Socioligical verification of economic programs and projects: training manual 9786010437531

Table of contents :
UDC LBC Sadyrova
Introduction
Chapter I
Chapter II
Chapter III
Chapter IV
References

Citation preview

AL-FARABI KAZAKH NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

M.S. Sadyrova

SOCIOLIGICAL VERIFICATION OF ECONOMIC PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Training manual

Almaty «Qazaq University» 2019

UDC 316.3/4 LBC 60.54 S 12 Recommended for publication by the Scientific Council of the Faculty of Philosophy and Political Science and RISO of Al-Farabi Kazakh National University (Protocol №2 dated 20.12.2018) Reviewers: Doctor of Sociological sciences, professor G.O. Abdikerova Senior Lecturer, PhD A.B. Sarsenova

S 12

Sadyrova M.S. Socioligical verification of economic programs and projects: training manual / M.S. Sadyrova. – Almaty: Qazaq University, 2019. – 93 p. ISBN 978-601-04-3753-1 The following manual contains information about the conceptual apparatus and the method of verification of social projects. Provided methods of the verification of identity, sociological theory and social programs. The manual was consecrated the following issues: Process of verification, System of verification, Verification of truth in economic theory as a process of rechecking, Verification of the human model in economics, Verification of economic indicators, Methods of verification of the behaviour of young people into the labour market, The principles, priorities and classification of social programme, Characteristics and method of target economic program. Handbook designed for university students and researchers in this field.

UDC 316.3/4 LBC 60.54 ISBN 978-601-04-3753-1

© Sadyrova M.S., 2019 © Al-Farabi KazNU, 2019

Introduction

INTRODUCTION The conceptual framework of the course «sociological verification of economic programs and projects»

Verification (from Latin verifificare – to check; Eng. veryfication; Germ. Verifizierung) is first determined as checking of the validity of theoretical positions establishing the reliability of the latter. Secondly – as the principle of experimental verification, according to which the truth of all statements must be ultimately set by its association with sense-data. Consequently, verification is the test for the truth, establishing credibility, reliability, empirical evidence of theoretical propositions of science by comparing these with the observed objects. This term also denotes the procedure associated with the establishment of the truth of the assertions or hypotheses and matching of received and transmitted data by means of logical methods. In this perspective, verification is characterized as logical and methodological procedure of establishing the truth of scientific hypotheses on the basis of their conformity with empirical data or theoretical positions relevant to the empirical data. The terms «verification» and «validation» are often used in technical literature and are associated with the analysis of the quality of any software. In scientific literature one can find various interpretations of these concepts. The most correct is the following definition: validation and verification are the activities aimed at monitoring the quality of a software product to detect 3

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

errors in it stages early stages of the development. It would seem that these definitions have a common goal. Still, there are differences in the sources, check of the properties, restrictions and regulations, the violation of which may be considered to be a mistake. Verification is the validation of the compliance of software technical documentation with technical specifications, the architecture or domain model. In the «duties» of the term is included also the comparison of the procedure of settlements with the process of their development, regulations and standards. Data verification may be executed to perform matching of the operation of the program with the established standards, requirements, design decisions and user documentation. Primary checking is mandatory for the documents subject to verification and comparison for compliance with the standards and regulations established in the country where the software is used. You must take into account the observation of all sequences of operations. In the event of an error or defect in the program or where a contradiction is observed between the above mentioned documents and the current functioning of the program, the decision on the choice of the instrument of correction should be an individual task solution. In contrast to verification, validation is aimed at checking the compliance of the software being developed or accompanied with the requirements of customers or users. These requirements are often not recorded in any documentation. Therefore, validation is less formalized than verification. This is the process where a representative of the customer or user participates, and an analyst or subject matter expert may be present. In other words, those who can express the specific requirements and real needs of the stakeholders. Verification is the answer to the question «is the software correct?», while validation – «is it the right software?». 4

Introduction

When searching for the answer to the questions posed, it may be found that validation (or certification) in terms of the content matters somewhat more than verification (verification). However, verification is closely related to ensuring control over the quality of the software product. For example, verification of a computer program involves a process in which the goal is to ensure that the requirements of the data obtained in a certain product life cycle satisfy those obtained at the previous stage. If we talk about the verification of the model, then we will focus on checking the correctness of the reflection by this computational model of the required conceptual or mathematical models. When verifying the system code, the source code is analyzed and its compliance with the documentary description is checked. In the verification process, operations containing alternative calculations may be included. Technical and scientific documentation of the new project is compared with the corresponding documentation of the existing project, mandatory testing of the new software product and demonstration of the results is performed. The principle of verification is the scientific criterion proposed by logical positivists (see Positivism), according to which the judgment must be «verifiable» in order to be accepted as «scientific».

5

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

Chapter I

VERIFICATION 1.1 Process of verification At first glance, the verification process seems easy, because sequential logic seems fairly simple. Since the verification process does not go beyond these assumptions, the correlation with the level of school performance is not the proof that mental development tests measure overall intellectual ability. In the process of verification, the operator-controller should restore the missing records after the site administrator has clarified the situation. With standard and non-standard system messages, the controller-controller performs the same operations as the initial entry operator, but with the only difference that erroneous documents may now be returned by the site administrator to the authors. With a very good reaction to errors in the verification process, the first scheme even at the level of photographing the data on punch cards may fail. The correlation of existing theories with the analogues of social reality (i.e., verification of their truth) in sociology is defined as a verification process. For the natural Sciences characteristic is the desire to find or build a simplified model of a complex phenomenon, to study its properties, and then in the process of model verification to transfer the acquired knowledge on a very complex phenomenon. The purpose of the processes of verification and testing is to find all possible errors, but not the proof of their absence. Understanding of this subtle distinction is very important. You need to check the 6

Chapter I. Verification

specifications when they are in a rough shape, since there may be a psychological barrier to improve the document describing the specifications. To prove full correctness, you must also show that disconnect areas define the rules of two functions. In the verification process, alternately you have to compare conditional rules, it is a more convenient separable form of these conditional rules. The process of verification (design) is a phased transformation of the postcondition – bringing it into the entry point. In this reversal there are alternative options when a point has several directions, leading to a nondeterministic choice. According to the report, the first phase of verification consists of three stages. The second stage is the formation of precise definitions of the semantics of the PASCAL language. At the third stage verification of the developed programs is performed. The authors cite a number of comments regarding the verification process. One of the most important parts in the process of verification includes 7th stages. Stage 1 is the verification of documents collected after filling out (forms of a sociological tool) for accuracy, completeness and quality of filling. Along with the correction of mistakes made when filling out the forms of the toolkit, the answers to the open questions of the questionnaire are edited, stylistic errors are fixed, attempts are made to classify them (standardize). Stage 2 is the sample adjustment, i.e. addition of missing data or correction of the sample (conducting additional surveys instead of rejected). When checking the questionnaires or other forms of sociological tools for accuracy, completeness and quality of filling, one should not lose sight of the representativeness of the sample. In other words, after excluding a part of the filled-in forms from processing due to the poor quality of the filling, it is necessary to conduct additional surveys in order for the sample to remain within the estimated range. The third stage is the refinement of the information processing and analysis program. The compilation of initial schemes for processing and analyzing information is carried out at early stages of the study. 7

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

The 4th stage is data coding, i.e. assignment of a numerical code to each piece of information in accordance with a previously developed program (task, instruction). The assigned code is convenient first of all for the planned computer data processing. However, in the case of manual information processing, the use of codes considerably simplifies the work, and also protects against the deliberate distortion of the research results where the personal interest of the information processor is present. The 5th stage is the input of primary information on electronic and paper carriers. At present, the work is certainly focused on the full-scale use of computers. This work is carried out by operators using computer tools, programs that allow you to «compress», archive information, quickly create tables, etc. Special attention here is drawn to the quality of input and correction of errors. The 6th stage is the systematization of homogeneous values, determination of percentage values, grouping, ranking of data by ascending or descending of the characteristic, calculation of arithmetic average, weighted average and other values required for recompression of information, bringing into the state convenient for the nearest longterm analysis. The 7th stage is the design of data in the form of tables, diagrams using other methods of transforming information, increasing its visibility. ‒ Direct verification. ‒ Indirect verification. ‒ Inverse verification. ‒ Secondary Verification. ‒ Duplicate Verification. Verification of the forecast by re-developing it by another method. Verification of the forecast by comparing it with forecasts obtained by other developers. Verification of the forecast by checking the adequacy of the forecast model for the period of forecast retrospection. Verification of the forecast by analytic or logical derivation of the forecast from previously obtained forecasts. Verification of the forecast by comparing it with the assessment of the most competent expert. Methods «verification» or method «transfers» are materially different 8

Chapter I. Verification

and a little more limited, and not as robust or rigorous as the method «validation». Nevertheless, verification is required to verify the capability of the lab to perform the analytical method reliably and precisely for its intended use. Methods of verifications are really performed for compendial methods, where there is already an existing method in a compendium, such as USP, NFBP or EP. It shows or proves that the given lab is capable of performing this particular test reliably and precisely. Method of transfers on the other hand, is performed for validated methods, where the method may have already been validated and it is being transferred to a new laboratory or a new facility. It is a validated method – but there is no need to ensure that the lab is capable of performing this method. There is a process that is to be followed and in place, to ensure that the transferring lab is able to perform the test reliably and accurately.

1.2 System of verification System Verification is a set of actions used to check the correctness of any element, such as a system element, a system, a document, a service, a task, a requirement, etc. These types of actions are planned and carried out throughout the life cycle of the system. Verification is a generic term that needs to be instantiated within the context it occurs. As a process, verification is a transverse activity to every life cycle stage of the system. In particular, during the development cycle of the system, the verification process is performed in parallel with the system definition and system realization processes and is applied to any activity and any product resulting from the activity. The activities of every life cycle process and those of the verification process may work together. For example, the integration process frequently uses the verification process. It is important to remember that verification, even being separated from validation, is intended to be performed in conjunction with validation. Definition and Purpose. Verification is the confirmation by means of the provision of objective evidence, that specified require9

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

ments have been fulfilled. According to the note added to ISO/IEC/ IEEE 15288, the scope of verification includes a set of activities that compare a system or system element with the requirements, architecture and design characteristics, as well as other properties to be verified (ISO/IEC/IEEE 2015). This may include, but is not limited to, specified requirements, design description, and the system itself. The purpose of verification, as a generic action, is to identify the faults/defects introduced in the course of any transformation of inputs into outputs. Verification is used to provide information and evidence that the transformation was made according to the selected and appropriate methods, techniques, standards, or rules. Verification is based on tangible evidence; i.e., it is based on the information the veracity of which may be demonstrated by factual results obtained from certain techniques, such as inspection, measurement, testing, analysis, calculation, etc. Thus, the process of verifying a system (product, service, enterprise, or system of systems (SoS)) consists of comparing the realized characteristics or properties of the product, service, or enterprise with its expected design properties. Principles and Concepts. Concept of Verification Action In the context of human realization, any human thought is susceptible to error. This is also the case with any engineering activity. Studies in human reliability have shown that people trained to perform a specific operation make around 1-3 errors per hour in best case scenarios. In any activity, or resulting outcome of an activity, the search for potential errors should not be neglected, regardless of whether or not one thinks they will happen or that they should not happen; the consequences of errors may cause extremely significant failures or threats. A verification action is defined, and then performed, as shown in Figure 1. The definition of a verification action applied to an engineering element includes the following: ‒ Identification of the element on which the verification action will be performed. ‒ Identification of the reference to define the expected result of the verification action (see examples of reference in Table 1). 10

Chapter I. Verification

Figure 1. Definition and Usage of a Verification Action. (SEBoK Original)

The performance of a verification action includes the following: ‒ Obtaining a result by performing the verification action onto the submitted element ‒ Comparing the obtained result with the expected result ‒ Deducing the degree of correctness of the element What to Verify? Any engineering element may be verified using a specific reference for comparison: stakeholder requirement, system requirement, function, system element, document, etc. Examples are provided in Table 1. Table 1 Examples of Verified Items. (SEBoK Original) Items

Explanation for Verification 2 To verify a document is to check the application of drafting Document rules. To verify a stakeholder requirement or a system requireStakeholder ment is to check the application of syntactic and grammaRequirement and tical rules, and characteristics defined in the stakeholder reSystem Requirement quirements definition process, and the system requirements 1

11

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects 1

Design

System

Aggregate Verification Procedure

2 definition process such as: necessity, implementation free, unambiguous, consistent, complete, singular, feasible, traceable, and verifiable. To verify the design of a system is to check its logical and physical architecture elements against the characteristics of the outcomes of the design processes. To verify a system (product, service, or enterprise) is to check its realized characteristics or properties against its expected design characteristics. To verify an aggregate for integration is to check, in particular, every interface and interaction between implemented elements. To verify a verification procedure is to check the application of a predefined template and drafting rules.

Verification versus Validation The term verification is often associated with the term validation and understood as a single concept of V&V. Validation is used to ensure that one is working on the right problem, whereas verification is used to ensure that one has solved the problem right (Martin 1997). Based on actual and etymological meaning, the term verification comes from the Latin verus, which means truth, and facere, which means to make/perform. Thus, verification means to prove that something is true or correct (a property, a characteristic, etc.). The term validation comes from the Latin valere, which means to become strong, and has the same etymological root as the word value. Thus, validation means proving that something has the right features to produce the expected effects. (Adapted from «Verification and Validation in plain English» (Lake INCOSE 1999). The main differences between the verification process and the validation process concern the references used to check the correctness of an element, and the acceptability of the effective correctness. ‒ Within verification, comparison between the expected result and the obtained result is generally binary, whereas within validation, the result of the comparison may require a judgment of value regarding whether or not to accept the obtained result compared to a threshold or limit. 12

Chapter I. Verification

‒ Verification relates more to one element, whereas validation

relates more to a set of elements and considers this set as a whole. ‒ Validation presupposes that verification actions have already been performed. ‒ The techniques used to define and perform the verification actions and those for validation actions are very similar. Integration, Verification, and Validation of the System There is sometimes a misconception that verification occurs after integration and before validation. In most cases, it is more appropriate to begin verification activities during development or implementation and to continue them into the deployment and use. Once the system elements have been realized, they are integrated to form the complete system. Integration consists of assembling and performing verification actions as stated in the integration process. A final validation activity generally occurs when the system is integrated, but a certain number of validation actions is also performed parallel to the system integration in order to reduce the number of verification actions and validation actions while controlling the risks that could be generated if some checks are excluded. Integration, verification, and validation are closely related to each other due to the necessity of optimizing the strategy of verification and validation, as well as the strategy of integration. Purpose and Principle of the Approach The purpose of the verification process is to confirm that the system fulfills the specified design requirements. This process provides the information required to effect the remedial actions that correct non-conformances in the realized system or the processes that act on it – see ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 (ISO/IEC/IEEE 2015). Each system element and the complete system itself should be compared with its own design references (specified requirements). As stated by Dennis Buede, verification is matching of [configuration items], components, sub-systems, and the system to corresponding requirements to ensure that each has been built right (Buede 2009). 13

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

This means that the verification process is instantiated as many times as it is necessary in the course of the global development of the system. Due to the generic nature of the process, verification may be applied to any engineering element used for the definition and realization of the system elements and the system itself. Facing the huge number of potential verification actions that may be generated by the normal approach, it is necessary to optimize the verification strategy. This strategy is based on the balance between what must be verified and the constraints, such as time, cost, and feasibility of testing, that naturally limit the number of verification actions and the risks one accepts when excluding some verification actions. Several approaches exist that may be used for defining the verification process. The International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) dictates that two main steps are necessary for verification: planning and performing verification actions (INCOSE 2012). NASA has a slightly more detailed approach that includes five main steps: preparation of verification, performance of verification, analysis of the outcomes, production of the report, and capture of the work products (NASA December 2007, 1-360, p. 102). Any approach may be used, provided that it is appropriate to the scope of the system, the constraints of the project, in some way includes the activities of the process listed below, and is appropriately coordinated with other activities. Generic inputs are baseline references of the submitted element. If the element is a system, inputs are the logical and physical architecture elements as described in the system design document, the design description of internal interfaces of the system and interfaces requirements external to the system, and by extension, the system requirements. Generic outputs define the verification plan that includes verification strategy, selected verification actions, verification procedures, verification tools, the verified element or system, verification reports, issue/trouble reports, and change requests on design. Activities of the Process To establish the verification strategy drafted in a verification plan (this activity is carried out concurrently to system definition activities), the following steps are required: 14

Chapter I. Verification

‒ Identify verification scope by listing as many as possible cha-

racteristics or properties that should be checked. The number of verification actions may be extremely high. ‒ Identify constraints according to their origin (technical feasibility, management constraints such as cost, time, availability of verification means or qualified personnel, and contractual constraints that are critical to the mission) that limit potential verification actions. ‒ Define appropriate verification techniques to be applied, such as inspection, analysis, simulation, peer-review, testing, etc., based on the best step of the project to perform every verification action according to the given constraints. ‒ Consider a tradeoff of what should be verified (scope) taking into account all constraints or limits and deduce what can be verified; the selection of verification actions should be made according to the type of the system, objectives of the project, acceptable risks, and constraints. ‒ Optimize the verification strategy by defining the most appropriate verification technique for every verification action meanwhile defining the required verification means (tools, testbenches, personnel, location, and facilities) according to the selected verification technique. ‒ Schedule the execution of verification actions in the project stages or milestones and define the configuration of elements submitted to verification actions (this mainly involves testing on physical elements). The performance of verification actions includes the following tasks: ‒ Detail each verification action; in particular, pay attention to the expected results, the verification techniques to be applied, and the corresponding means required (equipment, resources, and qualified personnel). ‒ Acquire verification means used at the system definition stages (qualified personnel, modeling tools, mocks-ups, simulators, and facilities), and then those used at the integration stage (qualified personnel, verification tools, measuring equipment, facilities, verification procedures, etc.). 15

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

‒ Carry out verification procedures at the right time, in the expected

environment, with the expected means, tools, and techniques. ‒ Capture and record the results obtained when performing

verification actions using verification procedures and means. The obtained results must be analyzed and compared with the expected results so that the status may be recorded as either compliant or non-compliant. Systems engineering (SE) practitioners will likely need to generate verification reports, as well as potential issue/trouble reports, and change requests on design as necessary. Control of the process includes the following tasks: ‒ Update the verification plan according to the progress of the project; in particular, planned verification actions may be redefined as a result of unexpected events. ‒ Coordinate verification activities with the project manager: review the schedule of acquisition of means, involvement of the personnel and resources. Coordinate with the designers on the issues/trouble/non-conformance reports and with the configuration manager – on the versions of the physical elements, design baselines, etc. Artifacts and Ontology Elements This process may create several artifacts such as: ‒ verification plans (contain the verification strategy) ‒ verification matrices (contain the verification action, submitted element, applied technique, step of execution, system block concerned, expected result, obtained result, etc.) ‒ verification procedures (describe verification actions to be performed, verification tools required, the verification configuretion, resources and personnel needed, the schedule, etc.) ‒ verification reports ‒ verification tools ‒ verified elements ‒ issue / non-conformance / trouble reports ‒ change requests to the design This process utilizes the ontology elements displayed in Table 2 below. 16

Chapter I. Verification Table 2 Main Ontology Elements as Handled within Verification. (SEBoK Original) Element

Verification Action

Definition Attributes (examples) A verification action describes what must be verified (the element as reference), on which element, the expected result, the verification technique to apply, on which level of decomposition.

Verification Procedure

Identifier, name, description A verification procedure groups a set of verification actions performed together (as a scenario of tests) in a gin verification configuration.

Verification Tool

Identifier, name, description, duration, unit of time A verification tool is a device or physical tool used to perform verification procedures (test bench, simulator, cap/stub, launcher, etc.).

Verification Configuration

Identifier, name, description A verification configuration groups all physical elements (aggregates and verification tools) required to perform a verification procedure.

Risk

Rationale

Identifier, name, description An event having a probability of occurrence and a gravity degree on its consequence onto the system mission or on other characteristics (used for technical risk in engineering). A risk is the combination of vulnerability and danger or threat. An argument that provides the justification for the selection of an engineering element. Identifier, name, description (rationale, reasons for defining a verification action, a verification procedure, for using a verification tool, etc.)

Methods and Techniques There are several verification techniques to check that an element or a system conforms to its design references, or its specified requirements. These techniques are almost the same as those used for validation, though the application of the techniques may differ slightly. In 17

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

particular, the purposes are different; verification is used to detect faults/defects, whereas validation is used to provide evidence for the satisfaction of (the system and/or stakeholder) requirements. Table 3 below provides descriptions of some techniques for verification. Table 3 Verification Techniques. (SEBoK Original) Verification Technique 1 Inspection

Analysis

Analogy or Similarity

Demonstration

18

Description 2 Technique based on visual or dimensional examination of an element; the verification relies on human senses or uses simple methods of measurement and handling. Inspection is generally non-destructive, and typically includes the use of sight, hearing, smell, touch, and taste, simple physical manipulations, mechanical and electrical gauging, and measurement. No stimuli (tests) are necessary. The technique is used to check properties or characteristics best determined by observation (e.g. – paint color, weight, documentation, listing of code, etc.). Technique based on analytical evidence obtained without any intervention on the submitted element using mathematical or probabilistic calculation, logical reasoning (including the theory of predicates), modeling and/or simulation under defined conditions to show theoretical compliance. It is mainly used where testing in realistic conditions cannot be achieved or is not cost-effective. Technique based on evidence of elements similar to the submitted element or on experience feedback. It is absolutely necessary to show by prediction that the context is invariant, that the outcomes are transposable (models, investigations, experience feedback, etc.). Similarity may only be used if the submitted element is similar in design, manufacture, and use; equivalent or more stringent verification actions were used for the similar element, and the intended operational environment is identical to or less rigorous than the similar element. Technique used to demonstrate correct operation of the submitted element against operational and observable characteristics without using physical measurements (no or minimal instrumentation or test equipment). Demonstration is sometimes called 'field testing'. It generally consists of a set of tests selected by the supplier to show that the element response to stimuli is suitable, or to show that operators can perform

Chapter I. Verification 1

2 their assigned tasks when using the element. Observations are made and compared with predetermined/expected responses. Demonstration may be appropriate when requirements or specification are given in statistical terms (e.g. meant time to repair, average power consumption, etc.). Technique performed onto the submitted element by which functional, measurable characteristics, operability, supportability, or performance capability is quantitatively verified when subjected to controlled conditions that are real or simulated. Testing often uses special test equipment or instrumentation to obtain accurate quantitative data to be analyzed. Technique based on verification of characteristics using samples. The number, tolerance, and other characteristics must be specified to be in agreement with the experience feedback.

Test

Sampling

Practical Considerations Key pitfalls and good practices related to this topic are described in the next two sections. Pitfalls Some of the key pitfalls encountered in planning and performing System Verification are provided in Table 4. Table 4 Major Pitfalls with System Verification (SEBoK Original) Pitfall

Description

1 Confusion between verification and validation

2 Confusion between verification and validation causes developers to take the wrong reference/baseline to define verification and validation actions and/or to address the wrong level of granularity (detail level for verification, global level for validation). No verification One overlooks verification actions because it is impossible to strategy check every characteristic or property of all system elements and of the system in any combination of operational conditions and scenarios. A strategy (justified selection of verification actions against risks) has to be established. Save or spend time Skip verification activity to save time. Use only testing Use only testing as a verification technique. Testing requires checking products and services only when they are

19

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects 1

Stop verifications when funding is diminished

2 implemented. Consider other techniques earlier at the stage of design; analysis and inspections are cost effective and allow discovering early potential errors, faults, or failures. Stop the performance of verification actions when budget and/ or time are consumed. Prefer using criteria such as coverage rates to end verification activity.

Proven Practices Some proven practices gathered from the references are given in Table 5. Table 5 Proven Practices with System Verification. (SEBoK Original) Practice Start verifications early in the development Define criteria ending verifications

Involve designer responsible for verification

Description The more the characteristics of an element are verified at early stages of the project, the easier is to make corrections and the less consequences on the schedule and costs the error will have. Carrying out verification actions without limits generates a risk of drift for costs and deadlines. Modifying and verifying in a non-stop cycle until a get a perfect system is the best way to never supply the system. Thus, it is necessary to set limits of cost, time, and a maximum number of modification loops for each verification action type, ending criteria (percentages of success, error count detected, coverage rate obtained, etc.). Include the verification responsible person in the designer team or include some designer in the verification team.

1.3 Forecast verification Determination of the degree of accuracy, reliability, validity is an important task in the framework of forecasting. To increase the accuracy and reliability of the forecast means to minimize faults and errors of the initial information, the forecasting method, the forecaster himself. Forecasting is usually associated with the presence of elements of uncertainty in the conditions of the problem. Naturally, the question 20

Chapter I. Verification

of the quality of the solution is inseparable from the concepts of accuracy and reliability of the forecast. This is especially true for forecasting in such areas as: politics, economics, ecology, sociology. The initial uncertainty here is so great that almost always special studies are required and the forecaster has to develop his own technics himself. The reliability of predictive scenario models of the development of families of various types may be estimated by another method – expert assessments. As noted above, the proportion of expert assessment methods in forecasts development and evaluation of their quality is quite large. Expert assessment is used in: – analyzing information about the object of forecasting (families of various types) and factors affecting their development (environmental, economic, educational, etc.); – determining the predicted values of parameters (income level, housing supply, etc.) characterizing the object (families of various types); – creating models and developing scenarios (for example, young families); – comparative assessment of the most probable and most preferable alternative variant of the prospective development of the object, and in other cases. The quality of the forecast depends on the degree of correctness, efficiency, and professionalism when using expert information. The following problems may arise here: – selection of qualified experts (selection criteria); – the adequacy of the conversion of expert information; – the correctness of the methods used to organize and conduct an expert examination; – objectification of expert information in expert forecasting (in world practice, as already noted, Delphi methodology is widely used, including its numerous varieties and modifications, «commission methods» and «brainstorming»). In forecasting the development of families of various types, expertise is used at the forecast verification stage. Verification of the forecast for accuracy, reliability, passes through the following stages: 21

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

– methodological support of expert forecasting (the development of a questionnaire; the formation of a data bank on the prospects for the development of the object, a data bank on experts); – analysis of the influence of factors (conditions) determining the development of the object of forecasting, the formation of expert commissions; – identification of the most likely options for the development of external conditions; – development of alternative options for the development of external conditions; – development of alternatives for projected key events (social consequences); – comparative assessment of alternative forecasting options; – determination of the most preferred alternative forecast; – calculation of the necessary resource provision; – creation of a system for updating forecast information; – adjustment of the initial forecast. There is a whole group of other methods for checking the prediction for accuracy, which will be shown in detail below: direct verification, indirect, duplicate, inverse, verification by minimizing systematic errors, etc. (forecasters choose the methods). A verified forecast may provide a high degree of justification and can serve as a reliable orienting information for making management decisions.

22

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

Chapter II

VERIFICATION THEORIES 2.1 Verification of truth in economic theory as a process of rechecking The concept of verificationism was developed by the members of the Vienna Circle, who often referred in this connection to the idea of L. Wittgenstein that «to understand a sentence means to know what is the case when it is true». Wittgenstein noted. that: «at one time I often repeated that to clarify the use of a sentence, it would not be bad to ask a question – how can this statement be verified? But this is only one way to clarify the use of a word or sentence ... Some people turned the advice I gave – to apply to verification – into a dogma, presenting the case as if I put forward a theory of meaning»). The first formulation of the principle of verifiability was developed by F. Waisman in his work «Logical Analysis of the Concept of Probability» (1930). Within the framework of logical positivism, the principle of verifiability was considered (meaningfully exhausted almost entirely within the framework of the formalized presentation of the methods of E. Mach and K. Pirson) as a criterially exhaustive way of testing scientific statements, understood as «protocol sentences», as fixations of direct experience data. According to M. Schlick, «originally, the «protocol sentences» were understood – as it is evident from the name itself – as the sentences that express facts absolutely simply, without any alteration, modification or addition to them of anything else – facts, which are searched for by any science and which 23

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

precede any knowledge and any judgment about the world. It is meaningless to talk about unreliable facts. Only statements, only our knowledge may be unreliable. Therefore, if we manage to express the facts in «protocol sentences», without any distortion, then they will probably become absolutely unquestionable starting points of knowledge. Sh. described a possible logical algorithm for the verification procedure as follows: in order to verify judgment A, it is necessary to derive from it by means of true judgments A1, A2, A3 ... Ak – a consistent chain of judgments A1, A2, A3 ... Ak. The last member of this sequence should be a judgment like this one: «…in such and such a place for some time for some reason that in some circumstances this or that is experienced or observed». Since the sentences, which are only capable, according to the concept of the Vienna Circle, appear in scientific knowledge are divided into two classes: 1) sentences that have no substantive content, reducible to tautology and related to the logical-mathematical field, are analytical, logical truths; 2) meaningful sentences, reducible to empirical facts and attributable to the field of specific sciences – factual truths. The other sentences are either absurd (meaningless), because they are organized contrary to logical and syntactic rules; or still scientifically unreasonable («metaphysical» or philosophical sentences, operating with such concepts as «matter», «absolute», «principle», etc.). The scientific meaning of the sentences turned out to be identical to its verifiability, while its meaning was its B method. Later, in the book Philosophy and Logical Syntax (1935), R. Karnap differentiated between the indirect and direct B. The first one assumed the direct B of the initial utterance: based on already known and approved by B law, the forecast is made, the necessary conditions are constituted and the forecast is verified. Due to the obviousness that sensual B was not admitted by many genuinely scientific sentences – a) «general» sentences that could not be confirmed by a finite number of experimental procedures; b) sentences concerning the future and the past that are not subject to momentary observation – the principle of B. was smoothed to the idea of »possible verifiability» (the principle of «verifiability»). The science of the 20th century, which refuted B. procedure, as well as the 24

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

coupled with it idea of independence of «pure experience» from the experimenter himself, gave some preference to the idea of falsification and focused on eliminating B. from the disciplinary arsenal of philosophy. Thus, in a report at the XIV International Philosophical Congress (1968), A. Ayer proposed to interpret the principle of B. as the requirement that a scientific hypothesis should, at least, «nontrivially occur in the theory that, taken as a whole, was open for confirmation». The principle of verifiability was formulated by Schlick in the General Theory of Knowledge (1918), and then by Wittgenstein. The problem of verification of sociological theories was quite fully formulated by R. Merton in his concept of theories of the average level (middle-range theory), which consist of verifiable generalizations linking theory and practice. Theories of the middle level are built on the basis of limited social phenomena, and at the same time these are generalizations related to theories of a higher level of abstraction. These theories are constructed in accordance with empirical studies, verified with their help (correspondence principle). They allow you to create more general theories, provided that they are related to each other (coherence principle). From the analysis of the relationship between sociological theory and social reality, it follows that the higher the generality of the theory, the less expected is its empirical verification, because such theories are more like «theoretical orientations» rather than strict deductive theories. Merton writes: «Universal sociological theoretical systems – such as Marx’s theory of historical materialism, Parsons’s social systems theory, and Sorokin’s integrative sociology – are more theoretical orientations than strict and ordered systems that the search for a «single theory» in physics is aimed at» [Merton R. Social theory and social structure. – M., 2006. – P. 100]. Indeed, specific theoretical propositions are more often subject to empirical verification. For example, German sociologists have empirically tested the main thesis of the theory of socialization of J. Habermas, based on the theory of the stages of Kolberg's moral development, which gave start to the growth of anti-capitalist protest attitudes of the young. This theoretical position was not confirmed [Tillmann K.-J. Sozialisationstheorien. Reinbeck bei. – Hamburg, 1997. – P. 252]. 25

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

To develop the theories of the average level, Merton chose the paradigm of functional analysis, which he revealed through the rules of studying explicit and latent functions. A set of methodological principles was developed in sociology, which provides a link between theory and empiricism. Tikhonov V.V. includes here: 1) the principle of correspondence (i.e., empirical reinforcement of theoretical statements); 2) the principle of coherence (consistency of theoretical developments with previously adopted theories); 3) the principle of growing agreement in the sociological community that is manifestation of the general scientific principle of the discipline development. Another principle is that the transfer of the newly acquired reliable knowledge to the basis of the discipline was not used in this project, since the project did not have the task to predict, when the second version of the system theory in sociology (Luhmann) will exhaust itself and require replacement by the next one. Thus, verification of a complex sociological theory requires consideration of the correlation of statements of the theory and generalizations of empirical observations of social objects on the one hand, and, on the other hand, a comparison of the theory in the same subject area // Tikhonov A.V. Postcrisis syndrome of national sociology and its problems // Sociological studies. 2008. No. 6. P. 43–46. Since there is a polemic about the difference between the sciences of nature and the sciences of culture, polyparadigmality is considered to be an essential characteristic of the latter. The eminent Polish sociologist P. Sztompka mentions two aspects of it: theoretical and methodological aspect, linked with the controversy concerning the theory and method of sociology, and a local one, which is the fact of the existence of national sociologies, colored by the specifics of the social problems of a particular society. Nevertheless, sociology has its disciplinary identity and a tendency toward a theoretical unity. P. Sztompka gives examples of such unity. It may be based on the influence of a particular theoretical idea in a certain period of time (structural functionalism in the middle of the twentieth century), be 26

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

the result of intellectual fashion (postmodernism), and be provided by political pressure (Marxism in socialist countries) [1, p. 32]. The movement towards the theoretical unity of sociology, based on the influence of one or another theory, represents a tendency connected with the dynamics of the development of the discipline. Such a development, based on Luhmann’s general theory of systems, is observed since the 1970s [2]. At present, the influence of Luhmann's sociology is comparable in perceptions with that of the Parsonian theory and continues to grow. However, if we want to explain social relations and processes with the help of this or that sociological theory, even if it is very influential, or use it in a practical activity, then it should not only be substantive and recognized. It must be adequate to the social reality and close to empirical truth, as far as possible. The practical relevance of this requirement may be explained taking into account the situation in Russian sociology, which A. Tikhonov (Moscow) described as a post-crisis syndrome in Russian science about society. He believes that Russian sociology should be clearly distinguished in an independent and creative direction in the world sociological thought. He sees one of the opportunities for this in integrating sociological knowledge on the basis of empirical research, as Russian historical science does [3, p. 42]. However, here we are talking about the connection between the theory and empiricism in sociology. To ensure this, Tikhonov believes, it is necessary to observe the following principles: 1) Correspondence (i.e., empirical reinforcement of theoretical facts); 2) coherence (i.e., the consistency of theoretical developments with previously accepted theories); 3) monotonous growth of consent in the sociological community – the manifestation of the general scientific principle of the development of a discipline. All three of these principles are complex truth criteria developed in the twentieth century. in the course of a broad philosophical discussion about the principles of social cognition. It suffices to note that the connection between the first two principles, or rather the concepts of truth, was substantiated by German philosopher and logician GK Gempel in 1934 in a discussion about the concept of truth with the 27

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

representatives of logical positivism [4, p. 233]. Hempel emphasizes that there is no ontological form for protocol pronouncements (generalizations of empirical material). It must be fixed by agreement in the scientific community. Hence the above-mentioned research orientation on both concepts of truth follows. The third principle is formulated by K. Popper, who understands the progress of science as the growth of scientific knowledge. Unlike the natural sciences with their only one universal object – nature – and the corresponding methods, the subject of social sciences is variable: social life can be organized differently. Therefore, social sciences are inherently debatable, and theoretical discussion is one of the most important methods for verifying the theory. All of the foregoing considerations in general and the three methodological principles of the link between theory and practice formed the basis for a research project aimed at verifying the sociological theory of Luhmann's communication, whose general theory of social systems has the most substantiated claims to take a place in sociology, being analogous in the importance to Parsons general theory of social action in 1970-1980s. In other words, the relevance of the project is connected with a communicative turn in the social sciences, within which the theory of socia l communication is supplanted by the theory of social communication as the basis of sociology. The project, started in 2009 at the Faculty of Sociology of the St. Petersburg State University, is called «Verification of the General Theory of Social Systems by N. Luhmann (on the materials of latent advertising messages).» It is supported within the framework of the federal target program «Scientific and Scientific Pedagogical Staff of Innovative Russia» for 2009-2013 in the direction «Philosophical Sciences, Sociological Sciences and Culturology» and is aimed at involving young people in the sphere of science, education and high technologies. The project is implemented by a research group consisting of students and graduate students of the Department of Theory and History of Sociology of the Faculty of Sociology of St. Petersburg State University and is held in the form of a research seminar under the supervision of the teachers – specialists in quantitative and qualitative methods in sociology. 28

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

The problem of verification of sociological theories was once fully formulated by R. Merton in his concept of middle-range theories, which consist of verifiable generalizations linking theory with practice. Theories of the middle level are built on the basis of limited social phenomena, and at the same time these are generalizations associated with theories of a higher level of abstraction. The theories are built in accordance with the empirical research, tested with their help (the principle of correspondence). They allow us to create more general theories, provided that they are related to each other (the principle of coherence). The theory of social communication of Luhmann, which is the core of his general theory of social systems, describes a real communicative process in a modern complex society. Given that it can be considered a general theory of social systems in a minimized form that may be expanded in a meaningful theory of similar systems of different levels, the development of a method for verifying such a theory would substantially enrich the methodological arsenal of sociology. Thus, the goal of the project was to create a way to verify a modern sociological theory that describes a complex reality. This goal is correlated with the problem of verification, which may be found implicitly in Merton's book Social Theory and Social Structure (1949). From his analysis of the correlation between sociological theory and social reality, it follows that the higher the generality of the theory, the less expected is its empirical verification, for such theories are rather «theoretical orientations» than strict deductive theories. Merton writes: «General sociological theoretical systems – such as the theory of Marx's historical materialism, Parsons' theory of social systems, and Sorokin's integrative sociology – are rather theoretical orientations than rigorous and orderly systems aimed at finding a» unified theory «in physics» [5, p. 100]. Indeed, specific theoretical positions are more likely to be empirically verified. For example, German sociologists have empirically tested the main thesis of the theory of socialization of J. Habermas, based on the theory of the stages of the moral development of Kolberg, from which the growth of anti-capitalist protest attitudes of young people followed. This theoretical position was not confirmed 29

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

[6, p. 252]. (Since the anti-capitalist protest of the 1970s, when this thesis was formulated, quickly gave way to the conservative trend of the 1980s, and new cohorts of young people entered the social life, the period of secondary socialization took a conservative turn, and remained outside the framework of the theory.) To develop theories of the average level, Merton chose the paradigm of functional analysis, which he disclosed through the rules of studying explicit and latent functions. To verify the theory of social communication of Luhmann, the project participants chose the same paradigm and, as an object of research, they chose advertising as a low-structured field of social communication at the macro level. Characterizing its functioning as a kind of mass media, Luhmann writes that «the addressees show themselves quantitatively: sales figures, inclusion quotas, but they are not able to reverse effect. The measure of their participation can be noted and interpreted, but it is not expressed in feedback communication» [7, Ch. 3]. Further, he notes other features of advertising as communication at the macro level: a complex psychological impact in circumvention of the cognitive sphere, in order to exclude the critical attitude of the addressee to the content of advertising; influence on the motivational sphere, including consumption as a motivation for saving («as if spending money, you can save them»), appeal to exclusivity in the mass society, etc. [7, Ch. 7]. Thus, Luhmann argues that advertising is not a social system, but a process of multi-level communication. In our opinion, advertising should distinguish between explicit and latent content (and, accordingly, functions). In the consumer society, it not only promotes the product, but also sells the image and lifestyle to consumers. This applies not to all advertising, but only to that which is placed in glossy magazines, on television, on billboards of outdoor advertising, on transport, ie, stylish advertising with the plot. Other advertising in the form of short announcements about goods and services either intimidates listeners of radio spots with diseases and ailments, or is informational and pragmatic in nature and is not considered here. The first, the main function of advertising – to sell goods – is the subject of market research. Advertising effectiveness is judged here 30

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

by feedback – by the number of clients' calls for the service, by the number of customers attracted. The second, implicit function of advertising – the sale of a way of life – is a classic subject of sociology studying implicit functions and phenomena. This function is aimed at a broad target audience – stylish advertising is addressed to men and women, children, youth, middle-aged people and pensioners, entrepreneurs and employees – all social strata of society. If in marketing research the method for determining the effectiveness of advertising is developed, then the question of the effectiveness of the latent content of stylish advertising is poorly understood, since in sociology there is a shortage of such studies. Meanwhile, they are an integral part of the verification of the theory in question. The basis of the project is the thesis that the latent function of (stylish) advertising is realized at the system level in the form of macro-level social communication and that its latent effect at the society level can be assessed by quantitative and qualitative methods. The degree of perception of latent advertising messages is seen as a measure of the success of advertising in the Luhmanian sense of this concept, and therefore it is the most important parameter of the empirical evaluation of N. Luhmann's theory of social communication. This expectation is justified by the fact that the theory of social systems of Luhmann, based on the current development of the general theory of systems and the methodology of system analysis, is the most developed fundamental theory in modern sociology. As noted above, its relevance is connected with the transition to the theory of social communication in place of the theory of action. To what extent does this content reach the target group – the target groups – and how does it affect the recipient? Let us turn in connection with this research question to the theory of Luhmann's communication. The essence of this theory lies in the thesis of the impossibility of communication – it is a kind of watershed with the theories of improving society, which places the theoretical and informative question on how social systems are possible and how they function. According to Luhmann, communication is, like life and consciousness, an emergent reality that is carried out through three different selections, namely, information selection, selection of the message of this information and selective understanding (or misunderstanding) of this message and its 31

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

further implementation in social behavior. The thesis of the impossibility of communication contains three conditions, consisting in overcoming, first, the impossibility of understanding one individual by another in general because of the autonomy of people. However, sociocultural evolution has developed many means of overcoming such improbability: language, writing, common means of communication, such as money. The second improbability refers to the achievement of recipients, which at the empirical level is not a sociology problem and here, like the first improbability, is not considered (this problem is solved by the development of means of delivery of messages). The third impossibility of communication is, according to Luhmann, the improbability of its success, that is, the acceptance or nonacceptance of the content of communication. Even if communication is understood, this does not mean that it will be accepted. A communicative success is the perception by the recipient of the selective content of communication (information) as a prerequisite of its behavior and the addition to this selective content of subsequent ones, which only increases its selectivity. Perception of the style of life-content of communication in one's behavior can be considered a criterion of success with respect to the latent content of the advertising message. Thus, in the theory of social communication of Luhmann, it is of interest to verify the thesis of the impossibility of communication by quantitative and qualitative assessment of its selectivity (selective) a) with respect to expressive means; b) reachability of the audience; c) from the point of view of sociology. It is especially interesting to assess the success of communication, that is, the realization by the recipient in his behavior of a latent content of an advertising message concerning values, style and lifestyle promoted along with the advertised product. The verification of a complex theory requires a correspondingly complex empirical verification, which was confirmed by a preliminary survey of advertising experts who described practical problems in determining the effectiveness of advertising communication. In the empirical part of the study, it is envisaged to determine the structure of the latent content of advertising messages, which is determined by content analysis of a large array of advertisements in glossy magazines and commercials broadcast on television. The obtained results are 32

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

correlated with the target audience of advertising messages, information about which is taken from the secondary analysis of advertising marketing research. The degree of reachability of advertising messages to its target audience is determined taking into account the results of audiometry. The most difficult task – determining the success of advertising – requires a special empirical study devoted to the lifestyles of representatives of target groups, their relation to advertising. It is a group focused interview about the perception of advertising in general and its style of living content in particular. Thus, for an empirical reconstruction of the Luhmann concept of social communication, an example of advertising requires a complex empirical study involving the study of several different research questions. In the theoretical interpretation of the results of empirical studies, the theory of Luhmann's social communication is compared with other theories of communication in sociology, which makes it possible to give it a critical assessment and clarify its place in the system of sociological theories. This will be discussed in the second part of the project. It seems that this version of the verification of the theory is optimal, since, based on the distinction between the explicit (commercial) and latent content of advertising (broadcast values and life styles), the project participants have operationalized all three «improbabilities» of Luhmann communication, including the Luhmann concept of communication success. Of course, in the future work on the project, the intended method of verification should be developed in detail. In the empirical study, the value content of advertising should be considered with a high degree of differentiation, and its perception is studied taking into account the diversity of life practices of respondents and their social-behavioral motivation. In this connection, the effectiveness of expressive means of advertising is required to be studied and evaluated, and detailed differentiation of both verbal and non-verbal cultural-specific features is necessary, and the formulation of empirical signs for the study of expressive means of advertising by empirical methods. An important criterion for the success of advertising communication is the question of whether it reaches the target audience. 33

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

Although this characteristic of the reliability of advertising communication can be obtained by secondary analysis of mediaplanning data and audiometry, but due to its importance as a compiler of life styles and in the importance of the theory, it becomes one of the most important tasks of empirical research. The most difficult problem of the operationalization of Luhmann's theory is the problem of understanding the advertising message in the Luhmannian sense of this term, «Success» of advertising communication in relation to the translation of life styles. Because of the complexity of the very phenomenon of the lifestyle, one does not have to count on the elementary measurement of only one parameter after a certain period of time. It seems that the study of the problem of understanding is achieved through the study of the motivating function of advertising: on the one hand, the correspondence of values and styles of life in advertising and actually practiced by the target group is to be measured, and on the other – the study of the value-motivational sphere of respondents and an assessment of its correlation with values and life styles represented in advertising. Both measurement results are characterized by quantitative relationships and are necessary for the subsequent description of the advertising communication process in terms of probability theory. In conclusion, it should be noted that the implementation of the project for students and graduate students participating in it is a serious experience of scientific work the period of training. Its main content is the integration of the theoretical knowledge and practical research competences of the sociologist as a result of the participation of the student (graduate student) in all stages of the research cycle, including posing the problem, putting forward hypotheses, developing a research program and performing all stages of the research, including the use of quantitative and qualitative methods, as well as the preparation of the research report. Verification of truth in economic theory as a process of rechecking. Objective difficulties in verifying economic knowledge pose complex and important tasks for economists-theoreticians. First of all, we should not obscure this problem, but, on the contrary, attract 34

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

attention to it. Correctly it will be interpreted not only as an isolated problem, referring exclusively to the field of epistemology, but also as an integral part of the acquisition of any theoretical knowledge. Among other things, the need for verification of truth should become a key element of the research culture and the process of professional economists training. This circumstance has to be paid a special attention, since modern economic theory textbooks, both Russian and translated ones, most often do not even mention the verification problem and the existing difficulties with the verification of theoretical postulates. One of the elementary proposals, which in fact calls attention to the problem of verifying truth in the economy, can be formulated as ensuring that each topic in theoretical courses in economics must be accompanied by a section (methodological workshop) that would consider the procedure and methods for assessing the truth of the specific theoretical positions contained in them. Further, for the elevation of the status of scientific truth, it is useful to abandon the idea of the mainstream that is disastrous for its justification in economic theory, and, in fact, from the dictates of that scientific branch that occupies the dominant positions. It leads to stagnation in science and deprives it of reliable evaluation criteria. There should not be such a situation that the very entering a leading scientific school would almost guarantee the quality and truth of the propagandized knowledge. Therefore, economic science of modern Russia should stimulate the emergence of a variety of scientific schools and a direct dialogue between them. As M. Alle rightly writes, in order for science to develop, the main principle must be «a constant doubt in what is considered to be true, a constant readiness to favorably consider opposing opinions and to promote research aimed at refuting the positions you believe in» Thus, scientific pluralism and dialogue become a necessary condition for maintaining the verification mechanism in the operating mode, because through direct comparison of hypotheses and scientific results that are born in the depths of different currents of economic thought, it is possible to actually find and confirm more true theoretical statements. In this respect, the current situation in Russian economic science is characterized by the action of the opposite trend – the growth of a new scientific monopoly. At the same time, it has 35

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

become a stereotype when representatives of competing scientific schools demonstrate complete disregard to the critical arguments put forward by their opponents. This is especially true for newly converted Russian adherents of the neoclassical school. Refusal of scientific dialogue is most often explained by their reluctance to discuss the obsolete Marxist dogmas, the place of which is in the museum of history of economic thought. However, most likely, the point is that the transition from the monopoly of Marxism to the monopoly of neoclassicism was least of all stimulated by the search for scientific truth. The change of scientific coordinates was not primarily of a scientific nature, but of a purely ideological one, supported by external circumstances (for example, the obligatory transition to the reading course based on neoclassicism) and the fear of being on the sidelines of the «scientific fashion» with all the ensuing consequences. The most desirable result of the new stage in the development of Russian economic thought should be the formation of a system of mutually competing and simultaneously complementary economic theories, at least following the example of neo-classicism and neoinstitutionalism. After all, real knowledge most often forms a system of theoretical models, hierarchically organized. At all times there will be differences in scientific views on the degree of authority in society and popularity among scientists. It is important that in economic science not only a one-sided mechanism for discarding existing knowledge works. At the same time, it should be noted that for the history of economic ideas, their «roll call» is more typical, when, it would seem, archaic ideas are being revived in one form or another. Thus, the theory of a fair price, actively developed by medieval Scholastic scholars (in particular F. Aquinas), acquires new life in the case of wages in relation to a non-competitive market, when its value is determined not by purely market coordination of supply and demand in the market labor, and as a result of an agreement between the employer and the employee. Or you can give an example with Keynes, who evaluated mercantilism, considered classics of political economy as a «children's» doctrine, a predecessor of the modern theory of monetary economics, and so on. Hence, A. Marshall was right when he asserted: «At first glance, some of the best works of contemporary authors come 36

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

into conflict with the works of their predecessors. Meanwhile, when these new studies eventually fall into place, and their critical acuity is removed, it turns out that in reality they do not violate the continuity of the development process. New doctrines only supplement the old ones, sometimes they correct them, re-emphasizing the accents, but very rarely subvert them. «25 Actually, such a cumulative principle of the development of economic science corresponds to the general laws of scientific knowledge formation. And here a useful example is given by natural sciences in which scientific increment follows the path of accumulation, while old theories tend to enter new ones in the form of more particular cases*. In physics, for example, fundamental theories are united in a single whole by the principles of symmetry and all their structure. You cannot break even a small part without destroying the whole. But this whole shows its undeniable stability from 300 years (classical mechanics) to 70 years (quantum mechanics). For several centuries scientists have dealt with a huge number of empirical laws that are difficult to calculate. And all laws are interrelated. After the creation of classical physics – the first fundamental physical theory – all theoretical physics eventually came down to a small number (less than ten) of fundamental theories, each of which describes a huge range of phenomena or, in other words, the behavior of a certain form of the motion of matter. In addition to Newtonian mechanics, fundamental theories include Maxwell's electrodynamics, thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, quantum mechanics, etc. All these theories are based on immense empirical material and throughout the development of physics (for 300 years), there is no deviation from the fundamental theories within their applicability. It unites the scientific community (scientific school) around itself and turns into a factor constituting science. And the development of science is carried out through a paradigm shift as a manifestation of scientific revolutions. It is also important that each scientific paradigm develops its own language, using different concepts that follow from *

Note that a different interpretation of the development of science offered a famous representative of the philosophy of science T. Kuhn. He developed the concept of a «paradigm» as a concrete vision of the world, acting as a standard of scientific description of the world and scientific activity.

37

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

different visions of the world. And different theories have sets of empirical data which are not comparable with each other. Finally, to strengthen the status of the economy as a science, it is necessary to continue developing the verification mecha-nism itself, using for this purpose the experience of other scientific disciplines and taking into account the nature of economic knowledge formation. And here it is expedient to take into account two important aspects. On the one hand, no single branch of scientific knowledge, including economics, can exist in a philosophical vacuum, without an epistemological (philosophical) context. In addition, there are great opportunities to transfer the experience of evaluating theories developed in other more precise sciences. In scientific field, ideas and discoveries continually flow from one science to another. On the other hand, it is required to develop economic theory in the direction of the real economy, no matter what difficulties arise, by all means encouraging a scientific search based on the analysis of real economic practices. Thus, the verification of truth in the economic and theoretical sphere means that it should not be evaluated as a separate act, but as a continuous process of rechecking the truth, immanently inherent in the very nature of economic knowledge and using all possible options for its implementation. The path to scientific truth is not a one-way movement. It leads through the multiplicity of criteria, the necessity of which is explained by the very relativity of scientific truth. This is the only way to eliminate the shortcomings inherent in each of the existing verification methods. This is equivalent to using iterative and multifactor procedures for verifying the whole set of theories through their direct comparison and binding to the real economy. Until a mechanism is developed for a truly effective verification of economic knowledge, the emergence of which cannot theoretically be ruled out, all the available verification methods should be used together. 2.2 Verification of the human model in economics Of particular methodological importance is the question of the verification of the behavioral hypotheses that make up the human 38

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

model. It is a part of a more general problem of verifying the prerequisites of economic analysis (in addition to the human model, these include prerequisites of equilibrium, perfect competition, etc.). There are many approaches to this problem, including mutually exclusive ones. A. Sen writes that three points of view are common among economists of various schools: 1) the hypothesis of rational behavior is fundamentally irrefutable; 2) it is fundamentally refutable, but still not refuted; 3) it is refutable and repeatedly refuted [381, p. 325]. From our point of view, this classification should include the position of M. Friedman under a special rubric, according to which the realistic nature of the assumptions of the theory does not matter in its assessment. The aprioristic approach of the new Austrian school, and above all L. Mises [327, p. 64-69], that is shared by such eminent economists as L. Robbins [363] and F. Knight [288, p. 163-168], states that the prerequisites of rational behavior that underlie not only economic theory, but all praxeology – the science of human behavior, which Mises sharply separates from history – an unscientific description and understanding of real behavior, are a priori axioms. Each person learns these axioms by introspection and logically derives from them the theorems concerning human behavior in conditions close to real ones. Behavioral axioms, according to Mises, are not subject to empirical verification, as well as, for example, the categories of logic that we cannot analyze «from the side», because our mind is naturally logical and operates with these categories. This approach has been preserved in our days only by some representatives of the new Austrian school, while others deviate from the extremes of the Mize-Sovereign apriorism and are tolerant to empirical tests [342]. The opposite extreme is the positivist approach introduced by economics of T. Hutchison [261]. He requires an empirical test of all the prerequisites of economic theory, without which they, in his opinion, are tautological judgments that do not contradict any possible state of the world [261, p. 13]. The prerequisites of economically rational behavior were included in the number of such tautological judgments. P. Samuelson somewhat softened the requirements put forward by Hutchison, calling for economic theorems to be operationally significant, i.e., if not the magnitude, then the algebraic sign 39

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

of a change in a given economic variable would thus be potentially empirically determined as refutable [367, p. 7]. The idea that the positivist and Popperian criteria for acceptability of the theory should be extended to prerequisites of economics also retains some influence up to this day, especially among the supporters of the so-called behavioral direction (behavioral economics). The instrumentalist approach of M. Friedman [120] suggests that the prerequisites of the theory, including behavioral ones (in Friedman’s work, in particular, profit maximization) may be more or less realistic, but it doesn’t matter for the evaluation of the theories constructed on their basis. The criterion of acceptability of the latter is only the accuracy of the forecasts obtained with their help. Thus, according to Friedman, in principle it is possible, but not necessary, to check the realism of the prerequisites. There is a whole literature devoted to what Friedman meant, speaking of the realism of the prerequisites of economic theory [172, p. 91-93]. Obviously, sometimes he meant the concreteness and accuracy of these prerequisites. In other cases, protesting against the requirements of realism, Friedman objected to the fact that only motives realized by economic actors themselves could be included in the model of a market participant. Finally, one more, the third meaning that can be given to the definition of realistic and which most critics of Friedman’s methodology had in mind is that this premise corresponds to empirically observed economic behavior. Here, the verification of prerequisites, according to Friedman, can have some meaning, since it allows one to clarify the scope of application of the theory. One way or another, according to Friedman, it is enough to assume that the prerequisites are «as if true, and to proceed to the empirical verification of the corresponding predictions. This point of view has gained extremely wide popularity among modern economists, but has been subjected to quite severe criticism from the methodologists of economics. In particular, the so-called F-bias is condemned (F – revealing the fact that the most productive economic theories from the point of view of predictive properties, according to Friedman, usually have the least realistic prerequisites. (If under the term unrealistic prerequisites Friedman meant only their 40

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

abstractness, one could agree with his thesis to a certain extent, but since sometimes unrealistic prerequisites imply the fact of their empirical refutation, it is much more difficult to agree with this thesis 61). Moreover, the Friedman methodology allows one to completely do without knowing the motives of economic subjects (whether they are trying to at least maximize profits, etc.) [372, p. 706], which undermines the foundations of methodological individualism and the intentional approach to explaining human behavior. The position of Friedman was clarified and developed by F. Machlup. He divided Friedman’s prerequisites into fundamental hypotheses and accepted conditions describing the range of admissible application of the theory [311, p. 148-150]. The accepted conditions must correspond to the observed reality, while the fundamental hypotheses, which include the properties of an economic subject, do not need empirical verification. Thus, the maximization hypotheses are ideal constructions, heuristic postulates too distant from operational concepts to be empirically refuted [311 p. 147], and may be rejected only together with the theoretical system which they are part of. It is easy to see that the views of Machlup are close to the methodology of the research programs of I. Lakatos, in which the postulates constituting the «hard core» are not subject to empirical verification and may be rejected only with the entire research program [47]. Practical ways to test behavioral hypotheses are, as experience shows, beyond the limits of economic theory itself. In contrast to the restrictions, quantitative values of which are easily determined, economists can find out preferences only indirectly, based on the results of real behavior. For verification, it is necessary that preferences are defined independently of behavior, otherwise their tautological identity will be guaranteed. Therefore, either the researcher conducts a sociological survey, finding out from respondents, for example, from entrepreneurs, how they are guided in making decisions, or psychological laboratory experiments are organized, in the course of which subjects get, for example, into the position of consumers choosing one or another alternative [364, 404]. In both cases, the results indicate that people show significant deviations from the behavioral hypotheses of economic theory (for more, see Chapter 3). Economists object to this, that the conditions for 41

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

conducting an experiment are far from the real situations of consumer choice, and in the case of the survey, the interviewer and respondent possess different understanding of the same concepts. Moreover, it is hardly possible to test such a general, poor content hypothesis as a model of an economic man. In order to conduct an appropriate experiment, it is necessary to very accurately determine limitations and preferences, and this requires the use of additional hypotheses, so, having obtained, let us suppose, a negative result, it is impossible to decide whether it relates to the model itself or to one of the auxiliary hypotheses [280, at. 19-20]. However, it is interesting that, declaring adherence to the Popper principle of falsification, economists rarely use the opportunity to check the content of their prerequisites (see [25]). They tend to consider as unobservable even those variables that are actually easily observable [257, p. 8197–8198]. In principle, the model of economic actor can also be used to explain (predict) individual behavior, provided that the adopted restrictions are so rigid that the choice is made under the dominant influence of one of the external factors, which turns out to be stronger than the other factors taken together (the so-called situational determinism) [295, 438], and the preferences of the individual play only a secondary role. Verification of the human model. In this regard, the question of verification of behavioral hypotheses making up the human model acquires a special methodological significance. It is a part of a more general problem of verifying the prerequisites of economic analysis (in addition to the human model, these include the prerequisites of equilibrium, perfect competition, etc.). There are many approaches to this problem, including mutually exclusive ones. A.Sen writes that three points of view are common among the economists of various schools: 1) the hypothesis of rational behavior is fundamentally irrefutable; 2) it is fundamentally refutable, but has not been refuted yet; 3) it is refutable and repeatedly refuted. The aprioristic approach of the new Austrian school, and first of all of L. Mises, supported by such eminent economists as L. Robbins and F. Knight152, holds that the prerequisites of rational behavior 42

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

underlying not only economic theory, but the whole praxeology, the science of human behavior, which Mises sharply separates from history as a non-scientific description and understanding of real behavior, are a priori axioms. Each person learns these axioms by introspection and in a logical way derives from them the theorems concerning human behavior in conditions close to real ones. Behavioral axioms, according to Mises, are not subject to empirical verification as well as, for example, categories of logic that we cannot analyze «from the outside», because our mind is naturally logical and operates with these categories. This approach has been preserved in our days only by some representatives of the new Austrian school. Others depart from the extremes of Mises's apriorism and are tolerant to empirical tests. The opposite extreme is the positivist approach introduced into economics by T. Hutchison. It requires an empirical verification of all prerequisites of economic theory, without which they are tautological judgments that do not contradict any possible state of the world. The prerequisites of economically rational behavior were also among those tautological judgments. P. Samuelson somewhat softened the requirements put forward by Hutchison, calling for making economic theorems «operationally significant», that is, allowing the determination if not of the magnitude, then at least of the algebraic sign of a change in this economic variable, and thus these theorems would become potentially empirically refutable 156 . The idea that the positivist and Popperian criteria for acceptability of the theory should be extended to prerequisites of economics also retains some influence up to this day, especially among the supporters of the so-called behavioral direction (behavioral economics). The instrumentalist approach of M. Friedman suggests that the prerequisites of the theory, including behavioral ones (Friedman’s work, in particular, is focused on profit maximization) may be more or less realistic, but it doesn’t make any difference for the evaluation of the theories based on them. The criterion of acceptability of the latter is only the accuracy of the forecasts obtained with their help. Thus, according to Friedman, in principle it is possible, but not necessary, to check the realism of the prerequisites. There is a whole literature devoted to what Friedman meant, speaking of the «realism» 43

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

of the prerequisites of economic theory. Obviously, sometimes he meant the «concreteness» and «accuracy» of these prerequisites. In other cases, protesting against the requirements of «realism», Friedman objected to the fact that only motives realized by economic actors themselves could be included in the model of an economic person. Finally, one more, third meaning that can be given to the term «realistic», and which most critics of Friedman’s methodology had in mind, is that this prerequisite corresponds to empirically observed economic behavior. Here, the verification of prerequisites, according to Friedman, may have some meaning, since it allows to specify the scope of the theory. One way or another, Friedman believes that it is enough to assume that the «as if» prerequisites are correct and proceed to the empirical verification of corresponding forecasts. This point of view has gained extremely wide popularity among modern economists, but has been subjected to quite severe criticism from the methodologists of economics. In particular, the so-called F-bias (F-twist) is condemned. It says, according to Friedman, that the most productive economic theories from the point of view of predictive properties usually have the least «realistic» prerequisites. (If Friedman meant only abstractness of prerequisites under the term «unrealistic», one could agree with his thesis to a certain extent. But sometimes the «unrealism» of prerequisites implies the fact of their empirical refutation and in this it is much more difficult to agree with this thesis. (See Blaug M. Op. cit. p.91-93). It should be noted that the very concept «prerequisites» is used by Friedman in different meanings. (See Archibald G.C. The State of Economic Science// British Journal for Philosophy of Science. 1959. V.19. p. 64-65). In addition, Friedman’s methodology allows one to completely do without knowing the motives of economic subjects (whether they are trying, at least, to maximize profits, etc.), which undermines the foundations of methodological individualism and an intentional approach to explaining human behavior. Friedman’s position was clarified and developed by F.Mahlup. He divided Friedman’s «prerequisites» into «fundamental hypotheses» and «accepted conditions» describing the area of permissible 44

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

application of the theory. The accepted conditions must correspond to the observed reality, while the fundamental hypotheses, which include the properties of an economic person, do not need empirical verification. Thus, maximization hypotheses are ideal constructions, heuristic postulates too distant from operational concepts to be empirically refuted, and can only be rejected with the theoretical system of which they are part of. It is easy to see that the views of Machlup are close to the methodology of I. Lakatosh’s research programs, in which the postulates constituting the «solid core» are not subject to empirical verification and can be rejected only with the entire research program. Practical ways to test behavioral hypotheses are, as experience shows, beyond the limits of the economic theory itself. In contrast to restrictions, the quantitative values of which are easily determined, economists can find out preferences only indirectly, based on the results of real behavior. For verification, it is necessary that preferences be defined independently of behavior, otherwise their tautological identity will be guaranteed. Therefore, either the researcher conducts a sociological survey, finding out from the respondents, for example, from entrepreneurs, how they are guided in decision-making. «In general terms, the more important a theory is, the less realistic (in the indicated sense) its prerequisites are.»(Friedman. M. Ind. Works p. 29. For F-twist criticism see Samuelson P.A. Problems of Methodology Discussion// American Economic Review.1963. v. 53. p. 232-236; Blaug M. Op.cit. p. 91-99): Schlicht E. Rationality, Bounded or not, and Institutional Analysis // Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics. 1990. V. 146. P. 706.160 Machlup F. Methodology of Economics and Other Social Sciences. N. Y., 1978. P. 148-150.161. Ibid. p. 147. An assessment of such a naive attempt to verify the behavioral prerequisites of economic theory undertaken by R. Lester see in the work Psychological laboratory experiments, in the course of which subjects are, for example, in the position of consumers choosing one or another alternative. In both cases, the results indicate that people admit significant deviations from the behavioral hypotheses of economic theory. Economists object to this, saying that the conditions for conducting an experiment are far from the real situations of consu45

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

mer’s choice, and in the case of a survey, the interviewer and respondent have a different understanding of the same concepts. Moreover, it is hardly possible to test such a general, poor content hypothesis as a model of an economic man. In order to conduct an appropriate experiment, it is necessary to very accurately determine the limitations and preferences, and this requires the use of additional hypotheses, so that, having obtained, say, a negative result, it is impossible to decide whether it relates to the model itself or to one of the auxiliary hypotheses. However, it is interesting that, adhering in the words to Popper's principle of falsification, economists rarely use the opportunity to check the content of their prerequisites. They tend to enlist into unobservable even those variables that are actually easily observable. In principle, the economic person’s model may also be used to explain (predict) individual behavior, provided that the adopted restrictions are so rigid that the choice is made under the dominant influence of one of the external factors, which turns out to be stronger than the other factors taken together (the so-called situational determinism) that the preferences of the individual will play only a minor role. 2.3 Verification of economic indicators A number of relative and absolute indicators are formed in the economic activity of the enterprise. These indicators must meet a number of requirements. Indicators should be: reliable, verified, confirmed. These requirements are equivalent and non-compliance with any of them leads to negative consequences of the work of the enterprise. Credible economic indicators reflect the adequacy of the company's financial, business and management activities. They serve as the basis for objective conclusions, as well as the basis for the correctness of new activities, proposals, development projects. Therefore, all the necessary indicators of the activities of the enterprise must be subjected to a thorough check. When it comes to verifying or confirming programs, procedures, processes, forecasts, indicators in literary sources, the concept of verification occurs. 46

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

The term verification is derived from the lat. Verus – «true» and facere – «to do». In literary and electronic sources, the notion of verification is most often mentioned: «Verification» is a verification, confirmation, a method of verifying by means of evidence any theoretical propositions, algorithms, programs and procedures by comparing them with experimental (reference or empirical) data, algorithms and programs. The term verification in the economic literature is interpreted as verification, verification and confirmation of the authenticity of materials, documents, calculations, etc. Also the term verification is used in technical literature. Upon considering several terms, it is proposed to count economic and mathematical activities under the verification of economic indicators aimed at conducting procedures for detecting errors, deviations from the real value. Activities to identify and compare this procedure may include: implementation of alternative calculations, analysis, comparison of information, and even tests. Also, the use of the following methods for establishing direct verification; indirect verification; consequential verification; duplicating verification; verification through expert assessments; inverse verification; verification through minimization will help modern enterprises and entrepreneurs to get verified and confirmed indicators of financial and economic activity. Further consideration of the issue is aimed at calculating the interpretation values of verification of indicators and determining the verification of statistical indicators of enterprise forecasts. Economic short- and medium-term forecasts are developed both in Russia and abroad on the basis of statistical methods and models. Statistical indicators are quantitative characteristics of socio-economic phenomena in terms of qualitative certainty. The system of statistical indicators is a set of interrelated indicators that have a single-level or multi-level structure and are aimed at solving a specific statistical problem. There are the following types: ‒ specific statistical indicator – characterizes the size, magnitude of the phenomenon studied in a certain place and at a certain time; 47

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

‒ indicator-category – reflects the essence, general properties of a particular statistical indicator of the same types without indicating the place and time. According to the girth of aggregate units, statistical indicators can be: ‒ Individual – characterize 1 object or 1 unit of population. ‒ Consolidated – characterize a group of aggregates or the entire population as a whole; types of summary: volumetric (obtained by summing the values of the characteristic of individual units of the population) and calculated (determined by the formulas). By the way of expression: ‒ absolute; ‒ relative; ‒ average. Among many methods of forecasting, statistical tools that are most convenient in practice. The methodology of verification and estimation of accuracy was developed for statistical forecasts in the works of A. Nagar, J. Beerens, S. De'Leev, S. Tilanus. But the priority in studying the problem of checking statistical forecasts should be given to the Dutch scientist G. Teil. According to G. Teil, the verifiability of forecasts, developed with the help of verifiable methods, uniquely determines the scientific nature of the forecast. Verification of the forecast means that: ‒ there are two fundamentally realizable possibilities of the predicted event (true and false); ‒ clearly defined concepts; ‒ a priori formulated requirements for the moment or time interval for which the forecast is made; Probabilistic statements are made about the relationship between the forecast value and the actual value of a certain quantity. The verifiability of the prediction method (procedure) requires that the reasoning that leads to the synthesis of the forecast may be checked in the same way as the forecast itself. In other words, it is necessary to check the following: ‒ the principal possibility of this kind of reasoning; ‒ unambiguous understanding of the forecasting logic; 48

Chapter IІ. Verification theories

‒ the reasonableness of the method (the availability of the forecast and resources for its achievement, the level of development of science required for estimating the forecasting methodology). Probabilistic statements contained in the forecast and requiring verification are checked in the presence of a series of forecasts developed in a certain period of time.

49

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

Chapter III

METHODS OF VERIFICATION 3.1 Methods of verification of the behavior of young people on the labor market According to experts, insufficient education, low vocational training, lack of work experience, poor awareness of the state of demand on the labor market, high competition, spontaneous labor migration of young people and, moreover, high salary demands of applicants are the main obstacles to youth employment. Personnel competition in the near future may grow due to the fact that Kazakhstan has entered the Customs Union, as a huge labor market of the countries -allies opens up for domestic employers. In this regard, young professionals are encouraged to take care of their employment even in the process of learning. Lack of education, low vocational training, lack of work experience, poor awareness of the state of demand in the labor market, high competition, spontaneous labor migration and, at the same time, high salary demands of job seekers are the main obstacles to the employment of young people. Today, the unemployment rate among the young in Kazakhstan makes up 4.6 percent. At the same time, urban unemployment is higher than that in rural areas – 6.4 and 4.3 percent, respectively. Young people account for about a third of the total population of Kazakhstan. Therefore, today the state is taking a number of measures to provide young people with work. As it was mentioned at the recent meeting of the Council on Youth Policy under the President of the 50

Chapter III. Methods of verification

Republic of Kazakhstan in Karaganda, at the beginning of this year 40 thousand unemployed citizens aged 16 to 29 years who applied to employment agencies, more than 16.6 thousand were employed. Almost half of them (7.3 thousand) are rural youth. By the end of this year, the program «Youth Practice» is planned to involve up to 20 thousand young people. Almost 2.8 billion tenge were earmarked for these purposes from the republican budget. Also, the program «With a diploma – to the village» makes a great contribution to the process of employment of young specialists. However, the majority of young professionals are not satisfied with the state programs. One of the reasons is low wages and temporary employment. So, they endeavor start a freewheeling on the labor market in the hope that they will find their own pier. Meanwhile, according to the Head Hunter study, «the search for a new job is accompanied by numerous refusals, since the current applicant has little knowledge of the situation on the labor market in his field and does not want to be loyal to the employer. Basically, this behavior is typical for young specialists: having received a diploma, yesterday's student at the interview declares the desired income of several thousand dollars, not really understanding what he could do for the company with this money». Young professionals still have to make great efforts to find a job. Experts recommend to start thinking about it during the learning process, not to neglect unpaid internships and practices that allow the student to reveal their skills at the company and later to receive a permanent job offer, to participate in joint education and employment programs that are implemented at universities jointly with Kazakh and foreign companies. As for demand, according to Head Hunter, the position of a secretary remains the most demanded. A high demand and shortage of specialists is observed in the field of telecommunications, information technology. Besides, qualified accountants and financial analysts are welcomed by the employers. Due to the development of the Internet today on the market there is a significant shortage of specialists with deep understanding of the online environment, social media managers, search engine optimization specialists, and a shortage of experienced 51

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

SEO specialists with the knowledge of English is especially noticeable. In the near future, young people will experience the pressure of the increased competition on the labor market as another consequence of Kazakhstan’s entry into the Customs Union, as a huge labor market of the allied countries opens up before domestic employers. Nevertheless, the number of vacancies on the labor market of Kazakhstan is constantly growing. The evidence of this can become the upcoming night of vacancies «A Tram into the Future», which will be held in Almaty today, July 19, at 21.30. Four trams will house potential employers (up to 25 companies) and recruiting agencies. The cars will travel around the night city (along Baitursynov Street in the southern direction, along Shevchenko Street in the eastern direction, along Kunaev Street in the southern direction, the place of deployment is Kunaev-Zhambyl intersection) in the search for university graduates, as well as for everybody who needs work. Employees of recruitment agencies will hold a master class for applicants on preparing a competent and attractive CV and tell about the most popular specialties and the situation on the labor market as a whole. However, the action raises some doubts in success – who do employers and recruiters expect to find at night in the period of summer holidays? And, as it turned out, even the recruitment agencies themselves do not have full information about the trends on the labor market. Meanwhile, in Kazakhstan, a wave of spontaneous migration of rural residents, especially young people, to the cities does not subside. The state authorities fail to regulate this flow as migrants do not consider it necessary to register with the territorial bodies of justice. At the same time, internal migrants completely lack any skills, abilities and knowledge for the work in the city. Hence, the growth of unemployed youth in the cities, the growth of social tension and aggravation of the criminal situation, enhanced by inaccessibility of housing and the low standards of living are observed. In our Republic, a number of activities aimed at the implementation of youth programs are being carried out, e.g. the programs 52

Chapter III. Methods of verification

Youth Practice, state program Employment 2020, Road Map 2020. Despite these measures, the economic and political environment of modern Kazakhstan is perceived by unemployed youth mainly as a medium of their alienation from production and public life. This is the basis of mass social dependency, political extremism and crime among unemployed youth. The situation of unemployment has a destructive, traumatic effect on the psyche of a young person, causes a state of frustration, aggression, leads to the loss of sense of social activity. Most of the young people are unable to overcome this situation on their own, they need help of a specially organized system of social services or centers. Support and development of competitiveness in the young is a very relevant and strategic priority of the state policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Competitive youth of Kazakhstan is the key to a successful entry of our country into the 50 competitive countries of the world. In the annual messages of the President to the people of the country, the main attention is paid to the construction and development of a socially-oriented state. The main factor in the formation and further sustainable development of a socially-oriented state is the formation and education of national competitive youth meeting modern, international requirements and standards in the context of increasing globalization. The presence of such young people is the key to the prosperity of the nation, the key to a developed civil society, and therefore, to basic institutions of democracy in our country. The fundamental factor in the formation of competitive young people is their high qualification and relevance in the conditions of market economy. Such young people form an active civil society, constitute the middle class – the basis of any state. The presence of active competitive young people in the country is the guarantee of the effective functioning of civil society and the stable development of the middle class, that is the foundation of the country for the further prosperity and strengthening of the positions of Kazakhstan in the international community. We should not forget about the impact of education on economic activity, that leads to a shift from younger groups of population to more adult groups. 53

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

In Kazakhstan, this primarily relates to an increase in the duration of studies at a comprehensive school and a significant increase in the number of primary students (vocational schools and lyceums) and secondary vocational education (colleges). However, it should be emphasized here, that the number of unemployed with incomplete higher and higher education tends to increase, whereas the opposite trend is observed for persons with secondary special education. This indicates that higher education itself is not considered as a guarantee of finding a place on the labor market, but on the other hand, it is the evidence of increasing market demand for skilled workers and service personnel. In his message to the people, the President of Kazakhstan paid great attention to young generation. It was for the younger generation the President determined the task of being the engine of the new course. The state, in turn, started developing a new concept of youth policy. It is the youth who should introduce innovations, because the younger generation is the future of Kazakhstan. The problem of youth unemployment and adaptation of modern youth to the labor market is a very topical issue, so research works in this direction are quite common. The young people of independent Kazakhstan are forced to develop their own adaptation strategies, without much reliance on the social experience of parents, since the transition to market conditions, carried out in a society that does not, in fact, have experience in market relations, requires from the individual an entirely different style of thinking, behavior, and other competences and skills. Human capital is understood as a set of economically valuable resources embodied in a human being – knowledge, skills, motivations, abilities to perceive and produce new information, expediently used by him in the labor process, contributing to the growth of his productivity and earnings. Given that this capital is accumulated as a result of educational and practical activities, this approach (that is, the theory of human capital) should be considered in close relationship with the theory of lifelong education. These trajectories are closely related in terms of 54

Chapter III. Methods of verification

the recursive relationship between the labor market and the education system, but, on the other hand, educational and professional trajectories are still dissimilar forms of movement in the space of social positions, and the professional trajectory becomes a social field for the use of educational resources of the individual saved in the process of formation and development of the educational trajectory. The concept of «professional and educational trajectories,» according to G.A. Cherednichenko, absolutely naturally replaced the traditional concept associated with the concept of transition from education to work, as a result the traditional model of the transition «study – work» as a discrete process of changing educational activity to labor activity is more and more receding into the past. So, at the present stage of the increase of the investment in education and widespread non-standard forms of employment and new forms of flexible use of labor (allowing to combine and / or alternate studying and work – according to the data of sociological research, the number of working students ranged 40-45% over the past decade), a new model – «a long interrelated process of alternating or parallel circulation and resumption of study and work» has been formed [3, p. 69]. Educational and vocational trajectories are closely related to the vocational guidance of young people and the subsequent adaptation to the labor market. Since, as already noted above, the accumulation of human capital in the Russian youth in the course of implementation of its educational and professional trajectories is closely linked to the emerging model of permanent education as a model of «lifelong education» and a success factor for labor adaptation of young people, it is necessary to a bit closer consider the theory of lifelong education. It is the process of forming a completely different type of society – informational one, the basis of which is information, knowledge. The transition to this type of society with varying degrees of intensity is noted in all economically developed countries. Its peculiarity is the transformation of information and knowledge into the main strategic resource of the individual, society and the state, for the access to which the competitive struggle unfolds. The most important aspect of the information society is the shift of focus from action to reaction, the 55

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

results of which at high speeds of electronic communications appear instantaneously without hesitation. A timely response to the change in market conditions and priorities is the basis for the success of adaptation on the labor market, and in this process it is the model of continuing education as a source of continuous professional and personal improvement that can ensure high performance of the process of implementing youth adaptation strategies and satisfaction with the process itself of integration into the social and labor space, where, based on the use of this model, an individual can feel socially competitive, capable and confident, despite the uncertainty of the situation on the labor market and in the society as a whole. Thus, life in the conditions of the formation of the information society leaves its mark on the creation of adaptation strategies of Kazakhstani youth, who are forced to take into account that education, possession of information, knowledge, constant updating of these are the key to the success of social and professional activities of the young generations [4, p. 119]. It becomes obvious that only that knowledge has value and force in the modern society, which is the source of constant personal development in the form of timely updating of knowledge and competences. Based on the concept of integration models of Y.A. Zubok who distinguishes two models of social development of young people: social exclusion model and integration model of youth development, then modern Russian youth is in the situation of social exclusion. This situation is characterized by the fact that various groups of young people are rejected from livelihood (labor market, certain types of work, land ownership, normal living conditions, social security system, etc.), from political and social rights. The situation of social exclusion gives rise to the feeling of incompleteness of social status, restrictions in the field of social mobility, rejection of various groups of young people from full participation in the process of social life and in practice leads to the formation of socially atypical and, as a rule, socially disapproved youth groups with an uncertain social status and identity (for example, people with disabilities, drug addicts, extremists, the homeless, etc.). In contrast to the model of social exclusion, which is characteristic for modern Russian youth, the model of social inclusion of 56

Chapter III. Methods of verification

young people is the most effective and successful model of integrating young people into the society, since it involves the process of their mechanical entry into the society based on the feeling of internal inseparable link with social environment, adoption of social norms and values and willingness to participate in joint activities. Today there is no system of state distribution of university graduates, which was customary in the Soviet times, which ensured the maintenance of the general system of social-labor and professional continuity of generations and the process of painless integration of young people into the labor space The young people in modern Kazakhstan, regardless of their group differentiation, are forced to independently adapt to the conditions of instability and uncertainty that are new to the Kazakh society, since all the previous adaptation mechanisms have been destroyed, and the new ones have not yet been worked out. However, the adaptation behavior of the majority of young Kazakhstan citizens is based on the use of social capital in the form of family capital (support of parents or the assistance of influential relatives, acquaintztances) in the process of searching and finding the optimal socioeconomic niche in which they could realize their potential, but such a mechanism of successful social adaptation is not available to all representatives of the younger generation of modern Kazakhstan. This is often the determining factor in shaping the adaptation strategies of the young people of modern Kazakhstan, who choose the strategies based on risk-technology as the way to fulfill their life plans and meet their requirements for the reason of insufficiency of social resources. In connection with what has been said, it is worth agreeing with the opinion of Y.A.Zubok, that risk becomes the most significant factor in the social development of the young [5, p. four]. Thus, the adaptation of modern youth on the labor market, which is the process of active adaptation to certain material conditions and cultural values of the labor market, its requirements and norms, is a kind of indicator of the current risk-generating situation in Kazakhstani society. Adaptation strategies of young people on the labor market as a part of life strategies in general reflect this dynamic essence of life strategies and are characterized by the need for constant modification, updating, bringing them in line with the epoch and its challenges. 57

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

Chapter IV

SOCIAL PROGRAMS 4.1 The principles, priorities and classification of social programs The program is a developed and implemented set of tasks and activities that have a specific content, and are aimed at achieving the ultimate goal. Social programs are one of the types of programs (see Appendix B). Each characteristic reflects one or another aspect of the program – meaningful, leveled and temporary. Programs may be viewed as a type of a project. Different social events may have no links between them and are carried out separately, but if such links exist, the activities on the development and implementation of one or several social projects are combined into one social program. In the management process, there are situations where one or another line of activity has to be singled out. Then it takes the form of a target program that fits into the existing organizational structure of management, or a special structure is created for its implemen-tation, or both variants are employed. The target program and the control system that ensures its implementation (execution) is called management by objective (MBO). If the program does not have a supporting structure or it works weakly, then it «freezes», i.e. its implementation is problematic. This is one of the common «program diseases». A great advantage of programs in general and of social programs in particular is a special allocation of «program resources» and their concentration on the achievement of the sub-goals, objectives, activities and, ultimately, the goals of the program. In its own way, 58

Chapter IV. Social Programs

program-oriented management confirms the importance of determination of priorities in practical activities at any level. Resource provision: the program requires technical equipment – a computer, a photocopier, video equipment for the psychologist, equipment for the rehabilitation department for disabled children. Principles, priorities and classification of social programs When developing social programs, it is necessary to observe the following principles: the principle of scientific justification, principle of expediency and determination, principle of socially reproductive value, principle of complexity, principle of realism and reliability. When developing a social program, it is also necessary to adhere to the following priorities: the priority of the personal element over the group; orientation of management processes in programming to improve the quality of life of the population; a detailed definition of the main types of social services provided by the program; active use of local government in the development and implementation of social programs at the local level; the need for continuous training of participants in the process of social programming. A large variety of social programs requires classification by various characteristics (features). By class: mono-programs are simple programs containing one goal and one line of action; multi-programs are complex programs containing several goals and activities; mega-programs are target programs containing a large number of interconnected simple and complex programs united by a common goal, resources and period of implementation. Multi-programs include mono-programs. Megaprograms include mono and multi-programs. By type: social programs are the programs designed to solve socially significant tasks; economic programs – programs applied in the field of economic regulation; organizational – programs implemented in the field of personnel management and in the management of organizations; technical ones – programs used in the implementation of the results of scientific and technological progress; mixed programs – programs containing the elements of the above types. By the form: educational programs – the programs applied in teaching new knowledge, abilities and skills; research programs – 59

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

programs implemented in the course of social and empirical research; innovative – programs used in the implementation of innovations that ensure the development of various systems; investment – programs used in creation or renovation of fixed assets; mixed programs – programs containing the elements of the above types. By duration: short-term programs are developed for the periods of up to three years; medium term programs are developed for a period of 3 to 5 years; long-term programs are developed for a period of over 5 years. By complexity: simple – mono-programs; medium – multiprograms; complex – mega-programs. By scale: small – aimed at solving simple problems; medium – aimed at solving problems of medium complexity; large – aimed at solving complex problems. By level: international programs that are implemented at the international level; federal programs – those implemented at the level of the country as a whole; regional – implemented at the level of regional actors; municipal – implemented at the level of municipalities; local – implemented at the level of enterprises, institutions and organizations. This classification is very conditional, since in actual practice the goal and objectives of social programs are quite complex and diverse. Different interpretations of the concepts of social programs and social projects can pluralize the conclusion from this topic; therefore, there are three main variants of the relationships between social programs and social projects. A social program may be represented as a set of projects united by a common goal, allocated resources and time for its implementation by technology, the way of organizing activities, etc. Thus, the program may be considered as a set of social projects, but this point of view in science is not the only correct one. A number of researchers distinguish not only instrumental, but also qualitative, semantic differences between these concepts. The use of the concept of a project, as a rule, is associated with the development and implementation of something fundamentally new. The concept of the program is more often used in connection 60

Chapter IV. Social Programs

with the necessity to improve the optimization or improve the quality of any activities or social practices. The program consists of two parts: 1 part – the development of any type of activity, direction, form, technology or a set of activities. Part 2 – implementation of the project developed under the relevant program. Introduction (in accordance with what it is designed, what constitutes; what are the main goals; what determines the composition of the program activities). 1. Content (its characteristic is given). 2. The necessity to develop the program (argumentation). 3. Goals and objectives of the program (main goal, activities). 4. Justification of the program activities (what has been done for it, the optimal period for implementation of the program is stated – 14 years). 5. Terms and stages of the program implementation: the first stage (1997–2000); the second stage (2001–2005) and the third one (2006– 2010). It is indicated that the activities stipulated by the program with the indication of timing of their implementation are presented in the annex. 6. The system of the program activities in the fuel and energy complex; chemical and petrochemical industry; machine building and metalworking; construction industry and woodworking industry; industrial waste; agro-industrial complex; forestry and specially protected natural territories; water industry; transport; environmental monitoring; public health; city (district) economy; environmental education. 7. Ecological and economic efficiency of the program (it is indicated what determines environmental, social and economic efficiency; the payback period of the program is 7 years 3 months). 8. Resource support for the program (total financing and sources of funding). 9. The mechanism for the implementation of the program and monitoring its progress (a brief description of the mechanism; the creation and development of the monitoring system). 61

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

4.2 Evaluation of the economic efficiency of social programs Achieving the long-term goals socio-economic development of Russia in the context of slowing economic growth and strengthening of budget constraints requires searching for new solutions to improve the quality of budget services, the efficiency and effectiveness of spending on the provision of these. For the social sphere, this task is particularly relevant, since, as a rule, there are no clear criteria for measuring the quality of services and assessing the final effect of their provision. The methodological basis for assessing the economic efficiency of social programs in the final form has not yet been formed. There is no uniform terminology and methods for determining the indicators of the effectiveness of social programs, there are no common approaches used in calculating the economic efficiency of social programs, the content of information required for carrying out calculations is not defined. When making decisions on new programs or activities, it is not practical to compare various options for achieving the goals set for each social program. Meanwhile, the general theoretical approaches to such an assessment are known. It is necessary to measure the result expected from the implementation of the social program, and compare it with the amount of funds spent on its implementation. The main difficulty in this is just the measurement of the final result. In the simplest case, to assess the economic efficiency of reforms in the social sphere, in particular, those involving changes in the content of services addressed to target groups, it is enough to show that the social service system that arises as a result of such services rendering will be able to better meet the needs of the target groups than the current one, and at the same time, the content of the new system will cost the budget no more than the functioning system. In cases where the reform is aimed at meeting new needs or covers new target groups that did not previously receive budget services, it is necessary to show that these services will not only satisfy the existing needs, but that the effect that will be obtained from providing them will justify an increase in budget expenditures. In addition, the calculations should show that the cost of 62

Chapter IV. Social Programs

maintaining the social service system, which will be created as a result of the reform, will be feasible for the budget of future periods. The main methods for evaluating the effectiveness of social programs are predetermined by the peculiarities of evaluating the results of the activities of non-profit organizations (hereinafter referred to as NPOs). In the non-profit sector, which includes both state and non-state organizations that provide social services, the results of operations cannot be expressed by one universal indicator. To substantiate the need to develop and implement programs in the social sphere, the main objectives of which are to improve the quality of life of individual target groups of the population or society as a whole, a special system should be created for assessing the effectiveness of spending money. The problem in this case is that the results of the implementation of such programs may or may not be quantifiable. The result of the implementation of any programs, including socially oriented ones, is always the creation of new value. The decision to finance any program means that the company evaluates its results higher than the resources spent. This value may be different in nature, including purely economic or market value, purely social and socio-economic one. The assessment methodology implies the work mainly with the socio-economic value created as a result of social programs, but for the sake of completeness, it is necessary to characterize the whole range of possible results. Economic cost. This is the creation of a new value as a result of the use of economic resources. Examples of creating economic value are well known on the example of private sector activities. Measurement methods are also well known: indicators such as added value, profit, profitability, capital productivity, payback period, etc. are used. In the course of implementation of socially oriented programs, economic value may also arise. For example, enterprises founded to ensure the employment of persons with disabilities may well be profitable, although they are not intended for profit. The new economic value created in the course of such projects consists of the profit of enterprise after tax deduction. Social value (public or social result). This is a positive change in the lives of individuals, the target group or the whole society. Social 63

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

result is often difficult to measure. For example, the preservation of forests improves the life of the whole society, but how much better life becomes is difficult to measure, especially in terms of value. The direct result of social (including environmental) programs is usually measurable – how many hectares of forest have been saved or how many public events held, but the social value of these immediate results is not always measurable. Nevertheless, some social outcomes are quite amenable to the cost determination – for example, the increase in the income of the target group. Socio-economic value. This is a part of the social result, which may be measured in terms of value. As a rule, socially oriented programs lead to budget savings by increasing the autonomy of program participants from socially vulnerable categories of the population and reducing the necessity for state support. Increasing the independence of participants, such programs may lead to the increase in employment among the members of the target group, the increase in their income, that is also an important socio-economic result and, in turn, leads to an increase in budget revenues through the increase in the taxable base. Since socio-economic results are measured using the same cost indicators as the expenditures on program implementation, the socioeconomic effectiveness of social programs may be measured based on the same principles that are used to evaluate the effectiveness of investment projects. Examples of social programs aimed at achieving primarily socioeconomic results are the programs in the areas of increasing employment, employing people with disabilities, socializing and employing graduates of children's boarding schools, programs of professional training, etc. As an additional or side effect, socio-economic results arise in many social programs not aimed at the budget saving or growth in the budget revenues. Accounting for such effects makes it possible to at least partially «justify» the costs of implementation of social programs by the considerations of budget savings or economic benefits. Moreover, despite the fact that the estimated assessment of the social and economic efficiency of social programs is incomplete and does not take into account all the social benefits generated by the program, it often allows proving the feasibility of spending on social 64

Chapter IV. Social Programs

programs, since the social and economic value these programs produce turns out to be higher than the expenditures for their implementation. Evaluation of socio-economic effect In assessing the socio-economic effect achieved as a result of implementation of a social program, it is necessary to take into account all socially significant effects – benefits that direct program participants will receive, benefits and costs for the budget, benefits and costs for residents of the area where the social program will be carried out, benefits and costs to the society as a whole. In public costs should be included budget expenditures for the program implementation. Loss of work by the employees of shut down social institutions may be attributed to the costs of the society, if the society is obliged, by virtue of public or tacit agreements, to provide them with a new job. If such obligations do not exist, such a loss should be considered as a negative increase in household income as a result of the project realization. As a rule, the budget is not responsible for finding employment or compensating lost income for the representatives of those professions that may find employment on the open market (guards, cooks, accountants, etc.), but in relation to public sector specialists (teachers, doctors) if they lose their jobs as a result of reshaping or liquidation of a budget institution, the attitude should be different: they can be offered compensation or participation in a retraining program for the employment in a new place. It is not easy to find a compromise that suits all parties, and often a compromise solution leads to a significant increase in budget expenditures, which is not quite correctly attributed to the program itself. Rather, such expenditures should be included into a separate program with a different target population, and in evaluation of the main program, taken into account for reference only from the point of view of risk assessment. Along with the indicators of the socio-economic cost-effectiveness of the implementation of the social program, the reduced net socio-economic effect, that is, the socio-economic gain minus the costs, and the net budgetary effect indicator may be calculated. In this 65

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

case, you need to be prepared for the fact that the net budget effect will be negative: budget expenditures will not pay off due to the programgenerated increase in budget revenues and savings on unemployment benefits, although for the target group the effect will be significant. 4.3 Comparison of alternatives programs The results of the evaluation of the socio-economic efficiency of the costs of implementing socially oriented programs are very informative and important, but they do not allow to judge whether the program provides the best way to meet the needs of the target group. In the social sphere, where new programs are often not aimed at meeting new needs and servicing new target groups, but at changing the content of services offered to target groups that are already recipients of government support, it’s important not so much to calculate the estimate of the program’s socio-economic effectiveness its comparative socio-economic efficiency in comparison with the existing methods of state support of the target group. When comparing two or more alternative ways of servicing the same target population or different ways of satisfying the same social requirement of the target group, there is no need to evaluate the main social effect of the program, be it the provision of decent living conditions for senior citizens, the upbringing of children without parental care, or the organization of leisure for veterans. Since the maintenance and support of the target population is recognized as necessary, regardless of whether it will bring any economic benefit to society or not, you may just choose the least costly way for society to meet this need. Such an approach does not exclude the possibility of considering side cost effects, if, for example, provision of an alternative set of services not only satisfies the main need for government support on the part of the target group, but also leads to the decrease in the target group need for other budget services or will later give the economic effect due to the increased productivity of the recipients of budget services. When making such comparisons, since the decision to choose one or another development option has not yet 66

Chapter IV. Social Programs

been made, we may speak not about different programs, but about different scenarios for the development of the social sphere or the system of services for target groups. Basic program requirements The program must meet certain requirements, without which it cannot be used as a unit of budget planning and a tool for assessment of socio-economic efficiency of budget expenditures. A program is usually understood as a set of measures and services that lead to a certain quantitatively measurable and socially significant result and require the allocation of certain resources for their implementation. As a rule, the program corresponds to the level of aggregation higher than a separate service, the result of which is measured by the number of consumers receiving the service. The socially significant result of the program should be expressed in an objectively measurable state of the target group. It does not matter whether the program is approved by a regulatory document or various components of the program are combined for analytical purposes. The program should have a quantitatively measurable goal, and this goal should reflect a socially significant result concerning the state of the society as a whole or of individual target groups. For governmental programs in the field of social protection of the population it is difficult to formulate a program goal due to multiplicity and heterogeneity of the target groups, whose needs the program is meant to satisfy. Nevertheless, to form a list of services and activities aimed at meeting the needs of the target population, and assessment of the effectiveness of the program as a whole and its individual sub-programs, it is necessary to clearly define if not all, but at least the main categories of citizens who will receive social support. If the program has already been approved, and the formulation of its goal does not contain measurable indicators, or if the goal is formulated in terms of tasks for performers and does not contain indications of the final socially significant result, then to assess the socio-economic effectiveness of the program, it is necessary to assign it a conditional goal which would meet the necessary requirements, and pick up a quantitative indicator of the expected final result. The 67

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

outcome indicator should reflect a change in the state of the target group or target groups, if there are several of them. Very often, improving the condition of a target group means increasing the independence of its members, acquiring additional skills, increasing productivity, or reducing the need for government support, which directly or indirectly can lead to an increase in the income potential of the program participants or their families. However, in many cases, the improvement in the condition of the target group cannot be measured in terms of increased productivity. With regard to such programs, we may speak about the assessment of their socioeconomic efficiency not in an absolute, but in a relative sense, when different methods of achieving the same goal fundamentally immeasurable in cost indicators are compared in terms of budget expenditures. The program should include all the activities necessary and sufficient to achieve the socially significant goal, otherwise the cost estimate required to achieve it will be incomplete and as a result of the program activities, a socially significant goal will either be not achieved or will be achieved at a different price. For this reason, as a rule, it is impossible to assess the effectiveness of individual social services: to achieve a socially significant result, it is necessary to consider not a separate service, but the whole range of services. New approach From a practical point of view, a system in which the provision of services different in content to different recipients works for the achievement of one goal and requires a new approach to accounting of services rendered and evaluating the effectiveness of the measures taken. Moreover, if at the stage of the development and planning of the program, the effectiveness of the entire complex of the planned services may be evaluated by expert means, then at the stage of program implementation it is necessary to be able to constantly monitor the real effectiveness of the measures applied. A system for recording measures taken and evaluating the effectiveness (efficiency) of new services should be built in into the program beforehand. The necessity to include all the expenses leading to the achievement of the goal into one program leads to the erasure of the distinction 68

Chapter IV. Social Programs

between current and capital expenditures. Often the same goal may be achieved both by increasing current expenditures and by implementing a capital construction project. If capital expenditures are supposed to be financed from extra-budgetary sources, for example, from charitable funds, they should be included in the program as the means of co-financing the program from extra-budgetary sources. This will not only allow estimating the total cost of the program, but also show how much money from extra-budgetary sources was attracted for its implementation. The program should include all types of activities and services, the demand for which may increase or decrease as a result of implementation of the program activities, regardless of which agency is responsible for the provision of services or arrangement of relevant activities. Linking programs to ultimate socially significant goals inevitably increases the horizon of planning compared to the usual annual cycle, since it usually takes several years to achieve socially significant goals, in the social sphere – at least 3-6 years. This remoteness of the expected results from the current period expenditures raises the question of how to estimate the average duration of social services rendering and how important it is to take into account future budget savings or future increase in revenues compared to the expenditures that will be required to achieve these results in the current period. An assessment of socio-economic and budgetary efficiency of program expenditures may be made both for the program as a whole as well as for individual activities (sub-programs, projects) if these activities are necessary and sufficient to achieve the final socially significant goal. At the program planning stage, estimates of the expected performance are usually carried out by the program developers, but to assess the actual results achieved, it is advisable to involve independent specialists who did not participate in the development and implementation of the program and are not responsible for the overall results of the program activities. Characteristics and method of target economic program The following features are inherent in targeted economic programs: 69

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

– programmability, characterized by the presence of a plan for a set of interrelated, coordinated program actions; – goal-orienteers, expressed by the focus of policy measures on the achievement of the goal in the form of solving a single, common problem; – complexity in the form of a combination of all the required various measures that provide a solution of the program problem; – resource availability, reflecting the reinforcement of program actions with necessary resources in the required amount, concentration of resources within the program; – effectiveness (efficiency), which is manifested in the fact that a successful solution of a program problem cannot be achieved by other, non-programmatic means, without carrying out the program measures and concentrating the resources. It should be noted that along with the term «targeted economic programs», other ones are used, for example, «targeted integrated programs», «national economic programs», «federal targeted programs», «regional targeted programs» and simply «targeted programs». State programming (program-target planning) represents the application of the program-target planning method in the state management of the economy in the form of development and introduction into practice a periodically supplemented and changed set of targeted economic programs that are formed in accordance with the emerging or aggravating socio-economic problems of the national economic scale and importance, the solution of which requires concentration or attraction of resources. The program-target method is widely used in planning and management of economic objects, processes, relations at the interstate, state, regional, sectoral levels. To a large extent, it is represented in the planned management at the level of economic entities: corporations, companies, enterprises. There are several prerequisites that contribute to the expansion of the use of the program-target method in the state management of objects of socio-economic character. The modern world is characterized by the development of social production, markets and market processes, an increase in the diversity 70

Chapter IV. Social Programs

and urgency of the state needs on the background of limited and extremely vulnerable natural resources and increasing political tension. All this leads to the increase in the number and urgency of continuously emerging socio-economic problems. Since it is the state program-target planning that is intended to be an instrument for solving such problems, then, accordingly, the field of practical application of state programming is expanding. The use of state target-oriented planning in the modern economy is greatly promoted by its applicability and effectiveness in the conditions of practically any economic system. Program-oriented planning was used in a centrally controlled Soviet economy to the same extent as in the market economy of capitalist countries, because of its relative invariance in relation to the type and nature of socioeconomic systems. Problems arise in the countries with any forms of political and economic systems. Regardless of the type of such a system, problems can be solved and actually are being solved on a program basis using the program-target method, approach, the program-target methodology. Significant differences are observed only in the ways of managing the development and implementation of the set of program activities. In the countries with a centrally managed economy, there is a tendency towards directive, administrative forms of state targetoriented planning. With such forms, the establishment of problems of a programmatic nature and the formation of program goals represent the prerogative of the state executive bodies. In the directive order, the same bodies designate the developers of target programs or other program complexes, approve the scope of program activities (tasks) and their implementers, centrally allocate and distribute the resources necessary for the implementation of program activities. Program tasks are communicated to performers in a directive form. The management of the development and implementation of the program-target complex is entrusted to structures designated by the executive authorities or other state and municipal authorities. Funding for program activities is carried out on a budget basis. In the countries with mixed, transitional economy, the central authorities retain the powers to determine the scope of program 71

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

problems, determine the target settings of the programs, and approve target programs that have been adopted. At the same time, the powers of the participants of the program-implemented complex are expanded, among the participants the state, municipal, and non-state organizations may be found. Partially the program activities are implemented on the basis of government orders, financed from budgets of different levels, the other part of activities – from extrabudgetary funds and funds of the participants of the implemented program complex. It is possible to raise funds on a credit basis. At the level of large corporations, joint-stock companies, the implemented programs and projects enjoy governmental support if the state is interested in achieving the program objectives. In the countries with a developed market economy, state federal targeted programs are initiated and adopted by state bodies, financed from the state budget, and implemented on the basis of governmental orders and contracts by organizations of various forms of ownership. Similarly, state, regional and municipal programs are developed and implemented. At the same time, transnational and national corporations, companies, firms develop and implement production, technical and technological, marketing programs in order to improve the technical level and quality, product competitiveness, penetrate new markets, expand sales, overcome crisis situations. In the practice of countries with market economies, such program-target complexes are called not only programs, but also projects. Characteristically, in the countries with centrally managed economies, program-targeted management complements and expands the scope of directive state planning, forming the so-called programmatic cross-section (section) of the national economic plan. The introduction of this section is designed to ensure and accelerate the solution of the most pressing problems that require concentration of efforts and resources exceeding those foreseen by the state plans. In the countries with market economies, state programming is intended to complement the system of forecasting and state indicative planning by means of plan-program solutions of the problems requiring substantial participation of the state. That is, program-oriented planning and management in the countries with a market-based economic system can be 72

Chapter IV. Social Programs

called a peculiar form of state planning, based on the system of state program orders. An important role in the theory and methodology of goal-oriented planning is played by the problem of combination of the concepts «program» and «plan». In scientific literature of the past years, the issue of the relationship between these concepts was lively debated. At the same time, the main object of scientific disputes was the search for the answer to the question: «What are the characteristics, properties that differentiate a program from a plan?» and a plan was understood only as a directive. We are convinced that there is not a single feature that is inherent to programs, but not to plans in the broad sense of the word. In one way or another, a plan has all the features of a program, but the scale of manifestation of program properties, their «concentration» in the program is much higher than in the plan, that allows us to single it out as a relatively independent planning tool. In addition, the very opposition of plans and programs, which is implicitly manifested in the original formulation of the question, is wrongful. The cardinal principle, which should be the basis of the theory of program planning, is that plans are a general manifestation of the planned functioning and development inherent to the economy, while a program is a particular manifestation of planning in the framework of solving a local problem. Let us consider some more specifically the characteristics that distinguish the target program from the plan in its most general representation. First of all, the program is focused on solving one, albeit a very large social and economic problem, while the plan is designed to solve a complex of task of economic and social development. In this sense, the program is a kind of «single-purpose», problem-oriented plan, with a narrower and clearly defined target area compared to the plan of the same level, scale. In addition, there are noticeable differences between the form in which they are made and the language in which the programs and plans are written. The plan is expressed primarily in terms of the values of the targets that are to be achieved at the end of the planning period or at certain fixed time points during the planning period. The 73

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

program is mainly represented by a set of activities, sequential actions that must be carried out during the program period in order to achieve the required targets. The plan basically expresses the final result of the activity, and the program also provides a detailed vision of the methods and procedures of the activity itself. In this sense, the program requires a more detailed development, analysis of the entire program trajectory in time, along with the planned outcomes to which it is oriented. The program in this aspect has certain features of similarity to technical, innovative, investment projects and can by analogy be called «economic or socio-economic project» (this term is used in the practice of foreign programming). If the plan is presented predominantly in the form of tables of indicators, then the program is characterized by such forms of expression as a network schedule, a coordination plan, a list of activities and tasks. From the theoretical point of view, it is necessary to single out another clear difference between the program and the plan. Plans have a clear, predetermined planning period, depending only on the type of the plan (five-year, annual, quarterly, monthly). Thus, the timing of the start and end of the plan is not at the mercy of its developers. The duration of the program, the dates for its commencement and completion are not predetermined in a rigid manner, but, to a certain extent, are set by the customers and program developers, as well as by the bodies approving the program. The program differs from the plans in the way of their development and implementation. If plans are most often developed by permanent bodies, the development of programs and management of their implementation is characterized by the creation of special structures that are temporary. Despite a number of differences in programs and plans, their commonality is much higher than distinctiveness. The peculiarity of the program as a specific form of planned management in no way diminish the fact that they represent one of the manifestations of the state planned activity. The degree of closeness of programs and plans is so great that the target program can be called a problem-oriented plan. 74

Chapter IV. Social Programs

Target programs provide a means of enhancing the scientific validity of planning and management decisions by strengthening their target orientation, deepening the elaboration of ways and options for achieving long-term goals, allowing them to more fully link their goals with resource capabilities, and give a more detailed picture of the stages of solving problems sequentially. The main purpose of state programs is to accelerate socio-economic processes leading to the solution of the most pressing and important problems of economic and social development, to reduce the time required to achieve these goals and targets, which are paramount for the society as a whole and for certain areas of social production at this stage under these circumstances. In the light of this main task, target programs serve as a means of implementing the principle of a leading element in planning, creating priorities that are strategically important for the economy of the country, region, industry development lines, ensuring structural changes caused by the requirements of production intensification, concentration of resources in the most significant areas of scientific technical and social progress. Programs represent an effective means of complex comprehensive problem solving, designed to provide the possibility of full coverage of all measures necessary to solve problems and coordinate actions aimed at achieving program goals in space and in time. At the same time, the development of targeted programs represents a method of establishing the complete set of resource needs for solving a national economic problem. Government programs are designed to become an effective means of coordinating the activities of individual sectors, departments, organizations in solution of the problems of inter-industrial and interregional nature, when the target task is inherent to the national economy, national character, and the achievement of the goal requires joint efforts of a significant number of governmental and non-governmental organizations of different ownership forms. The use of targeted programs should contribute to finding effective ways to solve the most important socio-economic problems. 75

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

4.4 Methods of assessing the effectiveness of social programs Any communication campaigns are carried out to achieve a specific goal: commercial or non-commercial. For instance, social projects are characterized by non-commercial goals. When comparing the final results and objectives of the project, efficiency is revealed. The importance of calculating the effectiveness of the campaign should be emphasized, as thanks to it, it is possible to improve the strategy of communication with the target audience. The effectiveness of social advertising was investigated by L. Tereshchenko in the article «Evaluation of the effectiveness of social advertising», E. Fetisov, S. Kalmykov in the article «The effectiveness of social advertising» Social advertising and, in particular, social projects are aimed at achieving specific goals, which may vary depending on the theme of the campaign. The goals of such communication projects are individual and depend on the subject, but can be conditionally grouped depending on the period of their achievement. Short-term projects usually draw attention to a social problem and change or form attitudes towards it. Medium-term ones, as a rule, try to motivate the public to commit any specific actions to address the social problem. And longterm goals claim to create new social values. Obviously, through the implementation of a communication campaign, the goals set may be achieved or not achieved, and in accordance with the results, their ultimate effectiveness is revealed. Based on the overall identified objectives of social projects, one can determine the main results that may be obtained after the implementation of such communication campaigns: Attention was drawn to a specific social problem, and the maximum number of people belonging to the target audience was reached; The image or concept used in the social project forms a definite attitude to the public problem; A social project motivates people to take certain actions to solve a social problem; A new sustainable moral value is formed. Evaluation of the effectiveness of commercial projects is based on calculations of economic indicators, the number of financial 76

Chapter IV. Social Programs

resources spent on the project and received upon its implementation. The analysis of the effectiveness of social projects is different in that the main goal is not to achieve profit, and, accordingly, cannot be calculated based on the same parameters. Therefore, when forming a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of social projects, two aspects of their influence on the audience should be taken into account: communication and psychological ones. Communicative component of a social project. Evaluation of the effectiveness in this case reveals the perception, memorability of the implemented campaign. In addition, it allows analyzing the effectiveness of the forms, channels, tools and types of communication. Within the framework of the communicative component, several criteria may be distinguished by which the effectiveness of the project is evaluated: Recognizability. Memorability. Creativity. Influence. Quantitative indicators of the effectiveness of the communication company. The psychological aspect involves the assessment of the effectiveness of the emotional impact of advertising on a person. As it is known, the ability of the emotional memory to induce people to action is greater. In addition, it is more durable according to a large number of studies showing that the hormones of adrenaline and norepinephrine are involved in the storage of emotional memories, while in the storage of other types of memories they are not involved. For this reason, the social advertising that arises in the person the most powerful emotions is better remembered by him. It is the emotional aspect that is perceived less critically, since it does not use in its context the facts that may be refuted. As a part of the evaluation of the effectiveness of the psychological aspect of the social project, the following criteria are highlighted: 77

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

‒ Presence of a single image, concept, or idea that fits or describes a social problem. ‒ Complex influence on the target audience with the help of two components: reflexive and selective. Reflexive impact implies a reaction to external stimuli, while selective impact is based on the motives and expectations of the target audience and carries a certain semantic load; ‒ Ability to make the audience interested and hold the attention of it. ‒ Memorability of the advertised idea, the broadcasted social problem. ‒ Audience engagement ‒ Project cognition ‒ Affectivity of the project ‒ Project conation Some of the selected criteria cannot be evaluated accurately, or such assessment will not be objective. However, some indicators may be calculated or objectively analyzed through qualitative or quantitative research. Problems of evaluating the effectiveness of social projects As shown by domestic and international experience, targeted projects may serve as an effective tool for the implementation of the state social policy [43]. They provide a solution to certain problems of a key character and appropriate concentration of resources, give opportunity to influence on social processes intentionally, in an integrated, systematic way. They reflect the algorithms of future actions aimed at the solution of certain social problems. Overcoming the existing negative aspects requires improving the organizational and methodological support for the formation and implementation of projects, where a special role is assigned to the problem of objective evaluation of efficiency. Assessment of implementation of the project helps: ‒ focus the performers on the achievement of specific results; ‒ analyze the existing trends; ‒ ensure the timely adjustment; 78

Chapter IV. Social Programs

‒ gain the trust of the public by the publication of the results of the activities [44]. There are several types of project evaluation. Assessment of processes which gives the answer to the question of whether the project have been implemented as intended. Here it is possible to apply such criteria as the correlation of the project goal with the goals of social development and the needs of the target group; availability of the forecast of social and economic consequences of the project activities; the use of modern methods of analysis of the organization and management of projects, taking into account the resource, legal and information support of their activities; achievement of the project objectives in the most optimal way, defined as the degree of social problems solution in minimum terms and at minimum material costs for the society; outcome evaluation that determines to what extent the goal has been achieved[45]. Here, the main attention is paid to the achieved indicators of the performance, regardless of whether these indicators were obtained as a result of the efforts of only this project or due to external factors as well. A contribution assessment, which is an attempt to assess the impact of the project on performance indicators in isolation, is used when it is known that there are external factors that affect the outcome. Semyonova T. Yu. [46] formulated the principles of evaluation of the effectiveness of social projects, some of them are given below: ‒ account of the time factor, including the dynamics of the parameters of the project and its environment, ruptures in time, disparity of different costs and outcomes; ‒ comparison of situations not «prior to the project» and «after the project», but «without the project» and « with the project»; ‒ assessment of all the most significant results of the project; ‒ account of the impact on the efficiency of the need for current costs required for the functioning of the social and economic institutions created during the time of the project implementation; ‒ assessment of the impact of uncertainty and risks. The social orientation of the projects implies some specificity of these, which is manifested in the following. First, the twin goals. The social project should include not only measures aimed at solving the problem, but also measures to ensure 79

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

the creation of a new mechanism that does not allow the problem to arise in the future. Secondly, the effectiveness of social projects manifests with a certain time gap, which makes it difficult to adjust the project at the stage of implementation and makes it impossible to assess its effectiveness immediately upon completion. Third, the development of social projects involves public participation, and hence the development of an organizational mechanism. Fourthly, it is impossible to assess the final results of the project without taking into account the impact of external factors. In addition, there is the risk of underestimation or overestimation of the expenditure requirements resulting from the improper account of external influence. Fifth, since the purpose of these projects is to obtain social effect, it is necessary to develop special methods for determining their effectiveness [47]. Now the economic justification of social projects is actually based only on the needs and required amounts of funding. In essence, they are treated as costly activities, although the social program is also a significant source of economic benefit. This effect is realized mainly in the form of «external effects», that is, the monetary gain from the implementation of social projects is dispersed among many recipients. Since social objectives are generally not adequately expressed in the language of real cash flows, methods for assessing the financial performance of investment projects are inappropriate in this case [48]. Speaking about the economic justification, it is necessary, first of all, to separate the concepts of «efficiency» and «results rating» of target projects. The results rating of the project, in the interpretation of VN Lexina and A. Shvetsova[49] – is: – measure of compliance of its expected results with the goal; – the degree of approximation to the latter; – direct positive impact on social, demographic and other situations in the society. Evaluation of the efficiency of social projects may be expressed either by a comparison of the actual results with the possible results of the development without the project implementation, or by comparing 80

Chapter IV. Social Programs

the results with the costs. In the first case, the effect of the project is defined as the difference between the actual social indicators that could be obtained in the absence of the social project [50]. This idea is clear in the content, but more difficult from the point of view of its practical implementation. The search for possible approaches to the implementation of this option is advisable to carry out, on the one hand, conducting a comparative analysis, that is, a comparison with other regions or total indicators, and on the other hand – the analysis of time series, i.e., the analysis of changes over the past 5-10 years. An important point in the implementation of this approach is the forecast of the consequences of non – acceptance of the project. That should take into account both the losses that had occurred at the time of the program development and the likelihood of the increased damage in the future. In this case, it is taken into account that sooner or later the need for appropriate compensation of damage will become inevitable. Modeling is used to predict mediated data and remote social effects, in particular, the construction of the decision tree and Markov’s model [51]. In the second case it is worthwhile to use some elements of the techniques of economic commensuration of costs and benefits and a comprehensive comparison of costs with effects [52]. Cost-Benefit Analysis is used in our country to assess the effectiveness of projects and activities in certain economic sectors, in particular, in health care, and is considered reliable for making decisions on the allocation of budget resources in the social sphere. Cost-benefit analysis is practical when the effects of the social project affect different areas of life or when the project competes with other social projects for the allocation of material resources. At the same time, the use of these methods in Russian practice is hampered by the following circumstances: high complexity of such analysis, especially with regard to identifying the consequences of the implementation of the project activities; lack of a developed market of social services and information and statistical database required for the calculation of social and economic consequences of implementation of projects [53]. Thus, it is possible to offer different approaches to the assessment of the effectiveness of social projects, the widespread use of which 81

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

will increase the validity of budget commitments and management decisions and will allow to substantiate the feasibility of state participation in certain social projects financing [54], as well as to expand opportunities for their extensive implementation. And, based on all the above, we see that there are still many shortcomings in the evaluation of efficiency and there is no clear standard for its implementation, which complicates the work on normatives, as was adopted to this day in public institutions. We will try to check in practice how effective social design is and what problems actually arise in the implementation of social projects and evaluation of their effectiveness. 4.5 Methods of assessing the effectiveness of social programs The most important tool for managing social programs of the organization is internal and external evaluation of the effectiveness of social programs, on the basis of which the administration of the organization makes a decision either on the preparation of new social programs in the implemented directions in case of their successful implementation, or on the definition of new priorities of social programs in case of their inefficient implementation. The peculiarity of evaluating the effectiveness of social programs is that if the results can be evaluated within a certain period of time, the evaluation of the results is possible only after the completion of the program. It is not a secret that among the most acute problems of the social sphere, the problem of underfunding of both existing programs and programs under development is most often mentioned. At the same time, it is forgotten that, despite the urgency of this problem, financing is only a resource necessary to achieve the final result – reducing social tension in society, improving the welfare and economic independence of needy families. Budget opacity and exceptional attention to resources can be attributed to the most serious factors affecting the effectiveness of political decisions and the ability of municipalities to improve the quality of social services. Even if the actual results of the service or social assistance are known to a municipal institution, social 82

Chapter IV. Social Programs

worker or employment officer, the authorities usually do not require them to report and therefore, pay not for the result but, at best, for the process or, at worst, for the demonstration of the process. At the same time, there are no effective mechanisms to motivate or help the service provider to achieve results, and to hold him accountable for achieving them. Social and socio-economic effect of social programs is expressed in improving the quality of life of citizens and society as a whole. Such characteristics as reduction of morbidity, increase of educational level, reduction of the number and composition of risk groups, expansion of the sphere of activities for persons with disabilities, improvement of the quality of the natural environment, etc. may be used as indicators of social effect assessment. Such characteristics as the number of new jobs, the number of newly created small and medium-sized enterprises, financial stability of enterprises, growth of tax revenues to local budgets, reduction in the outflow of population from the territories, diversification of the local economy and other data are used as indicators for assessing the socio-economic effect. In assessing the socio-economic impact of corporate programs, attempts are also made to combine social indicators with financial indicators of companies. For social enterprises method SROI and the coefficient of social investment payback were eveloped and implemented. The methods allowing the evaluation of socio-economic effect of the programs on the respective reductions of the expenditures from the state budget. In general, the effectiveness of social programs of the organization may be evaluated by three aspects: 1. By the aggregate of quantitative and qualitative indicators. – the indicators of the effectiveness of social programs within the direction «Staff Development» are the following ones: the number of managers and specialists who have been retrained; the amount of funds allocated by the organization for training and retraining of the personnel; average salary level of the personnel; number of the workers who were trained; volume of the funds allocated by the organization for providing a social package and bonus payments to the personnel; number of hours of training per employee; 83

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

– the direction «Health Protection and Safe Working Conditions» is evaluated by the following indicators: the number of employees who received vacation packages to rest houses, sanatoriums, dispensaries, etc. at the expense of the organization; the amount of funds allocated by the organization for medical care of the employees of the enterprise; the amount of funds allocated by the organization for occupational health and safety; the amount of funds allocated by the organization for the maintenance of sanitary and ergonomic working conditions; the amount of funds allocated by the organization to support motherhood and childhood; – assessment of the direction «Environmental Activities and Resource Conservation» includes: number of the actions aimed at greenspace expansion, community work days and other similar actions; volume of the funds allocated by the organization for the organization of environmentally safe production process; the amount of funds allocated by the organization for the construction of waste treatment facilities – the direction «Development of the Local Community» is assessed by taking into account the amount of funds allocated for: participation in charity events, holding programs and actions to support socially unprotected groups of population, sponsoring local cultural, educational and sport facilities and events, supporting childhood and youth, supporting housing and utility infrastructure and objects of cultural and historical significance, support of socially significant research and campaigns; – the indicators of the effectiveness of the «Good Business Practice» direction may be: the amount of funds allocated by the organization to publish information about the organization for business partners, customers and other stakeholders (corporate website, information brochures, etc.); for fulfilment of cooperation programs with governmental authorities, consumer associations, small businesses, professional associations and other public organizations; for training of suppliers, business partners and other stakeholders. The sequence of indicators reflects their importance in terms of providing information about social programs. The greater the quantitative significance of the most significant indicators of each direction, the more 84

Chapter IV. Social Programs

effective is this social program from the point of view of the parties interested in it and the existing features of the economic development of the society at the present stage; 2. By the ratio of costs, results and long-term impact of the results of social programs. Financial, time, material resources and volunteer work and donations of employees of the organization are the main expenses of the organization for social programs. The results obtained in the implementation of social programs include: – the attracted additional resources (for example, budget funds, private donations, resources of the partners in program implementation); – specific positive results in solving actual social problems; – benefits obtained for business development (all those specific benefits that we considered in the first chapter of the study). The long-term impact of the results of social programs is manifested in positive changes in public opinion and the situation, as well as a contribution to strengthening and development of the business as a whole. In addition, long-term impact requires careful analysis of all investments in the program, as well as direct and indirect results revealed over a number of years after its completion; 3. Whenever possible, apply methods to achieve organizational effectiveness as a result of implementing corporate social programs. In this aspect, it is possible to assess how the results and the long-term impact of the social program of the organization influence the achievement of the organization’s effectiveness through the indicators of its core business: financial performance, reduction in operating expenses and development of personnel policy and corporate culture. There are several factors affecting the improvement of the financial performance of the organization that are directly related to the company's social programs. Evaluation of these factors in comparison with the volume and content of social programs shows the level of interrelation between the quality of social programs and the improvement of financial indicators. These factors include increased confidence in the organization on the part of partners and consumers, the commitment of consumers to the products of the organization, recommendation of the goods or services of this organization to other 85

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

consumers, increased productivity of workers due to reduction of social tensions, rise in the value of the organization’s shares, reduction in the number of conflict situations with the authorities, mass media, non-profit organizations; competitive advantages when participating in tenders. Many Russian companies see the cost of social programs as the cost increase and involuntary expenses. However, mechanisms have already been developed and are being implemented that make it possible to significantly reduce these costs and, in some cases, bring social programs to self-sufficiency, for example, grant programs. International practice shows that social programs in the implementation of which employees of an organization are involved may become an important additional tool of personnel policy, with the help of which the administration can positively influence every employee by developing and consolidating him in an organization. Unlike investment in production or marketing, directly affecting business processes, social investment involves more complex and indirect mechanisms for the return of invested funds. However, in the end, social investments influence precisely on the underlying business processes: 1. On the production of goods and services – the benefits of social investments are determined by the level of production costs reduction, labor productivity increase, decrease in the losses from temporary disability of employees, increase in the availability of qualified specialists, sanctions and penalty payments decrease (due to environmental impact) , downsizing, etc. Such investments are investments in training programs (both current and future), the development of the social environment and social infrastructure, improvement of the quality of municipal management in the areas of presence. 2. Promotion and sale of goods and services – a social investment benefit is determined by effect of such investment upon the company's reputation, increased market presence, increased sales and brand value. 3. Raising capital – the benefits of social investment are determined by the extent to which social programs have influenced on the company's reputation among the investment community, the assessment of the quality of corporate governance. 86

Chapter IV. Social Programs

The results of an independent evaluation of social programs, published in the form of reports, may serve as a proof that corporate programs are aimed at the social effect, and are not purely imagebased. These results can also demonstrate the scale of corporate investment, often comparable with social expenditures from the state budget. Social investments expand long-term business pprospects, foster strategic partnerships with non-profit and public sectors, and boost business confidence.

87

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

REFERENCES 1. Apel K.O. Transformation of philosophy. – M.: Logos, 2001. – P. 35. 2. Archibald G.C. The State of Economic Science // British Journal for Philosophy of Science. – 1959. – V. 10. – P. 64-65). 3. Blaug M. Op. cit. – P. 91-93. 4. Bourgeois sociology at the end of the twentieth century. Criticism of the latest trends. – M., 1986. 5. Buede, D.M. 2009. The Engineering Design of Systems: Models and Methods. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc. 6. Buede, D.M. 2009. The Engineering Design of Systems: Models and Methods, 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc. 7. DAU. 2010. Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG). Ft. Belvoir, VA, USA: Defense Acquisition University (DAU)/U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). February 19, 2010. 8. ECSS. 2009. Systems Engineering General Requirements. Noordwijk, Netherlands: Requirements and Standards Division, European Cooperation for Space Standardization (ECSS), 6 March 2009. ECSS-E-ST-10C. 9. Eichler I.A. Theoretical bases of business processes identification // Academic science – problems and achievements VIII: Materials of the VIII International Scientific and Practical Conference. – 2016. – P. 174-176. 10. Gempel K. The theory of the truth of logical positivism / / Epistemology and philosophy of science. – 2009. – № 3. 11. Guidelines for the formation of the concept of socio-economic development of the municipality for a strategic perspective. The program of social assistance to the population / Collection of guidelines for the development and implementation of social projects and programs. – M.: INFRA-M, 2009. – P. 345. 12. INCOSE. 2012. INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook, version 3.2.2. San Diego, CA, USA: International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE), INCOSE-TP-2003-002-03.2.2. 13. INCOSE. 2012. INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook: A Guide for System Life Cycle Processes and Activities, version 3.2.2. San Diego, CA, USA: International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE), INCOSETP-2003-002-03.2.2. 14. ISO/IEC/IEEE. 2015. Systems and Software Engineering – System Life Cycle Processes. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for

88

References

15.

16. 17.

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25.

26. 27.

28.

29.

30. 31. 32.

Standardization (ISO) / International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) / Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288:2015. ISO/IEC/IEEE. 2015.Systems and Software Engineering – System Life Cycle Processes.Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288:2015. Ivanova V.N. Technology municipal management: textbook manual / V.N. Ivanova. – M .: Finance and Statistics, 2005. – P. 396 Lake J. 1999. «V & V in Plain English». International Council on Systems Engineering (NCOSE) 9th Annual International Symposium, Brighton, UK, 6-10 June 1999. Lisichkin, VA On the reliability of forecasts. – M.: Knowledge, 1999. Luhmann N. The reality of the media. – M., 2005. Lunin O.P. Management of objects of state and municipal property / O.P. Lunin. – SPb.: Peter, 2003. – P. 345. Machlup F. Methodology of Economics and Other Social Sciences. – N.Y., 1978. – P. 148-150.161 Ibid. P. 147. Mayer Т. Truth versus Precision in Economics. Aldershot, 1993. Merton R. Social theory and social structure. – M., 2006. Mironov BN Social history of Russia during the period of the empire: In 2 t. St. – Petersburg, 2000. Mirowski Ph. The When, the How and the Why of Mathematical Expression in the History of Economic Analysis // Journal of Economic Perspectives. – 1991. N 1. – P. 145-157. MITRE. 2011. «Verification and Validation» in Systems Engineering Guide. Accessed 11 March 2012 at [[1]]. NASA. 2007. Systems Engineering Handbook. Washington, D.C.: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), December 2007. NASA/SP-2007-6105. NASA. 2007. Systems Engineering Handbook. Washington, DC, USA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), December 2007. NASA/SP-2007-6105. SAE International. 1996. Certification Considerations for Highly-Integrated or Complex Aircraft Systems. Warrendale, PA, USA: SAE International, ARP475. Samuelson P.A. Problems of Methodology-Discussion // American Economic Review. – 1963. – V. 53. – P. 232-236; Blaug M. Op. cit. P. 91-99). 159. Schlicht E. Rationality, Bounded or not, and Institutional Analysis // Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics. – 1990. – V. 146. – P. 706.160. SEI. 2007. «Measurement and Analysis Process Area» in Capability Maturity Model Integrated (CMMI) for Development, version 1.2. Pittsburgh, PA, USA: Software Engineering Institute (SEI)/Carnegie Mellon University (CMU).

89

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects 33. Sen A. Rational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioral Foundations of Economic Theory // Philosophy and Public Affairs. – 1977. – V. 6. – N 4. – P. 325. 34. Sukharev S.V. Forecasting, the basis for the successful operation of a trucking enterprise [Electronic resource] / S. V. Sukhareva // NovaInfo.Ru. – 2016. – T. 2. – No. 50. – P. 80-82. – URL: http://novainfo.ru/article/7591 (circulation date 4.01.2017). 35. Sukharev S.V. Methods for forecasting the development of a freight motor transport enterprise / S.V. Sukhareva // Topical issues of economics and management of Russian enterprises. Collection of scientific papers. Siberian State Automobile and Highway Academy (SibADI). Omsk, 2009. – Pp. 168-171. 36. Sukhareva S.V. Business processes of motor transport enterprises [Electronic resource] / S. V. Sukhareva // NovaInfo. – 2016. – No. 50. – P. 146148. – URL: http://novainfo.ru/article/7578 (circulation date 4.01.2017). 37. Sztompka P. One sociology or many // Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology. – 2009. T. XII. 38. Teslova, S.A. On methods for assessing risk situations in entrepreneurial activities [Electronic resource] / A.S. Danilova, S.A. Teslova // Synergy of Sciences. – 2016. – №6. – С. 200-209. – URL: http://synergy-journal.ru/ archive/article0124 – Date of circulation: 01/06/2017 39. Tikhonov, AV Post-crisis syndrome in Soviet sociology and its problems // Sociological research. – 2008. – №7. 40. Tillmann K.-J. Sozialisationstheorien. Reinbeck bei. – Hamburg, 1997. 41. Tolkacheva, L.V. Development of labor potential of automobile transport enterprises [Electronic resource] / L.V. Tolkacheva // Science of the XXI century: the experience of the past – a look into the future: materials II Intern. scientific-practical. Conf., 2016 / SibADI. – Omsk: SibADI, 2016. With. – P. 623-628. 42. Velikhov L.A. Basics of urban economy / L.A. Velikhov. – M.: INFRA-M, 2009. – P. 242. 43. Vernikova A.O. Social projects and programs: common principles, different methods / A.O. Vernikova. – M.: INFRA-M, 2009. – P. 345. 44. Volgin N.A. Social Policy / N.A. Volgin. – M.: Exam, 2005. – P. 742. 45. Voronin A.G. Municipal management and management. Problems of theory and practice / A.G. Voronin. – M.: Finance and Statistics, 2004. – P. 176. 46. Zorenko A.V. Social programs at the municipal level / A.V. Zorenko. – M.: INFRA-M, 2008. – 221 p. 47. Zotov V.B. Municipal Administration: Textbook for universities / V.B. Zotov, Z.M. Makasheva. – M .: UNITY-DANA, 2007. – P. 345. 48. A typical example of interpretation of this issue by many outstanding economists – article by M. Allae «Modern economics and facts» (THESIS. – 1994. Issue 4. – P.11-19.

90

References

CONTENTS Introduction.............................................................................................. 3 Chapter I.

Verification ........................................................................ 6 1.1 Process of verification .................................................. 6 1.2 System of verification................................................... 9 1.3 Forecast verification ..................................................... 20

Chapter II. Verification Theories ......................................................... 23 2.1 Verification of truth in economic theory as a process of rechecking ....................................................... 23 2.2 Verification of the human model in economics ............ 38 2.3 Verification of economic indicators ............................ 46 Chapter III. Methods of verification ..................................................... 50 3.1 Methods of verification of the behavior of young people on the labor market ................................... 50 Chapter IV. Social programs ................................................................. 58 4.1 The principles, priorities and classification of social programs ............................................................... 58 4.2 Evaluation of socio-economic effect ............................ 62 4.3 Comparison of alternative programs............................. 66 4.4 Characteristics and method of target economic program ............................................................................... 76 4.5 Methods of assessing the effectiveness of social programs ............................................................... 82 References................................................................................................. 88

91

Sociological verification of economic programs and projects

Chapter I. Verification (Sadyrova M.A., Akmsdi M.A.) 1.1 Process of verification 1.2 System of verification 1.4 Forecast of verification Chapter II. Verification Theories (Sadyrova M.A., Asaubek S.) 2.1 Verification of truth in economic theory as a process of rechecking 2.2 Verification of the human model in economics 2.3 Verification of economic indicators Chapter III. Methods of verification (Sadyrova M.A., Kosherbay K.) 3.1 Methods of verification of the behaviour of young people into the labour market Chapter IV. Social programs (Sadyrova M.A., Esenbaeva A.) 4.1 The principles, priorities and classification of social programmes 4.2 Economic efficiency evaluation of social programs 4.3 Alternatives comparison programmes 4.4 Characteristics and method of target 4.5 Methods of assessing the effectiveness of social programs

92

References

Еducational issue

Sadyrova Mansya Sapargaliovna SOCIOLIGICAL VERIFICATION OF ECONOMIC PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS Training manual

Editor V. Papova Typesetting and cover design G. Kaliyeva Cover design used photos from sites www.background-2672597_960_720.com

IB №12560 Signed for publishing 22.01.2019. Format 60x84 1/16. Offset paper. Digital printing. Volume 5,81 printer’s sheet. 50 copies. Order №249. Publishing house «Qazaq University» Al-Farabi Kazakh National University KazNU, 71 Al-Farabi, 050040, Almaty Printed in the printing office of the «Qazaq University» publishing house.

93

«ҚАЗАҚ УНИВЕРСИТЕТІ» баспа үйінің жаңа кітаптары Дін­та­ну­: энциклопедиялық сөздік. 1-том (А-И) / құраст.: Н.Ж. Байтено­ ва, А.Д. Құр­ма­­на­лиева, Ш.С. Рыс­бе­ко­ва, Б.Қ. Бей­се­нов [және т.б.]; жалпы ред. басқ. Н.Ж. Байтенова. – Алматы: Қазақ университеті, 2018. – 495 б. ISBN 978-601-04-3021-1 (ортақ) ISBN 978-601-04-3230-7 (1-том) Басылымға ұсынылып отырған дінтану сөздігінде жалпы дінтану пәні, оның ерекшеліктері, пән­нің анықтамасы беріліп, дінтанудың негізгі бөлімдері қарастырылған. Дінтану бүгінде бірқатар бөлім­дерді қамтиды, олардың арасынан дін философиясы, дін социо­ логиясы, дін психологиясы, дін феноменологиясы және дін тарихы негізгілері болып табылады. Философия діннің терең мәндік қасиеттерін ашса, әлеуметтану, пси­­хология, феноменология, тарих діннің әртүрлі келбетін және әртүрлі деңгейде қалай көрініс беретінін, әртүрлі діни фено­ мен­дерде қалай байқалатынын көруге мүмкіндік береді. Дінге қатысты еркін ойлау туралы білімді қамтитын бөлім атап көрсе­тіледі. Бұл бөлімде еркін ойлаудың мазмұны, оның даму заң­ дылықтары, қоғамдағы және жеке тұлғаның өміріндегі қызмет­ терінің мәні ашылады, оның әртүрлі көріністері зерттеледі, оның тарихы, даму типтері мен кезеңдері, оның әр дәуірде концеп­ туалды деңгейде және халық санасында, ғылымда, мораль, өнер, саясат, философия, теологияда көрініс алуы сипатталады. Соны­ мен қатар сөз­дікте дінтанулық ұғымдар мен терминдердің бір­ қатар топтары көрсетіліп, зерттеу әдістері мен пән­нің негізгі принциптері зерделенеді. Дін­та­ну­: энциклопедиялық сөздік. 2-том (Й-Я) / құраст.: Н.Ж. Байтено­ ва, А.Д. Құр­ма­­на­лиева, Ш.С. Рыс­бе­ко­ва, Б.Қ. Бей­се­нов [және т.б.]; жалпы ред. басқ. Н.Ж. Байтенова. – Алматы: Қазақ университеті, 2018. – 439 б. ISBN 978-601-04-3021-1 (ортақ) ISBN 978-601-04-3252-9 (2-том) Басылымға ұсынылып отырған дінтану сөздігінде жалпы дінтану пәні, оның ерекшеліктері, пән­нің анықтамасы беріліп, дінтанудың негізгі бөлімдері қарастырылған. Дінтану бүгінде бірқатар бө­ лім­дерді қамтиды, олардың арасынан дін философиясы, дін со­ циологиясы, дін психологиясы, дін феноменологиясы және дін тарихы негізгілері болып табылады. Философия діннің терең мәндік қасиеттерін ашса, әлеуметтану, пси­хология, феноменология, тарих діннің әртүрлі келбетін және әртүрлі деңгейде қалай көрініс беретінін, әртүрлі діни феномен­ дерде қалай байқалатынын көруге мүмкіндік береді. Дінге қа­тысты еркін ойлау туралы білімді қамтитын бөлім атап көрсе­ тіледі. Бұл бөлімде еркін ойлаудың мазмұны, оның даму заңды­ лықтары, қоғамдағы және жеке тұлғаның өміріндегі қызметтерінің мәні ашылады, оның әртүрлі көріністері зерттеледі, оның тарихы, даму типтері мен кезеңдері, оның әр дәуірде концеп­ туалды деңгейде және халық санасында, ғылымда, мораль, өнер, саясат, философия, теологияда көрініс алуы сипатталады. Соны­ мен қатар сөз­дікте дінтанулық ұғымдар мен терминдердің бір­қа­ тар топтары көрсетіліп, зерттеу әдістері мен пән­нің негізгі прин­ циптері зерделенеді. Кітаптарды сатып алу үшін «Қазақ университеті» баспа үйінің маркетинг және сату бөліміне хабарласу керек. Байланыс тел: 8(727) 377-34-11. E-mail: [email protected], cайт: www.read.kz, www.magkaznu.com