Challenges in Evaluation of Social Effects of Social Infrastructure Projects
https://doi.org/10.25205/2542-0429-2024-24-2-5-33
Abstract
In transition to sustainable development, the development of new approaches to changing the content and methods for assessment of social effects becomes still more crucial. Over the past decades, there has been a rapid growth of research and publications in this direction. In a number of countries, non-financial reporting has become mandatory at legislative level so far. However, problems with the consistency of terminology in general, as well as conceptual differences between concepts formulated in foreign and Russian literature, remain unresolved, making it difficult to obtain and share knowledge in this area of research. In the paper, we classify approaches to the definitions of social effects, which helps us to have a clear vision of this concept and, therefore, understand the evaluation methods used in assessing the consequences of programs and projects. In particular, the differences in the formulation of the concept in foreign and Russian literature are examined. The paper also discusses a number of methods widely used for assessing social impacts, dividing them into assessment methods (cost-benefit analysis, cost-benefit analysis, cost-utility analysis, social return on investment) and evaluation methods (macroeconomic and microeconomic). As a result of the work, a systematization of conceptual approaches to the formulation of social effects can be highlighted.
Supporting agencies: The article was prepared with the support of the Russian Science Foundation, project No 24-28-00119.
About the Authors
M. Zafarjonova
Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering SB RAS; Novosibirsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Mokhidilkhon Zafarjonova - Engineer, Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Postgraduate student, Economics and Management of the National Economy, Novosibirsk State University.
Novosibirsk,
Scopus Author ID 58097208500
T. S. Novikova
Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering SB RAS; Novosibirsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tatiana S. Novikova - Leading Researcher, Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor, Novosibirsk State University.
Novosibirsk
RSCI 76283, WOS Researcher ID 000589725700034, Scopus Author ID 44661276300
References
1. Keynes J. M. The End of Laissez-Faire. Essays in Persuasion, London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2010, pp. 272–294. doi: 10.1007/978-1-349-59072-8_21
2. Tanzi V., Schuknecht L. Public Spending in the 20th Century. Cambridge University Press, 2000, 291 p. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511625800
3. Nelson R. H. The Economics Profession and the Making of Public Policy. J. Econ. Lit., 1987, vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 49–91.
4. Backhouse R. E., Baujard A., Nishizawa T. Introduction: Revisiting the History of Welfare Economics. Welfare Theory, Public Action, and Ethical Values. Cambridge University Press, 2021, pp. 1–18. doi: 10.1017/9781108882507.001
5. Posner E., Adler M. Rethinking of Cost-benefit analysis. 109 Yale Law Journal, 1999, pp. 165–247. URL: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2755&context=journal_articles (accessed: April, 2024).
6. Roche C. Impact assessment for development agencies: Learning to value change. Oxfam, 1999. 322 p.
7. Friedman M. The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits. Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2007, pp. 173–178. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-70818-6_14
8. Freeman R. E. Strategic Management. Cambridge University Press, 2010, 276 p. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139192675
9. Dmytriyev S. D., Freeman R. E., Hörisch J. The Relationship between Stake-holder Theory and Corporate Social Responsibility: Differences, Similarities, and Implications for Social Issues in Management. J. Manag. Stud, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 1441–1470. doi: 10.1111/joms.12684
10. Ahmad S., Wong K. Y., Butt S. I. Status of sustainable manufacturing practices: literature review and trends of triple bottom-line-based sustainability assessment methodologies. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res, 2022, vol. 30, no. 15, pp. 43068–43095. doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-22172-z
11. Loviscek V. Triple Bottom Line toward a Holistic Framework for Sustainability: A Systematic Review. Rev. Adm. Contemp., 2021, vol. 25, no. 3. doi: 10.1590/1982-7849rac2021200017.en
12. Global experience in the development of impact investments. Foundation “Our Future”, HSE University, 2020, 39 p. (in Rus.)
13. Ebrahim A. S., Rangan V. K. The Limits of Nonprofit Impact: A Contingency Framework for Measuring Social Performance. SSRN Electron. J., 2010. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1611810
14. RawhouserH., Cummings M., Newbert S. L. Social Impact Measurement: Current Approaches and Future Directions for Social Entrepreneurship Research. Entrep. Theory Pract, 2019, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 82–115. doi: 10.1177/1042258717727718
15. Novikova T. S., Gulakova O. I., Ershov Yu. S. Cost-benefit analysis in the assessment of large research infrastructure projects: “Akademgorodok 2.0”. Region: Economics and Sociology, 2023, no. 3, pp. 207–233. doi: 10.15372/REG20230309
16. Liu W., Kwong C. C. Y., Kim Y.A., Liu H. The more the better vs. less is more: Strategic alliances, bricolage and social performance in social enterprises. J. Bus. Res., 2021, vol. 137, pp. 128–142. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.08.012
17. Rodrigues I. Social returns from education: a systematic analysis with forward and backward effects. Int. J. Sci. Acad. Res., 2023, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 5136–5143.
18. Timokhovich A. N., Nikuradze O. I. Measuring the efficiency of social entrepreneurship. Vestn. Univ., 2020, no. 7, pp. 193–198. doi: 10.26425/1816-4277-2020-7-193-198 (in Rus.)
19. Komarova Y., Muravev E. The Answer to Global Challenges: Why Investing in Impact Projects is the Future. Posit. Chang., 2023, pp. 71–77. doi: https://doi.org/10.55140/2782-5817-2023-3-S1-71-77 (in Rus.)
20. Perelman L., Barrett E., Paradis J. The Mayfield Handbook of Technical and Scientific Writing. Mayfield Publishing Company, 1997. URL: https://www.mit.edu/course/21/21.guide/ (accessed: April, 2024).
21. Ravallion M. Evaluating Anti-Poverty Programs. Handbook of development economics, 2007, pp. 3787–3846. doi: 10.1016/S1573-4471(07)04059-4
22. Avramenko E. Evaluating Impact with All Rigor Possible. Applicability of Mathematical Methods in Measuring Social Impact (Exemplified by the Health Insurance Subsidy Program). Posit. Chang., 2022, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 68–81. (in Rus.)
23. Gertler P. J., Martinez S., Premand P., Rawlings L. B., Vermeersch C. M. J. Impact Evaluation in Practice (2nd ed.) Washington DC: Inter-American Development Bank and World Bank, 2016. 244 p. doi: 10.1596/978-1-4648-0779-4
24. World Bank Group Impact Evaluations: Relevance and Effectiveness. Washington, 2012. 164 p. doi: 10.1596/978-0-8213-9717-6
25. White H., Raitzer D. A. Impact Evaluation of Development Interventions: A Practical Guide. Manila, Philippines, 2017. 202 p. doi: 10.22617/TCS179188-2
26. OECD. Better Criteria for Better Evaluation: Revised Evaluation Criteria Definitions and Principles for Use. Paris, 2019. URL: https://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/revised-evaluation-criteria-dec-2019.pdf (accessed: April, 2024)
27. OECD. Impact by Design Effective Results Frameworks for Sustainable Development. 2023. URL: https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD(2023)17/en/pdf (accessed: April, 2024)
28. Livchits V. N., Mironova I. A., Shvetsov A. N. Evaluating investment projects efficiency in various conditions. Russ. J. Ind. Econ., 2019, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 29–43. (in Rus.) doi: 10.17073/2072-1633-2019-1-29-43
29. Belcher B., Palenberg M. Outcomes and Impacts of Development Interventions. Am. J. Eval., 2018, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 478–495. doi: 10.1177/1098214018765698
30. White H. A Contribution to Current Debates in Impact Evaluation. Evaluation, 2010, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 153–164. doi: 10.1177/1356389010361562
31. Maas K., Liket K. Social impact measurement: Classification of methods. Environmental management accounting and supply chain management. 2011, pp. 171–202. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-1390-1_8
32. Wood D. J. Measuring Corporate Social Performance: A Review. Int. J. Manag. Rev., 2010, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 50–84. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00274.x
33. Vanclay F., Esteves A. M., Aucamp I., Franks D. Social Impact Assessment: Guidance for assessing and managing the social impacts of projects. Fargo ND: International Association for Impact Assessment, 2015. URL: https://pure.rug.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/17534793/IAIA_2015_Social_Impact_Assessment_guidance_document.pdf (accessed: April, 2024).
34. Bornmann L. What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? A literature survey. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 2013, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 217–233.
35. Riatti P. Thiel A. The societal impact of electronic sport: a scoping review. Ger. J. Exerc. Sport Res., 2022, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 433–446. doi: 10.1007/s12662-021-00784-w
36. Doh J. P., Eden L., Tsui A. S., Zaheer S. 2023. Developing international business scholarship for global societal impact. J. Int. Bus. Stud., 2023, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 757–767. doi: 10.1057/s41267-023-00603-4
37. Boardman A. E., Greenberg D. H., Vining A. R., Weimer D. L. Cost-Benefit Analysis: Concepts and Practice. 5th ed. Cambridge University Press, 2018. 520 p.
38. Novikova T. S. Economics of Public Sector. Saint Petersburg: Lanbook, 2023. 324 p. (In Russ.)
39. Little I. M. D., Mirrless J. A. Project Appraisal and Planning for Developing Countries. London: Heinemann, 1974, 388 p.
40. Suslov V. I., Novikova T. S. & Gulakova O. I. Price effects in the evaluation of investment projects. Economy of Region, 2021, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 16–30. (in Rus.) https://doi.org/10.17059/ekon.reg.2021-1-2
41. Guidelines for evaluating the effectiveness of investment projects (second edition). Moscow, Ekonomika, 2000. 422 p.
42. Novikova T. S. Public efficiency analysis of investment projects. Novosibirsk, IEIE SB RAS. 2005, 282 p. (in Russ.)
43. OECD. Assessing the Impact of State Interventions in Research—Techniques, Issues and Solutions. OECD Directorate for Science, Technology and Innovation: Paris, France, 2014.
44. Thusini S. T., Milenova M., Nahabedian N., Grey B., Soukup T., Chua K. C., Henderson C. The development of the concept of return-on-investment from large-scale quality improvement programmes in healthcare: an integrative systematic literature review. BMC health services research, 2022, vol. 22, no. 1492. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08832-3
45. Banke-Thomas A. O., Madaj B., Charles A., van den Broek N. Social Return on Investment (SROI) methodology to account for value for money of public health interventions: a systematic review. BMC Public Health, 2015, vol. 15, pp.1-14. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1935-7
46. Mouter N. Standard transport appraisal methods. Advances in Transport Policy and Planning, 2021, vol. 7, pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1016/bs.atpp.2021.02.001
47. Novikova T. S. Transformation of estimation methods of investment projects under conditions of modern scientific and technological development. Development of Territories, 2018, no. 3, pp. 54–61.
48. Pauly M. V. Valuing health care benefits in money terms. Valuing health care: costs, benefits, and effectiveness of pharmaceuticals and other medical technologies; Ed. F. A. Sloan. Cambridge (MA): Cambridge University Press, 1995, pp. 99–124.
49. Klarman H. E. The Road to Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Milbank Mem. Fund Q. Health Soc., 1982, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 585–603. doi: 10.2307/3349692.
50. Levin H. M. Belfield C. Guiding the Development and Use of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Education. J. Res. Educ. Eff., 2015, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 400–418. doi: 10.1080/19345747.2014.915604
51. Niyibitegeka F. Thavorncharoensap M., Riewpaiboon A., Youngkong S. Does the Choice of Health Metric, DALY or QALY, Influence Conclusions of Health Economic Evaluation? A Case Study of Rotavirus Vaccine in Burundi. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy, 2022, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 707–716. doi: 10.1007/s40258-022-00722-3
52. Andersson H. The value of a statistical life. Advances in Transport Policy and Planning, 2020, vol. 6, pp.75–99. doi: 10.1016/bs.atpp.2020.07.004
53. Brent R. J. Cost-Benefit Analysis versus Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from a Societal Perspective in Healthcare. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 2023, vol. 20, no. 5, 4637. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20054637
54. Gosselin V., Boccanfuso D., Laberge S. Social return on investment (SROI) method to evaluate physical activity and sport interventions: a systematic review. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act, 2020, vol. 17, no. 26. doi: 10.1186/s12966-020-00931-w
55. Cordes J. J. Using cost-benefit analysis and social return on investment to evaluate the impact of social enterprise: Promises, implementation, and limitations. Eval. Program Plann., 2017, vol. 64, pp. 98–104. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.11.008
56. Edwards R. T., Lawrence C. L. ‘What You See is All There is’: The Importance of Heuristics in Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) and Social Return on Investment (SROI) in the Evaluation of Public Health Interventions. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy, 2021, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 653–664. doi: 10.1007/s40258-021-00653-5
57. Emerson J., Wachowicz J., Chun S. Social Return on Investment: Exploring Aspects of Value Creation in the Nonprofit Sector. Box Set Soc. Purp. Enterp. Ventur. Philanthr. New Millenn. 2000, vol. 2, рр. 130–173.
58. Corvo L., Pastore L., Mastrodascio M., and Cepiku D. The social return on investment model: a systematic literature review. Meditari Account. Res., 2022, vol. 30, no. 7, pp.49–86. doi: 10.1108/MEDAR-05-2021-1307
59. Then V., Schober C., Rauscher O., Kehl K. Social Return on Investment Analysis. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. 406 p. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-71401-1
60. Arvidson M., Battye F., Salisbury D. The social return on investment in community befriending. Int. J. Public Sect. Manag., 2014, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 225–240, Apr. doi: 10.1108/IJPSM-03-2013-0045
61. Florio M., Sirtori E. The Evaluation of Research Infrastructures: A Cost-Benefit Analysis Framework. SSRN Electron. J., 2014. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2722500
62. Novikova T., Kaneva M., Zafarjonova M. Cost-benefit analysis for health project evaluation (example of a Russian outpatient clinics’ project in the Novosibirsk region). Front. Public Heal, 2023, no. 11, 1073964. doi: 10.3389/fpu-bh.2023.1073964
63. Turner H. C., Sandmann F. G., Downey L. E., Orangi S., Teerawattananon Y., Vassall A., Jit M. What are economic costs and when should they be used in health economic studies? Cost Eff. Resour. Alloc., 2023, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 31. doi: 10.1186/s12962-023-00436-w
64. Banerjee O., Cicowiez M., Moreda A. Reconciliation Once and for All: Economic Impact Evaluation and Social Cost Benefit Analysis. IDB Working Paper Series, 2017. №. IDB-WP-835. doi: 10.18235/0000823
65. Ferreira V., Fabregat-Aibar L., Pié L., Terceño A. Research trends and hotspots in bioeconomy impact analysis: a study of economic, social and environmental impacts. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev., 2022, no. 96, 106842. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106842
66. Keček D., Brlek P., Buntak K. Economic effects of transport sectors on Croatian economy: an input–output approach. Econ. Res. Istraživanja, 2022, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 2023–2038. doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2021.1931908
67. Jagrič T., Brown C., Boyce T., Jagrič V. The impact of the health-care sector on national economies in selected European countries. Health Policy (New. York). 2021, vol. 125, no. 1, pp. 90–97. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.10.009
68. Niamir L., Ivanova O., Filatova T. Economy-wide impacts of behavioral climate change mitigation: Linking agent-based and computable general equilibrium models. Environ. Model. Softw., 2020, no. 134, 104839. doi: 10.1016/j.env-soft.2020.104839
69. De Rus G. Cost-Benefit Analysis for the social appraisal of projects. C-Bridge: Reconciling CBA and CGE methods for the economic appraisal of investment projects. European Investment Bank Institute, 2023. pp. 15–48.
70. Ashimov A. A., Borovskiy Y. V., Onalbekov M. A. A Parametric Control Model for Implementing the National Healthcare Project. Autom. Remote Control., 2020, vol. 81, no. 7, pp. 1271–1278. doi: 10.1134/S0005117920070085
71. Ayres R. U., Van den Bergh J. C., Lindenberger D., Warr B. The underestimated contribution of energy to economic growth. Struct. Chang. Econ. Dyn., 2013, vol. 27, pp. 79–8. doi: 10.1016/j.strueco.2013.07.004
72. Oryani B., Koo Y., Rezania S., Shafiee A. Investigating the asymmetric impact of energy consumption on reshaping future energy policy and economic growth in Iran using extended Cobb-Douglas production function. Energy, 2021, no. 216, 119187. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.119187
73. Angrist J. D., Pischke J. S. Mastering metrics: The cause from path to effect. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2015. 282 p.
74. Imbens G. W., Rubin D. B. Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. 625 p. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139025751
75. Avxentyev N. A., Makarova Y. V. Cost-effectiveness analysis of encorafenib and binimetinib combination as first-line treatment for metastatic or unresectable BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma in Russia. Farmakoekon. Mod. Pharmacoeconomics Pharmacoepidemiol., 2023, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 375–385. doi:doi.org/10.17749/2070-4909/farmakoekonomika.2023.202
76. Kurzawa Z., Cotton C. S., Mazurkewich N., Verney A., Busch‐Hallen J., Kashi B. Training healthcare workers increases IFA use and adherence: Evidence and cost‐effectiveness analysis from Bangladesh. Matern. Child Nutr, vol. 17, no. 2, e13124. doi: 10.1111/mcn.13124
77. De Pastena M., Esposito A., Paiella S., Surci N., Montagnini G., Marchegiani G., Malleo G., Secchettin E., Casetti L., Ricci C., Landoni L., Bovo Ch., Bassi C., Salvia R. Cost-effectiveness and quality of life analysis of laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched study. Surg. Endosc., 2021, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 1420–1428. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07528-1
78. Decramer S., Vanormelingen S. The effectiveness of investment subsidies: evidence from a regression discontinuity design. Small Bus. Econ., 2016, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 1007–1032. doi: 10.1007/s11187-016-9749-2
79. Nagaoka M., Koreki A., Kosugi T., Ninomiya A., Mimura M., Sado M. Economic Evaluation Alongside a Randomized Controlled Trial of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy in Healthy Adults. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag., 2023, vol. 16, pp. 2767–2785. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S406347
80. Egorova L. G. State preference methods for identifying people’s preferences regarding public goods and environmental factors: description of the methodology and examples of use. Moscow, 2018. 64 p.
81. Schoeters A., Large M., Koning M., Carnis L., Daniels, S., Mignot, D., Urmeew R., Wijnen W., Bijleveld F., Van der Horst M. Economic valuation of preventing fatal and serious road injuries. Results of a Willingness-To-Pay study in four European countries. Accid. Anal. Prev., 2022, no. 173, 106705, doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2022.106705
82. Hultkrantz L., Svensson M. The value of a statistical life in Sweden: A review of the empirical literature. Health Policy (New. York). 2012, vol. 108, no. 2–3, pp. 302–310. doi: 10.1016/J.HEALTHPOL.2012.09.007
83. Aganbegyan A. G. How much does a human life cost in Russia? Economic Policy, 2014, no. 1, pp. 54–66. (in Russ.)
84. Broughel J. Rethinking the value of life: a critical appraisal of the value of a statistical life. Utah State Center for Growth and Opportunity, Policy Paper Series, Policy Paper. 2020.
85. Dublin L. Lotka A. The Money Value of a Man. N.Y.: The Roland Press, 1930. 264 p.
86. Banzhaf H. S. Retrospectives: The Cold-War Origins of the Value of Statistical Life. J. Econ. Perspect., 2014, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 213–226. doi: 10.1257/jep.28.4.213
87. Dr`eze J. H. L‟Utilit´e Sociale d‟une Vie Humaine. Rev. Fran¸caise Reserche Op´erationnelle, 1962, no. 6, pp. 93–118.
88. Schelling T. C. The life you save may be your own. Problems in public expenditure analysis; Ed. S. B. Chase. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1968, pp. 127–162.
89. Mishan E. J. Evaluation of Life and Limb: ATheoretical Approach. J. Polit. Econ., 1971, vol. 79, no. 4, pp. 687–705.
90. M. W. Jones-Lee. The Value of Changes in the Probability of Death or Injury. J. Polit. Econ., 1974, vol. 82, no. 4, pp. 835–849.
91. Zubova E. Value of statistical life in Russia: Estimates based on panel microdata for 2010–2020. Appl. Econom., 2022, no. 65, pp. 45–64. doi: 10.22394/1993-7601-2022-65-45-64
92. Andersson H. and Treich N. The Value of a Statistical Life. in A Handbook of Transport Economics; Eds. de Palma A., Lindsey R., Quinet E., Vickerman R. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2011, pp.412-443
93. Bykov A. A. On methodology for economic assessment of the value of statistical life (explanatory note). Problems of Risk Analysis 2, 2007, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 178–191. (in Rus.)
94. Zubets А. N., Novikov А. V. Quantitative assessment of the value of human life in russia and in the world. Financ. Theory Pract., 2018, vol. 22, no 4. pp. 52–75. doi: 10.26794/2587-5671-2018-22-4-52-75 (in Rus.)
95. Zavodskikh A. A., Kislitsyna M. A. Value of human life as a measurement for assessment of social well-being. Scientific review. Economic sciences, 2020, no. 3, pp. 27–31. (in Russ.)
96. Viscusi W. K. Best Estimate Selection Bias in the Value of a Statistical Life. J. Benefit-Cost Anal., 2018, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 205–246. doi: 10.1017/bca.2017.21
97. Kniesner T. J., Viscusi W. K. The Value of a Statistical Life. SSRN Electron. J., 2019. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3379967
98. Kosyakina A., Ponomareva E. The Value of a Statistical Life: Estimates Based on the Concept of Human Capital. Econ. policy, 2021, vol. 16, no. 6 pp. 94–119. (in Rus.)
Review
For citations:
Zafarjonova M., Novikova T.S. Challenges in Evaluation of Social Effects of Social Infrastructure Projects. World of Economics and Management. 2024;24(2):5-33. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/2542-0429-2024-24-2-5-33
Views:
188
Email this article 
