
the CATU is filled with. What is it expressed in taking
into account the changes that are taking place today,
that is, how the value core of corporatism is
transformed taking into account changes in time,
various parameters, etc. In addition, we have
introduced the concepts of the expected and optimal
development of the CATU: expected from the subject
of the state, authorities, etc. – that is, from the outside,
as well as optimal, according to the actor. Thus, it is
clearly visible how the subjects and the actor of social
management perceive the practical expression and
refraction of corporate values, taking into account the
current situation, as well as what expectations are
placed on this process"(Karachkov, 2017).
Respondents assessed the possibility (expected
development model) of three main options for the
development of CATU in the present time:
− development according to the "Soviet scheme",
an attempt to return to the past, taking into
account existing opportunities, the current
situation, etc.: CATUs in this case return to the
"old" life;
− reformation with the change of the status of the
city. There are a lot of options here: partial
opening of the city while maintaining a
protected perimeter around the production
complex, complete removal of the status and
opening of the city, an attempt to make
ordinary Russian cities out of CATUs, adapt
the population and infrastructure, debug
budgeting, try to include cities in regional
development programs, etc.;
− an innovative "reboot", the purpose of which is
to fill the CATU as the most suitable socio-
technological platforms with a new large-scale
idea, with the adjustment of infrastructure,
filling in the missing human, financial,
scientific, technological, logistics and other
resources. In other words, "while preserving
the old, we supplement it with the new", when
a large-scale or a number of large-scale state
projects arise on the basis of CATU.
The respondents' expectations of what kind of
development model the management entity
(represented by statesmen) will choose for CATU are
shown in diagram 5. It shows that in 2012 this issue
was rather open for residents. This is evidenced by a
large percentage of those who found it difficult to
answer (38%). The most anticipated alternative was
the opening of the city and the removal of the status
of CATU (24%). The possibilities of an innovative
reboot or a return to the old model were less
considered as expected (18% and 20%, respectively).
According to the guide interview, this is due to the
general instability of the situation in the country, the
ambiguity of the position of the authorities (the
government, the president, Rosatom State
Corporation) about the role of CATU in modern
conditions and the tasks that they are facing in 2012
[... we are sitting on the wreckage of the empire, it is
unclear where we are going at all ...], [...Rosatom
optimizes costs, roughly speaking, reduces and
commercializes everything that was done in Soviet
times ...it hurts to look at it], [...I don't see a clear line
of leadership about the CATU, it feels like they
themselves don't understand what to do, maybe there
are just a lot of other problems and didn't get round
to it ...].
Diagram 5 also shows that the situation has
changed significantly in 2021. The number of
respondents who found it difficult to answer is
decreasing by 20% compared to 2012 (from 38% to
18%). According to respondents, the authorities are
considering options for preserving the old and at the
same time introducing "something new" (32%), or
restoring the former functionality of the CATU, as in
Soviet times (27%). The opening of the city is
considered as the least expected result at the moment
(24%).
These guide interviews explain this quantitative
distribution of opinions. In 2021, experts are looking
more clearly at the prospects for the development of
CATU, although they express a lot of doubts. [...now
is the time when CATU sites can be used for new bold
projects on a global scale, to build not only
Electrograd in Siberia, but also to revive Nuclear
power plants in the Urals, for example ...], [...we have
such an infrastructure that you can safely implement