Stanislav Zaichenko

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.

Research and Technology Organizations (RTOs) in the primary sector: Providing innovation to Russia's mines and corn fields

Purpose – Given the immense gains in productivity in agriculture and mining over the last decades, the purpose of this paper is to study knowledge transfer from Research and Technology Organizations (RTOs) into primary sector producers. The authors inquire which of these RTOs are successfully competing for public funding, and how these funds are used. Also, the authors study what makes an RTO more (financially) successful in technology transfer than their peers and which RTOs transferred technology that was new to the Russian market. Design/methodology/approach – This research is based on 62 RTOs which reported technology transfer to enterprises with main economic activities classified by NACE rev 1 as “A – agriculture, hunting and forestry” and “B – fishing” and “C – mining and quarrying,” including oil and gas extraction. Findings – The authors found remarkable differences between the Russian RTOs and their OECD peers, but also differences between agriculture and mining. Interestingly, competitive fundi...

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.

KNOWLEDGE INPUTS TO SCIENCE- AND DEVELOPMENT-BASED REGIMES: EVIDENCE FROM THE BEHAVIOUR OF RUSSIAN RTOs

Little is known about how transfer processes are shaped by the underlying industry and its technical regimes. In our analysis, we differentiate between Science and Technology-modes of learning which incorporate the latest developments in research, and a more practice-oriented mode based on industry-specific knowledge. We test whether Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs), that provide technology transfer to firms, follow one or the other mode in correspondence to their customers needs. Our analysis is based on 67 Russian RTOs transferring technology either to low-tech or high-tech manufacturing firms. For high-tech manufacturing, the use of patents and the intake of scientists are vital for successful technology transfer. Own basic research is positively correlated only with transfer to low-tech manufacturing.

Regional balance of technology transfer and innovation in transitional economy: empirical evidence from Russia

During the last decade, the role and meaning of research and technology organisations (RTOs) and their contribution to the innovation potential of countries has been questioned. In this paper, RTOs are understood as organisations with significant core government funding (25% or greater) which supply services to firms individually or collectively in support of scientific and technological innovation and which devote much of their capability (50% or more of their labour) to remaining integrated with the science base (Hales, 2001). Transitional economies like Russia face substantial challenges with national and regional innovation policies for supporting and enabling knowledge transfer. In this context, RTOs often maintain obsolete behavioural schemes of non-market public institutions isolated from the real economic sector. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate and explain some unexpected knowledge transfer phenomena crucial for efficient regional innovation policies using Russian RTOs as example.

Sectoral differences in technology transfer

This paper studies sectoral differences in technology transfer of 170 Russian Research and Technology Organisations engaged into technology transfer to agriculture, mining and quarrying, high-tech, medium-high-tech, medium-low-tech and low-tech industries. RTOs in these five groups do not overlap by customers’ economic activities and are representative for all Russian regions. Certain factors have in fact opposite effects in different sectors. A customer without a clear vision is perceived as a curse by one sector, but by another one perceived as a blessing. Another such factor is the high economic risk of the application of new technologies. Furthermore, we proved the presence of influence factors which show the same effects with different degrees of intensity depending on the sectors. Thereby, we also provide insights into Russia’s innovation system.

The Feeding Of The Nine Billion — A Case For Technology Transfer In Agriculture

This paper studies technology creation and transfer of 95 Russian research and technology organisations (RTOs) into producer organisations in agriculture and mining. Previous findings suggested that in agriculture, the barriers for technology adaption are particularly high due to technological conservatism and the atomic structure of the industry. Although RTOs in agriculture publish more and register more patents, they struggle to translate their success into transfer activities. While technology transfer in mining goes well hand in hand with applied research, RTOs in agriculture either build on new technologies or generate revenues through ready-to-use services. The explanation for this rather short-term oriented demand for services of Russias RTOs lies in the financial situation of client organisations. The vast majority complain about their dire lack of financial means to pay for new technologies. Consequently, agricultural producers do not generate enough revenues to pursue future opportunities, with far reaching consequences. The situation could get better if the RTOs and the client would agree to longer-lasting relationships.

Monitoring Innovation Activities of Innovation Process Participants (2011: R&D Organisations)

“Monitoring innovation activities of innovation process participants” is a project which has been carried out by the Higher School of Economics (HSE) for several years to promote monitoring and analysis of innovation issues in general, and on specific activities of its particular actors from a scientific research perspective. The project is aimed at accumulating empirical knowledge about the nature and types of interaction between various actors of the national innovation system. In 2009-2010 the study was targeted at manufacturing and service sector companies while the 2010-2011 study targeted at RD - Survey programme and tools to monitor Russian RD - Results of RD the collected data also allows to identify and systematise various factors and conditions affecting innovation activities of these organisations; Eventually areas for updating the survey’s concept and tools were identified

Universities as Actors of Inclusive Development in Russia

Social inclusion and inclusive innovation practices are being implemented in university strategies and routines in various ways considering historical, cultural, socio-economic and other factors. This chapter deals with the current state of the universities’ inclusive function in Russia, its origins and prospects. It represents the inclusive activity as an outcome of the national and local top-down policies combined with universities’ bottom-up initiatives. To clarify the path dependency it also describes respective particularities of the Russian higher education system vis-a-vis internationally recognised concepts and models. Finally, a study of particular cases provides an evidence for a preliminary classification of university’s practices and tools for social inclusion and inclusive innovation. In addition to practical cases the chapter provides relevant statistical data and structured legislation review.