Leonid Gokhberg

S&T and Innovation in Russia: Key Challenges of the Post-Crisis Period

The article is devoted to the analysis of major trends in innovation activities in Russia before and after the 2008 global financial crisis. Its particular focus is a discussion of a new post-crisis model of innovation policies in the context of institutional peculiarities of the national innovation system. The article is based on the findings of the studies undertaken by the authors and describes major challenges and opportunities for more efficient policy regulation, including both supply and demand sides. It also initiates a discussion on a social dimension of innovation and allied priorities and instruments for the public innovation policy in Russia.

Towards a new role of universities in Russia: prospects and limitations

The paper refers to a contemporary discussion of S&T and innovation activities of Russian universities and respective national policies against the background of institutional transformation of the national innovation system. It emphasizes the Russian NIS structure and subsequent positioning of universities and the research institutions of the Academy of Sciences. The analysis makes it evident that the innovation activity of Russian universities is strongly challenged by various interdependent hampering factors. These factors arise directly from traditional barriers between science and education, which in turn relate to the imperfection of Russias NIS originating from deep structural breaches far beyond S&T and education activities. National policies nowadays are aimed at increasing the innovation activity of universities, and the article concludes with an overview of the current debate on the most urgent issues. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Developing and using indicators of emerging and enabling technologies

This Handbook comprehensively examines indicators and statistical measurement related to innovation (as defined in the OECD/Eurostat Oslo Manual). It deals with the development and the use of innovation indicators to support decision-making and is written by authors who are practitioners, who know what works and what does not, in order to improve the development of indicators to satisfy future policy needs.

Exploring Innovation Modes of Russian Companies: What Does the Diversity of Actors Mean for Policymaking?

Recent studies of innovation behavior characteristics focus on analysis of microdata (enterprise level) as the key instrument to reveal facts and hypotheses describing the innovation activities under diverse economic, political and infrastructural conditions. This paper applies the state-of-the-art innovation modes approach [OECD, 2008] to provide insights on the Russian innovation environment, highlighting the variation of innovation strategies across sectors of Russian industry. Cross-country comparison based on the OECD data and Russian firm-level findings is presented along with the discussion of possible development of systemic instruments and evidence-based methods for policymaking

Russia: Universities in the Context of Reforming the National Innovation System

The concept of National Innovation Systems (NIS) initially developed by Freeman (1987, 1995), Lundvall (1992), and Nelson (1993) has proved to be a useful tool for the analysis at national, regional, and sectoral levels as well as for the design of policies to promote science and technology (S&T). Its considerable contribution reveals the role of the national institutional context as the main factor of economic growth based on innovation and learning.

The Meaning of Foresight for Science, Technology and Innovation Policy

Science, technology and innovation (STI) policies are topics that has been much written about in the last decades. However until today no common understanding has been articulated on what these policy fields are and how they are correlated in daily practice of policy making. The book thus pursuits a completely new approach, which goes much beyond existing practices. For the first time the concept of evidence based science, technology and innovation policy making is elaborated and put into context with Foresight studies. Foresight studies are commonly understood as a measure supporting governments, public agencies and companies in designing future oriented strategies. The editorial book brings together contributions from leading international scientists, representatives of national governments and international organisations like the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

The Meaning of Doctorate Holders for Human Capital Development of Nations

Given the constantly high demand for skilled workers in professions and industries around the world, national governments strive for developing and implementing comprehensive and sustained policy measures to develop human potential of countries. This is especially done by educating people towards tertiary graduates and most recently by enforcing doctoral education and training. The aim of these initiatives is to make highly qualified graduates available to the labor market with the ambition to achieve and maintain sustainable competitiveness of the national labor force (OECD 2011). There is consensus that if countries want to develop and maintain competencies and capacities for science, technology and innovation the education and training system needs to be strengthened at all its levels.

Indicators for Science, Technology and Innovation on the Crossroad to Foresight

This chapter introduces a systemic model which combines indicators for science, technology and innovation (STI) policy with Foresight approaches. The aim is to build a bridge between the existing information and knowledge base and the potentials for extending this into the longer term which are offered by Foresight studies. STI involve dynamic phenomena which are creating continuously changing conditions and requirements of the national innovation system (NIS) as a whole. Foresight can play an important role in reflecting and providing new insight into ongoing and emerging changes at different levels of this system. This interconnection of Foresight and STI (indicators), contributes to new perspectives on NIS with more explicit use of systems thinking. We consider the major challenges facing both STI indicators and Foresight indicators, and how existing and potential indicators from both spheres can be used to generate inspirations for development of the next generation of STI indicators, and also for future Foresight studies and indicators.

Summary – Targeting STI Policy Interventions – Future Challenges for Foresight

The scope for Foresight studies to contribute to S&T strategy development, at different levels of governance, is growing. But little is known about the actual implementation of the results of Foresight studies, even though these aim to improve innovation capacities and national innovation systems. The design and initiation phase of Foresight studies include the setting of objectives and the identification of themes for the exercise. These activities need to be aligned to the broader perspective and mission of the initiator – and, importantly, to the tendering procedure for launching Foresight activities. At national (and international) level it would be valuable to establish networks and a central database collecting the experiences of these studies, to make them accessible and useful for future Foresight studies. The main focus of such efforts should be on the procedural dimension – learning from the Foresight processes and their organization. Currently Foresight studies are mainly used for detecting future social challenges, potential technological developments, and associated gaps and requirements for immediate, mid-term and long-term measures. Foresight studies also have the potential, we argue, to be used for the assessment of potential policy measure impacts and the identification of the next generation of innovation policy related measures. This new application of Foresight approaches is likely to arise in the near future.

Russian Science: Bibliometric Indicators

The development of Russian science in the last decade is characterized by very contradictory trends. Their understanding deserves special attention in the justification of the measures of state science and technology policies and their implementation. It is sufficient to say that despite the significant increase in domestic expenditure on research and development, the volume of which in terms of fixed prices for the period 1995-2005 increased by 83.3%, while the employment in this sector decreased by 23.4%. and the effectiveness of scientific activity is also steadily decreasing, that is expressed by a wide range of indicators of publication and patent activity, the creation and commercialization of technologies, etc. This article presents an analysis of bibliometric indicators allowing to assess progress and quality of activities, primarily in the basic sciences, by study size, structure and dynamics of the created scientific knowledge. Note: Downloadable document is in Russian.