Demographic "compression" of rural territories in the cross-border regions of the Far East

The article identifies the mechanisms and consequences of the demographic «compression» of rural areas in the Republic of Buryatia and Zabaykalsky Krai as key cross-border regions of the Russian Far East. The study is based on an analysis of data from Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat), EMISS, and the results of the All-Russian Population Censuses. The methods of comparative, structural and dynamic analysis were used. Since 1990, the population of the Zabaykalsky Krai has decreased by 29.1%, and in the Republic of Buryatia - by 7.6%(with further acceleration after 2015). The rural total fertility rate in the Republic of Buryatia decreased by 34.5% (to 1.628), and in Zabaykalsky Krai by 15.0% (to 1.847). The share of the rural population in Buryatia remains high (40.9%), having decreased by only 0.6 percentage points, while in the Zabaykalsky Krai it decreased by 3.8 percentage points. (up to 30.2%). Between 2010 and 2025, the number of rural settlements in Zabaykalsky Krai decreased by 45%, and in the Republic of Buryatia by 3.5%. Life expectancy for the rural population in Zabaykalsky Krai is 64.8 years, which is 7 years lower than the national rural average. The rural territories of the cross-border regions of the Far East are in a state of sustained demographic «compression», which is reflected not only in population decline and increased migration outflow but also in qualitative changes: growing imbalances in the age structure, weakening reproductive potential, and transformation of the rural settlement network. In most rural areas of border districts, migration loss is much greater than natural decline, indicating that migration is the main driver of demographic compression. Regional models of demographic «compression» are identified: an extensive model in Zabaykalsky Krai and an intensive model in the Republic of Buryatia. The research shows that overcoming demographic «compression” requires differentiated measures that take into account the identified models. The main conclusions and recommendations can be used by legislative and executive authorities in developing programs for the socio-economic development of rural areas and the development of agriculture.