The global economic and political landscape is undergoing profound changes as the world enters a period of rapid transformation development strategies or adjusting their existing ones with greater prominence given to the role of innovation in the leading and underpinning development to strengthen their strategic arrangements for innovation⁃driven development, in a bid to improve their international competitiveness and seize the initiative in global competition Science, technology and innovation (STI) are recognized as the golden key to the door to growth In this trend of the times, the BRICS countries are spearheading the development of developing countries and attracting international attention with their highly innovative and distinctive development strategies Meanwhile, the BRICS as a bloc has become an exemplar of STI cooperation of developing countries.
As the rotating chair of BRICS in 2017, China will host the 9th BRICS Summit in Xiamen in September In the lead⁃up to the summit, the Ministry of Science and Technology of China (MOST) hosted the 5th BRICS Science, Technology and Innovation Ministerial Meeting in Hangzhou in July, where BRICS STI ministers had in⁃depth discussions and reached wide consensus on topics including STI policy, cooperation in priority areas, and co-funding for multilateral research projects The BRICS Action Plan for Innovation Cooperation and the Hangzhou Declaration
To support the work relating to BRICS STI cooperation under the Chinese presidency, China Science and Technology Exchange Center (CSTEC), as entrusted by MOST, established a High Level Expert Group of leading professionals The High⁃level Expert Group complied theBRICS Innovative Competitiveness Report 2017, in collaboration with the science and technology sections of Chinese embassies in other BRICS countries and STI think tanks in other BRICS countries Based on the latest available data, the Report of the BRICS STI cooperation, and presents country and thematic studies on the STI development of BRICS countries.
The Report consists of four parts, with a total of 12 sub⁃reports Part I two general sub⁃reports: an analysis report which evaluates and forecasts the national innovation competitiveness of BRICS countries and their STI cooperation and strategic priorities; and a research report on the priority areas BRICS STI cooperation for win⁃win results This part evaluates the comprehensive national innovative competitiveness of the BRICS countries since 2001 and forecast their innovative competitiveness in the next five years It also assesses the current status and progress of China's STI cooperation with other BRICS countries, and identifies priority areas of BRICS STI cooperation, support for BRICS countries to strengthen their national innovation competitiveness Part Ⅱ presents six country reports, which evaluate, analyze and forecast of the national innovation competitiveness of the BRICS countries and studies of their STI cooperation within the BRICS framework Part Ⅲ presents four thematic reports, which focus on the four thematic areas to STI, including digital economy, inclusive finance, energy, and agriculture, elaborate the STI development and potential of the individual BRICS countries in those areas, and provide valuable inputs for the BRICS countries' national innovation competitiveness Part IV contains appendixes, including an introduction to the related indicator system BRICS STI cooperation.
The ISSI 2017 Conferences provide an International forum for scientists, research managers and administrators, as well as other professionals related to information and communication science to share research and debate the new advancements of Informetrics and Scientometrics theories and applications. The theme of the 16th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference is the theory, method as well as principle of five metrices science concepts including Bibliometrics, Informetrics, Scientometrics, Webometrics and Knowledgometrics.
Tech Mining, a special form of “Big Data” analytics, aims to generate Competitive Technical Intelligence (CTI) using bibliometric and text-mining software (e.g., VantagePoint, TDA) as well as other analytical & visualization applications for analyses of Science, Technology & Innovation (ST&I) information resources. The goal of the conference is to ENGAGE cross-disciplinary networks of analysts, software specialists, researchers, policymakers, and managers toADVANCE the use of textual information in multiple science, technology, and business development fields. The conference program will address key CHALLENGES in:
DataSourcing, preparing, and interpreting data sources including patents, publications, webscraping, and other novel data sources
Text-mining tools and methodsBest practices in software-based topic modeling, clumping, association rules, term manipulation, text manipulation, etc. Visualization
Applied researchFuture-Oriented Technology Analysis (FTA) Intelligence gathering to support decision-making in the private sector (e.g., Management of Technology)
This conference is intended for researchers and students across multiple fields, especially Scientometrics, Public Policy, Management of Technology and Information Science.
This article analyses the perception of the Russian science and technology complex in the OECD reports for 2014 and for 2016. According to the OECD indicators of scientific and innovative development the Russian S&T complex shows a considerable improvement. However, the OECD indicators do not take into account the scale and effectiveness of S&T complexes, which leads to a high degree of abstractness of cross-country comparison. In addition, a number of indicators do not have a transparent calculation base or do not correspond to the Federal State Statistics Service data. It is also shown that in the foreign perception of national science and technology complexes great importance is attached to the public sector of science and the role of the government funding in it. The public sector of science is the main driver of innovative development, ensuring the growth of new knowledge and know-how, which then act as a trigger for the development of new technologies. It is considered to be the norm if the national public sector of science is 90% financed from public funds, although it is expected that in the future the share of non-budgetary sources will increase.The foreign concept of the public sector of science is a great methodological problem for any comparison of the Russian science and technology complex with foreign analogues, because despite the widespread use in foreign sources, the use of this term has not developed in the Russian state statistics. The article demonstrates that the translations of public research as ‘‘state research'', as well as other derivative interpretations with the word state, are incorrect. It is concluded that the statistical data on the parameters of foreign science and technology complexes should be used with great caution in reasoning and decision-making in the Russian national science and technology policy.
Improving human potential in R&D and increasing its performance are key to the development of human capital globally. The topic of R&D personnel has been on Russia’s S&T policy agenda for roughly 20 years. There are numerous reasons for the persistence and even aggravation of existing problems. In the 1990s, after the fall of the Soviet Union, the R&D sector went through a serious economic crisis. Amid negative changes in the internal and external environment there was a sharp drop in the provision of resources for research, reducing the productivity of research and experimental activity and its contribution to the development of the economy and society as a whole (Gokhberg et al. 2011; Kuznetsova 2013). Global positions in this area have also deteriorated. The level of publication activity in the country shifted from 3rd place during the Soviet era to 6th place at the start of the 1990s, and to 15th place in 2013. In the period 2000–2013 the proportion of publications by Russian authors in scientific journals indexed by Web of Science decreased from 3.22–1.92 % (Brazil—2.48 %, Japan—5.27 %, USA—24.85 %). However, in terms of patent activity (in 2013 28,765 patent applications filed in Russia by residents, 44,914—by residents and non-residents), Russia occupies the sixth position globally, but based on the number of applications per one million of the population (240.0)—it is only at the end of the top 30 globally.
Research evaluation recently became a widely disseminated exercise aimed in the end of the day at improving the cost efficiency of public funding of national R&D sectors. In November 2013, the Government of the Russian Federation initiated a national evaluation exercise of public research institutions (PRIs) to provide information basis for development of S&T policies aimed at increasing effectiveness and strengthening the role of R&D performing institutions in economic and social development. The aim of this paper is that of providing an approach for multidimensional assessment of R&D performance based on quantitative data derived from the national evaluation exercise, specifically looking at its applicability and limitations for further analysis and preliminary differentiation of PRIs as well as for use in policymaking.
This paper reviews the most central analytical and methodological issues that arise in developing national STI strategies. First, an outline of the relationship between national innovation systems and the strategic dimension is presented. The paper shows that science, technology and innovation strategy are often used in different forms and that there is no common understanding yet of the actual meaning and coverage of these strategies. The paper develops the terminology from a discussion of different approaches towards company innovation processes analyzing their evolution in different socioeconomic environments and the role and impact of science, technology and innovation policy on company innovation processes. Based on this conceptual understanding the paper defines national science, technology, innovation, and STI strategy and explains the basic terminology. From these definitions, the strategic dimension including the impact on the stakeholders is discussed. It is shown that a major success factor for STI strategy development is the involvement of stakeholders to vary and extend their use of their portfolio of instruments. Moreover it becomes evident that stakeholders follow their own interests which aren’t necessarily in the interest of the national STI strategies. The analysis shows advantages and disadvantages as well as potentials and limitations of different approaches to develop STI strategies in their ability to describe the reality of innovation processes and to allow conclusions about the relationship between innovation policy and the innovation processes implemented by companies. It is shown that knowledge of these limitations is an important factor to consider in designing consistent and coherent national STI policy which aims at supporting innovation eventually. Finally the paper concludes that the STI policy mix concept needs a more systemic development approach which is integrated in the national STI strategy development and implementation.
This paper is dealing with the disciplinary history of the rural economics in France between 1955 and 1985 which mark respectively the beginning of its institutionalization and a radical turning point in its development. I analyze the conditions of the emergence and evolution of this specific form of knowledge within a public research institution emphasizing the important role of science policy in the organization of knowledge in the second half of the twentieth century. This perspective suggests a link between intellectual development and institutional configuration in the transformation of rural social sciences. Changing conceptions of the public utility of social science and recent efforts of internationalization of academic institutions not only introduce new institutional practices, but lead to the complete reconfiguration of rural disciplines
Several approaches to the concept of fatherhood present in Western sociological tradition are analyzed and compared: biological determinism, social constructivism and biosocial theory. The problematics of fatherhood and men’s parental practices is marginalized in modern Russian social research devoted to family and this fact makes the traditional inequality in family relations, when the father’s role is considered secondary compared to that of mother, even stronger. However, in Western critical men’s studies several stages can be outlined: the development of “sex roles” paradigm (biological determinism), the emergence of the hegemonic masculinity concept, inter-disciplinary stage (biosocial theory). According to the approach of biological determinism, the role of a father is that of the patriarch, he continues the family line and serves as a model for his ascendants. Social constructivism looks into man’s functions in the family from the point of view of masculine pressure and establishing hegemony over a woman and children. Biosocial theory aims to unite the biological determinacy of fatherhood with social, cultural and personal context. It is shown that these approaches are directly connected with the level of the society development, marriage and family perceptions, the level of egality of gender order.