Based on a 2023 study by hh.ru and the ecological service “Save the Forest,” it appears that the majority of Russia’s economic sectors have decreased the salaries of ESG specialists and scaled back their recruitment.[22]
The reality is, despite the ratification of UN SDGs by Russia, the national ESG agenda as a basis for financial stability — upon which large investments were forecasted and decisions for significant international financial dealings were made — has seen substantial shifts over the past couple of years. Consequently, the nation’s leading figures have repeatedly emphasized the necessity of creating a bespoke, local ESG agenda.
By mid-2023, Russia had established the conditions necessary for reevaluating and forming a novel concept, one that would naturally incorporate a human-centered, social agenda addressing the development of transparency and engagement with society, inclusivity, support of volunteer and other civic initiatives, and the overall contribution to and assessment of positive social changes. This approach rests on a broader comprehension of sustainable development, not restricted to a narrow set of ESG benchmarks. Let us now consider a number of recent initiatives that have been introduced, fostering the development of the ESG discourse in Russia.
In November 2023, the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation published the document “On Approval of Methodological Recommendations for the Preparation of Sustainable Development Reporting.”[23] It refers to that very Reporting Standard that, at the moment of publishing, was still in the phase of development.
At the WeAreTogether forum during the “Russia” exhibition in December 2023, experts discussed this approach, suggesting significant refinements for the forthcoming iteration of the standard. This discussion was held within the framework of the strategic session titled “Sustainability Reporting Standard as a tool for fostering volunteerism and social engagement among residents, businesses, and territories.”[24]
“I want to highlight that this is a discretionary, advisory document,” said Irina Filippova. “We consider it a fundamental set of guidelines that enables companies not yet engaged in sustainability reporting processes to exhibit their work results.”
The document contains recommendations for organizing stakeholder engagement in report preparation, and for revealing historical data for at least the past three years to understand the development dynamics of the company. Additionally, to prevent dishonest practices and errors, it is advised that reports be professionally verified — through auditing firms (according to the existing draft of the Sustainable Development Reporting Standard available to the editorial board).
The set of indicators was compiled from an analysis of various reporting standards of companies, with the United Nation’s UNCTAD standards on economic, social, governance, and environmental aspects being the baseline at the initial stage.[25]
“In the guidelines, we pinpointed the metrics that warrant attention and endeavored to precisely define how to calculate them and their sources,” Filippova says. “For organizations to compare against one another, it’s critical that they consistently disclose and compute these metrics year over year using a uniform approach.”
The social indicators spectrum now includes factors related to both internal stakeholders, like employees and their families, and external social effects, such as the organization’s involvement in philanthropy. When discussing corporate social responsibility, the economic indicators also encompass those related to sustainable investing.
Furthermore, Filippova noted that following the publication of the methodological recommendations, legislation supporting additional volunteer activities was enacted, coming into effect on January 1, 2024. Additionally, there have been revisions to the taxonomy of green projects, notably those elements associated with volunteer activities.