+7 495 989 9610, 9am6pm (GMT+3), Monday – Friday
ИД «Финансы и кредит»

JOURNALS

  

FOR AUTHORS

  

SUBSCRIBE

    
International Accounting
 

Abstracting and Indexing

РИНЦ
Referativny Zhurnal VINITI RAS
Worldcat
Google Scholar

Online available

EBSCOhost
Eastview
Elibrary
Biblioclub

Archiving

Cyberleninka (24 month OA embargo)

Non-financial reporting of enterprises in the USSR: Relevance to the modern economy

Vol. 23, Iss. 10, OCTOBER 2020

Received: 4 August 2020

Received in revised form: 26 September 2020

Accepted: 30 September 2020

Available online: 15 October 2020

Subject Heading: CORPORATE SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY

JEL Classification: M41

Pages: 1162–1181

https://doi.org/10.24891/ia.23.10.1162

Solovei T.N. Saint-Petersburg State University (SPbSU), St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
t.solovey@spbu.ru

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7453-297X

Ivanova D.S. Saint-Petersburg State University(SPbSU), St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
dar.s.ivanova@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2331-6660

Subject. Currently, the Russian economy sees the institution of non-financial reporting emerging. What it means is ambiguous. On the one hand, the country adopts the concept of public non-financial reporting and the Federal Law On Public Non-Financial Reporting is being drafted. On the other hand, experts complain about the quality and comparability of such reports. Public non-financial reporting constitutes a set of data and indicators on purposes, approaches and results of corporate performance concerning all material issues of social responsibility and sustainable development.
Objectives. We determine whether the USSR methodology for setting social indicators is applicable to modern Russia. We also describe the impact of the inertia of the Soviet period in the current circumstances, compare social indicators the Soviet enterprises released after WWII with the international non-financial reporting standards, in order to understand whether they are still relevant.
Methods. We investigated the way the Soviet enterprises formed and disclosed their social indicators. The article also presents the comparative analysis of the said indicators with those of Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), key indicators of the Russian Union of Industrialist and Entrepreneurs and the list of key indicators proposed by the Russian Ministry of Economic Development as part of the Public Non-Financial Reporting Concept for the Russian Federation.
Results. The article provides the rationale for the Soviet methodology for setting social indicators to be used in Russia today.
Conclusions. The list of relevant key indicators of non-financial reporting (as drafted by the Russian Ministry of Economic Development in 2019) is mainly comparable to those disclosed by the Soviet enterprises. The international non-financial reporting standards mostly provide for qualitative and descriptive metrics. Quantitative indicators are more comparable, verifiable and generalizable, which is important for such a stakeholder as the State.

Keywords: nonfinancial reporting, regulation, USSR, key indicators

References:

  1. Kuzubov S.A., Danilenko N.I., Demchuk O.N. [Corporate social responsibility as a subject of the accounting research]. Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet = International Accounting, 2015, vol. 18, iss. 17, pp. 48–61. URL: Link (In Russ.)
  2. Rudenko O.N., Velichko O.B. [Non-financial reporting as a tool to implement the corporate social responsibility concept]. Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet = International Accounting, 2017, vol. 20, iss. 19, pp. 1115–1133. (In Russ.) URL: Link
  3. Korotaev S.A., Shkaratan O.I., Gasyukova E.N. [Post-Soviet Statehood and society. Part 2. Social and labor market policy at the stage of post-Soviet Statehood forming]. Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost' = Social Sciences and Contemporary World, 2017, no. 6, pp. 110–122. (In Russ.)
  4. Zaloilo M.V. [Problems of incorporation of legal acts of the USSR and the RSFSR into the modern Russian legislation]. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2017, no. 10, pp. 24–36. URL: Link (In Russ.)
  5. Zhuravlev A.L., Ushakov D.V. [The origination and competitiveness of the nation: Psychological considerations]. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal = Psychological Journal, 2009, no. 1, pp. 5–13. (In Russ.)
  6. Andryushkov A.A. [The formation of Russian identity as an aim of educational system philosophy that creates future]. Educational Studies Moscow, 2011, no. 3, pp. 287–300. (In Russ.)
  7. Salakhova E.K. [Modern problems of conducting socio-environmental accounting and making report]. Vestnik Astrakhanskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta. Seriya: Ekonomika = Vestnik of Astrakhan State Technical University. Series: Economics, 2014, no. 2, pp. 120–128. URL: Link (In Russ.)
  8. Zenkina I.V. [Increasing the informative and analytical value of public non-financial reporting]. Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet = International Accounting, 2019, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 4–23. (In Russ.) URL: Link
  9. Shilovskaya M.S. [The comprehensive characteristics of the concept Integrated Information]. Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet = International Accounting, 2019, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 158–173. (In Russ.) URL: Link
  10. Tryastsina N.Yu. [Presentation of information in integrated reporting to assess the investment attractiveness of companies]. Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet = International Accounting, 2018, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 281–296. (In Russ.) URL: Link
  11. Radaev V.V. [Farewell to the Soviet ordinary man!]. Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost' = Social Sciences and Contemporary World, 2018, no. 3, pp. 51–65. (In Russ.)
  12. Davis K. Can Business Afford to Ignore Social Responsibilities? California Management Review, 1960, vol. 2, iss. 3, pp. 70-76. URL: Link
  13. Davis K. The Сase For and Against Business Assumption of Social Responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal, 1973, vol. 16, iss. 2, pp. 312–322. URL: Link
  14. Aupperle K.E., Carroll A.B., Hatfield J.D. An Empirical Examination of the Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 1985, vol. 28, iss. 2, pp. 446–463. URL: Link
  15. Carroll A.B. A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance. The Academy of Management Review, 1979, vol. 4, iss. 4, pp. 497–505.
  16. Hess D. Social Reporting and New Governance Regulation: The Prospects of Achieving Corporate Accountability Through Transparency. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2007, vol. 17, iss. 3, pp. 453–476. URL: Link
  17. Montiel I. Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Sustainability: Separate Pasts, Common Futures. Organization & Environment, 2008, vol. 21, iss. 3, pp. 245–269. URL: Link
  18. Murray K.B., Montanari J.B. Strategic Management of the Socially Responsible Firm: Integrating Management and Marketing Theory. Academy of Management Review, 1986, vol. 11, iss. 4, pp. 815–827. URL: Link
  19. Tuzzolino F., Armandi B.R. A Need-Hierarchy Framework for Assessing Corporate Social Responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 1981, vol. 6, iss. 1, pp. 21–28. URL: Link
  20. Freeman R.E. Stakeholder Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Marshfield, MA, Pitman Publishing, 1984.
  21. Phillips R.A. Stakeholder Theory and a Principle of Fairness. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2003, vol. 7, iss. 1, pp. 51–66. URL: Link
  22. Goodpaster K.E. Conscience and Corporate Culture. Malden, MA, Blackwell Publishing, 2007.
  23. Porter M.E., Kramer M.R. Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review, 2011, vol. 89, iss. 1/2, pp. 62–77.
  24. Mikhailov S.V. Mirovoi okean i chelovechestvo [The world ocean and humankind]. Moscow, Ekonomika Publ., 1969, p. 397.

View all articles of issue

 

ISSN 2311-9381 (Online)
ISSN 2073-5081 (Print)

Journal current issue

Vol. 23, Iss. 10
October 2020

Archive