Traditionally, the priority directions for the scientific and technological development and the corresponding critical technologies were defined once in a few years on the basis of prognosis (last year - foresight) research, formed by the Ministry for Education and Science of the Russian Federation and then were approved by the President of the country. A regular reconsideration of priority directions took place in 2009 and by September the Project of the Ministry for Education and Science containing the corrected list of priorities had been ready (table 2).
Table LISTS OF PRIORITY DIRECTIONS OF DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGIES AND TECHNIQUE IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION List 2006 List 2009 (project) List of RF President Information and telecommunica- Information and telecommunica- Strategic information technolotion systems tion systems gies Rational use of natural resources Rational use of natural resources Industry of nanosystems and Industry of nanosystems nanomaterials Life systems Life sciences Medical technologies Energy industry and energy saving Energy efficiency and energy saving Energy efficiency and energy saving Transportation, aviation and Transportation, aviation and Space technologies space systems space systems --Nuclear technologies Sources: 1. Priority directions for the development of science, technologies and technique in the Russian Federation and the List of critical technologies for the Russian Federation. Approved by the RF President 21.05.2006, Pr-842. 2.
Priority directions for the development of science, technologies and technique in the Russian Federation and the List of critical technologies for the Russian Federation. Project by the Ministry for Education and Sciences. 30 September 2009.
3.First meeting of the Commission for Modernization and Technological Development of Russian Economy. 18 June 2009. http://www.kremlin.ru/transcripts/As it follows from the data of table 2 the President’s priorities differ from the previous formats not only in content but also in wording. Traditionally, the priorities were formulated in the terms 1 http://www.kremlin.ru/transcripts/4506 18 June 2 Introductory speech by D. A. Medvedev at the meeting of Commission on Modernization and Technological Development of Russian Economy http://www.kremlin.ru/transcripts/4506 18 June STIMULATING OF INNOVATIONAL DEVELOPMENT...
of broad fields and disciplines (“life systems”, “transportation and space systems”) or industries (“industry of nanosystems”). Priorities of technological breakthrough are formulated more narrowly and precisely, in terms of the very technologies.
At the same time the existing federal targeted programs (FTP) and first of all the main FTP in the fields of R&D support – “Research and development in the priority directions for the development of the science and technological complex of Russia for 2007-2012” – is structured according to the list of 2006. At the same time new President’s priorities, as it follows from the reports on the meetings of the Commission on modernization, are to serve as the guidelines for the work of different ministries, departments and development institutions. It is likely that the reconsideration of the content of the programs and a large number of measures aimed at the support for the development of different technologies will follow soon. For instance, the Russian Academy of Sciences has already reacted to the new list, revised the topics of scientific research and established that the financing of the projects of five directions of the technological breakthrough makes only 23% of financing of the Program of the fundamental research at present. It was at the same time defined that this figure can be increased up to 35%1.
The main problems and possible measures to stimulate the innovative development in a broader context, and not only in connection with the particular technologies, were considered at three latest meetings of the Commission. The first broad topic was the work of the development institutes, the second – activity of the state companies, also from the point of view of the volumes and the quality of R&D financing, the third – the issues of technical regulation.
As for the development institutions, well-known problems have been summarized: the sporadic nature of institutes (lack of coordination and doubling functions as a result), insufficiently systematic approach to the work, “gaps” in support for some stages of scientific research, development and commercialization of R&D results. This primarily concerns small-scale programs of “sowing financing”, absence of the segment of financing of the medium-sized science-intensive companies as well as institute to support the purchase of technologies and lacking competence. It was noted that the institutes work basing on the principle of “flat subsidy”, there is no system for supporting the projects and pushing them through the stages of innovative cycle. It should be noted that this drawback applies not only to the development institutes but also to the whole infrastructure created in the country to support the scientific and innovation activity the development institutes have not managed so far to become “system integrators” of innovative changes. It seems that there are problems in the conception of the state corporations itself, as well as in the difficulties of overcoming the resistance of the surroundings where they have started operating, and in the lack of the qualified specialist-managers who were to organize the processes of the work on the strategy of the technological development and well-grounded choice of short- and long-term instruments to achieve the goals.
The measures suggested concerning the development institutes are primarily aimed not at the optimization of their organization and management, but at correcting the nature of the works financed by them. As to the work of the development institutes themselves, only the issue of coordination of their activity has been touched. The coordination of the work of the development institutes is suggested to improve through the exchange of the information on the projects, also by creating the technological platforms under which the areas to discuss the most important projects and formation of demand for them are understood.
The main suggestions on changes in the content of the work of development institutes can be summarized as the following2:
1. Support of companies fulfilling R&D works at the expense of budget grants;
2. Financing of the fundamental research with the prospect of private business being willing to co-finance experimental and construction works;
3. Scaling of financing of the sowing phase, also by more intensive functioning of the Russian venture company and additional capitalization of the Fund for assistance of the small-sclae enter1 No hammer. RAS will give a fundamental basis to modernization //Poisk, ¹3-4, 22.01.2010, p.5. (in Russian) 2 Verbatim report on the meeting of the Commission on Modernization and Technological Development of Russian Economy. 25 November 2009 http://www.kremlin.ru/transcripts/RUSSIAN ECONOMY: TRENDS AND PERSPECTIVES prises in scientific and technical sphere which is probable through additional allocation of RUR 500 million a year to fulfill the special program of the Fund;
4. Priority support of the development of small-scale companies by the development institutes which are formed under the supervision of the research institutes and higher educational institutions after adoption of the Federal Law No 217-FZ1.
The first two suggestions require serious elaboration so that the given measures will not turn into budget financing of those works that business could finance independently. The fulfillment of two other directions have in fact already started, and they are really aimed at overcoming of the serious gaps in the innovative system. As it is seen from the list of measures, they are mainly aimed at the support of the business of both small and large companies.
A more detailed analysis of the situation connected with the innovative activity in the state companies was presented at the last meeting of the Commission on modernization in 20092. The data on several large companies testify that they are characterized by low expenses for R&D works, and the most widespread types of R&D works are the following: the elaboration and adaptation of the technologies purchased abroad, development of the specific software in companies and improvement of the technologies existing at the enterprises. With a rare exception the state companies do not fulfill the breakthrough innovations connected with the development and implementation of the new technologies, products and services. That is, not only volumes but also the quality of the conducted R&D works is low, if one takes the novelty and breakthrough nature of innovation in the world as a criterion.
In order to correct the statement it is suggested to use two main measures of the coercive nature and a number of tax and administrative stimuli, which are to serve as “compensations”:
• Introduction of compulsory corporate programs for innovative development for state companies in concordance with the requirements established by the Government, which should be accepted together with and not be included to the list of investment programs.
• Introduction of a standard on the proportion of expenses for the R&D works for state-owned companies, separately for each company, basing on its branch specificity and comparison with the similar companies abroad.
• Optimization of tax administration and the supplementation of the list of R&D concerning the privilege envisaging the possibility for nonrecurrent recognition of some expenses for R&D including without a result and their write-off with the application of 1.5 coefficient.
• The reduction of the period for amortization of non-material assets (inventions, models, knowhow etc.) by the choice of the taxpayer but not below 2 years.
• The change in the procedure for accounting the value of the objects of intellectual property, including the accounting of the expenses for R&D works when defining the initial value of nonmaterial assets.
Finally, for such an instrument of the stimulating companies for innovation activity as technical regulation it was suggested to use the world experience and practice in this sphere more widely, as well as to intensify and optimize the development of technical regulations and standards3.
The suggested set of measures can be seen as an attempt to balance the encouraging, compelling and stimulation of the companies to invest in R&D and innovative activity. At the same time the main stress is put on the business sector, which is right on the whole since so far the issues of support, development and efficiency of the R&D were considered generally in the context of the state sector of science, including the work of the state academies of sciences and partially higher educational institutions.
There are however several worrying moments. First, the process of making decisions is spontaneous and not transparent enough, which is especially clearly seen in the example of the appearance of the new list of the technological priorities. Second, the suggested measures for forcing the 1 Federal Law “On making changes to some legislative acts of the Russian Federation concerning the issues of creation the economic entities by the budget scientific and educational institutions for the purposes of practical application (implementation) of the results of intellectual activity” (No 217-FZ from 02.08.2009).
2 Verbatim report on the meeting of the Commission on Modernization and Technological Development of Russian Economy. 25 December 2009. http://www.kremlin.ru/transcripts/3 The first meeting of the Commission in 2010 was devoted to the issues of technical regulation. 20January ãîäà. http://www.kremlin.ru/news/STIMULATING OF INNOVATIONAL DEVELOPMENT...
business recall the Soviet principles for economy management (perhaps, it is sop-called “hands-on management”). The suggested approaches are not practiced in the countries with the developed innovation systems. In some countries there is an indicative planning but not a detailed elaboration for each state company (or company in which the state owns a “golden share”) “standards” for expenditures for R&D works and requirements to make plans for innovative development. These issues are under the authority of the company’s management and not the federal government and management of the company is conducted according to the market principles. The coercion should proceed through more flexible instruments – technical regulation, co-financing of the innovation activity in companies on predefined conditions etc. Finally, the third indirect regulation is still weakly developed and the field of their administration has a lot of problems and cannot be compensation or counterbalance for the suggested compulsory measures.
RUSSIAN ECONOMY: TRENDS AND PERSPECTIVES FOREIGN ECONOMY COMPLEX OF RUSSIA AND PROBLEMS WITH MECHANISM FOR EXPORT SUPPORT FUNCTIONING A.Pakhomov In the period of economic crisis the stimulation of the goods and services export by the state is of special importance since when the internal demand is contracting the significance of the external market is growing. Taking into account this task within the framework of development of the Russian foreign economy complex it is necessary to provide selected support to Russian exporters and investors, which would also be oriented on the preservation of the Russia’s position on the most important markets of goods and services.
In the middle-term prospect in the post-crisis period one should take into account that the competition on the external markets will become much more acute and will reach a breakthrough level. This trend is accounted for by expansion of the influence of companies from fast developing and developed countries that managed to modernize the structure of their national economies and strengthen their export potential.