Social Rating System as a Form of State Control Over Society: Prospects for Implementation and Development, Threats to Realization

The purpose of the article was a scientifically sound assessment of the advantages and risks of introducing a social rating system into the mechanism of state control over society. The article reveals the concept of social rating and reveals the basic principles of its formation. The degree of influence of the rating assessment on the living conditions of citizens and stimulation of their socially useful behaviour is reflected. Using the example of Chinese experience, the procedure for implementing projects on the implementation of the social rating system was considered, on the basis of which a comparative analysis of the advantages and risks of integrating the concept of social rating into the mechanism of public administration was carried out. During the author’s study, general scientific methods of analysis and synthesis were used, as well as the monographic method and the method of establishing causal relationships.

Methodological recommendations for digital evaluation of social indicators of enterprises

Introduction. One of the most important functions of the state in accordance with the Constitution is a constant increase of the well-being of the population of Ukraine. The main direction of raising the well-being is the implementation of the country's socio-economic policy. Digital rating of legal entities and individuals is one of the directions of informatization of society in European integration. The importance of the rating is determined by the problem of creating a transparent society, the fight against corruption, the creation of equal conditions for individuals and legal entities, control over the loyalty of the population, etc. The purpose of the paper is the thorough study and analogization of the international and domestic experience of social rating of economic activity of enterprises on the territory of Ukraine in order to develop harmonized and unified methodological recommendations for the social rating of business entities in the conditions of European integration of Ukraine. Results. In the conditions of chronic deficit of the state budget and the deficit of the Pension Fund, all types of activity of the enterprise are acquiring special relevance to the improvement of these problems. Of course, for the rating of an enterprise, one of the most important indicators is the indicator of payment of taxes and social contributions to compulsory state funds. The next criterion for assessing the social activities of the enterprise is employment at the enterprise. Special moment you need to note the creation of new jobs. Also important element of evaluation is a salary, or rather its size. The main landmark should serve the average salary in the field of field in the country, but with an amendment to the geographical region. The more deviation from the average salary in one direction or another, the more accrued (calculated) scores to the rating. The auxiliary unit consists of a social package that operates at the enterprise. Conclusions. The proposed methodological recommendations on the social rating of enterprises allow to form the necessary basis for state bodies in the scope of managerial decisions on financing, support, protection, permission to participate in public bids, providing various benefits and brets and it is recommended to use not only by state social bodies, but also by others, by a variety of state authorities. The proposed recommendations will allow to eliminate disadvantages in the distribution of state subsidies, subsidies, subventions and other state-owned assistance, as well as serve as a benchmark in determining the optimal social policy both in the country as well as in regions. Social authorities will also be able to optimize the necessary issuance of targeted assistance not only legal but also on the basis of the existing base and individuals.

Lawyers and the Machine. Contemplating the Future of Litigation in the Age of AI

The possible impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) on the modern world constitute a complex field of study. In our analysis, we attempt to explore some possible consequences of the utilization of AI in the judicial field both as regarding adjudication, formerly exclusively reserved for human judges, and in the rendering of legal services by attorneys-at-law. We list the main factors influencing technology adoption and analyse the possible paths the automated management and solution of disputes may take. We conclude that the optimal outcome would be a cooperation of human and artificially intelligent factors. We also outline the conditions in which, following the abandonment of the principle of procedural fairness, AI may be directly utilized in judicial procedure. We conclude that big data solutions, such as social rating systems, are particularly concerning as they constitute a conceivable modality of deploying AI to solve litigious disputes without regard to fundamental human rights as understood today.

Chinese digital profile or social trust scoring system

The formation of a digital profile of a citizen, according to the ideologists of modern China, opens the way for the restoration of China's former power, but at the same time leads to the establishment of a digital dictatorship. In China, pilot projects of social rating of the population have been completed and the system of social assessment of individuals and legal entities is being introduced on a large scale throughout the country. To form a reliable and loyal person, a carrot and stick system is used, a system of rewards and punishments, which opens the way for “right” citizens to a privileged society, and blocks all opportunities for intellectual development for other “lost” individuals.

Constructing the ideal SRI (sustainability reporting index) framework for Indonesian market: combined perspectives from rating agencies, academics, and practitioners

Purpose This study aims to focus on developing the sustainability reporting index (SRI) with combined perspectives from varied social rating agencies, along with integrated combined perspectives from academics experts and Indonesian companies. Design/methodology/approach The first section discusses the theoretical framework along with the sustainability challenges faced by companies in Indonesia. The second section develops the methodology of the study to measure the SRI by considering practical and theoretical perspectives, starting from the identification of initial disclosure, selecting the final disclosure and developing the hierarchical framework. Lastly, the third section confirms the validity of the study’s framework by the exploratory factor analysis method and its comparability by comparing the content analysis result of the study with the Kinder–Lydenberg–Domini (KLD) method. The content analysis was used to analyze annual reports, sustainability reports and companies’ websites based on indicators found in the resulted model. Findings The main finding is the SRI framework (SRIF) of the study, which is built on the basis of the stakeholder relationship theory and is focused on three main dimensions (social, economic and environmental). Specifically, the framework consists of 17 indicators and 93 sub-indicators. On the basis of factor analysis method, it can be safely said that the study’s SRIF is quite valid. The high score of correlations between the SRIF and KLD results at the composite and dimension levels, along with the statistically significant results show that the study’s SRIF results and KLD results are fairly similar. Research limitations/implications The present study has its limitation as it only gathers data from publicly available reports issued by the firms (secondary data). Owing to time limitation, primary data are not collected. However, this is also the strength of this research as it will allow investors to replicate the study’s methodology to measure companies’ sustainability. Practical implications The study is useful to organizations and statutory bodies toward finding a replicable method to measure the Indonesian companies’ social performance. In addition, the study also introduced the usefulness of the qualitative program Atlas TI to perform content analysis, the exploratory factor analysis method to ensure validity and comparability by comparing it to the KLD methodology, which is known globally as the most widely accepted methodology to measures social performance. Lastly, this study will provide implications to the Government to ascertain the level of SRI reporting among the Indonesian public-listed companies. Originality/value The resulted framework in this study simultaneously considers social, environmental and economic factors in the context of companies in Indonesia, while previous researchers have constructed reporting index separately (i.e. Sumiani et al., 2007; Zhao et al., 2012). Especially in the context of Indonesia, there is no such index simultaneously focused on the three main dimensions, namely, social, environmental and economics. The current study tries to fill the gap by using the constructed SRI index based on three perspectives combined, namely, social rating agencies, academic theorist and Indonesian companies.

Foundations of Banking Origin and Social Rating Philosophy—A New Proposal for an Evaluation System

Social impact investments represent a cultural revolution, as they offer the opportunity to pursue financial and social goals simultaneously. However, Social impact investing market configurations are not evolving equally across national contexts. Therefore, in different contexts, different actors may play the pivotal role to make social impact investments more attractive. The present work, by looking at the Italian context, applies a qualitative methodology to study Foundations of Banking Origin (FBOs). This is a specific category of foundation which is bound by law to work and expand the charity sector. It emerges that the role of these entities, inside the philanthropy system, should develop from “impact facilitators” to “impact generators” in promoting social initiatives. Furthermore, the work sustains the importance of introducing a social impact rating system as a formalized methodology to select and finance the worthiest social project. In this perspective, the definition of a clear social rating philosophy and its correct application in the rating system design and use is a necessary condition to increase the solidity of a social impact assessment model.

The Inclusion of Socially Irresponsible Companies in Sustainable Stock Indices

Social rating agencies implement complex filters to identify the companies with the best sustainable and social performance and help investors select the companies for their sustainable portfolios. This study analysed whether companies that are defined as ethical, sustainable and socially responsible by those agencies actually deserve this label. More specifically, the inclusion in the prestigious Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) World of companies that have been involved in controversies according to the Thomson Reuters Eikon database was studied. The results show that the inclusion of irresponsible companies in the DJSI Index is a fact. This outcome is in line with previous studies that criticise the methodologies applied by social rating agencies and those which outline the similarity of sustainable and conventional portfolios. The results may explain the contradictory conclusions regarding the performance of sustainable and conventional mutual funds in numerous studies.