View this article in RussianThe main difficulty of forming and realization of perspective the national science and technology policy is the need to simultaneously address both the near – and mid-term tasks (associated primarily with “pointing” technological bottlenecks), and long-term goals to create a new technological base, achieve technological leadership in selected areas [1].
From the standpoint of these criteria were analyzed Strategy of Russia’s development until 2020, the draft concept of long-term socio-economic development of the Russian Federation, sectoral strategies and programmes, as well as the results obtained in the macroeconomic, industrial and scientific-technological blocks forsythe. All this has allowed to construct the initial list of national priorities
Thus, we have a two-dimensional system of criteria, including three selection criteria of national priorities with respect to their alignment with the strategic goals and challenges, the accumulated potential and existing capacities, the maximum socio-economic efficiency, as well as the criteria by which priorities are set to one of three areas of responsibility and interests of the state.
It should be borne in mind that the output of this system should be described in terms of the expected end results.
A necessary condition for a coherent science and technology policy is to ensure continuity of priorities and mechanisms for research and technological development.
The solution is the formation of the technological corridors linking within a single logic implementing long-term initiatives to create the technological base for future development, the individual high-risk applied research and development to create technology solutions and creation at the expense of private business specific products. A good example is the development of new technologies in the United States, where new technological directions in some cases, directly or indirectly financed by the budget, creating components, and new techniques-demonstrators technologies takes place in the framework of the national technology agency (for example, NASA developed technologies such as carbon blade for helicopters”), and the final products are designed and manufactured by private companies.
According to the author, we can follow resolution mechanisms institutional problems of scientific-technological sector
Further, it should be noted that development institutions in supporting innovation and encouraging the development of high-tech industries, has become one of the main tools of strategic objectives set in the “concept of long-term socio-economic development of the Russian Federation for the period until 2020″.
First, the development Institutions (primarily Development Bank) should act as co-organizers and co-investors for projects in high-tech industries, including aviation, space, shipbuilding, electronics, nuclear energy complex, information-communication sector.
In addition to supporting projects in priority areas, development institutions should create available for manufacturers in all industries with a high degree of product processing export credit and insurance, state guarantees for the implementation of joint with foreign clients projects in the sphere of high technologies, leasing expensive high-tech equipment.
Secondly, the development institutions within 4-5 years should form the infrastructure to support the application of innovations covering all stages of the innovation process and providing free access to the necessary financial, information, and innovative resources to the priority sectors of the economy.
The relative scale of the innovation infrastructure organizations (measured by share of supported small innovative companies in the total number of public companies, as well as in the profits of non-financial sector, the ratio of the volume of attracted innovative infrastructure funds and others) should be comparable with the parameters of middle-and high-level innovative business development (Israel, Canada, Korea and others)
Specialized development institutions should become co-organizers and the main source of funding for several major innovative projects aimed at the development of classes of technologies that define national security and strategic competitive position of Russia.
Participation of specialized development institutions in these projects must be coordinated with the realization of Federal target programs (FTP), aimed at the development and implementation of appropriate technologies. Attracting development institutions will strengthen institutional mechanisms for enforcement of these Federal programs (in terms of Fund-raising and project monitoring).
In our opinion, the system of institutions to support innovation should be comprehensive, i.e. close to “market failures” at all the stages of innovation, where they take place. Otherwise, there will inevitably bottlenecks that hinder the promotion of innovative businesses.
All successfully solved the problems of innovative business development countries simultaneously created institutions focused on different groups of participants at different stages of the process. In particular, in Israel, whose concept of Fund of funds borrowed when creating RVC, the activity of this Fund was supplemented by a program of technological incubators, collaborative commercial research firms and universities.
With this in mind the government’s planned large enough measures to encourage innovation in middle stages (start-UPS and venture business) should be complemented by commensurate action to support early (pilot study and pilot pre-commercial development) and late stages (growth and replication of new business). Support at this stage, in particular should provide assistance in the IPO of new companies.
In the current system of development institutions until unduly modest place is occupied by non-financial institutions (technology parks, business incubators, technology transfer centers and others).
At the same time, these types of institutions are sufficient demand. In addition, due to the nature of their activities, they have much greater protection against the risk of corruption in comparison with financial institutions development.
It should be noted that it is necessary to develop a complex of measures for the development of non-financial development institutions.
In low innovation activity of the corporate sector, underdeveloped financial markets and the low level of enforcement, is characterized including Russia as the most effective form of universal institutions of the innovation support fund (Chile, program Avance). Last become a “shell” that protects against adverse external environment the innovation process, ensuring the continuity of the innovation chain.
However, this design imposes high requirements to quality management, including the integrity and professionalism of managers, their knowledge, experience, and ability to see the prospects and risk. Quality management should be even higher than in the case of “normal” venture capital fund. Because the market opportunity, empirical verification of the effectiveness of choice of investment directions may be submitted only in the final stages of the innovation project.
Taking into account the deficit on the Russian market of high-quality innovative managers, also known as “weaknesses” of the domestic bureaucracy, this requirement becomes a serious limitation to copy the Chilean experience.
It seems that in Russian conditions, it can be not about creating a unified organizational structure, closing all parts of the investment chain, and close coordination between independent institutions responsible for the various links. Such coordination should allow continuous tracking of projects across the chain and simplified transfer from one Institute to another, for example, the high importance for Russia may be the creation of such forms of development institutions as agencies for the development of strategic technologies operating in areas associated with high risk research and require interdisciplinary studies.
Summarizing, we note that scientific and technological policy should be aimed at developing and maintaining constantly at a high level the innovation capacity of the nation, which is characterized by the presence of:
- powerful modern science;
- developed areas of applied research, carried out the practical implementation of fundamental developments, including commercial applications;
- effective promotional and marketing mechanisms, including demand forecasting and effective schemes, technologies and methods of promotion of products on the domestic and world markets;
- flexible and dynamic production, capable of mass production of competitive products of high demand;
- system continuous specialized the preparation of research, engineering, scientific, administrative and managerial personnel, including experts-professionals in markets for complex products;
- modern structure complex of financing research, industrial and educational processes in the sphere of high technologies, based on a comprehensive combination of direct state support, tax and other indirect stimulation of innovative initiatives of public and private corporations, state cooperation with the small business venture, participation of state and local business in cooperation with transnational corporations and foreign States on line application of scientific developments.
It is established the opinion of some Russian scientists on a high level of innovative capacity of the nation [2-7], which are essential to the national security of the country and a generalized description of national competitiveness of Russia in international politics in General.
The task of the modern scientific-technological policy not so much in drawing up lists of priority sectors as in the formation of an effective “live” system of regulation and self-regulation of the priorities in the field of high technologies, in support of the development of scientific and innovation infrastructure.
It should be public support for the formation of large research-and-production complexes, regional innovation networks and clusters, allowing to focus the scientific and industrial potential of the regions at all stages of innovative reproduction and to ensure the effective development of the regions and the employment growth of their population.
A significant place in the implementation of national priorities should take measures to expand the forms of private-public partnerships, in particular for the development of concession arrangements. An important element of promoting international integration, high-tech exports – political assistance to Russian companies in the acquisition of foreign assets associated with production and sales and after-sales service. It is necessary support services to the business sector of the economy that are necessary in the process of research and implementation work, and to help domestic producers of goods and services to the world market.
Special attention should be paid to the activities of small enterprises in scientific-innovation sphere – the most flexible, risk-averse and proactive market participant companies, focused on finding and developing innovative ideas, and supporting structures, such as technology incubators, technology parks and innovative centers.
The main levers of state regulation of scientific-technological sphere should be the state budget and the state order on R & D, high technology products and services, implemented in the framework of the state contract. As in the first and in the second case should provide strict state control over the efficiency and targeting of spending and mandatory connection structures of small business to meet the needs of the state.
Thus, the management of scientific and technological development in Russia, including state regulation of entrepreneurial activity must combine three components: projects (both due to budget and on the basis of public-private partnership); the creation of supporting infrastructure; development of the institutional environment (national innovation system). The ratio of these approaches depends greatly on the division of subjects and areas of interest and responsibilities of the state and business entities (in particular, bridging the gap formed in their development priorities).
References
- Long-term forecast of scientific and technological development of the Russian Federation (up to 2025). URL: http://www.strf.ru/
- Stepanova T.E. Knowledge for “cabbage”. Theoretical aspects of market knowledge // Journal of Russian entrepreneurship. – 2006. – № 3. – P. 9-13.
- Stepanova T.E. To know or not to know… that is the question! The law reconfiguration of knowledge // Journal of creative economy. – 2007. – № 3. – P. 36-44.
- Stepanova T.E., Korneva S.S. Between the hammer and anvil. Intellectual mediation // Journal of creative economy. – 2008. – № 2. – P. 66-73.
- Stepanova T.E. Based on intellect. The economy of the XXI century – the economy based on knowledge // Journal of creative economy. – 2008. – № 4. – P. 43-47.
- Stepanova T.E. Based on intellect. The economy of the XXI century – the economy based on knowledge // Journal of creative economy. – 2008. – № 5. – P. 18-22.
- Stepanova T.E. The law of knowledge valorization // Journal of creative economy. – 2012. – № 12 (72). – P. 3-8.
- Knowledge, networks and nations. Global scientific collaboration in the 21st century (pdf). http://royalsociety.org/uploadedfiles/ royal_society_content /influencing_policy/reports/2011-03-28-knowledge-networks-nations.pdf. URL: http://sci.informika.ru/text/magaz/newpaper/messedu/cour9967/1000.html