importance is the extent to which the utilized methodologies are substantiated and whether robust procedures for monitoring and assessment of changes — both intended and incidental effects arising within the course of a project or program’s execution — are in place. For NGOs, particularly when projects are financed externally — by grant-making entities or social investors — activities are regularly subjected to rigorous assessment and oversight. Conversely, when a project or program is initiated by a business entity, it lacks an overseeing body that would be obliged to pay close attention to the level of proof underpinning the practices utilized. If such guidance is not included in the standard, CSR programs may turn into a ‘space for experiments on people and nature.’

Additionally, the expert opines that it is essential to embed within the standard the concept of an assessment model. This pivotal term reflects the anticipated process by which results will be evaluated: how data on achieved changes will be collected, and who will be involved in these evaluative undertakings and how, at what stage. According to Natalia, the practice of soliciting assessment services from auditing firms for evaluating social impact is exceptionally uncommon among social investors or non-governmental organization. The mere fact that figures have been calculated correctly is unlikely to offer any significant insights or new knowledge to the project team or organization, particularly in terms of its sustainable development. When discussing an external, independent ‘evaluating’ party that implies a ‘mutually beneficial’ partnership, one should keep in mind universities, where expertise, researchers, and proven scientific approaches can be found.

“A standard will truly become truly significant and valuable when it transcends the prevailing narrative of ‘we’ll grade you — and you might get an F’ to enhance companies’ awareness of how they might further reflect their contributions to sustainable development in all its depth and beauty,” concludes Natalia Gladkikh. — “Once the standard encompasses varied approaches that enable any organization, regardless of size, to ‘see itself’ in a newer, more splendid light.” Described approaches and methods will assist companies in establishing their internal evaluative models, considering the unique aspects of their activities without any retributive implications. The chief advantage should inherently lie in the benefit it presents to the company itself — reveling in the transformations it prompts within the sphere of sustainability.”

In conclusion, Natalia Gladkikh put forth precise recommendations for modifications to be made to the standard. The fundamental point is that all activities conducted within the framework of sustainable development must meet criteria for evidence and validity. Specifically:

1. Issues to be addressed should be distinctly defined and their causes pinpointed, relying on existing data, knowledge from similar endeavors, etc.

2. All implemented programs and projects should describe their target audiences.

3. The action plan should be clearly defined and the relationship between the realized actions and the problems, their causes, as well as the planned results should be obvious, the experience of similar projects, the effectiveness of the chosen approach (social, ecological technology) should be studied.

4. The immediate results, social effects, and social impact should be clearly spelled out for each intervention.

5. The activity planning stage specifies the plan of activities and their results, as well as indicators to conclude on the achievement/ non-achievement of the planned changes.

6. For each project or program implemented within the framework of achieving sustainable development, an evaluation model should be developed, which implies a system of monitoring and evaluation of changes achieved, in accordance with the system of indicators.

7. For each project or program implemented within the framework of achieving sustainable development, it is recommended to calculate an evidence and validity index.

8. The development and implementation of a model for assessing the impact of a sustainable development project/program, reflecting the changes it achieves (achieved), can be carried out by the organization independently or with the involvement of research and other specialized companies, scientific organizations, including those based at research universities.

The recommendations provided are not confined to a specific federal document under development; rather, they are meant to be immediately applicable in real-time across any corporation. This does not, however, diminish their relevance for inclusion in the national Reporting Standard.

We would like to conclude the overview with data from a November 2023 survey by Expert RA rating agency, according to which almost 80 % of non-financial and 60 % of financial companies will be prepared to report on sustainable development at the end of the year.[30] This trend is being noticed and supported by government agencies as well. And it is important that more and more leaders of social change are involved in this work.

Репортажи / Reports

Насколько добрый мой город? Репортаж с конференции

«Про развитие городов и сообществ»

Юлия Вяткина

DOI 10.55140/2782-5817-2024-4-1-26-33

Как меняется работа с местными сообществами, что будет с ними происходить в ближайшем и отдалённом будущем, как партнёрские проекты бизнеса и НКО помогают жителям развивать свои территории и за счёт чего повышается социальная эффективность таких проектов? Об этом и многом другом урбанисты, НКО, футурологи и представители бизнеса говорили на практической конференции «Про развитие городов и сообществ», прошедшей в феврале 2024 года в Москве. Делимся ключевыми тезисами о том, каковы возможные сценарии развития территорий по мнению экспертов.

Юлия Вяткина

Редактор журнала «Позитивные изменения»

ДОБРЫЕ ГОРОДА

В 2023 году Содружество Добрых городов, в которое входит больше 220 территорий, совместно с лабораторией «Гражданская