Позитивные изменения, Том 3 №1, 2023. Positive changes. Volume 3, Issue 1 (2023)

According to current legislation, these models interpret the very fact of working in the social sphere as, first, a socially oriented activity, and second, a successful activity. Turning to the Federal Law No. 245-FZ of 26 July 2019 “On Amendments to the Federal Law On the Development of Small and Medium Entrepreneurship in the Russian Federation”, which defines the concepts of “social entrepreneurship” and “social enterprise”, you can see that inclusion in the register of social entrepreneurs is possible on several equally important grounds.

Some of the attributes are of a substantive and judgmental nature – for example, providing employment to people from socially vulnerable categories[48], facilitating the sale of products produced by such workers, or producing the goods for socially vulnerable groups. It is true that any activity in this area would have above-zero social effect per se, but the question of its effectiveness would remain. On the other hand, the criteria used for including most businesses in the register, specify the areas of operations that automatically make your enterprise a social one. For example, these areas include services in the field of additional education, recreation and health improvement for children, cultural and educational activities. In this case social impact cannot even be confidently stated without further evaluation.

Since social investment requires proof of social impact, it seems reasonable to consider including the requirement for evaluation into the legislation. In particular, to introduce practices of social impact assessment for inclusion in the register of social entrepreneurs or confirmation of the status of a social enterprise. This way the legislative environment will stimulate a more informed and evidence-based approach to social investment using social entrepreneurship as an example.

Going back to the report by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies (Mackevičiūtė, R. et al., 2020) with an overview of best practices in social investment, we must mention that most of the measures listed in the report have been adopted in Russia, with varying degrees of success:

• creation of state structures responsible for the facilitation of the impact investment market (VEB.RF as the SIB project operator);

• providing a legal framework and legal status for social entrepreneurs;

• availability of tax incentives.

However, at the moment, with the exception of the SIB project mechanism itself, there are no regulatory measures – particularly in the form of the introduction of standardized systems for measuring social impact and reporting. It is this indispensable element of the legal foundation of social investment that is proposed for implementation in the Russian context.

Similar practices of social impact assessment are important in other Russian legal constructs in the field of social investment – such as public-private partnership projects, which do not currently undergo social impact assessment, or the social impact bonds projects, which need a mediator to evaluate the project results.

To summarize, it must be said that actual impact assessment in the field of social investment both in Russia and abroad, being an integral element of the definition of this type of investment, is gradually beginning to take shape in both practice and legislation.

REFERENCES

1. Mackevičiūtė, R., Martinaitis, Ž., Lipparini, F., Scheck, B. C., & Styczyńska, I. (2020). Social Impact Investment – Best Practices and Recommendations for the Next Generation. Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies Directorate-General for Internal Policies, European Parliament. Retrieved from: https://www. europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/658185/ IPOL_STU(2020)658185_EN.pdf. (accessed 07.02.2023).

2. Alekseeva, M. (2017). Monitoring in the Framework of the Institutions of Regulatory Impact Assessment and Evaluation of Actual Exposure in Russian Federation. State and Municipal Administration. Scientific Notes, (2), 20–25. https://doi.org/10.22394/2079–1690–2017–1–2–20–25.