WWW.DISSERS.RU


...
    !

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 53 | 54 || 56 | 57 |   ...   | 102 |

The key issue in measuring performance in the field of science is what and how to measure. For example, what should be measured to determine the extent to which scien tific and industrial centers have an effect on industrial compositeness Such traditional RUSSIAN ECONOMY in trends and outlooks indicators as licensing, mutual agreements, patents etc. can only be used to measure a short term effect rather than long term one. Long term effects, in its turn, normally show a qualitative rather than quantitative value. Thus, there are two specific features of measur ing goals and performance which can be emphasized for the sector of science. First, it is difficult to directly relate the performance of a research to the annual investments in sci ence, because a real effect is expected to be evident in several years or even decades to come from the initial investment. Second, performance measurement in science always has a retrospective character and consequently involves skilled experts. In some coun tries, an alternative method was adopted to measure efficiency of investments in science:

qualitative performance measurement rather than quantitative one. Besides, case study methods are often used in addition to expert appraisal, which can determine how scientific work is promoting a socially essential performance21. Utilizing only qualitative indicators is risky in that such approach normally excludes top priority tasks which can not be reliably measured for quality, as well as it ignores such task components which have no direct ef fect on values of the indicators set for assessment.

The Ministry plans to implement the task in the field of science and innovations as part of the Program on Research and Development in Top Priority Trends of Science and Technology, which since 2005 became a single program in the field of scientific, techno logical and innovative work, including FTP actions, Integration of Science and Higher Edu cation in Russia and top priority scientific research, including the national key projects on innovative work.

Nevertheless, the federal budget can provide a significant resource to achieve the goals set. This is budget funds allocated to the public academies of sciences. Over the last few years, allocations to these academies have been accounting for 30 to 33% of the total state budget allocations for the benefit of civil science. The biggest volume of fundamental research is provided within the system of institutions subordinate to the Russian Academy of Sciences, which in fact makes the RAS responsible for achievement of a strategic goal of the country: build up potential for future development. In addition, over the last few years, the RAS has been actively participating in innovation work thus justifying its partici pation (statements and reports) in resolving the issues of innovation development. At pre sent, however, this significant resource is not being in use, as the RAS and other public academies are not the subjects of budgeting due to their special legal status. Thus, a fairly large share of public funds allocated to the development of science appears to be ex cluded from budgeting.

3.5.5. Public Scientific Funds and Private Charity Operating conditions gradually deteriorated for scientific funds (RF FI and RHSF) during the year. First, it was caused by the fact that the RAS strengthened its control over their activity. Their reorganization into state financed organizations as accompanied by changes in the management in the previous year, was followed by a new step, i.e. changes in composition of their Councils. There are currently no scientists representing higher edu cation institutions in the RF FIs Council, while a percentage of representatives of non academic science is miserable in the RHSFs Council. Thus, the RAS has come to have a decisive effect on decision making in the funds. In addition, the funds have lost the right to self governance pursuant to a revised version of the Law on Science effective from Janu Roessner D. Outcome measurement in the United States: State of the Art. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the AAAS. Boston, MA. February 17. 2002.

Section 3.

The real sector ary 1, 2005. This may have an adverse effect on contest based selection of projects for grant financing.

Under the circumstances, the funds are getting rely upon partnership with ministries and further diversification of their activity. The RF FI and the Federal Agency for Industry entered into an agreement on cooperation. Under the agreement they will conduct joint contests of projects designed to continue applying research and development findings in various industries (in particular, radioelectronics, aviation and shipbuilding).

Second, it is also related to work organization at the funds. Over the last few years, Demands and role of science have gradually been changing which should be taken into account in the criteria of assessment and selection of projects. Being public agencies, the funds have to perform some of the public functions, including reformation in the field of science in Russia. It seems to be expedient to introduce such criteria of project assess ment as compliance with the national top priorities, effect of a proposed project on the de velopment of other sciences, as well as applicability of projects findings beyond funda mental research. To date, both the assessment criteria and the classification of sciences still remain unchanged in spite of a heavy criticism.

Third, there is a problem of an ambiguous interpretation of the grant term by the funds, which was not resolved in 2004. Such interpretation plays a decisive role in the en tire financing system at the funds. A type of obligations defined as charity in clause 582, section 2 of the GC RF is closest to the meaning of grant. Grant recipients are defined as legal entities (medical, educational, scientific, social and charitable, etc.), as well as public and religious funds. This definition is imposing material limits on Russian legal entities as parties of a grant agreement by classifying them as non profit organizations, including state financed ones.

Fourth, there is a problem of taxation of grants. With regard to grants, it is expedient to apply the system of tax allowances which is applicable to foreign grants. Under the applica ble RF Tax Law, grants are not identified as monetary funds received from Russian scientific funds, though they are exempted from profit tax22. Subventions, subsidies or transfers re ceived by citizens and organizations of the Russian Federation from the RF FI and the RHSF and allocated for conducting scientific research, holding scientific conferences and imple menting other programs realized by these funds should be defined as grants.

No progress was made in private charity in 2004 as judged by the number of new or ganizations implementing science promotion programs. At the same time, the non profit organizations established in the previous years expanded their scope and the number of programs for support. This is especially true in regard to such organizations as the Domes tic Science Promotion Fund and Dynasty Fund. At the same time, however, the initiatives of YUKOS, a major benefactor, were reduced (for instance, provision of financial support for regional Internet centers.

In the period ending in 2004, the RAO EES (RAO Unified Energy Systems of Russia) and the RAS entered into an agreement on establishing a New Generation Contest for young scientists and students of higher education institutions conducting research in the sector of power energy and related sciences. The RAO EES plans to establish an annual award in the amount of $100 thousand to the best scientists at the age of up to 35 ($2.000) and scholarships to the best students ($1.000 each) whose major is power energy.

Tax imposed on grants of non profit organizations is one of the problems interfering with the development of private charity. In 2004, corresponding amendments the Tax Code Pursuant to section 1, paragraph 14, clause 251 of the RF Tax Code (the Federal Law as in force since May 29, 2002, No. 57 FZ).

RUSSIAN ECONOMY in trends and outlooks were under consideration, and a draft law passed fist reading. From now on, Russian benefactors may provide profit tax free grants, provided that such benefactors are regis tered in the list of such non profit organizations. The list is subject to approval by the Gov ernment of the Russian Federation. Thus, a procedure is suggested which is similar to that applied to foreign organizations operating in Russia. There is a restricted number of well established and well known foreign organizations operating in Russia, while any Russian non profit organization may establish its grant and consequently obtain tax allowance in this country. So far, there is no criteria for selecting non profit organizations for the list of benefactors. Neither is existing any revision procedure for the list. It seems to be expedient to draft and adopt a special law on grants concerning both public and private funds with a special provision for their scope, rights, possibilities and limitations.

3.5.6. Developing a Program on Foreign Funds and International Organizations In 2004, the United States, major sponsor, continued to reduce the number of Pro grams on Russian Science Promotion. In particular, financing pursuant to the US Law, Act in Support of Freedom, was cut off. This means termination of the initiatives of such or ganizations as AIREX, ASPRAL, the Kennan Institute, the Eurasia Fund. The US Agency for International Development also reduced its allocations for Russia. Such a situation is mostly due to gradual changes in US goals. Initially, large amounts were invested in con version of military oriented science into a civil one, preventing brain drain, establishing a civil society, and supporting social sciences. It is admitted for the time being that the ma jority of the above listed goals have been reached. The British Council has been reducing dramatically its financing the Russian sector of science and innovations, including support for Russian programs and a series of foreign organizations.

At the same time, some initiatives are likely to be enlarged in scale. Consideration is under way of expanding Russian American initiatives relating to short term exchange pro grams, and increasing the number of participants by reducing the term of their staying abroad23. Another advancing trend in cooperation is commercialization of scientific and technical performance. It is scheduled to be developed by International Scientific and Technical Center (ISTC), organization which in 2004 cancelled the 10 year operation in Russia. During its operation the ISTC provided support for 60 thousand scientists of the CIS countries by having allocated nearly $600 million. A share of annual allocations from this Center accounts for 5% of budget financing of civil science in Russia. Canada became a member of the ISTC from March 2004, which plans to provide an annual contribution of up to $18 million to the programs on financing scientists that used to be employed in the former defense sector of science. At its inception, the center provided financing for civil scientific research conducted by the former defense sector scientists in order to keep them employed in the country. Over the last few years, the ISTC has turning into a techno logical broker by outsourcing private foreign firms for the project and developing partner ship projects. At present, the ISTC is providing cooperation between Russian scientists and 229 foreign private companies. Over the last two years, the annual growth rate of pri vate investments has been accounting for nearly 150%24. The ISTC plans to increase its investments in patenting, commercialization of scientific research findings, creating infra structure of technologies transfer, including former restricted cities, i.e. special research and development cities. Another key aspect is placing focus on supporting special re Preparing for a New Decade of Exchange Programs Between Russia and the United States. Materials of the Symposium.

., 2004. P. 25, 37.

ISTC 10 years (1994 2004). . : ISTC, 2004. P. 3.

Section 3.

The real sector search for the benefit of all the parties involved. This is primarily related to terrorism fight ing, developing new sources of energy and biological research.

The InTAS, another major international organization, has been developing the similar way. It became obvious in 2004 that provision of the same kind of support to all and each of the CIS countries could not be efficient any longer. This is why the InTAS conducted ap praisal of its programs which resulted in developing several scenarios.

Scenario 1 provides for continuing the cooperation programs by placing emphasis on conducting special contests (dedicated to power energy, IT and biology), practical ap plication of the research findings, as well as programs for young scientists. European re searchers have been showing less interest in the practice of supporting broad networks of scientists, which forms the basis of InTAS operation. According to assessment of the for mer initiatives, support for small partnership teams of representatives from 2 to 5 organi zations proves more efficient than that of the networks. This (1) insures better compliance with the basics of organization of scientific process and (2), allows administrative costs to be reduced.

Under Scenario 2, the InTAS is expected to broaden its advisory functions in regard to the CIS countries. In doing so, it will rely mostly on top priorities of the Frame Programs of the European Union.

Finally, Scenario 3 provides for converting the InTAS into nothing but a consultant, which will provide consultancy in the field of science and services for countries recipients.

In this case, Russia will be replaced as the key client with Central Asian and Transcauca sian countries, where scientific and research forecast institutions are poorly developed and need support in establishing and developing.

Final decision on InTAS development strategy still remains to be taken, but experts tend to Scenario 1. Russia is not yet ready to become a full member of the EU projects.

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 53 | 54 || 56 | 57 |   ...   | 102 |



2011 www.dissers.ru -

, .
, , , , 1-2 .