The development of science in the Russian Federation. Scientific and technical resources of Russia. Productivity of scientific research

In the context of the transition to a post-industrial society, science, as a system of knowledge and as a special type of human activity, is turning into an important area that permeates production, technology, economics, education, health care and politics.

Traditionally, it had a significant scientific potential, which has been developing since the 18th century. Initially, scientific activity was mainly localized in St. Petersburg and Moscow, where the first universities and structures of the Russian Academy of Sciences arose.

The infrastructure of science, as a result of the diffusion of various structural elements of its organizational structure (academic organizations, university science, etc.), is currently represented by a number of centers integrating various elements of the scientific complex in various combinations. At the same time, Moscow and St. Petersburg traditionally combine university and academic science. The main part of science cities is located in the European part of Russia. At the same time, many large centers of the European part of Russia are deprived of any other elements of the scientific complex, with the exception of university science.

In the future, the territorial organization of Russian science took shape in the process of its intensive spatial diffusion and was characterized by the consistent transfer of the “center” of Russian science from Moscow to Moscow (with the subsequent hypertrophied development of its research functions), as well as the emergence of more and more new university and academic poles of scientific research. activities (in the 19th century in Kazan, Tomsk, Irkutsk, Voronezh, etc.; in the 20th century in almost all major regional centers), including a network of "science cities".

Modern science is, first of all, the scientists working in it, highly qualified personnel. In the 1990s the number of researchers in the Russian Federation has undergone a significant reduction. By 1992, 2.3 million people, or 3.2% of all those employed in the economy, were employed in science and scientific services. In 2002, the number of people employed in science and scientific services in the country decreased to 1.2 million people, that is, almost 2 times over the past ten years, and the share of this sector was down to 1.0%. The pace of this process turned out to be unequal in individual territories of Russia.

Quite significant - over 50% - they were in a number of regions of Central Russia, as well as in certain peripheral regions of Siberia and southern Russia. At the same time, Moscow and St. Petersburg, as well as some southern and northern regions, were less affected by the decline in the number of researchers - here their number decreased by no more than a third.

As a result, today many regions of the north and south of Russia, as well as most regions of the Far East, are actually deprived of real scientific potential (due to the absence or a small number of researchers). The specific number of researchers is higher than the average in a number of regions of Central Russia, in the traditional centers of science in the eastern part of the country (Sverdlovsk, Novosibirsk, Tomsk regions).

The decline in employment in science was accompanied by a numerical growth of highly qualified personnel, including doctors of science.

The dominant trend of recent years is the territorial deconcentration of the process of increasing the number of doctors of sciences in the composition of researchers. Thus, the most significant (more than 1.5 times) increase in the number of doctors of sciences in the regions where the saturation with them was initially minimal - in the south of Russia, in a number of peripheral Siberian regions, as well as in. At the same time, many regions of the center and north-west of Russia, where the concentration of doctors of science was also minimal, showed only average growth rates - from 1.0 to 1.5 times. There are relatively few regions where the number of doctors of sciences-researchers has decreased. Against the background of a small number of regions where the concentration of doctors of science is high, the predominant part of the regions is characterized by medium or weak concentration indicators.

The existing regional differences in the localization and dynamics of highly qualified personnel generally correspond to the placement and performance of postgraduate and doctoral studies. In terms of the number of graduates of postgraduate and doctoral studies with the defense of dissertations (reflecting center-peripheral gradients in the territorial organization of Russian science, the situation when in some regions the entire cycle of reproduction of scientific personnel is powerfully represented, while in others it is “truncated” to one degree or another) almost half of the regions of Russia belong to the territories with an insignificant number of defenses of candidate and doctoral dissertations (that is, in fact, to the scientific "periphery"). The cities of Moscow and St. Petersburg, the epicenters of training highly qualified personnel, including the graduation of doctoral students, stand out significantly against the all-Russian background. Somewhat inferior to them, but also have higher graduation rates from doctoral and postgraduate studies, some other traditional regions of the development of science (Novosibirsk, Tomsk, Sverdlovsk regions), as well as a number of regions of active development of science in recent decades in the Volga region, in the south and in the central part of Russia . A number of regions of Central Russia, as well as the Krasnodar Territory, Perm Territory and Omsk Region, also actively formed in the 1990s. their scientific potential, however, the number of defenses of candidates of sciences here often significantly exceeds the intensity of defenses of doctoral dissertations.

Training of highly qualified scientific personnel

The complexity of the structure of the territory of Russia, the presence of economic and culturally "advanced" regions and regions of outsiders contributes to the polarization of the geospace of modern Russian science, which is clearly visible both in terms of general (generally quantitative) indicators of the scientific process (number of researchers, training of highly qualified personnel in the regions of Russia, etc. .), as well as for more “subtle” indicators reflecting qualitative nuances, including citation of research results in the global system of scientific publications.

Accounting for the Science Citation Index Expanded, provided by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), covering such priority areas of scientific knowledge as physics, chemistry, mathematics, biology, research in the field of biotechnology and medicine, earth sciences, as well as technical sciences, illustrates basic features and trends in the territorial organization of modern Russian science: the continuing even increasing concentration of scientific activity in Moscow (half of the total amount of publications in the regions of the country) and St. Petersburg; the growth of the scientific potential of a number of "second echelon" centers (Novosibirsk, Sverdlovsk, Kazan, Tomsk, Irkutsk, etc.), as well as various forms of regionalization of research.

Productivity of scientific research

At the beginning of the XXI century. In terms of funding for science and innovation, Russia has moved from the group of Central European countries to the group of countries with low scientific potential. The share of research and development spending in the gross domestic product has fallen to about 1.3% (in industry, this share has recently been trending to increase to about 3%).

In the first half of the 1990s the number of organizations performing research and development has declined slightly. To the greatest extent, this affected the number of design bureaus, design and design and survey organizations, which indicated the almost complete cessation of the design of production technologies and a decrease in innovative activity. By the beginning of 2000, the cost of the active part of the objects of the experimental base (buildings and structures, test sites, experimental experimental installations, etc.) had decreased by almost 7 times; decommissioning and replacement of obsolete instruments and equipment with new ones was extremely low.

Despite the fact that by the beginning of the XXI century. the main part of the organizations retained the state form of ownership, the process of formation of legal entities in the form of private research institutes (especially in the sector of industrial science) was significantly outlined, the number of organizations with a mixed Russian form of ownership and with foreign participation increased. More than 6% of the personnel involved in fundamental research and scientific development currently work in privately owned organizations.

In the field of science financing, the share of direct budget financing is declining and the share of non-state sources is growing, incl. receipts from abroad (10% of total spending on science). An increasing share of government allocations is distributed on a competitive basis, incl. through special budgetary and non-budgetary funds, which serve as a transitional form from centralized financing of sectoral science to direct orders from enterprises.

Patenting of Russian developments abroad and foreign ones in Russia is being stepped up. The consequence of integration into the world science and economy was the outflow of researchers to work abroad, both in the form of permanent residence and to work on temporary contracts.

The rapid development of information technologies based on computer technology has revolutionized the processes of exchange and storage of scientific and technical information, as a result of which electronic media have significantly replaced paper ones. Restoring a full-fledged exchange of information on electronic and paper media is the most important task of managing scientific and technical potential.

Historical excursion. In Russia, the number of scientific and pedagogical workers in 1913 was 11.6 thousand, in the USA in 1910 it was almost three times more - 33.6 thousand. In Russia there were 414 chemists, almost 15 times less than in the USA, in 8 times less than in Germany and England, 2.5 times less than in France. The lack of scientific personnel in Russia during this period held back scientific and technological progress and became especially intolerable in the conditions of the newest revolution in natural science that had begun.

The high level of Soviet science was confirmed by the assessments of a fairly large number of results of work that was not carried out abroad or had only just begun. This primarily applied to certain areas of physics (acoustics, optics and quantum electronics, solid state physics), general and technical chemistry (colloid chemistry and physicochemical mechanics, chemical physics, including the problems of combustion and explosion, electrochemistry, inorganic chemistry, high-energy chemistry), physical chemistry and technology of inorganic materials (physical and chemical foundations of metallurgy, new processes for the production and processing of metallic materials, theoretical foundations of chemical technology), energy (the use of superconductivity in energy, nuclear energy), geological sciences, computer science, research in areas of physiological, biochemical and structural foundations of human life, etc.

The development of many scientific areas was associated with the country's defense strategy, which was specific to the USSR. The level of engineering and technology in the science-intensive sectors of the defense industry was close to the world level.

The modern scientific, technical and educational potential of modern Russia has a certain specificity compared to the Soviet period.

In the period after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the beginning of market reforms in Russia, there was an essentially landslide decline in funding for the scientific sphere, cooperation ties with scientific institutions in other former Soviet republics were largely disrupted. This led to a sharp reduction in both the general front of scientific research and the virtual disappearance of some areas in this area, as well as to a reduction in the scale of research and development work itself and an outflow of qualified scientific personnel from them.

At present, according to the Russian Academy of Sciences, in terms of public spending on R&D per capita ($86) Russia lags behind the leaders by 4-5 times, and in terms of private spending ($40) by 15-20 times. In terms of per capita spending on R&D by the private sector, China is already almost 1.5 times ahead of Russia, where the level of spending per researcher is extremely low. According to this indicator, Russia is 3 times behind the world average.

However, since 1999 the situation has begun to change in a positive direction.

Today, the non-alternative basis for the policy of acquiring a high status for Russia in the world economic community is the management of scientific and technological progress and the creation of a technological environment compatible with developed countries. Of course, it is necessary to continue to develop market mechanisms for managing the economy, to carry out appropriate institutional reforms. But this still does not resolve the issue of a worthy prospect for Russia in the scientific and technical field.

Setting the task of increasing the volume and improving the structure of financing of the scientific and technical sphere should take into account critical threshold indicators of national security, and the achievement of these indicators has encountered certain difficulties. Thus, in 2009, R&D expenditures amounted to only slightly more than 1% of Russia's GDP (as already noted, by 2020 this figure is planned to increase to 2.5%).

Scientific, technical and educational policy should proceed from a two-stage transition from the current to the innovative model of economic development. At the first stage (medium term), the real goal is to achieve the indicated thresholds in relation to the share of expenditures on science in GDP (for comparison: currently in Sweden it is 3.7%, Japan - 3.2%, USA - 2.8 %), the share of appropriations for basic research in total spending on science and the share of spending on innovation in the total volume of industrial output.

The progress achieved will help Russia become more competitive in the world market of science-intensive products and bring its share in it to at least 2% against 0.3% in 2002. To solve this problem, it is necessary to overcome the crisis in Russian fundamental and applied science.

Russian science has a unique potential. In terms of the number of research scientists (410 thousand people, or less than 8% of their global number), it is ahead of most developed countries, except for the USA and Japan. And although, according to the World Economic Forum, Russia consistently ranks third in this indicator, in 2006 it was in 32nd place in terms of the level of scientific research, and in 44th place in terms of R&D spending.

The so-called brain drain hinders the development of Russian science. According to expert estimates, more than 30,000 Russian scientists are currently working abroad, including up to 18,000 in the field of fundamental research. There is evidence that from 100,000 to 250,000 scientists have left the country over the past 20 years. This is largely a consequence of the fact that the salary of a Russian scientist of the same qualification is 40-50 times less than in developed countries. According to many forecasts, the brain drain will increase, especially in the field of information technology (in developed countries, only at the beginning of the 21st century, there were not enough 850,000 such specialists).

Another reason for the crisis of Russian science is that the domestic economy is not able to adopt modern developments. Foreign trade in technologies in Russia is clearly non-equivalent: under the agreements signed, technologies imported from abroad are valued much more expensive than technologies created in Russia. On average, the purchase price of technology is 3.2 times higher than the sale price, and in some cases, almost 80 times. It should also be noted that many foreign technologies are of Russian origin. Thus, according to experts from Rospatent, Russian developments in the field of electronic, laser, fiber-optic technology, oil and gas processing technologies, organic chemistry, medical and environmental technology have been patented in the United States. Only in 1992-2000. more than 1,000 patents for military and dual-use technologies have been registered in the United States, where the authors are Russian inventors, and the owners of patents and, therefore, exclusive rights are foreign legal entities and individuals.

Thus, Russia participates extremely inefficiently in the international exchange of technologies. Proceeds from the export of scientific research amounted to at the beginning of the XXI century. about 63 million dollars, and patents and licenses - only 1.7 million dollars. At the same time, revenues in the United States only from the sale of licenses amounted to about 40 billion dollars, Japan - more than 10 billion, Great Britain - about 8 billion, Germany - more than 3 billion dollars

A particularly unfavorable situation has developed in the field of the military-industrial complex (DIC), despite the fact that Russia in terms of exports of arms and military equipment (WME) (more than $ 8 billion in 2008) ranks second in the world after the United States. The reduction in the state order forced defense industry enterprises to export the most modern equipment abroad (the state order for military equipment began to grow quite dynamically since 2005).

Due to the historically established system of military technology priority in Russia, about 75% of R&D is performed by defense industry enterprises. It follows from this that in the near future, without the modernization of the defense industry, the development of high-tech industries is impossible. Aware of this situation, the management of the defense industry is consolidating assets and financial flows, forming single industry holdings under the control of the state. In the process of reforming it, 700-800 viable enterprises are oriented towards integration within the framework of 40-50 basic holdings with a controlling stake in the state, which will purposefully introduce basic technologies of high-tech production.

At present, venture funds, which are the basis for stimulating innovation processes in developed countries, practically do not work in Russia. Venture Innovation Fund - VIF, created in accordance with the order of the Government of the Russian Federation in March 2000 in order to form the organizational structure of the venture investment system, is still insufficiently funded by the state.

A significant potential for scientific and technological development lies in such a form of innovation infrastructure as science cities. Currently, the status of a science city of the Russian Federation has been assigned to the city of Obninsk, Kaluga Region (2000), the cities of Korolev and Dubna, Moscow Region (2001), the working settlement of Koltsovo, Novosibirsk Region (2003), the city of Michurinsk, Tambov Region (2003). ), the cities of Reutov and Fryazino, Moscow Region (2003), Peterhof, St. Petersburg (2005), Pushchino, Moscow Region (2005). On March 23, 2010, the Russian leadership decided to establish a Center for Advanced Technologies in the city of Skolkovo, Moscow Region.

In general, the budgets of the leading Russian research institutes, according to American experts, account for only 3-5% of the material support of similar institutions in the United States.

The amount of funding for science cities is constantly increasing, although it is not enough to overcome the crisis in Russian science and education.

The priority measures to stimulate scientific, technical and innovative activities include:

■ increase in the share of spending on scientific research as a percentage of GDP;

■ support for the export of science-intensive products and training of managers for the commercialization of scientific developments and the introduction of intellectual property into economic circulation;

■ state order for the training of highly qualified personnel, as well as economic, primarily tax measures, to stimulate the training of personnel at the expense of their own industries and activities;

■ improving the efficiency of using the results of fundamental research and R&D and their implementation in industrial production, using the existing scientific, technical and intellectual potential and introducing intellectual property into economic circulation;

■ prioritization of knowledge-intensive industries and technologies, given that the restoration of their entire range is economically unsustainable and irrational even in developed countries;

■ restructuring of the scientific and technological complex in accordance with the established priorities;

■ increasing innovative activity through the development of small business in the scientific and technical sphere and the formation of a new infrastructure for the innovation process, part of which should be innovation and consulting firms, innovation and technology centers and technology parks;

■ development and use of an economic mechanism that stimulates the introduction of innovations in production (including: differentiation of tax cuts on profits from the production and sale of products manufactured using certified intellectual property objects, improvement of the pricing mechanism for science-intensive products, provision of government interest-free loans to enterprises for the purchase and the development of certified innovative innovations, the provision of free licenses to enterprises for the industrial development of intellectual property created at the expense of budgetary funds and owned by the state).

According to S. M. Rogov, director of the Institute for the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia's emergence as a leader in global scientific and technological development requires the accelerated implementation of the state strategy for supporting R&D and innovation. Taking into account the world experience and the peculiarities of the current state of the Russian economy, such a strategy should include, as he believes, two complementary components. First, it is necessary to increase budget funding for priority areas of fundamental research, as well as (in the defense sphere) applied R&D. Secondly, a well-thought-out tax policy to stimulate private sector spending on R&D (“tax spending”) and an effective public science policy are required.

At the first stage, the task is to bring R&D spending to at least 2% of GDP in the coming years (1% through public funding and 1% through private spending). In 2012, Russia can and should reach the level of 50% of the leaders in spending per researcher - about $50 billion per year in 2010 prices.

At the second stage (until 2020), R&D spending should reach 3% of GDP - 75% of the leader in spending per researcher, in order to reach the average level of $70-80 billion per year at constant prices.

At the third stage (mid-21st century), Russia's spending on R&D should be increased to 4-5% of GDP ($100-120 billion per year at constant prices), which will allow it to enter the group of world leaders in spending per researcher.

The prospects for the place and role of Russia in the world scientific and technological development depend on how targeted and consistent the policy of the Russian state will be to provide the necessary conditions for supporting and implementing the powerful scientific, technical, intellectual potential that our country has in the scientific and educational spheres.

Doctrine of the development of Russian science

APPROVED
President of the Russian Federation on June 13, 1996 (Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of June 13, 1996 N 884)

The doctrine of the development of Russian science is a system of views on the role and importance of science in ensuring the independence and prosperity of Russia, as well as the principles that determine the mechanism of state regulation of scientific activity, which, taking into account the specific socio-economic situation, are guided by federal executive authorities, executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation , scientists, research organizations, scientific and technical societies and associations.

1. Russian science over its centuries-old history has made a huge contribution to the development of the country and the world community. Russia owes much of its position as a great world power to the achievements of domestic scientists.

In modern conditions, the practical use of natural science, humanitarian and scientific and technical knowledge is increasingly becoming a source of ensuring the life of society, its spiritual and physical health.

The level of development of science largely determines the effectiveness of economic activity, defense capability, spiritual and political culture of the population of the country, the protection of the individual and society from the impact of adverse natural and anthropogenic factors.

2. An important condition for the formation of domestic science was the desire to cover all areas of research. An extensive network of research organizations of both fundamental and applied nature has been formed in the country. In many areas, domestic science occupied leading positions in the world. This was achieved due to the high level of leading scientific schools, the prestige of the work of a scientist and the involvement of a large number of researchers in science, as well as through full-fledged budget funding. However, the administrative-command mechanism in the economy, the high degree of closeness of the scientific and technical sphere, unjustified restrictions on intellectual property rights reduced the efficiency of using the country's scientific potential.

At present, when opportunities for freedom of scientific creativity, open exchange of information and international cooperation are expanding, the position of Russian science could change qualitatively. However, the systemic crisis that accompanies the period of socio-political reorganization of the country has led to the fact that domestic science has faced new serious difficulties: extremely insufficient budget funding for research and development work does not ensure timely renewal of the material and technical base of science, the creation of normal conditions life and work of scientists, complicates the effective state regulation in the scientific field. The prestige of the profession of a scientist in society has fallen to an unacceptably low level; science has ceased to be attractive to talented young people. Clearly, there was a need for a radical reorganization of the sphere of science, attracting additional sources of funding. The problem of more efficient use of the results of scientific research in the economy is still acute.

3. New trends in the development of the world community have become the expansion of cooperation and cooperation of states in solving global problems related to the preservation of the environment, ensuring a decent spiritual and physical standard of living for people, and maintaining human health. The efforts of scientists and engineers from developed countries are being combined in the search for and use of new energy sources, space exploration, and the creation of an open information environment. The new strategy for the development of science gives priority to research that is significant for the very prospects for the existence of the world community, for its sustainable and safe development.

4. Modern trends in interstate integration, however, do not mean the disappearance of national interests, including in the field of science. Moreover, the national scientific potential will largely determine the country's place in the world community, prospects for competition in the foreign market, and opportunities for solving its internal problems.

The scale and pace of development of domestic science should ensure that Russia's potential corresponds to the level of world scientific and technological progress. Priority areas of scientific research are also determined by the economic and geopolitical position of Russia, the availability of natural resources of global importance, the needs of the spiritual development of our society, and the humanistic traditions of Russian science. Global trends in the development of human civilization at the turn of two millennia continue to have a significant impact on the choice of priorities.

5. For the real transformation of life in Russia, the development of science in the regions, which contributes to their progress, taking into account economic, resource, environmental and cultural characteristics, is of exceptional importance.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

Federal Agency for Education

abstract

on the topic: "The development of science in modern Russia"

Arkhangelsk 2013

Oheading

Introduction

1. The state of science in Russia today

2. The main problems of Russia's lagging behind in the scientific and technical sphere and ways to solve them

3. Strategies for innovative development. Critical Technologies

4. State support for science

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

The destroyed scientific and technological potential, the one that our country had in the days of the USSR, cannot be restored, and it is not necessary. The main task today is to create in Russia a new, powerful scientific and technological potential at an accelerated pace, and for this it is necessary to know exactly the true state of affairs in science and higher education.

The problem of identifying priority areas of science and technology in Russia has become particularly relevant due to the reduction in budget funding for this area. The great interest in this issue is not accidental, given the ever-increasing role of science and high technology in the development of society in modern conditions and the price that society is forced to pay in one way or another in any case - both for the development of new technological achievements and for the refusal to from their use.

Scientific and technical policy is an integral part of the innovation policy and involves the choice of priority areas in the development of science and technology and all kinds of state support in their development.

In the reformed Russian economy, it is extremely important to develop and implement an industrial policy that ensures such structural transformations of the country's national economy that will allow it to form a highly efficient industrial complex that produces competitive world-class products. Innovation is at the center of structural change, as a well-functioning economy must continuously replace obsolete technologies with more advanced ones. Moreover, without an innovative rise, renewal of fixed capital, it is impossible to get out of the economic crisis. This is also confirmed by the experience of industrialized countries, whose economic growth is 90% ensured by the introduction of new knowledge and technologies into the industry. The backlog in the field of biotechnology, microelectronics, information and communication technologies on the threshold of the XXI century. practically closes the prospects for the formation of a competitive economy.

In a market economy, the state is not able to force enterprises to innovate, but it can create favorable conditions for this and especially support certain areas of the country's scientific and technological development with the help of targeted and limited measures of influence.

1. The state of science in Russia today

The national interests of Russia require decisive action to form and implement Russia's own industrial and innovation policy that meets the new economic and socio-political realities and ensures a large-scale inflow of capital for the modernization of production. However, the crisis of production deprives the state of the necessary resources for the accelerated renewal of production. As a result, investments in structural adjustment, in the development of the sphere of innovations are declining every year. Attempts to carry out structural transformations before the formation of market relations and institutions, as well as hopes only for market mechanisms, turned out to be untenable.

The field of science or research and development work (R&D) includes a large number of institutions, including research organizations and divisions (mainly research institutes - research institutes), design organizations (design bureaus - design bureaus), experimental production and test sites.

In modern society, the role of science is very great, since it is this industry that ensures the development of scientific and technological progress and the introduction of its achievements into the economy and everyday life. At the same time, R&D requires large financial and material costs, as well as very high qualifications of workers. Therefore, on a significant scale, it is represented only in the most developed countries of the world.

All over the world, at least, so the majority thinks, science is done by young people. Our scientific staff is rapidly aging. In 2000, the average age of academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences was over 70 years. This can still be understood - great experience and great achievements in science are not given immediately. But the fact that the average age of PhDs is 61 and candidates 52 is worrying. If the situation does not change, then by about 2016 the average age of researchers will reach 59 years. For Russian men, this is not only the last year before retirement, but also its average duration. Such a picture is emerging in the system of the Academy of Sciences. In universities and branch research institutes on a nationwide scale, the age of doctors of science is 57-59 years, and candidates - 51-52 years. So in 10-15 years science may disappear from us.

There is an opinion that, despite all the difficulties and losses, aging and outflow of personnel from science, we still retain the scientific and intellectual potential that allows Russia to remain among the leading powers of the world, and our scientific and technological developments are still attractive to foreign and domestic investors, however, investments are scanty.

In fact, in order for our products to win the domestic and foreign markets, they must qualitatively surpass the products of competitors. But the quality of products directly depends on technology, and modern, especially high technologies (they are the most profitable) - on the level of scientific research and technological development. In turn, their quality is the higher, the higher the qualifications of scientists and engineers, and its level depends on the entire education system, especially higher education.

If we talk about the scientific and technological potential, then this concept includes not only scientists. Its components are also the instrumentation and experimental park, access to information and its completeness, the system for managing and supporting science, as well as the entire infrastructure that ensures the advanced development of science and the information sector. Without them, neither technology nor the economy simply can work.

In the USSR, much attention was paid to the development of R&D. By the 1990s, about 2 million researchers worked in the industry (including more than 1 million in the territory of modern Russia), which is more than in any other country in the world. Research and development was carried out in almost all areas. But at the same time, military developments, which made it possible to maintain parity with the United States in the production of the latest weapons (nuclear weapons, rocketry), and fundamental research in the relevant natural sciences - physics, chemistry and exact science - mathematics, enjoyed a huge priority. In these areas, the Soviet Union occupied a leading position in the world. But the social and human sciences lagged far behind the world level. The existing achievements of military science were slowly introduced into the civilian sectors of the economy, as they were strictly classified.

More than 3/4 of the scientific research and development of the USSR was carried out on the territory of modern Russia. As in many countries of the world, science consisted of three sectors - academic, university and industrial. The industry sector was the most developed, in which research institutes and design bureaus of the military-industrial complex were mainly represented. They were concentrated in Moscow and the Moscow region, since the relevant departments were located here and the most qualified personnel were located, but there were also in many other large cities of the country. The sectoral sector of the R&D sphere was mainly engaged in applied research and the implementation of their results in the economy. In the academic sector, research of a fundamental nature was mainly concentrated, including in social and humanitarian disciplines. Academic research institutes were concentrated in Moscow and St. Petersburg, but departments and scientific centers of the Academy of Sciences (Novosibirsk, Yekaterinburg, Kazan, etc.) were created in many large cities. University science was engaged in both fundamental and applied research, but they often had an auxiliary character in the organization of the educational process. Large independent studies were carried out only in the leading universities of the country, located mainly in Moscow and St. Petersburg. Overall, it was the least significant R&D sector.

Almost all funding for science in the Soviet period came from the state budget. In the context of the socio-economic crisis of the 1990s, it dropped sharply. This has led to a significant reduction in the amount of research and development carried out. In many organizations, especially in the industrial and university sectors, they have actually ceased. The number of researchers in the country decreased by 2002 to 420 thousand people, which is more than 2 times compared to 1990. Similarly, the total number of people employed in the field of R&D decreased from 2.8 million to 1.2 million people . Workers in the scientific sphere began en masse to move to work in new, "commercial" industries: trade, credit and financial activities, etc. Many qualified specialists left to work in other countries. In a particularly bad situation were research and design institutions and units located outside the capital regions of the country. They were not able to compete with the leading metropolitan organizations in the implementation of nationwide scientific programs. At the same time, effective demand for the results of research and development in the field is almost absent. As a result, by the beginning of the XXI century. there was an even greater territorial concentration of research and development. About 50% of their volume in Russia currently falls on Moscow and the Moscow Region, and about 10% more - on St. Petersburg.

The determining factor in the current state of science is the budget crisis, as a result of which the financing of science is carried out at an extremely low level. It's no secret that a country that allows itself to spend less than 0.5% of GDP on science, in the XXI century. has no prospects for successful competition with economically and technologically developed countries. In Russia, over the past five years, the share of spending on science in GDP did not exceed 0.5%, while in industrialized countries such as the USA, Germany, and Japan, this figure ranged from 2.8% to 3% of GDP. In terms of expenditures on science today, Russia is closer to individual, not very rich countries in Africa.

The reduction in funding led to a sharp drop in the number of people employed in the scientific and technical sphere. The situation is developing dramatically in the most advanced part of the scientific and technical sphere of Russia - the scientific and technical complex of the military-industrial complex, where, as a result of the collapse of the research potential, almost a third of its total volume was lost.

The reduction and devaluation of one's own scientific and technical potential in the conditions of modern international competition means undermining the foundations of economic growth from domestic sources and dooming the country to a permanent lag.

The collapse of the scientific and technical sphere led to a decrease in the effectiveness of research and a sharp slowdown in the pace of scientific and technological development of the country. The volume of national patenting has significantly decreased, not to mention the patenting of domestic inventions abroad.

Rospatent has no money today. Help comes from abroad. International foundations are ready to support Rospatent, but in exchange they ask for information, so for several years now our technologies, developments, and know-how have officially gone abroad.

The rate of decommissioning of obsolete machines, structures and technologies has slowed down. For this reason, in most Russian enterprises, high-level innovative activity aimed at fundamental improvements does not make sense. For them, the only suitable type of innovation is the replacement of fixed assets. Moreover, the time when investments are still possible is running out very quickly - along with the destruction of the personnel potential of enterprises. This circumstance dooms a number of sectors of the Russian economy to growing technological and financial dependence on foreign countries.

The status of the scientific complex in the Russian economy does not correspond to the trends in the global economic system. To change the situation, purposeful efforts are required on the part of state bodies and all economic entities. Moreover, efforts should be aimed at changing not only the level of remuneration of scientists and its equipment, but also the prevailing public consciousness. It is necessary to form a social order for the scientific complex, which would ensure the correspondence between science, the innovation sphere and the structural reorganization of the economy and the requirements dictated by modern civilization. In this regard, Russia faces the most urgent task of developing an appropriate strategy for scientific, technological and innovative development, which would be based on the existing scientific and technical potential and would be aimed at promoting structural changes in the Russian economy that increase its competitiveness.

2. The main problems of Russia's lagging behind in the scientific and technical sphere and ways to solve them

One of these problems is the incompleteness of most technologies and products brought to the market, i. not bringing them - due to lack of funds - to a state where they can be claimed by consumers. This dramatically reduces the value of the proposed technologies (or products) in the eyes of potential partners.

Trade in technology and high-tech products can play a huge role in the revival of our country. Russian research institutes and design bureaus have accumulated a lot of developments that have not been brought to the stage of a finished product. The use of this potential is traditionally associated with the solution of the "implementation problem". For decades, our scientists and engineers have been encouraged to implement their developments. World management experience shows that this strategy (technology push), as a rule, is very inefficient. The most successful TNCs use the opposite model (market pull), which is characterized by putting the needs of the market at the forefront. It is this strategy that should be used in managing the selection of technologies and products offered by Russian research institutes and design bureaus to finance the final stages of commercialization.

It would be expedient to create the State Innovation Fund, which would finance the final stages of development and industrial development of technologies and products on a reimbursable basis. Reimbursement mechanisms may vary. One possible solution is for the fund to receive part of the rights to the technology. With its industrial development, partners would be given the right to buy out the fund's share either at the market price or according to the formula: the amount of the loan received from the fund, plus the latter's expected rate of return on investment.

A serious issue is the selection of those unfinished technologies or products that should be supported. Many experts believe that technologies that will have a decisive impact on the life of mankind in the first half of the 21st century already exist today in the form of laboratory developments. Of course, it is incredibly difficult to single them out. However, with regard to the short term, it seems quite justified to provide financial support for those technologies that best meet the needs of the market. World experience shows that when the volume of the potential market is large enough, innovations are mastered faster. The latter can become new "locomotives" of economic development, which in the last third of the 20th century. became computerization and telecommunications. A broad discussion of scientists, politicians, businessmen and international experts could play a big role in highlighting the most "fruitful opening ideas".

One of the strategic mistakes still clichéd by Russian science and technology authorities is that they continue to approach it as an area where centralized administrative methods should dominate. Again, attempts are being made to create a system of control over the use of scientific and technical reserves, patents, licenses.

Meanwhile, back in 1981, in the United States, the state's monopoly on the ownership of patents and know-how developed with budget funds was abolished. In order to increase the efficiency of using the accumulated potential, it was decided to transfer all rights for the commercial use of developments to those organizations where the relevant R&D was carried out. The state has created an infrastructure that facilitates such commercialization and at the same time protects the rights of developers.

Another problem of Russia's lagging behind in the scientific and technical field is the ignorance by Russian firms of the laws of "promoting" technological innovations, bringing them to the market. This is primarily due to the fact that in pre-reform times, large-scale development of innovations was carried out by decision of the central government bodies at already operating giants of industry.

In market conditions, the mechanism for mastering innovations is inextricably linked with small innovative businesses, which are characterized by high risk, but also high returns in case of success. In developed economies, there is a special sector of the national economy that provides the necessary conditions (infrastructure) for the development of small innovative businesses. This refers to scientific and technical incubators, a network of risk financing funds (venture funds), special financial mechanisms to support firms at the stage of their rapid growth, certified appraisers of firms, etc.

You can radically change the situation by:

Development of a special law to support small innovative firms;

Implementation of measures to support innovation incubators, in which, along with the federal authorities, the administrations of the constituent entities of the Federation should take an active part;

Changes in banking legislation that would allow banks to form risk financing funds to support innovative activities (current legislation and instructions of the Central Bank of Russia prohibit banks from issuing high-risk loans without providing guaranteed collateral).

The lack of effective demand for advanced technologies and industrial innovations in the domestic market also hinders the development of science and technology policy in Russia. Science and scientific and technical activity belong to the service sector, and these services must be in demand by the market. Unfortunately, the domestic market for scientific services and science-intensive products is currently very small. Most businesses cannot afford to "buy" science services.

The structure of R&D expenditures is dominated by the state (65% in 2008), and therefore the decline in funding is explained primarily by the "savings" of the state on science. The hopes that private business would actively join this financing did not come true: in the conditions of low competition in the domestic market and great opportunities for rent use (from a monopoly and oligopolistic position, ties with the state apparatus, etc.), Russian private business has little interest in conducting R&D. Another reason for the relative decline in R&D spending is the sharp decline in military spending compared to Soviet times, including military research and development, which made up the bulk of Soviet R&D, and civilian science was not up to par in Soviet times in many areas.

The measures taken by the state in the field of science in recent years were aimed mainly at protecting the interests of producers of a scientific product, maintaining the structure and organizations operating in this area, and not at developing the market for scientific services. A certain contradiction can be traced in such a policy, since it makes no sense to protect a manufacturer who has no incentive for production, no customer. It seems that the policy of the state would be much more effective if it were aimed at creating effective demand for science services.

Therefore, on the one hand, there is nothing wrong with the fact that scientific organizations "sell" their services abroad. On the other hand, to preserve high-quality science in the country, reliable "internal" consumers of its services are needed.

Today, GAZprom, Lukoil, RAO UES, Aeroflot, VAZ, GAZ, Minatom and other leaders of the Russian economy could become buyers of science services. However, they need to create appropriate incentives, for example, in the form of income tax exemption for funds allocated to support domestic science. The state can also create a number of first-class consumers of science services by helping firms buy research and development through targeted funding in this area. It seems useful to create a system of specialized funds that use budget money to issue targeted loans or grants to firms to finance R&D.

To eliminate possible abuses and ensure the quality of work of recipients of public money, it is necessary to certify, for example, the Ministry of Science. Such schemes are quite well developed in practice. One of them is used by the World Bank, participating in the program of restructuring Russian enterprises.

The creation of a system of such funds for sectors of the national economy (medicine, agriculture, energy, environmental protection, etc.) could, firstly, bring science financing mechanisms closer to the market, and secondly, decentralize decision-making on financing developments . To a certain extent, they would become the market counterpart to the sectoral R&D funding that existed before.

3. Strategies for innovative development. Critical Technologies

The "transfer" strategy consists in using foreign scientific and technical potential and transferring innovations to their own economy. It was carried out, for example, by Japan in the post-war period, when in the USA, England, France, and Russia it purchased licenses for highly efficient technologies for mastering the production of the latest products that were in demand abroad, with the subsequent creation of its own potential, which later provided the entire innovation cycle - from fundamental research and development to the implementation of their results within the country and on the world market. As a result, the export of Japanese technology exceeded imports, and the country, along with some others, has advanced fundamental science.

The "borrowing" strategy is that, having cheap labor and using part of the lost scientific and technical potential, they master the production of products that were previously produced in developed countries, followed by an increase in their own engineering and technical support for production. Further, it becomes possible to carry out their research and development work, combining state and market forms of ownership. This strategy has been adopted in China and a number of countries in Southeast Asia. A classic example is the creation of a competitive automotive industry, high-performance computing and consumer electronics in the Republic of Korea.

The USA, Britain, the FRG, and France adhere to the "build-up" strategies. It lies in the fact that, using our own scientific and technical potential, attracting foreign scientists and designers, integrating fundamental and applied science, a new product, high technologies are constantly being created, implemented in production and the social sphere, i.e. innovation is on the rise.

Russia must choose a strategy that would rely on the available intellectual potential and scientific and technical resources. Ways to transform fundamental science are more or less obvious. This is a forced narrowing of the front of work and the concentration of available funds in priority areas, the internationalization of research and the comprehensive development of competitive principles. The situation is more complicated with the choice of a strategy for enhancing technological innovation, i.e. applied research on a commercial basis, which become part of the normal market economy. The strategy of "transfer" is not feasible here, since the acquisition of licenses requires significant financial costs. In addition, a country with significant scientific, technical and industrial potential will not be sold licenses to create high-performance products or high technologies. Such a strategy can lead to complete dependence on highly developed countries, loss of national security.

Obviously, it is expedient for Russia to use elements of the "borrowing" strategy, in which joint ventures are organized to produce competitive products and sell them in the domestic and foreign markets using economic niches where a foreign partner already sells such products. Such processes are observed in the joint (or commissioned by individual Western firms) production of elements of electronic equipment, assembly of complex household appliances. These enterprises can support productive capacity, provide employment and develop their own innovative projects. A large role will be played by small innovative enterprises, one of the advantages of which is their functioning in large industries for the rapid readjustment of technologies for the production of products required by the main production.

In relation to breakthrough areas, such as space, aviation, nuclear energy, and the production of certain types of machine-building products, it is possible to implement a "build-up" strategy. In conditions of limited financial resources, it should be based on a limited range of highly effective innovative projects that implement the accumulated backlog. This refers to priority scientific and technical areas and critical technologies, the implementation period of which is 2-5 years. This requires state orders issued on a competitive basis and with guaranteed state funding, as well as equity participation of private investors.

It should be noted that the market elements of the innovation sphere in Russia already exist: private enterprises have appeared, large privatized industries have been freed from state tutelage in the distribution of profits, there is a scientific and technical potential that has been created over decades, the state participates in supporting priority projects, a system of competitions and investment funds has been formed for financing of innovation - nevertheless, the innovation mechanism does not work. Resources and opportunities exist on their own, in isolation from the structural transformations of the economy, and the latter practically do not increase the efficiency of production, i.e. do not fulfill the task for which economic reforms began. Therefore, innovation policy should be aimed at a systematic approach to the cycles of "STP - innovation - reproduction" and ensure the integration of all elements of the innovation process into a single mechanism capable of not only absorbing resources, but producing successfully implemented projects as a result, and not only in single instances. , but also serially.

The concept of "critical technologies" first appeared in America. This was the name of the list of technological areas and developments that were primarily supported by the US government in the interests of economic and military superiority. They were selected on the basis of an extremely thorough, complex and multi-stage procedure, which included the examination of each item on the list by financiers and professional scientists, politicians, businessmen, analysts, representatives of the Pentagon and the CIA, congressmen and senators.

A few years ago, the Russian government also approved a list of critical technologies prepared by the Ministry of Science and Technical Policy (in 2000 it was renamed the Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology) of more than 70 main headings, each of which included several specific technologies. Their total number exceeded 250. This is much more than, for example, in England - a country with a very high scientific potential. Neither in terms of funds, nor in terms of personnel, nor in terms of equipment, Russia could create and implement such a number of technologies. Three years ago, the same ministry prepared a new list of critical technologies, including 52 headings (still, by the way, not approved by the government), but we cannot afford it either.

4. Gstate support for science

The need for state intervention in the process of introducing innovations is explained by the duration of the scientific and production cycle, high costs and the uncertainty of the final result. The market cannot solve the problem of long-term risky investments. These functions should be assumed by the state. Innovations can generate dynamic effects that affect different areas of knowledge.

One of the priority steps that the state should take on the way to a radical change in the situation in the scientific and technical field is to exclude the possibility of implementing global, but ineffective programs. Scientific and technical programs should focus primarily on the commercial use of developments, while the state should support only those projects that bring a significant commercial effect. Expected results should be assessed not by project authors, but by independent economic centers or banks, taking into account possible sales markets, categories of potential consumers, the scale of necessary investments, etc. research science technical

In some cases, to overcome market inertia and share the potential risks associated with the initial stages of the introduction of new technologies, the state could partially finance or act as a guarantor of commercial financing for demonstration projects of new developments.

Perhaps no country can afford to support R&D across the entire spectrum of science and technology. Therefore, it is so important to correctly identify the priorities of scientific and technological development and to concentrate budget funds on certain areas, which ultimately contributes to the increase in the ISN. Japan has achieved the greatest success in this: using the levers of state influence, the Ministry of Industry and Foreign Relations coordinates the actions of individual firms, creates conditions for the formation of consortiums, joint ventures, etc.

An analysis of global trends in this area shows that the most significant effect is not provided by protectionism and the protection of national firms, but by rationally organized competition within the country and proper interaction with external partners. At the same time, the most "advanced" countries benefit greatly from a well-established partnership between the government and the private sector of the economy.

Zconclusion

What can and should be done so that science, which is still preserved in our country, begins to develop and becomes a powerful factor in economic growth and improvement of the social sphere?

First, it is necessary, without postponing for a year, or even for half a year, to radically improve the quality of training for at least that part of students, graduate students and doctoral students who are ready to remain in domestic science.

Secondly, to concentrate the extremely limited financial resources allocated for the development of science and education on several priority areas and critical technologies focused exclusively on boosting the domestic economy, social sphere and state needs.

Thirdly, in state research institutes and universities, to direct the main financial, personnel, information and technical resources to those projects that can give really new results, and not to scatter funds on many thousands of pseudo-fundamental scientific topics.

Fourth, it is time to create federal research universities based on the best higher educational institutions that meet the highest international standards in the field of scientific infrastructure (information, experimental equipment, modern network communications and information technologies). They will prepare first-class young specialists for work in the domestic academic and industrial science and higher education.

Fifth, it is time to make a decision at the state level to create scientific, technological and educational consortiums that will unite research universities, advanced research institutes and industrial enterprises. Their activities should be focused on scientific research, innovation and radical technological modernization. This will allow us to produce high-quality, constantly updated, competitive products.

Sixth, in the shortest possible time, by a government decision, it is necessary to instruct the Ministry of Industry and Science, the Ministry of Education, other ministries, departments and administrations of regions where there are state universities and research institutes to start developing legislative initiatives on intellectual property issues, improving patenting processes, scientific marketing, scientific educational management. It is necessary to legislate the possibility of a sharp increase in the salaries of scientists, starting primarily with state scientific academies (RAS, RAMS, RAAS), state scientific and technical centers and research universities.

Finally, seventh, it is urgent to adopt a new list of critical technologies. It should contain no more than 12-15 main positions focused primarily on the interests of society. It is they that the state should formulate, involving in this work, for example, the Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology, the Ministry of Education, the Russian Academy of Sciences and state industry academies.

Naturally, the ideas about critical technologies developed in this way, on the one hand, should be based on the fundamental achievements of modern science, and on the other hand, take into account the specifics of the country. For example, for the tiny Principality of Liechtenstein, which has a network of first-class roads and a highly developed transport service, transport technologies have not been critical for a long time. As for Russia, a country with a vast territory, scattered settlements and difficult climatic conditions, for it the creation of the latest transport technologies (air, land and water) is really a decisive issue from an economic, social, defense, environmental and even geopolitical point of view, because our country can link Europe and the Pacific region with the main highway.

Taking into account the achievements of science, the specifics of Russia and the limitations of its financial and other resources, we can offer a very short list of truly critical technologies that will give a quick and tangible result and ensure sustainable development and growth in people's well-being.

Critical ones include:

energy technologies: nuclear energy, including the processing of radioactive waste, and a deep modernization of traditional heat and power resources. Without this, the country may freeze, and industry, agriculture and cities may be left without electricity;

transport technologies. For Russia, modern cheap, reliable, ergonomic vehicles are the most important condition for social and economic development;

information Technology. Without modern means of informatization and communication, management, development of production, science and education, even simple human communication will be simply impossible;

biotechnological research and technology. Only their rapid development will make it possible to create a modern profitable agriculture, competitive food industries, to raise pharmacology, medicine and healthcare to the level of the requirements of the 21st century;

ecological technologies. This is especially true for the urban economy, since up to 80% of the population lives in cities today;

rational environmental management and geological exploration. If these technologies are not modernized, the country will be left without raw materials;

mechanical engineering and instrument making as the basis of industry and agriculture;

a whole range of technologies for light industry and the production of household goods, as well as for housing and road construction. Without them, it is completely meaningless to talk about the well-being and social well-being of the population.

If such recommendations are accepted, and we start financing not priority areas and critical technologies in general, but only those that society really needs, then we will not only solve Russia’s current problems, but also build a springboard for jumping into the future.

Withlist of used literature

1. Conversion in Russia: state, problems and solutions. M.: IMEPI RAN, 1996.

2. Science of Russia in numbers. 1997. M.: TsISN, 1997

3. Popov A.A., Lyndina E.N. Fundamentals of innovation management. Tutorial. Orenburg, 2004. - 129 p.

4. http://www.auditorium.ru

5. http://www.chelt.ru/2001/1/koch_1.html

6. http://nauka.relis.ru/06/0109/06109002.html

Hosted on Allbest.ru

...