The research is aimed at investigating the social organisation processes and the problems of organic solidarity formation in the youth environment.

Methods. The author applies for the mass formal and qualitative sociological research that approves the types and reasons of social activity among representatives of different youth groups. Empirical investigations named «Youth Policy and Social Activity of Youth» were carried out in the south cities of Tyumen region in January-February, 2014. 859 people took part in this survey. The series of the qualitative survey was multistage, quota-share representing young people from 18 to 30 years with age-gender characteristics and settlement place. The methods involve qualitative investigation of focus-groups; and the method of narrative interviews. Data analysis was based on Emile Durkheim’s theoretical concept of social solidarity enriched by the term «social capital» in modern interpretation.

Results. The research findings demonstrate a gap between asserted and real image of socially active and socially passive youth. Youth behavioral responses within the context of social solidarity are analyzed. The youth imputation of general, global «social passivity» is not proved by empirical verification. The author notes that the most attractive activities for youth are sports, creative projects and tourism; young people like least being involved in political events, building mutually beneficial cooperation relationships and meeting planning with representatives of different cultures and nationalities. Communication, social relations, social supports and altruistic motives (social benefit) are presented foremost in the hierarchy of social activity motives.

Scientific novelty. The author classifies social behavior attitudes of today’s youth. The author updates the terms «organic/inorganic solidarity», «social intercourse» and «social capital» by reference to specific empirical data. The possibilities of self-presentation analysis of young social groups are considered.

The practical significance. The research outcomes reveal the disadvantages and failures of contemporary educational system, theoretically-predicted social consequences between differences of verbally formulated and fabulously distributed image of «socially active» and «socially passive» youth.

1. Veselov Ju. V., Kapustkina E. V., Minina V. N. i dr. Jekonomika i sociologija doverija. [Economics and sociology of trust]. St.‑Petersburg: Sociological Society. 2004. (In Russian)

2. Golub G. B., Fishman I. S., Fishman L. I. Standarty tret’ego pokolenija: chemu uchit’ i chto proverjat’ na vyhode. [Standards of the third generation: what to teach and what to check]. Voprosy obrazovanija. [Problems of Education]. 2010. № 3. (In Russian)

3. Djurkgejm Je. Sociologija. Ee predmet, metod, prednaznachenie [Sociology: object, method, purpose]. Moscow: Canon, 1995. (In Russian)

4. Krupec Ja. N. Studencheskaja molodezh’ v SMI, osobennosti reprezentacii. [The ttudent youth in the media. Particular qualities of representation]. Sociologicheskie issledovanija. [Sociological research]. 2013. № 10. P. 61–69. (In Russian)

5. Romashkina G. F., Pecherkina I. F. Grazhdanskaja aktivnost’ molodezhi Tjumenskogo regiona. [Youth civic engagement in Tyumen region]. Vestnik Tjumenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. [Bulletin of the Tyumen State University]. 2012. № 8. P. 144–151. (In Russian)

6. Savinkov V. I. Nacional’nyj proekt «Obrazovanie»: faktor sodejstvija modernizacii sistemy vysshego obrazovanija/ [National Project "Education": promoting factor in the higher education modernization]. Universitetskoe upravlenie. [University Management]. 2011. № 1. (In Russian)

7. Fedotov L. P. Vnejekonomicheskij kapital i ego rol’ v ponimanii obshhestva. [Non-economic capital and its role in understanding society] // Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie [Knowledge. Understanding. Skill]. 2006. № 2. P. 230–235. (In Russian)

8. Shigaeva V. Neblagonadezhnyh soschitat’! [Unreliable is necessary to count!]. Nezavisimaya Gazeta. 15.03.2011. (In Russian)

9. Putnam R. Making Democracy Work. Civic Tradition in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993. P. 45. (Translated from English)