Scoring Systems as a Way to Assess the Social Well-Being of Citizens

Relevance. In the context of a rapidly changing society and the improvement of digital tools for data collection, processing and storage, many states are actively introducing scoring systems to evaluate citizens according to various parameters — from financial viability to social behavior. These systems, originally created to minimize risks in the financial sector, are now being transformed into comprehensive social management tools that affect citizens' access to a wide range of goods and services. But despite the obvious advantages of using scoring systems for commercial structures, the issues of risks and challenges that these systems pose to society remain relevant.The purpose of this study is to identify features in approaches to assessing the economic and social trustworthiness of citizens with further interpretation of threats and opportunities from the use of scoring systems.Methods. To achieve this goal, a comparative analysis of the scoring systems of Russia, the USA, China, Germany, Japan, India, Great Britain, France, Italy, and Canada was carried out. Also, the comparative analysis of scoring systems was supplemented by the results of interviews with 32 experts who gave their own assessments regarding the specifics of using large-scale assessment and rating systems for citizens. The article will also examine the key assessment parameters used in various national models. Special attention is paid to generalizing potential social, ethical, and political threats to the use of scoring systems in a large-scale assessment of citizens' trustworthiness.Results. The study revealed the specifics of approaches to assessing the economic and social trustworthiness of citizens, as well as interpreted the threats and opportunities of using scoring systems. The analysis showed that scoring systems reflect the values and priorities of the society and the state that implement them.Conclusions. Scoring systems, originally created to assess credit risks, have been transformed into social management tools that reflect the values and priorities of each society. Their widespread use carries risks such as the illusion of algorithm objectivity, the threat to data privacy, and the possibility of being used as a tool for control and punishment. To ensure a just society, strict regulation of these systems is necessary, including transparency, protection of citizens' rights, and public dialogue, so that they remain instruments of social well-being rather than comprehensive control.