Strategic planning in the mechanism of public administration: innovations in legal regulation

Ishchenko Alexander Alekseevich Postgraduate student, Department of State and Legal Disciplines, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation 119571, Russia, g. Moscow, ul. Prospekt Vernadskogo, 82, str.1 3a.bcex@gmail.com Other publications by this author

Introduction

The socio-economic problems of recent years not only do not discredit the strategic planning model, but, on the contrary, convincingly indicate that a successful solution to these problems is possible only on the basis of consistent approval of the model of state and municipal management, based on the necessary legal, economic, institutional, information and other resources ^[2]. It is obvious that one Federal Law No. 172-FZ of June 28, 2014 "On Strategic Planning in the Russian Federation" ^[1] is not enough to solve this problem; a whole system of laws, subordinate regulatory legal acts, and methodological documents is needed. Formally, much of this has already been done. So, currently more than 60 thousand strategic documents are listed in the Federal Register. In many regions of Russia, the main regulatory legal acts on strategic planning have been updated several times. The municipal management is also actively involved in the practice of strategic planning, although elements of a formal approach are very noticeable in this process. But even at the same time, the preparation and implementation of sub-federal strategic planning documents should be evaluated positively, as they help the relevant management units to understand the problems of socio-economic development of "their" territories more deeply and on a larger scale and identify possible ways to solve them in the long term.

However, in the process of establishing the practice of strategic planning, certain important questions have also emerged, to which there is no adequate answer yet. The main one, of course, is the question of the reasons for the lack of a "basic" strategy for the socio-economic development of the Russian Federation to date. After the adoption of Federal Law No. 172-FZ ^[1], the main attention of the scientific and expert community of the country focused precisely on making proposals to this "basic" strategy and even on developing integral projects of this important document. All these developments were subjected to the most serious scientific and expert discussion. However, in the end, this strategy did not appear; the reasons for this situation were not announced, and then this strategy was, as it were, "removed from the agenda" of strategic planning in Russia.

 Another important issue is that in the absence of a "basic" strategy, the system of goal-setting documents has become consistently filled with some alternatives in the form of national goals, development priorities, strategic initiatives, sustainable development goals ^[4]. In itself, such an expansion of the strategic planning tools can only be welcomed. However, the positive effect of such expansion is leveled due to the lack of proper regulatory regulation of these initiatives as components of the practice of strategic planning. It is unclear whether they replace the "basic" strategy and whether they will "work" in parallel with it. Opinions are expressed that a long-term (strategic) plan cannot give the expected effect in the absence of plans formed in the annual dimension. It remains a matter of debate whether, in the absence of a federal strategy, sectoral and sub-federal strategies will be able to "work" effectively: according to the author, no.

Strategic planning in public administration as a key element of its effectiveness

The state strives to conduct internal policy based on the introduction of new parameters of the social structure, functional states, and takes measures to strengthen competitive positions in the global world economy. But the tools with which the state is trying to raise Russia's rating in the world community, to regain its former authority, are very limited: foreign policy activity, Middle Eastern achievements, prestigious events like the Olympics or the World Cup. But whatever the efforts of the state to strengthen the country's position in the global political arena, with a weak economy, the country will be considered by its neighbors primarily as a raw material donor.

 In addition, the commitment of Russia's ruling elites to Western neoliberal economic concepts, broadcast by the IMF, has led the country to a protracted crisis, which, according to the government, is mainly of a financial nature.

 Sustainable economic growth, the security of the country, a decent standard of living of citizens is the result that is achieved as a result of planned balanced actions that have a clear correlation with space and time.

The emergence of the terms "strategy" and "planning" occurred mainly in areas not related to jurisprudence, but necessary in the process of studying legal aspects. The planning procedure is one of the important elements of public relations management, and the term itself is a general scientific category. Planning is both an object of legal regulation and a subject, for example, in the case of planning the socio-economic development of the state, where it acts as an important tool of public administration ^[1].

O.E. Kutafin highlighted the need for a full-fledged study of all aspects of public administration planning in order to identify the structural relationship between them, the key spheres of influence of the state on public relations and the main trends in its legal regulation.

 Due to the fact that planning is implemented with the help of legal mechanisms acting as the main regulators, researchers have repeatedly tried to define it from the point of view of law. Thus, A.V. Starovoitov defines planning as a special type of management process, which consists in setting priorities for development, taking into account resources and developing measures designed to ensure effective results within a predetermined period ^[9].

The principled nature of the study of the legal aspects of this issue is determined by a number of reasons, among which is the desire to give the phenomenon a legal form, which, in turn, is not such ^[8]. Strategic planning initially arose within the framework of the economy and, subsequently, was transferred to the sphere of public administration, from where it then gradually moved into the legal sphere. This is due to the development of the strategic planning structure and its features. The use of strategic planning in the field of public administration is beginning to acquire the properties of regulatory regulation, as well as the competence of public authorities ^[9].

This phenomenon is criticized by experts in the field of economics and public administration, who assess this phenomenon as an excessive dilution of the legal component of economic aspects that are of great importance in the planning process. Nevertheless, these shortcomings can be overcome by institutionalizing strategic planning at the state level ^[8]. The activity of state bodies for the implementation of strategic planning involves the formation of a specific worldview, goals and objectives, methods and approaches, means, and laws.

The scientific community criticizes the legislative framework of state strategic planning, noting the absence of the following elements ^[7]:

- a stable system of interaction between strategic and medium-term decisions, as well as the federal budget;

- decision-making systems based on strategic development goals;

- regulatory and legal regulation of the decision-making system;

- systems of interaction and coordination of the activities of the authorities;

- efficiency in the implementation of legislative practice, the formation of concepts of normative and doctrinal certainty.

As part of a detailed analysis of the range of issues under consideration, it is advisable to refer to the theses of the President's speech at the meeting of the Security Council on September 27, 2021 on ways to improve the practice of strategic planning in the Russian Federation. In particular, he stressed that the state "needs a balanced, unified and holistic strategic planning system in order to create modern, verified, result-oriented plans and programs ..." ^[5]. In this regard, the President drew attention to the following fundamental tasks, pointing out the need for:

 — optimize the number of strategic planning documents adopted, primarily at the regional and municipal levels, clearly linking them with federal ones;

 — ensure consistency of strategic planning and budget process;

 — to achieve an increase in the level of information and analytical support for strategic planning, primarily through the use of common source data, common methodological approaches to forecasting and modeling the development of the situation;

— to conduct control and monitoring in the field of strategic planning more effectively.

At the same time, since the situation in the world and in Russia is developing dynamically, mechanisms for rapid adjustment and adjustment of the adopted plans and programs are required.

Of course, within the limits of one article it is impossible to analyze all the tasks set by the President of Russia in the field of improving strategic planning and suggest possible ways to solve them. Let's focus on some of the positions of these proposals and, above all, in the context of their further disclosure in such a new document as the Foundations of State Policy in the Field of Strategic Planning ^[3]. These positions are scientific, methodological and documenting the practice of strategic planning in the country.

Thus, it is necessary to pay attention to one of the theses expressed by the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin regarding the improvement of the practice of strategic planning, which concerned the strengthening of its scientific support. Consequently, the degree of such provision is now considered insufficient and in need of substantial enrichment. According to the Head of state, it is necessary to involve the scientific community more actively in work in this direction, to develop the Russian school of strategic planning ^[5]. This indication leaves an essential "field" for reflection. The current version of Federal Law No. 172-FZ on Strategic Planning says a lot about the role of science and the scientific support of key strategic planning documents. However, in fact, these references are very formal, since scientific institutions themselves, for example, the Russian Academy of Sciences, according to article 9 of this law, are not listed among the participants in strategic planning ^[6].

It is quite reasonable to assume that public authorities and management may have serious claims to the scientific and methodological justification of forms and methods of strategic planning. But at the same time, it would be reasonable to point out what exactly these claims are, and which "niches" of the theory and methodology of strategic planning remain unfilled, while negatively affecting the entire practice of state and municipal management. If we turn to the Basics of state Policy in the field of strategic planning in the Russian Federation, we also do not find a sufficiently specific disclosure of this issue here, however, a number of significant directions for the development of the designated topic are still obvious. Thus, in the document, the main directions of state policy in the field of strategic planning include "the systematic implementation of scientific research in the field of strategic planning" ^[3]. Although in the most general form, the main tasks of scientific and methodological support of strategic planning are indicated, among which, in particular, are:

 — formation of methodological and methodological support for strategic planning processes, including justification of forecasting methodology, decomposition of goals and objectives, scientific approaches to the development of a system of indicators used in the strategic planning process;

 — formation of tools for the implementation of the principles of the organization and functioning of the strategic planning system;

— development of the methodology of indicative planning, monitoring the implementation of strategic planning documents ^[3].

We consider extremely important the provision of the Fundamentals of State Policy in the field of strategic planning that the scientific and methodological support of strategic planning is carried out by a specialized scientific center with the participation of scientific organizations, including the Russian Academy of Sciences. Apparently, if such a specialized scientific center already exists, it should be named, defining its functions as a coordinator of this area of research. If not, it is important to speed up its creation as much as possible. Only on this basis can a significant number of disparate studies and publications be transformed into a truly systematic scientific and methodological basis for effective strategic planning practice at all levels of state and municipal administration. ^[10]

 It is also necessary to address such an initiative of the President of the country as the need to optimize the number of strategic planning documents adopted, primarily at the regional and municipal levels. It is logical to assume that optimization is most often understood as reduction. What does this picture look like at the moment; what exactly in this structure of this category of documents is subject to optimization? At the moment, about 60 thousand strategic planning documents are listed in the Federal Register, as noted above. Their structure is as follows. There are 127 federal documents. There are only two meso-level documents (the North Caucasus Federal District, the Far East and the Baikal region), which allows us to talk about a clear failure with the formation of this link of the "vertical" of strategic planning. Documents of strategic planning at the level of the subjects of the Russian Federation — 2373. All other documents (57.5 thousand or 96% of their total number) represent the municipal level of socio-economic strategizing. The "saturation" of these documents at the local government level is about the same as for the regions.

Where, then, is the "field" for optimization? In the spatial aspect, such a "field" is seen in the municipal management unit. Now this level of strategizing, as a rule, is represented by three types of documents: actually, the strategy of the municipality, its implementation plan and the territorial planning scheme. However, the key to optimizing strategic planning documents is not the quantity, but the quality of this category of management documents. The situation with municipal strategizing in general was not easy. Initially, this was addressed only to municipal districts and urban districts, then this restriction was lifted. But this does not mean that now all municipalities operate in conditions of equal readiness and equal provision with all resources for the implementation of such strategizing. However, the current version of Federal Law No. 172-FZ does not take this fact into account ^[1]. Practice shows that the tools of municipal strategizing should be significantly expanded, but at the same time it should be clearly differentiated according to the economic, socio-demographic and other characteristics of municipalities. It is advisable to form standard "packages" of strategic planning documents. In some cases, it is possible to recommend the preparation of a single document combining the main strategic guidelines, a plan for their implementation, and the main parameters of the territorial (spatial) development of the municipality. Finally, for small settlements of both urban and rural types, it can be recommended to return to such unified and simpler strategic planning documents as Integrated Socio-Economic Development Plans (CPSER). In addition, in the direction of optimizing the documentary side of the practice of strategic planning, President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin pointed to such a task as the coordination of sub-federal strategies with federal ones. However, this instruction of the President of the country has not yet received concrete development. Federal Law No. 172-FZ does not address this topic at all. As for the Fundamentals of state Policy in the field of strategic planning, this issue could not be reflected in them, since the document does not cover the municipal level of strategizing, although at the moment it is here that one of the most problematic blocks of strategic planning in the country has developed ^[11].

A new stage in the development of state policy in the field of strategic planning

One of the significant moments of the meeting of the Security Council of the Russian Federation on September 27, 2021, during which measures to improve strategic planning in the country were discussed, was the discussion of the draft of the already mentioned Foundations of state Policy in the field of strategic planning. In this sense, it would be quite reasonable to expect in the final version of this document a direct projection and detailed disclosure of the initiatives expressed earlier by the head of state. However, in fact, it is rather possible to express the opinion that the September initiatives of the President of the Russian Federation and the provisions of the Foundations of state Policy in the field of strategic planning largely lie in different planes. This also applies to the known discrepancies of the above-mentioned document with the provisions of Federal Law No. 172-FZ. For example, these discrepancies are noticeable within the conceptual framework of these two regulations (Table 1). So, the Law defines strategic planning in general, and "Fundamentals ..." is the definition of state policy in the field of strategic planning, which is not exactly the same thing. The law establishes the principles and objectives of strategic planning, and the "Fundamentals ..." sets out the goals, objectives and main directions of state policy in the field of strategic planning. As a result, there is a rather blurred line between strategic planning as such and state policy in the field of strategic planning.

Table 1 - Key definitions for strategic planning

A comparison of the two documents shows that in the definition of state policy in the field of strategic planning, given in the "Fundamentals ...", the process (phase) of practical implementation of strategic plans is largely taken out of the scope of this policy (in short, it all comes down to defining goals and ways to achieve them). At the same time, for some reason, the question of the role of state policy in the formation of economic, legal and institutional support for the practice of strategic planning fell out of the definition. Instead, such components as the orientation of strategizing on national goals and strategic priorities of development, on forecasting risks of socio-economic development and threats to national security are introduced, which in principle is very important for the practical integration of security requirements into a single system of strategic planning documents.

However, in fact, the most significant discrepancies seem to be of a different plan, in particular, on the definition of key strategic planning documents. It should be noted that in comparison with Federal Law No. 172-FZ ^[1], the "Fundamentals ..." says a lot about the special "architecture" of strategic planning documents, although it does not specify where and by whom this "architecture" should be specifically defined. There is no such concept as "architecture of strategic planning documents" in Federal Law No. 172-FZ, but basically the system of such documents is presented in the law. In the "Fundamentals ..." it is reproduced, although with known modifications, which in some cases, as we believe, are of significant importance. Let us illustrate this thesis by the example of a block of strategic planning documents developed within the framework of goal-setting at the federal level (Table 2).

Table 2 - Federal strategic documents in the field of goal-setting strategic planning

Here, the absence in the "Fundamentals ..." of an indication of a document, the content and meaning of which have become the subject of a large number of discussions in the last few years, is immediately striking. This is the "basic" Strategy of socio-economic development of the Russian Federation already mentioned above. All the work in the field of socio-economic strategizing in the absence of this Strategy, many experts generally likened the construction of a house without a foundation.

In this sense, the reasons and consequences of removing this Strategy from this block of federal strategic planning documents need serious reflection ^[12]. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that the Foundations of state Policy in the field of strategic planning are not a law, but a subordinate regulatory legal act that cannot make adjustments to a particular law, in particular, to the key Federal Law on Strategic Planning No. 172—FZ. Since in this law (the current version of July 20, 2020 on legal information bases; article 11, paragraph 3–b), the entry on the Socio-economic Development Strategy remains, therefore, the task of preparing it also remains in force and is subject to execution.

 It follows from the "Fundamentals ..." that now this Strategy should be replaced by "documents of strategic planning of socio-economic development defining the national development goals of the Russian Federation, a system of long-term priorities and tasks of public administration aimed at ensuring sustainable and balanced socio-economic development" ^[3]. But the possible composition of these documents, in accordance with this paragraph, looks as uncertain as the references to ensuring a "sustainable (?) and balanced (?) that are endlessly repeated and do not have clear criteria. socio-economic development". Other questions remain. So, should these documents comply with the principles of strategic planning established in Federal Law No. 172-FZ? Will these documents be able to play the role of a substitute for the "basic" strategy, that is, a document that should be characterized not only by a general goal setting, but also by a clear definition of the mechanisms for implementing these goals, as well as the economic, informational, institutional and other resources necessary for this?

However, objectivity requires pointing out a number of important advances to improve the strategic planning system, which are reflected in the Fundamentals of State Policy in the field of strategic planning. First of all, it should be noted that the document applies to public authorities, which increases the emphasis on coordinated interaction of all levels of government, on continuity and coordination of decisions and documents made by them in the field of strategic planning.

It is important that in the "Fundamentals ..." strategic planning documents developed at the federal level now include such documents as a Unified Plan for achieving the National development goals of the Russian Federation and national projects. Also, "Fundamentals ..." refers to the institute of indicative planning, which, of course, requires further disclosure of its content and implementation tools. This makes it possible to talk seriously about the scientific understanding of the policy of strategic planning and its subsequent practical implementation. "Fundamentals ..." provide for indicative planning as "the formation of a set of agreed indicators characterizing the state and goals of socio-economic development and ensuring national security, as well as carrying out balance calculations and developing measures based on them to achieve the goals and their resource security" ^[16].

Such an innovation of the Foundations of State Policy in the field of strategic planning as the establishment of "strategic planning cycles" deserves serious attention. The document states that strategic planning cycles are established in order to ensure the principle of continuity and continuity of strategic planning of socio-economic development and national security. The strategic planning cycle is determined by the term of office of the President of the Russian Federation and is uniform for all participants and strategic planning documents. The cycle provides for the following main stages of work on strategic planning documents:

 — forecasting, during which the development of scientifically based ideas about the risks of socio-economic development, threats to national security is carried out, forecast estimates of socio-economic development and the state of national security for the long term are clarified;

 — goal-setting, during which, taking into account the results of forecasting, strategic planning documents for socio-economic development and national security are developed and (or) adjusted;

 — planning and programming, during which state authorities, in accordance with their powers, develop program and planning documents in the field of socio-economic development and national security for six years;

— implementation of strategic planning documents, monitoring and control of the degree of achievement of the goals stipulated in them; development of measures to achieve target values, resource provision and adjustment of strategic planning documents developed for six years ^[3].

 Thus, the establishment of the above-mentioned cycles allows you to solve three groups of problems.

Firstly, to establish agreed (uniform) terms of validity of strategic planning documents — both vertically and horizontally. Today, this task has not been solved at the federal level, and even more so at the regional and municipal levels, where the horizon of strategic planning documents is, in fact, completely determined by the relevant administrations. As a result, many federal and regional strategies simply "do not live up" to the expiration of their formal validity period, and over and over again for one reason or another (for example, a change of governor) are replaced by new similar documents. In many ways, the same situation is observed at the municipal level; in addition, municipal strategies with different validity periods can be found in any region, which significantly complicates the interaction of regional and municipal strategic planning links.

 Secondly, to fix the logical sequence of actions for the formation and implementation of strategic planning documents within each cycle. This should improve the overall quality of strategic planning documents at all levels.

Thirdly, to establish the mandatory continuity of strategic planning documents, that is, first of all, the principle of the mandatory beginning of each new "cycle" with the official summing up and publication of the results of the implementation of the documents of the previous cycle. This continuity or, more precisely, its absence at present can be attributed to one of the most significant "pain points" of the domestic practice of socio-economic strategizing and public administration in general. For example, in 2020, the Concept 2020 was completed, which could be attributed to one of the most significant attempts to implement the functions of long-term planning and goal-setting. However, in fact, the 2020 Concept "went away" quietly, without any official summing up of its implementation and, most importantly, without a clear understanding of which strategic document replaced it. The new National Security Strategy adopted in 2021 also does not contain even a brief analysis of the extent to which the provisions of a similar document adopted in 2015 were implemented ^[7].

It is impossible not to pay attention to such an innovation of the "Fundamentals ..." as the "reincarnation" of the balance method of planning. In the "Fundamentals ..." it is noted that when developing strategic planning documents, balance calculations are used to ensure the most efficient use of resources when achieving set goals. In case of identification of insufficient resource provision of the strategic planning document, a decision is made to adjust this document or other strategic planning documents. It should be borne in mind that earlier balance methods (except for the budget as a form of financial balance) were traditionally considered an attribute of the planned economy of the Soviet type. It is known that Soviet planning was based on hundreds and even thousands of balances — material, financial and other ^[10]. In this sense, it is necessary to clarify what exactly is meant by the "resource security of the strategic planning document" and what balances the practice needs today.

Conclusions

The conducted research allows us to conclude that the real content of the "Fundamentals ..." does not yet allow them to be clearly positioned in the system of strategic planning documents. The specified normative act cannot rise to the level of the law due to its legal status, although the nature of the presentation of the material in the document most tends to the "genre" of the legislative act. But at the same time, the same nature of the presentation of the material clearly does not allow us to interpret the "Fundamentals ..." as a working document of strategic planning. It can be said that the document in many positions seems to be devoid of logical "finalization", that is, it sets many tasks without specifying how and where (including in the documentary plan) these tasks must be solved.

Summarizing, it can be concluded that in order to ensure a significant contribution of the Fundamentals of State Policy in the field of Strategic Planning to practice, they should be supplemented with a Plan for their implementation with a list of necessary regulatory legal and methodological documents that disclose specific aspects and procedures for the impact of the "Fundamentals ..." on the strategic planning system across the country and its regions. It is logical to assume that it is advisable to approve a number of provisions of the "Fundamentals ..." in the format of additions to Federal Law No. 172-FZ on the basis of full consistency of these documents.