Political, Social and Ethical Consequences of the Large-scale Introduction of Social Rating of Citizens
( Pp. 17-25)
More about authors
Sokolov Alexander V.
Dr. Sci. (Polit.), Associate Professor; Head, Department of Socio-Political Theories, Professor, Department of History, Social Studies and Political Science; North Eastern Federal University named after M.K. Ammosov; Yakutsk, Russian Federation
Demidov Yaroslavl State University
Yaroslavl, Russian Federation Grebenko Egor D. senior lecturer, Department of Sociopolitical Theories; Demidov Yaroslavl State University; Yaroslavl, Russian Federation
North Eastern Federal University named after M.K. Ammosov
Yakutsk, Russian Federation
Demidov Yaroslavl State University
Yaroslavl, Russian Federation Grebenko Egor D. senior lecturer, Department of Sociopolitical Theories; Demidov Yaroslavl State University; Yaroslavl, Russian Federation
North Eastern Federal University named after M.K. Ammosov
Yakutsk, Russian Federation
Abstract:
The social rating systems of citizens, formed on the basis of the integrated use of modern digital technologies – primarily methods of collecting, processing and analyzing large amounts of data – are a powerful management tool capable of optimizing the allocation of resources and increasing the effectiveness of state control. Their full-scale implementation carries a number of political and social risks, changing the nature of interaction between the state, large corporations, society and man. This article presents the generalized results of a comprehensive study based on the interpretation of empirical data obtained from 32 in-depth interviews with experts and a comparative analysis of 4 rating systems of Russian companies. The purpose of the research. The article examines the mechanisms of formation and functioning of social rating systems, as well as analyzes the ethical, legal, political and social consequences of their large-scale implementation. Results. The study demonstrates that social rating has ceased to be a futurological concept and has become a real management tool that is actively changing the structure of public relations in Russia. The key conclusion of the work is the need to revise the regulatory paradigm, where the state should step out of the role of a passive observer and become a guarantor of the protection of citizens’ rights in the digital environment, setting strict standards for the transparency of algorithms and responsibility for their use.
How to Cite:
Sokolov, A.V., Grebenko, E.D. (2026). Political, social and ethical consequences of the large-scale introduction of social rating of citizens. Sociopolitical Sciences, 16(2), 17–25. DOI: 10.33693/2223-0092-2026-16-2-17-25. EDN: OUAGKR
Reference list:
Bochanov M.A. Prospects for applying the social rating system in modern Russian politics. Vlast. 2024. Vol. 32. No. 3. Pp. 91–93. (In Rus.). DOI: 10.24412/2071-5358-2024-3-91-93.
Katrashova Yu.V., Mitiashin G.Yu., Plotnikov V.A. Social rating system as a form of state control over society: Prospects for implementation and development, threats to implementation. Administrative Consulting. 2021. No. 2. Pp. 100–109. (In Rus.). DOI: 10.22394/1726-1139-2021-2-100-109.
Lazarov A.A. Social lending (scoring): Ethical and legal issues. Agrarian and Land Law. 2023. No. 4 (220). Pp. 93–96. (In Rus.). DOI: 10.24412/2411-2275-2023-4-93-96.
Ruvinskii R.Z., Ruvinskaia E.A., Komarova T.D. Public perception of digital profiling and social rating practices: The situation in Russia and China. Sociodynamics. 2021. No. 12. Pp. 56–76. (In Rus.). DOI: 10.25136/2409-7144.2021.12.36824.
Riabova T.M., Mishenin S.A. Technologies for social assessment of citizens in the context of the development of the subjects of the Russian Federation. Social and Humanitarian Knowledge. 2023. No. 9. Pp. 52–56. (In Rus.)
Sedykh I.A., Strugov I.V. Analysis of current approaches to modeling rating systems. Vestnik of Voronezh Institute of the Ministry of the Interior of Russia. 2024. No. 1. Pp. 49–58. (In Rus.)
Chebotarev V.A., Nazina S.L., Podprugina I.V., Podprugin A.I. Comparative analysis of rating methods for pedagogical workers. Economy and Society. 2024. No. 6 (121)-2. Pp. 1422–1427. (In Rus.)
Berezina S. Consideration of China’s experience in implementing a social rating. Technology Audit and Production Reserves. 2022. Vol. 2. No. 4 (64). Pp. 38–40. DOI: 10.15587/2706-5448.2022.257312.
Creemers R. China’s social credit system: An evolving practice of control. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2018. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3175792.
Eggers T., Grages C., Pfau-Effinger B. Self-responsibility of the “Active Social Citizen”: Different types of the policy concept of “Active Social Citizenship” in different types of welfare states. American Behavioral Scientist. 2019. Vol. 63. No. 1. Pp. 43–64. DOI: 10.1177/0002764218816803.
Hendrickx F. Social rating (editorial). European Labour Law Journal. 2011. Vol. 2. No. 2. Pp. 98–100.
Kostka G. China’s social credit systems and public opinion: Explaining high levels of approval. New Media & Society. 2019. Vol. 21. No. 7. Pp. 1565–1593. DOI: 10.1177/1461444819826402.
O’Neil C. Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. New York: Crown Publishers, 2016. 272 p.
Pasquale F. The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2015. DOI: 10.4159/harvard.9780674736061.
Zuboff S. The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. New York: Public Affairs, 2019. 704 p. ISBN: 978-1-61039-569-4.
Katrashova Yu.V., Mitiashin G.Yu., Plotnikov V.A. Social rating system as a form of state control over society: Prospects for implementation and development, threats to implementation. Administrative Consulting. 2021. No. 2. Pp. 100–109. (In Rus.). DOI: 10.22394/1726-1139-2021-2-100-109.
Lazarov A.A. Social lending (scoring): Ethical and legal issues. Agrarian and Land Law. 2023. No. 4 (220). Pp. 93–96. (In Rus.). DOI: 10.24412/2411-2275-2023-4-93-96.
Ruvinskii R.Z., Ruvinskaia E.A., Komarova T.D. Public perception of digital profiling and social rating practices: The situation in Russia and China. Sociodynamics. 2021. No. 12. Pp. 56–76. (In Rus.). DOI: 10.25136/2409-7144.2021.12.36824.
Riabova T.M., Mishenin S.A. Technologies for social assessment of citizens in the context of the development of the subjects of the Russian Federation. Social and Humanitarian Knowledge. 2023. No. 9. Pp. 52–56. (In Rus.)
Sedykh I.A., Strugov I.V. Analysis of current approaches to modeling rating systems. Vestnik of Voronezh Institute of the Ministry of the Interior of Russia. 2024. No. 1. Pp. 49–58. (In Rus.)
Chebotarev V.A., Nazina S.L., Podprugina I.V., Podprugin A.I. Comparative analysis of rating methods for pedagogical workers. Economy and Society. 2024. No. 6 (121)-2. Pp. 1422–1427. (In Rus.)
Berezina S. Consideration of China’s experience in implementing a social rating. Technology Audit and Production Reserves. 2022. Vol. 2. No. 4 (64). Pp. 38–40. DOI: 10.15587/2706-5448.2022.257312.
Creemers R. China’s social credit system: An evolving practice of control. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2018. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3175792.
Eggers T., Grages C., Pfau-Effinger B. Self-responsibility of the “Active Social Citizen”: Different types of the policy concept of “Active Social Citizenship” in different types of welfare states. American Behavioral Scientist. 2019. Vol. 63. No. 1. Pp. 43–64. DOI: 10.1177/0002764218816803.
Hendrickx F. Social rating (editorial). European Labour Law Journal. 2011. Vol. 2. No. 2. Pp. 98–100.
Kostka G. China’s social credit systems and public opinion: Explaining high levels of approval. New Media & Society. 2019. Vol. 21. No. 7. Pp. 1565–1593. DOI: 10.1177/1461444819826402.
O’Neil C. Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. New York: Crown Publishers, 2016. 272 p.
Pasquale F. The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2015. DOI: 10.4159/harvard.9780674736061.
Zuboff S. The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. New York: Public Affairs, 2019. 704 p. ISBN: 978-1-61039-569-4.
Keywords:
big data, digital control, public administration, social rating, social risks, equity.
