Social disorientation of budget support for investment projects

Purpose: of the study is to identify factors that hinder budget support for investment projects aimed at combating poverty due to the deprivation of economically accessible social infrastructure (deprivation poverty).
Methods: the work used traditional methods of scientific analysis, as well as an interdisciplinary approach characteristic of the study of social well-being problems in the context of the availability of social benefits created by social infrastructure facilities. The research is based on the application of social goal-setting documents, methodological documents regulating investment activities and budget support, Rosstat data, EIS «Procurement», EMISS, GIS «Electronic Budget».
Results: the identification of factors of social well-being was carried out and the justification of the level of deprivation poverty in relation to the available social infrastructure was carried out. The necessity of independent regulation of the market of the poor suffering from such deprivations is confirmed. Based on the analysis of methodological tools for assessing the feasibility of budgetary support for investment projects in social infrastructure, methodological problems have been identified and the inapplicability of the existing approach for the market under study have been proved. Proposals are formulated to change approaches to calculating the budgetary efficiency of investment projects aimed at the infrastructural development of social industries.
Conclusions and Relevance: a growing number of the deprived poor are suffering from a lack of supply of economically accessible social infrastructure and services. The study shows that the involvement of private investment in the creation of such facilities, taking into account the need for non-market pricing, will require changes in the methodological approach of the state to budget support for investment projects. It is necessary to abandon the percentage and return principles and replace them with compensatory ones for servicing vulnerable categories. The social development of the country should be based on the social well-being of all segments of the population, without extreme gaps among them. For sustainable development, flexible methodological tools are needed, based on the dependence of the amount of budget support on the number of social effects generated by the project.

1. Grusky D., Hill J. (eds.). Inequality in the 21st Century: A Reader. N.Y.: Routledge, 2018. 506 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429499821 (In Eng.)

2. Voronin G.L. Objective and subjective indicators of societal wellbeing. Sociological journal. 2009; (3):41–54. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/pbdqwh (In Russ.)

3. Baturin N.A., Bashkatov S.A., Gafarova N.V. The theoretical model of personal welfare. Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Series “Psychology”. 2013; 6(4):4–14. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/rrqtob (In Russ.)

4. Graham C. Subjective Well-being in Economics. In: The Oxford Handbook of Well-being and Public Policy. Adler M.D., Fleurbaey M. (eds.). N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2016. P. 424–450. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199325818.013.14 (In Eng.)

5. Chernysh M.F. Factors influence on the state of happiness in the contemporary Russian society. Sociologicheskaja nauka i social'naja praktika. 2019; 7(2(26)):9–33. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/wxupvf. https://doi.org/10.19181/snsp.2019.7.2.6407 (In Russ.)

6. Shilova V.A. Classification of communicative strategies in the implementation of management decisions. Sociologicheskaja nauka i social'naja praktika. 2019; 7(3(27)):136–150. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/hbsffu. https://doi.org/10.19181/snsp.2019.7.3.6694 (In Russ.)

7. Karabchuk T.S., Salnikova D.V. Objective and subjective well-being: a comparative analysis of Central Asian countries, Russia and Belarus. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya Sociological research. 2016; (5(358)):96–109. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/vzsjpv (In Russ.)

8. Graham C., Pettinato S. Frustrated Achievers: Winners, Losers and Subjective Well-Being in New Market Economies. Journal of Development Studies. 2002; 38(4):100–140. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.285811 (In Eng.)

9. Chernysh M.F. Social well-being and health. In: Information and Analytical Bulletin (INAB). 2020; (1):54–74. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/sdchvn. https://doi.org/10.19181/INAB.2020.1.4 (In Russ.)

10. Sushko P.E. Social well-being of the Russian population in the context of accessibility of social benefits. Information and Analytical Bulletin (INAB). 2020; (1):39–53. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/vduvxm. https://doi.org/10.19181/INAB.2020.1.3 (In Russ.)

11. Grishina E.E. The material deprivation rate for households with children in Russia and European countries. Financial Journal. 2017; (4(38)):47–55. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/zddsmn (In Russ.)

12. Korchagina I.I., Prokofieva L.M., Ter-Akopov S.A. European experience in measuring poverty and social exclusion: AROPE index. Population. 2019; 22(3):162–175. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/wawawe. https://doi.org/10.19181/1561-7785-2019-00034 (In Russ.)

13. Shabanov V.L. Deprivation approach in studying poverty. Theory and practice of social development. 2020; (4(146)):13–16. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/qfimng. https://doi.org/10.24158/tipor.2020.4.1 (In Russ.)

14. Tikhonova N.E. Income stratification in Russia: cross-country and dynamic analysis. Sociological Journal. 2017; 23(4):31–50. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/ylbejs. https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2017.23.4.5527 (In Russ.)

15. Goffe N.V., Monusova G.A. Well-being: reality its perception. South Russian Journal of Social Sciences. 2018; 19(3):21–36. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/khueks. https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-19-3-21-36 (In Russ.)

16. Tikhonova N.E. Life success and social status factors in the minds of Russians. Bulletin of the Institute of Sociology. 2018; 9(4(27)):11–43. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/ywagzv. https://doi.org/10.19181/vis.2018.27.4.536 (In Russ.)

17. Albert M. Capitalisme contre capitalisme [Capitalism vs. capitalism]. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1991. 315 p. (In French) (Russ. ed.: Albert M. Capitalism versus Capitalism. St. Petersburg: The School of Economics, 1998. 296 p.)

18. Kapelyushnikov R.I. Inequality: how not to primitivize the problem (critical notes): preprint WP3/2016/06. Moscow: Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics. WP3 series «Labor Market Problems», 2016. 40 p. URL: https://wp.hse.ru/data/2016/10/31/1111320083/WP3_2016_06________.pdf (accessed: 17.04.2023) (In Russ.)

19. Bessonova O.E. Institutional dilemma of modern Russia. Economic of contemporary Russia. 2018; 4(83):23- 36. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/jvdkbe (In Russ.)

20. Yakovlev A.A. Where is global capitalism headed? Universe of Russia. Sociology. Ethnology. 2021; 30(3):29– 50. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/bfnutk. https://doi.org/10.17323/1811-038X-2021-30-3-29-50 (In Russ.)

21. Gavrilova I.A. Monitoring the practice of applying laws on the contract system and prospects for their improvement. Monitoring of law enforcement. 2019; (3(32)):36–42. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/obvcax. https://doi.org/10.21681/2226-0692-2019-3-36-42 (In Russ.)

22. Belozor F.I. Public procurement: harmonization of fair competition and economic efficiency. State and municipal management. Scholar notes. 2021; (1):93–101. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/dlftbi. https://doi.org/10.22394/2079-1690-2021-1-1-93-101 (In Russ.)

23. Keynes J.M. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. San Diego: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1991. 426 p. URL: https://archive.org/details/generaltheoryofe00keyn_0 (accessed: 20.03.2023) (In Eng.)

24. Hayek F.A. Profits, interest and investment, and other essays on the theory of industrial fluctuations. London: Routledge & K. Paul, 1939. 284 p. URL: https://archive.org/details/profitsinteresti0000haye (accessed: 20.03.2023) (In Eng.)

25. Abazieva K.G. Methodological approaches to the social programs effectiveness assessment. Terra Economicus. 2011; 9(1):55–59. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/nefcpf (In Russ.)

26. Anheier H.K., Leat D. Performance Measurement in Philanthropic Foundations: The Ambiguity of Success and Failure. London: Routledge, 2018. 216 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315161631 (In Eng.)

27. Fernandez K., Tremblay-Boire J. Raising Money for Government and Connecting Community: The Isomorphic Rise of Nonprofit Police Foundations Across the U.S. Public Performance & Management Review. 2021; 44(6):1422–1454. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2021.1912786 (In Eng.)

28. Livshits V.N., Livshits S.V. Poverty and inequality in income of the population in Russia and abroad. Part 2. Economics of contemporary Russia. 2018; 1(80):49–68. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/yvespd (In Russ.)

29. Tikhonova N.E., Lezhnina Yu.P., Mareeva S.V. at al. The model of income stratification of Russian society: dynamics, factors, cross-country comparisons. St. Petersburg: Nestor-History, 2018. 368 p. URL: https://publications.hse.ru/mirror/pubs/share/direct/226871178 (accessed: 17.04.2023) (In Russ.)

30. Van Parijs P., Vanderborght Y. Basic Income: A Radical Proposal for a Free Society and a Sane Economy. Cambridge (MA) and London, England: Harvard University Press, 2017. 400 p. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674978072 (In Eng.)