Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 13 | 14 || 16 |

The ideology of expanding the contacts should be formed at the level of organizations and universities and encouraged by the State as part of standard scientific environment. We need to start with small steps: to invite representatives of the scientific community as experts, to organize joint seminars, provide grants for travel to Russia, but not only in order to communicate with friends and relatives, but also to devote part of the trip, for example, lecturs to students and post-graduates. Given the growing problem of the quality of higher education, this measure is relevant.

In connection with the already being implemented program of joint projects, it should be noted that if the objective is the greatest contribution of foreign researchers in the development of the Russian system of education, science and high technology (that is the way it is formulated as one of the objectives of the subprogram), it would be useful to modify several terms of the program. In particular, it makes sense to oblige the visiting scientists to read a short course of lectures, to conduct several workshops, as well as to announce tenders on topics of relevant priority trends in of science and technology of the RF. Herewith, the task of "retention" of foreign researchers should not be the main purpose, because it deprives the event of flexibility. On the one hand, there may arise a pressure on the participants in the projects, which will repel, rather than attract them, and on the other hand, those who will stay, may be not only those who are needed for a long time. Ideally, for the two-year research projects there should not be the task of foreign investigators retention in Russia. Instead, the goal might be further development of scientific and other relations.

Finally, stimulating the circulation of personnel means also the expansion of Russian scientists ability to work and have probation abroad. The first step in this direction can be the financing of post-doctoral positions for the Russian researchers, interested to undergo three years of training in foreign laboratories of their compatriots and other foreign scientists.

4. 4. 5. Development of Int ernat ional Relat ions Work to attract the diaspora representatives can be regarded as one of the aspects of the government international activities in science and technology. Meanwhile, one of the main trends in this area was the development of relations with the EU, in particular, the discussion of the conditions for Russia joining the 7-th EU Framework Program as an associate member.

There are grounds for Russia to become an associate member. Among the "third" countries, Russia has been the most successful member of the 6-th EU Framework Program and continues to lead in the 7-th Framework Program in terms of number of projects in which the country participates, and the amount of funding obtained by the Russian teams. By these indicators Russia is ahead of such countries as China, India and Brazil. However, in terms of industries, participation of Russia is irregular; the highest "presence" of Russia is noted in such areas as Section Social Sphere sustainable development, global reforms and ecosystems, nanotechnology and nanoscience, as well as information communication technologies1. In the 7-th Framework Program similar trend persists (the most active participation of Russia is noted in such areas as ICT, nanoscience and environment). However, this statistics does not provide an answer to the question of economic feasibility of Russia entry into the 7-th Framework Program, as the volume of funds received as a result the won tenders may be lower than the financial contribution to the country as an associate member of the Program.

What are the advantages of an associate membership as compared with the status of the "third" country The first one is an opportunity to be the coordinator of projects, rather than just their party.

However, in order to be able to perform the functions of the coordinator, in Russia there must be organizations (structures) that can work in compliance with the standards and rule of the EU, including financial, accounting, auditing, etc. Regulations. There is relevant infrastructure in Russia yet.

Second one is participation in all tenders of the Framework Program. For example, currently grants of the European Research Committee to independent scientists and grants to advanced researchers are provided only to the scientists-residents of the European Union and associated countries,2 whereas such grants would be very helpful as a tool to attract the leading scientists, including our former compatriots.

However, the associate membership in the 7-th Framework Program does not allow to participate in identifying the topical areas of cooperation, what would be very important for Russia. Other countries, willing to become the associate members, have the goal of the subsequent entry into the EU. Therefore, associate membership in the Framework Program can be considered as one of the steps to achieve it. Russia has no such goal, and therefore, the issue of associate membership should be discussed in the context of reasonable economic benefits. From this point, the bilateral agreements and cooperation are equally important. The fact that Russian scientific teams can obtain, by participating in the Framework Program, the experience of modern project management, access to modern equipment and information, exchange of ideas, the ability to access the European markets with high-tech products - can be obtained in the framework of bilateral and multilateral cooperation.

Multilateral cooperation could potentially lead to a fundamentally new scientific findings as a result of a synergistic effect, however, bilateral relations are much easier for administration. It is no accident that the country-members of the Framework Program are allocating for its implementation significantly less funding than for the development of bilateral international scientific and technical relations. Thus, Russia's accession to the Framework Program as an associate member deserves support, but not to the detriment of other forms of cooperation.

In the situation of the budget reduction the programs of support to science and innovation, realized through foreign scientific foundations, which have their representative offices in Russia, become relevant again. Meanwhile, upon the adoption in June 2008 of the RF Government Decree No. 485 "On the List of international organizations receiving grants (free assistance) as a taxpayer, are not taxable and not excluded from the income for tax purposes for the Rus According to the results for the 6-th Framework Program. Source: European Commission, FP6 Data, 2008.

7-th Framework Program for Research and Technological Development of the European Union. M., 2007.

P. 8.

RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks sian organizations - grant recipients", have lost their force in exempting the international organizations from income tax. Other international and foreign organizations-grantors addressed to the authorized agencies with an application for inclusion in the new List. By 2010, there were no new foreign organizations-grantors, whose payments were not taxable. As a result of delays with the approval of the List, from January 1, 2009 everything is subject to taxation, including payment of individual grantees and the purchase of equipment from the grant funds.

Therefore, the conditions of foreign scientific foundations in Russia deteriorated, which led to the freezing of a number of programs, including innovative ones.

Thus, the benefits of international cooperation are not used to the full extent. At the governmental level, there is no clear position on the development of national priorities for science and innovation, and hence, the priorities for international cooperation, as well as coordinated inter-agency and intra-organizational and financial policies of international cooperation. There is no monitoring and assessment of international cooperation within the country. Actually, there is no information about the strengths and weaknesses of instruments and forms of cooperation.

In addition, international cooperation can not be developed outside the broader economic and political context, and its success depends on what conditions are created inside the country to carry out research activities. Among the important conditions are such provisions as the state of scientific equipment, the work on which would be attractive to foreign partners, the level of legislation elaboration in terms of intellectual property rights, working conditions of foreign organizations and scientists coming to work to the country. The failure to resolve all those issues limit the scope and form of international scientific cooperation.

4. 4. 6. Support t o Small Innovat ive Ent erprises and Innovat ion Infrast ruct ure Increased attention to the supporting of small innovative business and related technological infrastructure was due to the fact that small firms were, first, the least protected elements of the innovation system in crisis situation, and, secondly, a small business is regarded as one of the most important "intermediaries" of the transfer of knowledge and transformation of enterprises into new products and technologies. It should be noted that the second provision is only partly true, because in the absence of large high-tech companies the support to small businesses will have a relatively low efficiency, either because small firms usually work on outsourcing, or they are buying big companies, or they die. The transformation of small firms in the medium and large ones is a relatively rare phenomenon. In other words, support to small firms cannot be the basis for the development of large business.

In a crisis situation, the problems associated with the mechanisms of support for small innovative entrepreneurship get aggravated. First, the government's attention was drawn to the inconsistency between the organizational and legal form of the basic national Fund supporting small innovative companies - the Foundation for Assistance to Small Innovative Enterprises in Science and Technology (Assistance Fund) to the norms of the Civil and the Budget Codes.

Secondly, new technological infrastructure did not start to work to full extent (technicalpromotional zones (TIZ), technology parks), and in late 2009 there was started interagency transfer of responsibility for its development.

Section Social Sphere Currently the Assistance Fund is guided in its activities the Fund Regulations,1 according to which it is a public non-profit organization, without specifying the organizational and legal form. On the one hand, it gives the Fund a certain freedom of action. On the other hand, it brings the Assistance Fund outside the norms of the Civil and Budget Codes. The Fund is the manager of budgetary funds, but according to the Budget Code (Article 38.1 "The principle of departmental distribution of the budgets expenditures"), it can allocate funds only to those organizations that are under its supervision. Assistance Fund has no subordinate organizations and allocates funds for R&D on the basis of tenders, making contracts (under the Federal Act No. 94-FZ of July 21, 2005 "On Procurement of goods, works and services for national and municipal needs ") with the winning organizations, regardless of their affiliation.

Nevertheless, the activities of public funds support for science and innovation (primarily in regard to the Russian Fund of Federal Property (RFFI) and Russian Government National Fund (RGNF) was legitimate because federal law No. 63-FZ of April 26, 2007 "On Amendments to the Budget Code of Russian Federation in terms of regulating the budgetary process and bringing in line with the budget legislation of the RF some legal acts of the Russian Federation" gave them a deferral until January 1, 2010 to bring the documents in compliance.

Strictly speaking, The Assistance Fund was not affected by those provisions, but acting on the basis of its Regulations which does not specify, if the Fund is a budgetary or autonomous agency, or acts in any other legal-organizational form, it is found within the area of regulatory uncertainty and hence risk.

In this situation there are several possible solutions.

First choice: Assistance Fund can be converted into an autonomous institution. On the one hand, it removes an obstacle in the form of requirements to allocate funds only to subordinate organizations and makes it possible to receive funds from the federal budget subsidies. On the other hand, autonomous institutions can not be the main managers of budgetary funds, and because in this case the Fund is deprived of a separate budget line and would receive funding indirectly, through the ministry or department. Accordingly, it would be difficult to guarantee the preservation of the Fund's current standard of funding (1.5% of budget allocations for civilian science). This is especially true in view of the economic crisis, as the legal basis of autonomous institutions functioning is not well developed. Subsidies, with help of which autonomous institutions are financed are vulnerable budget lines and can be cut down in the first place.

The second option would be to amend the Budget Code, namely the provisions which gave special status to the Fund, and allow it to be the main manager of budgetary funds and allocate these funds through grants. Permission to the Assistance Fund to fund R&D through grants, rather than under the law on public procurement would simplify many of the procedural aspects.

The third option is an extension of the current statuses of funds, but that is not a solution of the issue. However, namely this way was chosen, and at the end of December 2009 the Federal Act was adopted to extend for another year the existing procedure for financial support through grants and budgetary subsidies. Regulations of the Assistance Fund to Small Innovative Enterprises in science and technology (approved by the RF Government No.65 dated February 3, 1994) (as amended on January 5, 12 December 1995, March 6, 1996, 31 March 1998.).

Federal Law No. 314-FZ of December 17, 2009 "On Amendments to Certain Legal Acts of Russia in connection with the federal law" On federal budget for 2010 and the planned period for 2011 and 2012.

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 13 | 14 || 16 |

2011 www.dissers.ru -

, .
, , , , 1-2 .