CC BY
43
5. Куценко Е.С. Кластеры в экономике: практика выявления. Обобщение зарубежного опыта // Обозреватель. - 2009. - № 10 (237). - С. 109-126.
6. Миролюбова Т.В. Теоретические и методологические аспекты государственного регулирования экономики в субъекте федерации: монография / Т.В. Миролюбова. - Пермь: Изд-во Перм. ун-та, 2008. - 400 с.
CRITERIA AND INDICATORS FOR SOCIAL EFFICIENCY
© Venelin Terziev*
Vasil Levski National Military University, Bulgaria, Veliko Tarnovo
The paper examines some of the most important criteria and indicators for social efficiency. Fundamental ideas of the Bulgarian and foreign economic science for the specifics of social efficiency in the activity of the subjects of institutional governance, including the bodies of state power are discussed. The paper applies a comprehensive (interdisciplinary) approach suggesting integration of sociological, theoretical and management, socio-economic and other aspects of the study is related to the system analysis. The social governance is seen from the perspective of a system method, being the regulation of the relations between the subject and object of management as a purposeful impact on the social system in order to bring its operation and development in accordance with socially significant goals.
Keywords: social policy, social program, social efficiency, social impact.
Introduction
Some experience has been gained in the foreign practice in the measurement of social efficiency within the estimates of the social consequences of scientific and technological projects, economic and social programs. That is how in the USA in the early 70-s a self-direction of research has been established for assessing the social impacts (Social Impact Assessment, abbreviated as SIA), or more precisely the integrated social consequences in the implementation of various projects and programs for development. Business and political circles in the United States realized that every technological breakthrough brings unexpected losses of environmental, social and psychological character, which in turn ultimately lead to indirect economic loss. In the field of scientific and technological development - both at the level of companies and the level of national programs, a reconstruction has started of the entire methodology for planning and management. Earlier it has been oriented only to purely economic efficiency criteria, but now the social, psychological and other consequences of the implementation of scien-
* Professor, D.Sc, Ph.D, Dipl. Eng. Department of Business Administration and logistics.
tific and technical projects started being considered at the stage of taking a decision for their development and implementation. There is a need for comprehensive assessment of the different categories of impact of the equipment and technology on society.
The assessment of the social impact of scientific and technical projects and programs in the USA has been separated in a different direction shortly after the adoption of an Act for a policy towards the surrounding environment in 1969 that fixed the mandatory procedure for assessment of their environmental impacts. All government projects that may significantly affect the environment undergo an environmental expertise, as well as the projects of private companies and companies requiring special state sanction. An impressive example of the use of environmental regulations in the implementation of economic development programs in the United States is the organization and development of the project for a pipeline in Alaska in the mid 1970-s. The project planning is carried out throughout the entire period of construction, operation and dismantling of the pipeline after depletion of the deposit. It should be noted that the entire complex multistep mechanism for the management of the program is formed and functioned on the basis of the active US economic law and special legislative decrees and agreements. This determines the specific form of this control mechanism in which the various parts and components provided by public authorities, owner companies, specialized companies, are related to each other in a single organizational system of bilateral and multilateral agreements and contracts. From the perspective of long-term interests of the nation, the project is recognized as highly efficient and exemplary.
For a long time, the very formulation of the problem of social efficiency has been considered in sociology for arguable. Up to this moment, there is no universally accepted definition of «social efficiency». There are enough works of monographic character, in which the authors try to explore the social effectiveness of the different activities, including management activities. Above all, most authors develop the concept of social efficiency, the criteria and methods for its assessment against the aims of social production. The monograph of the Bulgarian scientist M. Markov is considered as classical work on the issue of social efficiency [3]. He uses the term «efficient» in the strict sense of the word: efficient is what leads to the result, to the effect (in Latin effectus means action, implementation, and afficio means to act, execute) - efficient means actual.
Social impact and social efficiency
In a number of works, primarily the content of the notions of «social impact» and «social efficiency» has been considered. As a rule, the authors of publications agree that the social effect is a certain social result, goal-setting activity that has been made within the life of national economic decisions.
Moreover, in one case it is perceived as «something related to human development», which «forms new features in the image of life and activity, both indi-
vidual and collective, gives evidence of increasing social activity, contributing to a comprehensive personal development and the formation of a new type of worker». In another case - as «a result, meeting the goals of social progress». In a third case - as a «degree for improving the social and psychological or hygiene comfort of the person».
The proposed definitions allow capturing the essential differences between the concepts of «social impact» and «social efficiency». In the first, a statement for reaching a qualitatively or quantitatively evaluated result of social action in an independent meaning, is reflected and in the second one, the correspondence of this outcome with the measure or degree of realization of the normatively set goal or ideal for public development. This measure for assessing a social effect in turn serves as an important indication of this qualitative side of social activity that is integrated into its system organization thanks to which it essentially reaches the very social efficiency. This inherent efficiency of the social activity, the constitutive qualitative characteristics can be defined as a principle of social efficiency. It is directly related to the criteria for social efficiency as specific quality attributes and determinants of meanings on the basis of which as a kind of «zero points for rendering account» - the social activity is assessed as effective or ineffective. Considering the features that distinguish the social efficiency from the outcome, it is related to either the aims or needs. They note that «the most effective in other equal conditions will be an activity in which the goal to a maximum degree depicts human needs». Along with that, the issue of the specific social outcomes (effects) of the management impact has not been placed, although it is presented in a context that is very significant. The fact is that the setting of the issue for assessment of the social efficiency and the content of this concept is inseparable from the specific analysis as normative or ideological set goals of the social development as well the needs (expectations, interests, ideals) of various social actors.
It seems that social efficiency cannot be considered within the categories of the abstract social prosperity or just as a movement of the social system to some generalized goal of social development.
The social subject (subject of management), which refers to the concept of social efficiency is complicated enough in its structure: it covers the whole range of existing social relations and public relations, and the aims for social control inevitably affect the entire «space» of these connections and relations, including the social system (the society) in general, the social groups (communities) and individuals (people). Based on this and the efficiency of the social management activities, it is necessary to think on the overall assessment for the development of aspects and components of the social system.
It is obvious that the above examined reference of the efficient social activity to the objectives of the social progress indicates one of the important moments of social connection and interdependence between the general, social-group and individual-personal dimensions of the social activity in the complete and as a rule long lasting nature of its manifestation.
Discussing the socio-economic efficiency of the aimed complex programs, it is found that «the main purpose of the statements and assessment of social efficiency within the program-target method is the basis of the received planning and management decisions». Considering the need to anticipate the social consequences of economic events that are required to be reported in the overall evaluation of their efficiency, a number of authors note that in order to do that «sustain-able or quantitative (albeit in a row) dependencies between manufacturing and technical and social changes between the characteristics of planned events and indicators reflecting the corresponding target norms», must be revealed.
Some people associate social efficiency of economy (production) with the problem of efficiency. In sociology, even the question of the legality of a concept like «social efficiency» (in contrast to the more or less clear economic maximum production at minimum costs) appears to be arguable.
Sociologists, who consider this concept as lawful, try to give it a more specific definition. In particular, the criterion of social efficiency is a way to solve social problems in minimum time and minimum costs to society. This definition brings discussions, because the development of criteria for social optimality would significantly move ahead the understanding of the criterion of social efficiency, whatever the final wording of this concept.
In our opinion, the formulation of the question for optimality of the social activity as an integral criterion for its performance is very promising precisely because of the complexity of any social object, its dependence on a number of variables, but also by the presence of internal systematic contradictions.
Optimization in the mathematical theory of optimal processes is the process for selecting the best option possible, bringing the system and the subject in the best possible (optimal) condition; a process which maximizes the quantity characteristic of the most desirable properties of the subject and minimizes the least desirable.
An important theoretical result of the development of the problem of optimization of the national economy is the issue of criteria for optimality (optimum). In general terms, the criteria for optimality in the economy are defined as special economic-mathematical models expressing public aspirations, i.e. as a special variety of formalization of the purposes of economic development in the form of analytic (and therefore a priori set) function.
The problem with the ratio of the problems for optimality and efficiency is also arguable. Some economists actually identify them as the same thing, while others try to separate these concepts and in this area, there is a lot of focused research work to be done. For now, one thing is clear: there is a close connection between the criteria for optimality and efficiency, and this theoretical intelligibility in the given in relation allows us to achieve considerable success in the objective assessment of the consequences of the implementation of the plans, programs, projects and solutions. It is obvious that such social efficiency can be thought as closely pragmatic - as the best result in solving of an urgent social
problem and within the broader social approach reporting strategic and long-term consequences of the measures taken.
Certain contradictions and discrepancies may arise between these approaches. In these conditions, the task for reaching the aggregate social efficiency shall be formulated primarily as a task for optimization of the social managerial activity.
Social and economic efficiency has a twofold aspect: for each executor of a certain type of labor it refers to as part of the common, immediate public work. In terms of the product that is the result of any given type of labor, it exhibits as a quality (property) able to satisfy the increasing demand.
The economic efficiency concerns its criteria for evaluating the results of labor to deciding how much does it cost us to reach the received effect on the social activity, to whom and how this effect serves. Proceeding from this, it can be assumed that unlike the criterion of economic efficiency, the criterion certifying social efficiency does not only change within the «closed» system of social action but has ideal character defined by external normative way. This greatly complicates the assessment of the social efficiency of each management institute, as far it compels it to hold in its visual field the «internal environment» of its activities as in this way the productivity of research can be correctly assessed and measured exclusively with the quality of the given socio-management system, as well as the «external environment», which is not in the sphere of its control, but is the task of normative legal purposes which displays the integrated assessment of social performance.
It is appropriate to highlight the difference and the relationship between the categories of «efficiency» and «quality». The efficiency criterion is the ratio between cost and result and the quality criterion is the ratio between the effect and purpose, goals and means for their attainment. The principle of efficiency is: less cost and greater results. The principle of quality is the highest degree of achieving the objective in rational (optimal) use of the available resources. It is obvious that in such a formulation the principle of social efficiency should be considered mostly from the standpoint of quality of the social activity and not from the ratio cost-performance.
The problems of social efficiency from operation are paid immediate special attention in the specific management. The given context for our research is the most important and may be too extensive and diverse.
For example, the mentioned by us American Social Impact Assessment - SIA concerns the social consequences of managerial activity in the broadest sense of the word. American authors assign to them in the narrow sense of the word the economic, political, cultural and psychological effects. From the perspective of one who is subjected to impact, we can distinguish social entities and organizations. Social entities are public, social groups, social and territorial communities and individuals. From organizational and institutional perspective, the effects are analyzed to which the activities of the management bodies, ministries, industries, corporations are subjected. From the perspective of the dimensional scale of the
impact, the consequences for the country, region, district, municipal, territorial unit - the population of the impacted site are evaluated.
Under the social impact in the strict sense of the word, it is understood the impact on employment, creating new jobs, education and training, self-education, health and quality of life, communication in social groups and between social groups, social cohesion and social segregation within the local territorial community.
In this case, the task consists in answering the question of who is winning and who is losing if the alleged act takes place and what the social costs, benefits would be, and how they would be allocated.
In order to give an assessment of the social impact of the management decisions, it is necessary to have criteria that allow us to classify the social consequences to the benefits or costs. In other words, the presence of certain standards and value orientations is assumed.
In fact, the procedure ends with the determination of what some authors call «target» and «necessity» efficiency - which is efficiency, understood in a normative and ideal dimension.
The problem of social efficiency
The described experience allows us to realize a number of simple truths, without consideration of which we cannot proceed to the creation of socially significant programs and projects, namely:
- before proceeding to the implementation of any management decision, it is necessary to assess its social meaning, and hence its effectiveness;
- there are no universal standards for social performance as any particular managerial decision must be accompanied by justification of its intended social effect and specific criteria for its evaluation;
- interpretation of social impact depends on the scale of the management decision, the level of examination of the subjects experiencing the effects of the invention, the motives and objectives pursued, and also on the time interval over which it is expected to get the expected result;
- it is important to distinguish social effect in the broad and narrow sense, considering that there is interdependence between them. Justification of management decisions is increased, if the notion of social impact brings a complex character and incorporates economic, social, psychological, socio-cultural and other significant consequences;
- when evaluating the alleged social impact, it is necessary to navigate to specific value standards, enabling us to judge in a well thought manner for the social «value» of the significant social «continuity of decisions». Such an assessment is possible only in case of comparing the expected social impact of several alternative solutions.
The problem of the social efficiency of management began to actively being explored in the late 60s and early 70s. Before that, it is associated with the devel-
opment of the theory of social control, which raises the question not only about the economic, but also the social impact of management activity. The question of the efficiency of the management system (efficiency of the operation of the entity's operations management or the management subsystem) is necessary to focus on the following issues: What is the contribution of the management system in solving the socially important tasks? What is its contribution to achieving the objectives facing a particular organization?
A primary criterion is the degree of influence of the managed subsystem. However, as far as the management system is relatively independent and functions as a whole complex, another set of criteria can and should be defined. It is formulated based on the primary criterion and answers questions related to the internal state of the management system, with its ability to act with ever-increasing efficiency. Along with the assessment of the efficiency of the management system in the general aspect, the effectiveness of the main components of management -functions, functional structures, technologies might and should be determined.
Efficiency can be seen not only as a phenomenon of the economic sphere, but it is a relatively independent social phenomenon. In its base, it is the consideration of the multilevel structure of the elements, value criteria and indicators. They fix the productivity of social programs and events, the activities of the various population groups, the social consequences of the realization of economic, scientific and technical projects. Social efficiency indicators are considered as tools for assessing the implementation of the interests and needs of society, the state, the group and the individual.
Efficiency as a social phenomenon appears in the form of qualitative and quantitative characteristics for maximum development of the human resources, forms of social vitality and management of society, when taking into account the minimum social, political, economic and moral costs. This approach allows us to consider social performance as a universal means for stating the level of productivity of the positive and negative performance in the development of social institutions and processes. In addition, the widely approved principle of social efficiency goes beyond the given ratio, as it takes into account and integrates several of the most important dimensions of the efficiency of the social activity - its focus on reaching socially significant, legally set targets for development of the site for social management, assessment of the consistency and the actual degree of approximation to the public ideal within the «self-development» of the system and orientation to the quality of managerial activity. These aspects of measuring social efficiency shall naturally be reflected in the construction of the overall model (principle) of social efficiency.
The analysis of the problem of social performance shows that in the process of emergence and development of native and foreign sociology, it naturally receives more attention in the context of different management systems. In particular, the importance of this context in terms of a system for state and regional man-
agement of the social aspects of society should be emphasized. The public nature of these systems implies limiting them in their work for social impact and its determining quality of social efficiency in the broad range of social needs and goals. Therefore, the social efficiency of the state management system objectively requires polymodal and multiparameter approach for its measurement. Significant is also the relationship of the complex of social and efficient management with the social security of the country as a whole, as well as with each separate region and territory.
Given the specificity of this study and when speaking on the complex assessment of the efficiency of social programs, the following should be noted:
The assessment of the efficiency of social programs should be seen within the section the quantitative and qualitative indicators:
- the quantitative indicator is expressed in the natural volume of social benefits, but also in the material costs for their acquisition;
- the qualitative indicator or criterion is reflected in the internal mechanisms for achieving a certain result (the quality of the organizational and managerial systems, the norms and values, the rules of law on which the activity in a given social system is considered effective or not).
In the assessment of the programs, their economic and social efficiency should also be taken into account. The economic efficiency is evident in the fact that the implementation of the social program is in itself bound to become a catalyst for effective economic development. The means, spend by society to meet social needs, eventually has to be returned in the form of increased social and labor activities. The level for achieving social efficiency, which is determined by the position of the movement to the social ideal that is comprehensively revealed as a state of the most complete realization of human needs and self-realization of their essential strengths, in other words their personality, which is realized before everything in the creation of just living and working conditions. If it turns impossible to calculate the cost-effectiveness, the optimality shall carry more weight in reaching the social impact.
The results from the programs relate either to the objectives of the creators of the program, or to the needs of those to whom these programs are directed. To the greatest extent, efficiency in this case is reached by these programs, in which the objectives of the leaders and organizers of the program fully reflect the needs of the subjects of the program.
Due to the extreme complexity in reporting and evaluation of strategic and long-term consequences of the social events within the broader social approach in determining the social efficiency, in this work we will examine the social efficiency of implemented state programs in closely practical terms: as the highest productivity at solving a particular social problem. Evaluating the efficiency of social programs in this case is brought to the task of optimization of social management activities in the process of solving specific social programs by the program approach.
Efficiency criteria of social activity are determined by the objectives and tasks for providing social services to the population and the degree of their implementation. The following points are generally important: the purpose of the social work can be seen at the level of society, individual regions, populated areas, regions and micro-regions, and at the level of population groups and individuals.
Efficiency criteria for social activity need to become in the first place an expression of efficiency of all types, forms and methods for social services to the population and in the second place - they must show how effective the administration and social services are in modern Bulgarian conditions relating with the implementation of large and complex reforms. In the third place - criteria and indicators should reflect the degree of efficiency of the management of the entire process of deliberate and systematic social work with the population and the individuals in need of professional social assistance.
Several approaches can be formulated to determine the efficiency of the realized social program. The first will be connected with the most objective assessment of the ratio between the results achieved (effect) and the related costs. A key issue in this case becomes the measuring (description) of the results (effects), and the costs. Given that the cost can be estimated, planned, the efficiency of social services can be estimated, planned, and factual (actually reached).
Another approach focuses on the assessment of the efficiency of the social work from the standpoint of determining the degree of satisfaction of social needs and the expectations of the clients served (users, beneficiaries of the project or program). Critical significance in this case is carried by the subjective assessment methods, i.e. opinions, judgments, speeches (on someone, something that is more or less specific), the particular subject which makes the assessment for the efficiency of the social work. Therefore, in this case it is particularly important to identify and choose the information source of assessment (managers, professionals, representatives of bodies, users etc.) or in other words the subject, carrying important assessment information. Of course, it should be taken into account that assessment information derived from specific people was, is and will be subjective. The more entities there are in the assessment process, the greater the degree (the other conditions being equal) that such an assessment will aim to finding an objective and truthful picture of the activities of the social services and the implementation of the specific social employment program (project).
The complex character of the assessment implies purposeful organization of the process of disclosure of opinions, reasoning and inference voiced by certain forms and methods. In this case, we are dealing with the procedural and organizational significance of the term «assessment of the efficiency of social services». If we want to assess something or someone, it is necessary to organize the assessment process (collection and processing of assessment information), production and use of certain assessment procedures (including for example, complex methods for verification of assessments).
The diversity of assessments, derived from various entities, going through certain procedures and stages in the assessment process, turns into resultant (final) assessments. As a rule, the organizational assessment process of the final information can be the basis of certain important practical conclusions for the implementation of relevant events and actions, development of programs to increase efficiency.
Before the start of the practical measuring of the efficiency of social activity, the researchers inevitably face a number of questions, which they must answer: what is the object of assessment, what is the subject of assessment, what may be a subject to assessment, what is the set of criteria and indicators for assessment, etc.
Efficiency is a summarized, integral indicator of the quality of the system. It is determined by the intrinsic properties of the system (the meanings of the different indicators characterizing the potential and resources), and the conditions in which a given system operates. Therefore, it is more accurate not to talk about efficiency in general, but about the efficiency of the functioning of the system in the performance of specific tasks in certain conditions. There is an opportunity to connect functionally all private quality indicators into a common, integral indicator for efficiency. The study of the quality of this type allows bypassing many difficulties arising in the analysis of complex systems.
Among the factors that allow formulating the objectives and tasks for assessment of the efficiency of social services, we will list the following:
- the analytical capabilities of the social service of employment in identification and assessment of «inquiries»;
- the resources of the social service of employment in the operational execution of «requests»;
- the potential of the social service of employment (including the level of interaction with government, civil, commercial and public organizations);
- the socio-economic conditions in the administrative territory in which the social service of employment operates;
- the qualifications of the staff of the social service of employment;
- special care in assessing the efficiency must be paid to the special problem of quality assessment.
Indeed, many issues are solved in the light of quality and indicators (experts) appear to be the subjects for management of the activities of the social service of employment and the objects of its activity. The most typical operation in quality assessment is ranking. We call the objects (phenomena, processes) ranked if any of their quantified changes are in accordance with the specified quality which they possess in varying degrees. In the practice of the various social services of employment, ranking can be used in different situations. The most typical ones are represented by the arrangement of the objects (processes phenomena) in terms of their placement in space and time, in accordance with the level of expression of a quality which cannot be measured by any objective scale, according to some
measurable or liable to reporting features (as a rule the degree of expression of a quality, according to which ranking takes place can always be practically measured), in compliance with a quality that is generally measurable, but at the time cannot be measured for practical or theoretical reasons.
Typical example in the use of expertise in management is the developed matrix - «goal: means». The boxes of this matrix shall finally be filled with information derived from the results given by expert assessments.
The methods for efficiency assessment in the social protection system are very diverse, which is determined primarily by the subject for assessment. We will call these methods «first row». Each subject for assessment may be more detailed and then accordingly there will be new methods from the «second row». Every kind of social services (social, household, medical, legal, rehabilitation, psychological, advisory, material assistance) corresponds to a specific methodology for assessing efficiency.
Efficiency of social technology
Theory of organization and administration defines the efficient management as an attitude of pure positive results (exceeding desired consequences over unde-sired) and the eligible costs. The decision may be called effective if the best result is achieved in the given temporary expenditure or if the result is obtained at the lowest cost for the choice.
Modern societies are experiencing a crisis of efficiency of traditional systems for state government. We can analyze three key factors that influence the formation of the crisis: socio-political, economic and socio-cultural. Overcoming the crisis by modern democracies and thus solving the problem of the efficiency of administrative government is directly related to the establishment of a management paradigm corresponding to the maximum extent of the new cultural, social and political situation. As a management paradigm, it is suggested to consider the synergistic methodology. It is believed that the concordance theory denied extremes of deterministic and atomistic positions on the analysis of institutional systems, providing to researchers two key categories for the conceptualization of the term «social efficiency»: «interpretative rationality» and «transaction costs». These categories contribute to the decision of the main research task: the search for a general principle, proceeding from which to interpret the term «management decision» in the context of different institutional subsystems, recognizing that each of them has its own specific set of goals.
Besides the «economic» component of the concept of efficiency (the ratio between the volume, provided services to the value or volume of resources needed to provide the volume of services), we can note also the «technical» or organizational part, determined by the positions of reaching goals. The technical efficiency indicates the extent of compliance of the state services with the needs, desires and resources of their clients.
The concept of social efficiency is considered in the context of the new paradigm of state government. The Western researchers (M. Dimok, Anicet Le Port, J. Lane etc.) in the definition of the concept of social efficiency, address the question of resource allocation as methodologically closer to the political economy or the management of the organizations. Social efficiency is determined as a function of minimization of transaction costs (costs of exchange). Accordingly, a basic condition for socially efficient management is the presence of an effective mechanism for coordination of the social interactions. Transaction costs which are most typical for the government system can be of the following types: costs of opportunistic behavior («truancy», «influence», «agency costs», «blackmail» po-liticization costs, etc.) [3].
Within the conditions of a transitional period, we may talk about a system-wide crisis, covering all spheres of society for a long period of time. The success of the economic reforms depends on two sets of conditions: considering the interests of the subjects of reforms (mostly the political elite of the country) and recognizing the need for reform objects (management and staff of enterprises together with all forms of property, the regional structures, broad strata population). Moreover, the reporting of interests shall be carried out on «accounting» level and through the study of more specific motivations covering the multilayer structure of needs.
The experience in industrial and postindustrial development of all countries in the world without exception demonstrates the inadequacy of the purely technocratic approach to management. New technologies, information, taylorism, economic-mathematical methods are very important, but they allow reaching real efficiency and competitiveness only through the social motivation of workers and establishment of a system of a well thought stimulation system. It brings out criteria for assessing the social performance of the system of government. Two groups are differentiated with such criteria: general systems, which include balance, stability, diversity, presence of feedback, etc. and specifically social, as the most important of which should be considered the provision of social security and social protection of the population.
The problem of social efficiency is closely intertwined with the issue of the security of the social system. Statistically, under safety of the social safety we can understand a specific region of a territory, the condition of this system, the parameters of which are determined by the historically conditioned public ideal. For the contemporary Bulgarian society in particular, going abroad and being outside the borders of the defined territory means getting closer of the society to a variety of totalitarian regime.
Very important for this study are the developments, which reveal the problem of efficiency of the different social events or technologies.
Social technology is a method of management of social processes, which secures the system through consistent actions of the individual, the team, the man-
agement bodies of the region, district, municipality, settlement. The model of «Technologicalization» or technological development of social space (layout) through the presented by it social objects and processes, set of signs, properties, characteristics, nature of formation, manifestation and reproduction. It is more appropriate to evaluate technologies in terms of optimality of the way for achieving the set target and ensuring the achievement of certain results.
Efficiency of social technologies can be assessed based on recently received widespread assessment studies. Assessment studies can be conducted by both the developer and the guarantor of a social technology. It is important to emphasize that it can be carried out at the stage of development, and at the stage of implementation of the technology.
The practice of assessment study can be oriented not to the entire technology, but to a separate part of it. It should be noted that in an assessment study of the process there is orientation to the internal characteristics of the technology, allowing judging its positive and negative qualities.
In this case, the productive and implementation strategies of research orientation pass in search and assessment of external effects or its productivity.
Assessment of the efficiency of technology can be made based on different models. The target model for assessment studies is aimed at evaluation of the targets, the compliance of social technology of the set in its objectives and determination of the extent of their implementation. Firstly, in this case the quality of reporting and the list of potential targets is assessed, which may be related to the specific social technology. The basis of such an assessment can be made through analytical and expert methods. Secondly, the technological procedures are assessed in terms of their relevance to the lofty goals. The efficiency of technology is higher if it corresponds to its designated objectives.
The untargeted assessment study is aimed at detecting overt or latent effects of the social technology. The assessment of the efficiency of the social technology relates to the complexity of the set of expected effects: on the one hand, there is po-lymodality of the real effects of the object, subject and the social technology itself as a means, and the other there is no adequate valid document for their measuring.
Efficiency of social technologies can be measured by comparing the possible levels of action: the first gives evidence that it can be achieved with the existing resources and restrictions without technology deployment, and the second is related to the deployment of specific technologies at existing resources and limitations and potentially in the development of the technological resources and the removal of restrictions of various kinds. In addition, we can talk about the limits of growth of efficiency of social technology in the presence of resource constraints for its implementation.
Efficiency of social technology is determined by subjective and objective factors. To the number of the first we should refer the individual characteristics of the people, involved in the realization of a particular technology, the level of their
professional training and status. To the objective factors, we can refer the factors for business organization: the objective conditions of the environment, the workplace, the flow of information, control over the activity.
There are a number of attempts to characterize the efficiency assessment of social events (social projects and programs). Moreover, under the social event, the specific activity of this or that organization is understood, in order to amend the social status of a social group or category of people in the desirable direction. A private social event is usually expressed in the creation of legal, technical and economic conditions for the realization of every set goal. The complex of social events, united by common goals, is called social program.
Assessment of social efficiency
A common model for assessing the efficiency is the next scheme resource provision for the activity: expenditure - result. A characteristic feature of this scheme appears to be separation of the role of resource provision and the costs for increase of the efficiency of the management activity.
The model for effective organization of R. Laykert identifies three factors:
1. The factors for internal organization - formal structure of the organization, economic structure and social policy, professional qualification of employees.
2. Impermanent variables - human resources, organizational climate, decision-making methods, level of trust towards the management, methods of stimulation and motivation for activity.
3. Effective variables - growth or decrease of labor productivity and income, level of satisfying consumer demand and more.
With this approach, the efficiency is born as a result of a complex interaction between various factors, among which a dominant position is occupied by the human, social and environmental factors.
Another approach where efficiency is measured at the level of protection of the balanced interests of the state and society is also worth attention. The work of the state apparatus may be recognized as effective only in case if it successfully solves the problem for optimal protection of the interests of the population, social groups and every person. In this dual task, the most important part is the concept of efficiency of the state apparatus. According to this approach, its efficiency is expressed in expanding the opportunities for active civic life of every citizen, the society and the efficiency of the state. It provides a well-functioning system for the state authorities, their ability to legally implement state interests and implement state policy on social and community development.
Another point of view that connects the efficiency of governmental activities is the presence or absence of optimal paradigm for administrative and political management. It comes to opposing the traditional technocratic paradigm of political government to the new participative one.
Overall, the authors directly link the efficiency of the governmental activities with the presence in it of bureaucracy that is actually serving society. This bureaucracy:
- is under the real control of society;
- expresses the interests of social progress;
- is minimal in its quantitative and qualitative parameters.
This statement is based on an inherent contradiction in the bureaucracy between broad public purposes for which it has been created and its close corporate interests with the tendency to dominate.
According to some authors, efficiency criteria of social management consist of the following:
1. The compliance of the directions and the content and performance of the management structures and of these parameters, which are determined by the functions and status.
2. The legality of the decisions and actions corresponding to the management structures and the users (beneficiaries).
3. The reality of the impact of the management on the status and development of the managed sites.
4. The depth of reporting and presentation in management decisions and actions on specific and complex needs, interests and goals of the people.
5. The nature and volume of the direct and reverse connections with labor groups, wide range of people, or in other words in the democracy of the activities.
6. The extent of authority of the decisions and actions of the management structures.
7. The credibility and relevance of the information transmitted to the management structures and beneficiaries.
8. Impact of the management activity in relation to the external environment.
Any action, any social event or quality (including social efficiency) is characterized by quantitative and qualitative aspects. Even though these two aspects of the object exist in an inseparable unity and interconnection, they are still different characteristics of the surrounding social reality. The scientific literature has adopted the term «criterion» to indicate the qualitative aspect of the result (effect) and the term «efficiency indicator» to denote the quantitative aspect.
Other research suggests a slightly different interpretation of the term «crite-rion of social efficiency», considering it in terms of the relationship between the qualitative and quantitative determination of the studied and assessed object. In respect to the quantitative aspect, the criterion appears as a method, an instrument, a reference measure for moving towards the desired outcome, and in respect to the quantitative aspect - as an opportunity to separate the «positive aspects, forms of this movement in space and time».
However, in all of the differences in the understanding of the term «criterion» in the designated approaches there is a meaningful unity, except that their synthesis gives us new, deeper understanding of the social nature of the social efficiency.
Thus, the indicator of efficiency (quantitative criterion) fixes the objective and integral - mainly quantitatively expressed (e.g. in terms of the natural volume of social benefits and the time interval to secure them) - assessment of the achievements of the social system of every rank, and the efficiency criterion (quality criterion) to a greater extent is focused on the study of the internal mechanisms for achieving a specific result, including the degree of limitation, etc. -activation of the human factor as a condition for self-development, efficient operation, social cost of achievement or the extent of its limitations, etc.
This distinction is essential and important for the development of the system for the assessment of social work.
No matter what is the quantity of efficiency of the operating and the developing social system, it is always a result of the actions of all the factors of the system as a whole, presented as an integrative productivity of research. It is important to emphasize that even if the activity of the separate factors in the social system is extraordinary efficient, its efficiency can be secured only by the corresponding quality of systematic social interaction that comes as its irrevocable organic property and serves as a general algorithm and universal motivational mechanism for the activities of all the factors in the system.
The relationship between economic and social efficiency has a complex character. At the basis of the growth of economic efficiency, the following methodological principle is usually placed: the implementation of the social program is in itself bound to become a catalyst for effective economic development.
The funds spent by society to meet social needs, in the end are returned as evident increase of the social and labor efficiency. In this system, the realization of social control is ultimately one of the subordinate factors for achieving economic efficiency.
The effort to treat in a similar way the impact of the economic factor for achieving integrated social performance, will inevitably suffer from a simplistic approach. It has already been recognized as obvious that at a certain essence of the social efficiency, the classic criterion (the ratio between cost and income) is clearly insufficient. We need a different approach, by means of which to assess the effectiveness of one or other social events. The level for achieving social efficiency, which is determined by the position of the movement to a socially significant ideal that is comprehensively revealed as a state of the most complete realization of human needs and self-realization of their essential strengths, in other words their personality. The prosperity of the person as the supreme value to society becomes an end in itself for social development. Hence, the prospective objective of any development usually comes as a requirement to ensure the complete prosperity and free all-round development of all members of society, which is realized primarily in the creation of humane living and working conditions.
It is also necessary to make a number of important methodological and logical specifications. The notion of social efficiency as productivity, evaluated from the perspective of approaching the public ideal, must be related to the changes corresponding to the general line of the progressive development of the social system, i.e. with its gradual transition from the less to the more perfect existence.
We can note that before we compare any achieved social result with the costs, it is necessary to clarify the significance of the mere fact of reaching this result, especially in terms of its compliance with the objectives of social development. It is also important to take into account the time interval required to achieve the goal.
The importance of this observation for understanding the basic principle of social effectiveness and its criteria specifically emphasizes the concrete experience of social policy. The American scientist D. Rotblat stresses out that in the USA in 30s a fundamental rethinking of the principle of effective social policy has happened. Government measures on extending unemployment insurance funds and increase of the number of recipients of social tools that were initially considered as fully progressive, in the long run increasingly manifested their inefficiency as they had little impact on improving the human resource. Experience has shown that «the provision of prosperity without offering viable alternatives» for the development of the person and their initiative has become an obstacle for social progress, as long as it brings «reproduction of the culture of poverty from generation to generation». It is obvious that to the same extent that the time span allows more precisely to reveal the main line of social progress, the assessment of social activity of the carried out measures could be radically altered. According to the author, the inclusion of citizens in need of social support in the labor process, bearing perspectives in economic and social terms is more effective, than giving tools designed for short-term smoothing social tensions in society [3].
Staging the problem of social efficiency depending on the notions of social progress and its ideal creates additional difficulties. In those cases where the social impact is difficult to quantify, the only reliable criterion for its evaluation can only be the degree of approaching the purpose - the realization of these values, which are set out in it.
Experiencing social policy development and efficiency measurment [1-9]
In analyzing the national social policy, it is necessary to make a comprehensive review and analysis of the efficiency of state social services. In relation to the programs for social protection of the population realized by the state social services for employment in Bulgaria, we shall note that today the existing system of social protection of the population and its social services is primarily focused on the «process». The authorities for control of the social protection, the social institutions and offices typically plan and assess their work exclusively in such concepts as quantity of the beneficiaries, amount of services rendered and the amount
of resources spent by the budget or drawn from extra-budgetary sources such as operational programs, etc. Moreover, the result of the services provided (how they affected behavior, capabilities and self-perception of the customer group, etc.) is beyond their attention. Irrespective of the transition to a program-target method of management, the issues for measuring achieved results by this or that social program and their reference to the spent resources remain out of sight of the management bodies for social protection or finance.
In recent years, the implemented programs and measures for training and employment cover a relatively large number of unemployed people, but still the number is insufficient compared to the huge unemployment in the country. As a share of the GDP, the spending seems quite modest - between 0,23-0,25 %. In comparison with the member-states of the EU, the average spent for active policy there is between 3,0-5,0 % of the GDP. Proving the efficiency of the implemented programs and measures for employment and training is one of the main factors for the increase in the funds for active policy. The conclusions made from the assessment on the implemented programs and measures for employment in 2001 have been taken into account in the development of new programs and measures to their optimization. As a result, the funds for active policy of the state budget for 2003 are over 300 million leva, which represents a rate about three times larger than the previous year. The funds stipulated for the national program «From Social Assistance to Employment» account for 217 million leva of them.
It is not a secret that the one of the most acute problems in the social sector is the problem of insufficient funding of the existing and developing programs. One tends to forget that despite the relevance of this problem, its funding is just a resource necessary to achieve the end result - reducing the social tension in the society, increasing prosperity, etc.
The insufficient transparency of budgets and the additional attention to resources may refer to the most important factors influencing the efficiency of political decisions and the ability of the state to improve the quality of the social services. Even if the actual results in the service or provision of social support are known to the social services, the social worker or assistant in the office of employment, the control bodies as a rule do not require them to report and therefore to pay for no result, and in the best case for a process or in the worst case for a demonstration of the process. At the same time, there is lack of effective mechanisms for motivation of the service provider or support to achieve the results and also security of the responsibilities for their achievement.
One of the instruments available to amend the situation and transfer the attention to the efficiency of budget expenditures is the assessment of social programs. The assessment not only attracts the attention of state bodies to the diagnostics of the results achieved and the resulting effect (both quantitative and qualitative methods), but also improves the analytical base, increases the knowledge of the social services. It allows you to ask the right and timely questions, to develop ana-
lytical approaches to the decisions for spending budget funds and in the development or adjustment of the social policy. Does the program reach the set goals? Is the social assistance provided specifically to those for which it has been intended? Is there a leak of budget funds to those who do not need assistance? Are there administrative barriers to the access to public welfare? How do the achieved results relate to the money spent? All these and other questions formulated during the assessment of the social program outline the circle of really meaningful, clear and scalable tasks within the intermediate or long-term development of the social protection of the population.
Budget constraints are only one of the external factors determining the need to assess the efficiency of spending of the budget funds. Public pressure from the population, being the potential voters, is another key factor in stimulating the deployment of the assessment. Each of the developed social programs reflects particular interests of society, for example, to reduce the number of homeless people on the streets and the number of young people suffering from drug addiction, to increase the number of socially active old people in the local community, etc. The political pressure from voters on the one hand and budgetary constraints on the other determine the need for analysis of the concrete results from the social program funded by the local budget and control of targeted use of funds. The assessment provides to the regional state authorities complete, reasonable, objective information about the program results and the efficiency from the course of its implementation. Thus, the assessment is a tool for feedback between the representatives of the authorities and the program recipients. Information obtained during the assessment also allows promoting a specific program in the local community.
Interim assessment, which sets as objective an analysis of budget expenditures in the implementation of the program, allows revealing the reasons for the discrepancy between the estimated and actual data. Sometimes the error can be hidden inside the estimates of unrecorded number of external factors affecting the cost of the program. The assessment allows timely detection of such factors for impact, allowing adjusting the forecast budget expenditure under the program based on accurate factual data.
The assessment also serves as a foundation for the adoption of weighted economic and political rational decisions concerning the implementation of the program, as well as its timely correction. Specifically important seems to us the possibility to compare social programs with other forms of social support in situations of budget cuts and the need to adopt decisions on the extension of funding.
Very often in the course of realization of the social program, new mechanisms for provision of services are used - systems for search and selection of clients, collection schemes for payment, structures and schedules to provide this or that service, etc. A well-conducted assessment can detect errors in the design of the program or arising in the course of its implementation difficulties, which allows improving the mechanism for the provision of services, achieving their
greater efficiency at lower cost. Furthermore, assessment allows managers and specialists of the program to provide more clearly a comprehensive picture of the program implementation, including means to attain the final results. We will also highlight the opportunities for assessment on removing barriers between business and local authorities insofar, if the assessment results allow dispelling the bias in government efficiency and control. Not only the population, but also business structures sometimes have a too remote idea of what local authorities do to improve the prosperity of the residents of the city or region. The assessment causes the different groups of economic agents, in particular the business, to think about the efficiency of social programs, the possible ways to improve them in terms of the local population, opportunities to bring their own contribution to solving local problems.
What are the requirements brought to the assessment? The efficiency assessment of the program should be based on precise criteria, specific landmarks determining the efficiency of the social program with specific indicators. The given landmarks may constitute formally accepted standards for social services, but may also appear as parameters developed specifically for this program, for example the minimum quality standards of social services in England are developed by the Ministry of Health and there is constant verification of compliance of the services provided by these standards that is carried out by government agencies such as the Social Services Inspectorate (SSI) and the Audit Commission (AC / SSI), 2001-2002.
In order for the assessment to be efficient, it should not depend only on the opinions of the managers of the program. In other words, the decision to conduct or order an assessment should be within the competence of people standing over the management of the specific program. An important method of keeping the objectivity, is the attraction of independent experts, having no personal or professional interest in the results of the assessment. In order to have practical orientation and useful results, this assessment must take into account the opinion of specialists - practitioners (e.g. social workers at social services receiving people on certain issues), as well as the mandatory requirement - clients of the program. Collaborators and customers provide relevant information on various aspects of the program implementation, arising difficulties and ways to overcome them.
In order for the assessment to be reliable, it should be carried out by specialists, using consistent standards of modern methodology: in addition the information on the assessment results should be available to the main interested parties and should be considered from as a wide range of specialists as possible, who are involved in the implementation, financing or development of the social program. Thus, the primary method used in this study to determine the efficiency of government programs for social support of the population, is the assessment study of various performance indicators at all stages in the implementation of the program.
1. At the stage of development: the program project is assessed by qualitative indicators of the fixed in it basic value landmarks (degrees of com-
pliance with the objectives of the creators of the program with the objectives of the socio-economic development of the country, the declared legal norms and principles, as well as the expectations of the subjects of the program).
2. At the implementation stage: the efficiency of the program, expressed in qualitative indicators of the organizational, legal and management components in the implementation of the program (a condition for the efficient social state government is the presence of an effective mechanism for coordination of the social impacts in state social service - executor of the program).
3. At the final (assessment) stage: the program is assessed by quantitative indicators of the economic component of efficiency (referencing the volume of services and their value in terms of the limited human and material resources) and qualitative indicators (the degree of compliance with the objectives of managers and organizers of the program to the needs of the subjects of the program).
The presence of a wide range of objectives of the active programs shows that at the efficiency assessment all possible aspects of performance should be analyzed, as well as to measure and compare all the effects - increasing employ-ability, improving the level of payment, the social impact etc. Secondly, it is important to analyze the benefits and costs, which will make it possible to give a clear answer to the question of how the spent funds are economically and socially justified.
In the global practice, mainly four types of assessment of active policies are applied:
1) current monitoring and control of programs;
2) assessment of the net impact of the programs;
3) analysis of the costs and benefits;
4) assessment of the institutional and organizational capacity of the programs.
Full research means the realization of four of the above mentioned assessments. In practice, this is extremely expensive and therefore assessments of the net impact are most often applied. Most governments carry out continuous monitoring and control on the implementation of the programs. Even in the world practice there are few comparative analyzes of costs and benefits, although this type of assessments prove the economic efficiency of money spent on employment programs.
The efficiency of each program is measured by the realization of the set goals. A program is efficient when at its implementation it covers a significant part of the target group.
Furthermore, interest is the immediate impact of the active policies on employment and income levels. To calculate the net effect on employment it is necessary to ascertain how many of the participants in the program were able to find a job after participation in it and how many of them would fail to do that, if they
were not included in it. The net effect on earnings is measured as a proportion of the participants in the program, who after its completion report higher incomes than those received prior to enrollment in the program. Thus, the increase in income is explained by the inclusion in the program.
For the final efficiency measurement, it is necessary to compare the received net effects on the employment and income levels with the direct and indirect costs of the program. It is possible to assess also non-monetary effects, often called social.
In order for an active program to be fully efficient, at the macro level it is required to subtract the side effects from the resulting net effect on employment. Thus, we can ascertain the pure net effect or the real significance of the program as a means to reduce unemployment and increase new job positions.
Side effects are:
1. The effect of the deadweight: the results of participation in a program would have occurred without participation in it. For example, in the case where an unemployed person is employed under a subsidized employment program, but would receive the same job without the presence of this program (preference for employer), the effect of the dead weight is present.
2. Substitution effect: such effect occurs when an unemployed person is employed in the subsidized employment program and received a job that would otherwise be given to another person, not included in the program. The net effect in this case is zero.
3. Effect of displacement: this side effect is observed in the production process when one company, benefiting from subsidized employment, displaces from the market other companies that do not have preferences under subsidized employment programs.
In Bulgaria, two assessments of gross and net impact of the active programs and measures have been conducted. Both are focused on the immediate impact of the programs on employment. The effects of some social programs have been outlined. In the first study, an attempt was made to measure the impact of programs on the level of payment of workers after their inclusion in active programs and measures. Due to financial constraints and lack of statistical data, a full analysis of the economic efficiency of the programs has been made, and this is particularly relevant in the allocation of the budget for active policy between the separate programs and measures.
The importance of comparing costs with revenues and benefits of each program can be illustrated by the following example. If the program for training and retraining of unemployed and the intermediary services give the same quantitative contribution (net effect) for increase of employment, but the money spent on training and retraining are two times higher than those for intermediary services, the first program will be twice less cost-effective than the second one.
The economic effect of the active policy can be sought in several directions. On the individual level, for the unemployed person the economic effect is the in-
creased level of income due to job placement after participation into an active policy. At the level of the «Employment Agency», the economic impact can be measured by the savings on unemployment benefits in case of interruption of payments due to appointment of the unemployed person to a job. Government revenues appear as savings from unemployment benefits and increased revenue to the state budget of the NRA, which the unemployed person and their employer start paying at the time of entry into employment. For the society in general, the economic effect is the increased level of income.
Thus formulated the approaches should be compared with the costs made under the evaluated active policy at the appropriate levels. At an employment agency level, the costs are two types: direct (e.g., payment of a minimum wage and accrued insurance on it for each unemployed person included in the active program) or indirect (administrative costs under the service of the implementation of the respective active program). At the next two levels, namely the government and society, the costs are identical. That is why conducting an analysis of costs and benefits is possible only in case of valuation of the indirect administrative costs for the individual active programs and measures.
In an effort to implement the most informative and sustained assessment in respect of methodology, we are faced with a number of practical problems. The first is the problem of the consistent, temporal and territorial scope of the assessments. The complex character of the assessment of an active program and the related to its conduct considerable amount of financial resources often impose the common practice not to make simultaneous assessment of all or a large number of active programs. A further reason for holding separate and independent assessments of the programs is the difference in the times of startup, the peculiarities of manifestation and the life span of the program.
Choosing the critical moment of the study, i.e. when it should take place, is an important issue, since the macroeconomic conditions and the current state of the labor market can significantly affect the results of the assessment.
The existing practice shows that the results are influenced by the chosen method of assessment. The first choice in this respect is between the classic experiment and the quasi-experiment. The characteristics of the active policy in most cases determine the choice in favor of the quasi-experimental approach.
The essence of the latter consists in the formation of a sample of participants in the program. The two groups are interviewed at least one year after the participation in the program of the first groups.
The second methodological choice concerns the method of calculating the net effect on the employment. The choice is between an assessment based on an econometric model and an assessment under the «doubles method». In literature, there is no synonymous opinion on which one gives more accurate results. Often the «doubles method» is preferred due to its technical simplicity and the easy interpretation of the results.
There are constraints and difficulties relating to the statistical data for the survey. An essential condition to the success of an assessment is tracking the individuals in the sample of respondents under their residence, after participation in a certain active policy. The problem here is the fact that individuals are found at the address indicated by them at the time of their registration in labor offices. After the expiry of a certain period of time after the time of survey, it is objectively possible that some of the persons may not be found due to the change of domicile or because of errors and inaccuracies in the indicated address information to the labor office.
The positive initial steps in the assessment of the active policy should possibly continue taking into account all of the above mentioned aspects of the study. Particular attention should be paid to comparing costs with the realized economic effects and non-monetary benefits. It is more appropriate and economically feasible the programs to be assessed individually, regardless of their scope and the volume of invested funds.
Conclusion
The problem of studying the efficiency is one of the key areas of various activities of society, especially in production and management. Traditionally, the focus is on economic efficiency, reduced to simple enough and calculated «cost-result» ratio. This is a fundamental principle, characterizing the concept of «economic efficiency». Social efficiency does not have so direct character. It is rather a more complex category and is difficult to express in one dimension. Certain contradictions and discrepancies may arise between different approaches and the task for reaching the aggregate social efficiency shall be formulated primarily as a task for optimization of the social managerial activity.
References:
1. Terziev V, Arabska E. Assessment of active social policies' impacts on labor market in the Republic of Bulgaria // Социально-экономические и право-вы развитияэкономики: колективная монография. - Уфа: Аэтерна, 2014. -ISBN 978-5-906769-97-8.
2. Terziev V, Dimitrova S., Stoyanov E., Assessment of the efficiency of social programming in Bulgaria // Сб. ст. Международной научно-практической конференции «Состояние и перспективы развития экономики в условиях неопределенности», 28 февраля 2015. - Уфа: Аэтерна, 2015. - pp. 7-16. -ISBN 978-5-906790-31-6.
3. Терзиев В. Въздействие на политиките на пазара на труда за осигуря-ване на заетост: монография. - Университетски издателски център при Ру-сенски университет «Ангел Кънчев»; изд-во «Дема прес-Русе», 2013. - ISBN 978-954-92964-2-6.
4. Терзиев В., Димитрова С., Арабска Е. Политики в областта на безра-ботицата и заетостта в България // VIII Междунар. науч. конф. «Инновации в технологиях и образовании», КузГТУ 5-6 марта 2015. - Бело во, 2015.
5. Терзиев В., Димитрова С. Потоци на работна сила и видове пазари на труда в преходната икономика на България // VIII Междунар. науч. конф. «Инновации в технологиях и образовании», КузГТУ 5-6 марта 2015. - Бело-во, 2015.
6. Терзиев В., Димитрова С. Теории и анализ на трудовия пазар // VIII Междунар. науч. конф. «Инновации в технологиях и образовании», КузГТУ, 5-6 марта 2015. - Белово, 2015.
7. Терзиев В., Димитрова С. Структура и основни потоци на трудовия пазар в България // VIII Междунар. науч. конф. «Инновации в технологиях и образовании», КузГТУ, 5-6 марта 2015. - Белово, 2015.
8. Терзиев В., Димитрова С. Развитие и преструктуриране на заетостта в България // VIII Междунар. науч. конф. «Инновации в технологиях и образовании», КузГТУ, 5-6 марта 2015. - Белово, 2015.
9. Терзиев В., Димитрова С. Политика на изграждане на функциониращ пазар на труда и на политика на заетост в контекста на европейската интеграция // VIII Междунар. науч. конф. «Инновации в технологиях и образовании», КузГТУ, 5-6 марта 2015. - Белово, 2015.
ОСОБЕННОСТИ ОРГАНИЗАЦИИ УПРАВЛЕНИЯ ЖИЛИЩНО-КОММУНАЛЬНЫМ ХОЗЯЙСТВОМ В УССУРИЙСКОМ ГОРОДСКОМ ОКРУГЕ
© Щепин Д.И.
Владивостокский государственный университет экономики и сервиса,
г. Уссурийск
В данной статье рассматриваются теоретические и практические особенности организации управления жилищно-коммунальным хозяйством.
Ключевые слова организация управления жилищно-коммунальным хозяйством.
Жилищно-коммунальное хозяйство (ЖКХ) - это самостоятельная сфера в системе народного хозяйства, основной целью функционирования которой является удовлетворение потребностей населения и предприятия в услугах обеспечивающих нормальные условия жизни и работы [2, с. 107].
Организации жилищно-коммунального хозяйства - это предприятия, учреждения и организации вне зависимости от организационно-правовой формы, формы собственности и ведомственной подчиненности, оказывающие жилищно-коммунальные услуги соответствующим категориям потребителей. Они являются важнейшей частью территориальной инфраструктуры, определяющей условия жизнедеятельности человека, прежде всего комфортность жилища, его инженерное благоустройство, качество и надежность услуг
