4) Effective governance and protection of civil rights.

“We consistently emphasize: this is not a ranking; it’s a diagnostic tool. It is crucial for us to identify areas where we may be falling short and to understand why. It is essential to examine the results in a comparative context. Why is this important? If our employees and their families move from one plant to another, we want to assess how their quality of life might change,” explains Irina Bakhtina.

Based on the results of 2022, regional centers such as Volgograd, Krasnoyarsk, Sayanogorsk, Novokuznetsk, along with the Sharypovsky district of the Krasnoyarsk Krai and Kandalaksha in the Murmansk region, took the lead in the index rankings. Conversely, the territories of the Irkutsk region lagged behind. For instance, Taishet, a city in the Irkutsk region with a population of 34,000, occupied the 21st position out of 21 in terms of socio-economic well-being. Respondents provided a low subjective rating of urban improvement quality, highlighted inadequate street lighting, noted low participation of children in extracurricular activities, reported low scores in the Unified State Exam (USE), mentioned a scarcity of events and cultural institutions in the city, pointed out a high accident rate, and cited limited affordability of housing.

Understanding the landscape of these issues serves as a crucial reference point for making decisions regarding social investments. In this regard, the company hopes that by addressing significant problems in Taishet and other cities and regions, it will witness improvements reflected in the index in the years to come.

The Child Well-Being Index serves as a data source to gauge the quality of life for children. Such indices are employed in numerous countries across the world. For instance, there is a report from Ireland’s Department of Children’s Affairs on the state of the child sector in the country, the Child Poverty and Hardship Index in the Kyrgyz Republic, the National Cohort Study and School Health Surveys in Finland, and Kazakhstan’s Child Wellbeing Index.

In Russia, the Child Well-Being Index[24] was developed with contributions by the Timchenko Foundation, the Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow State University of Psychology and Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics, the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, and the Russian Ministry of Education.

This instrument consists of two indices: the Statistical Index of Child Well-Being, calculated based on 27 indicators published by Rosstat, and the Subjective Index of Child Well-Being, derived from 18 indicators obtained through surveys of children and their parents.

The Statistical Index encompasses four domains: health, development, material well-being, and security. Meanwhile, the Subjective Index includes six domains: health, material well-being, safety, education, social relationships, and self-actualization. The data collection system for the Subjective Index is designed to allow measurement not only at a regional level but also at the level of specific schools. Within each domain, responses to three questions are analyzed. For example, in the “Material Well-Being” domain, these questions pertain to assessing the family’s financial situation, whether the child has personal belongings and whether the child has been on vacation.

The creators of the index emphasize the importance of separately measuring the statistical and subjective indices of child well-being, with special attention given to situations where children’s assessments fall below the statistical figures.