Риски реализации стратегии инновационного развития Российской Федерации на период до 2020 года «Инновационная Россия -2020»
The paper is devoted the consideration of problems and their solution set and proposed by “The Strategy of Innovation Development of the Russian Federation for Period to 2020” (“Innovative Russia 2020”). The principles of The Strategy and stages of its realization, the model of coordination of interaction of blocks of national innovation system is investigated in accordance with the theory and practice of modern innovation development. It is shown that The Strategy is based on an attempt to establish the state administration management of innovation processes by means of integration of large business and bureaucracy. The danger and risks of realization of this approach for Russia development are investigated. The paper contrasts this approach with one based on building modern national innovation system. In the center this national innovation system there are independent enterprises absorbed in market environment, that are cooperated with institutes creating, distributing and storing knowledge. In the system, the state is considered as a catalyst and a partner of innovation processes, but not their administrator.
Тhе article is devoted to the analysis of science, education and business as key institutional agents of civil identity in contemporary society. The civil identity is specified as a subject-object interaction between an individual and a state. Also preconditions for diversification of state power in the field of civic identity forming are determined.
The book shows as at the end of the 18-th – 19-th centuries Russians "populated” the growing public sphere by the voluntary associations, based on the principles of the Age of the Enlightenment. As a result of the mission of scientific associations, the civil society in Russia became unavoidable connected with patriotism and propagation of scientific knowledge. Analyzing the capabilities of scientific associasions for self-identification, independent activity and organization, the book create the wide institutional context, in the framework of which they acted, and also evaluates their role in the development of civil society in tsarist Russia. The development of voluntary associations in Russia is placed into the comparative context of European history and political thought. Although the historians emphasize the special features of the development of the Russian Empire, particular associations in Russia were the part of the European phenomenon. Their history reveals the important features of the relations between the state and the society under the conditions of the absolutism, when voluntary associations were created and was supported the space of public initiative and independent activity, from where the sprouts of citizenship grew.
The author analyzes the decision of the President of the country on necessity of removal of state officials from committees of directors of the largest state companies, its pluses and minuses, and appreciates an investment climate in the country which unsatisfactory condition seriously anxious the country leaders.
Chapter 6 presents an analysis of Russian innovation system accompanied by an overview of state science, technology and innovation (STI) policy practice.
The authors cover the most urgent institutional cleavages, including the split-offs of science and industry, issues of institutional model of the R&D sector, sectoral discrepancies and regional polarization.
An outline of STI policy framework evolution is presented, including the most recent Strategy for Socio-Economic Development of Russia till 2020 topics. A special regard is paid to linkage-stimulating policy instruments, including grants for joint research for Universities, R&D organisations and companies, technology platforms, regional innovation clusters program and elaboration of innovation development plans for state-owned companies.
The paper examines the structure, governance, and balance sheets of state-controlled banks in Russia, which accounted for over 55 percent of the total assets in the country's banking system in early 2012. The author offers a credible estimate of the size of the country's state banking sector by including banks that are indirectly owned by public organizations. Contrary to some predictions based on the theoretical literature on economic transition, he explains the relatively high profitability and efficiency of Russian state-controlled banks by pointing to their competitive position in such functions as acquisition and disposal of assets on behalf of the government. Also suggested in the paper is a different way of looking at market concentration in Russia (by consolidating the market shares of core state-controlled banks), which produces a picture of a more concentrated market than officially reported. Lastly, one of the author's interesting conclusions is that China provides a better benchmark than the formerly centrally planned economies of Central and Eastern Europe by which to assess the viability of state ownership of banks in Russia and to evaluate the country's banking sector.
The paper examines the principles for the supervision of financial conglomerates proposed by BCBS in the consultative document published in December 2011. Moreover, the article proposes a number of suggestions worked out by the authors within the HSE research team.