# 1965 and 2020: why the reforms stalled — Open Planning > The 1965 economic reform and Strategy 2020 next to the green block standard: what they changed, how delivery was measured, who was accountable, what stopped them, and how we guard against the same causes. Источник / Source: https://gosplan2.ru/en/reforms-1965-2020 Язык / Language: en Обновлено / Updated: 2026-09-13 --- # 1965 AND 2020 Two attempts to rebuild economic management — and what their stalling means for open planning Both attempts began with the question of which indicator to judge work by. In 1965 the number of mandatory plan indicators for an enterprise was cut from 30 to 9, with profit and profitability made central. In 2011–2012 experts described a shift to a growth model not based on raw materials. Both stalled not on the idea but on delivery. We are not comparing scale — a block standard is not a national plan. We are comparing the mechanism: it breaks in the same places, and those places need strengthening in advance. ## The 1965 economic reform ## Concept 2020 and Strategy 2020 ## The common factor — money without effort In both cases the sources name the same cause: rising oil revenue removed the pressure that had prompted the reform. When the budget grows on its own, an efficiency indicator stops interesting anyone. What follows is our reasoning, not the sources’ conclusion: a standard must not rely on someone currently finding it profitable to meet. It must stay verifiable even when nobody wants to verify it. ## Three answers to the same questions | Question | 1965 | 2020 | Green block standard | What changed | The number and make-up of enterprise indicators | The country’s growth model | Requirements for the green area of a block of existing development | How delivery was measured | The enterprise’s report to its ministry | Expert interviews five years later | A calculation from open data that anyone can repeat — the nine indicators of the nomenclature | Who calculates | The party being assessed, and its ministry | Nobody assigned | Anyone: the method and the data are open, the calculation is repeatable | What stopped it | A gross indicator in the plan, directives returning, oil revenue | The 2008 crisis, no revision mechanism, implementers left out of drafting | The same risks: interest fades, the document ages, implementers see it as someone else’s | How we guard against it | — | — | The standardisation procedure: public consultation and revision of the standard. District administrations and developers are invited into drafting. The register of data gaps is open | ## What we take into the project ### Few indicators, each one measurable Nine instead of thirty was the right direction in 1965. Our nomenclature also has nine indicators: five can already be computed from open data, and for the rest we state plainly which data are missing. ### Judging by outcome, not by volume of work The reform tried to move away from gross output. For a block this means assessing the measured state of the area, not a report of how much was planted and spent. ### Savings stay with whoever achieved them The key finding of the Shchekino experiment. Our proposal for discussion: if a block meets the indicators below the estimate, the savings stay with the district for its own improvements. ### Rules that do not change retroactively The Shchekino wage fund was fixed for four years — and the experiment worked while that promise was kept. The standard’s requirements hold until the scheduled revision and are not tightened for work already done. ### We set the goal, not the method The 1965 enterprise chose its own product range. The standard sets a measurable outcome, not a list of plants and structures: how to achieve it is for the implementer to decide. ### Revision built in from day one Concept 2020 could not be rewritten quickly when conditions changed. The standardisation procedure provides for revising a standard, and from the start we record which indicators we will refine and from which data. ## What we do not repeat ### An indicator worth inflating Gross revenue in the plan pushed towards costly schemes. None of our indicators rises because more money was spent on a block. ### Punishment for success A plant running at 143% of capacity lost its bonuses for missing the plan. Exceeding a requirement does not become a new bar that is then punished when missed. ### A document with no delivery mechanism Strategy 2020 remained a declaration. For each of our indicators we record the data and formula it is computed from and the document that fixes it. ### Opinion instead of calculation Delivery of Strategy 2020 was assessed through interviews. Delivery of the standard is assessed by a number that can be recomputed from the same open data. ## What this page does not claim We do not put a single block standard on a par with a national reform, and we do not claim to understand why the reforms stalled better than historians do. The facts come from the sources below. The sections “What we take into the project” and “What we do not repeat” are our reasoning. We have not yet read R. A. Belousov’s own texts, so no assessments are given here in his name. ## Sources All links checked on 13 September 2026. The CSR’s “roughly one third” estimate refers to the unapproved Strategy 2020, not to Concept No. 1662-r — the CSR itself draws this distinction. The sources are in Russian. - [Экономическая реформа 1965 года в СССР — Википедия](https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AD%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0_1965_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0_%D0%B2_%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A0) - [Косыгинская реформа: от идеи до сворачивания — КиберЛенинка](https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kosyginskaya-reforma-ot-idei-do-svorachivaniya) - [Белоусов, Рэм Александрович — Википедия](https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%83%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2,_%D0%A0%D1%8D%D0%BC_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87) - [Р. А. Белоусов. Экономическая история России: XX век. М.: ИздАТ, 1999– — каталог РГБ](https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01000843675) - [Концепция долгосрочного развития до 2020 года, распоряжение № 1662-р — Гарант](https://base.garant.ru/194365/) - [«Стратегия-2020: Новая модель роста — новая социальная политика» — ВШЭ](https://www.hse.ru/strategy2020) - [Доклад ЦСР: Стратегия-2020 реализована примерно на треть — РИА Новости](https://ria.ru/20161227/1484673090.html) - [ЦСР: анализ факторов реализации документов стратегического планирования](https://www.csr.ru/ru/news/analiz-faktorov-realizatsii-dokumentov-strategicheskogo-planirovaniya-verhnego-urovnya/)