Заключение. Глобальные проблемы современности и перспективы их решения в свете концепций научно-технического прогресса
Ларионова И. Л.
М.: Московский государственный институт электроники и математики, 2010.
Порошин В., Авраамов Ю., Шляпин А. и др. Вып. 5. М.: Международный институт «ИНФО-Рутения» (АНО МИИР), 2012.
Added: Nov 10, 2012
Edited by: В. Порошин, Ю. Авраамов, А. Шляпин и др. Вып. 4. М.: Международный институт «ИНФО-Рутения» (АНО МИИР), 2012.
Added: Nov 10, 2012
Шалаева А. В. Вече. 2011. № 22. С. 237-246.
Added: Nov 30, 2012
Ермолов А. Ю., Ларионова И. Л., Панина Н. В. В кн.: История науки и техники. М.: Московский государственный институт электроники и математики, 2010. Гл. 2. С. 60-72.
Added: Apr 20, 2012
Диличенский Г., Любимов Л. Л., Максимова М. и др. М.: Мысль, 1981.
Added: Jan 17, 2013
Шалаева А. В. В кн.: Единство образовательного пространства как междисциплинарная проблема. СПб.: Издательство Политехнического университета, 2012. С. 233-240.
Added: Dec 9, 2012
Rosenberg D. Political Science. PS. Издательский дом НИУ ВШЭ, 2012. No. 06/PS/2012.
Technological innovations are inherently problematic (risky, uncertain, possess public goods properties (enhances free-riding since it is easy to steal), but once they succeed, they create negative externalities for incumbents in the form of economic resources redistribution. Economic resources are convertible into political power. Therefore, economic redistribution might eventually result in political power redistribution. Those who fear to lose political power have incentives to defend status quo. Innovators will face collective action problems (who will be willing to innovate and risk to fight with incumbents) and commitment problems (who will compensate losers from innovations and why they should believe such promises). My answer is that market is not enough. It is political institutions that solve collective action and commitment problems. Some political institutions e.g. parliamentary government form will deal with political risks better than others e.g. presidential one.
Added: Feb 18, 2013
Кочетов Э. Г. Безопасность Евразии. 2010. № 1. С. 397-403.
Added: Oct 4, 2012
Талалакина Е. В. Открытое и дистанционное образование. 2012. № 4(48). С. 47-52.
Added: Dec 6, 2012
The Economic Returns to Higher Education in the BRIC Countries and their Implications for Higher Education Expansion
This paper focuses on the changing economic value of secondary and higher education in four potential world economic powerhouses—Brazil, Russia, India, and China—known as the BRIC countries. We show that in the past twenty-five years in the BRIC countries, changes in rates of return to higher education have not conformed to the diminishing returns to capital theory, which says that rates decline with level of education and that this pattern holds as countries develop economically and educationally. The rates to university completion have generally risen relative to the rates to investment in lower levels of education, and in all but India are now higher than the payoff to secondary schooling. We argue that this reflects the rapid economic change in all four countries, including their incorporation into the global economy, and, in Russia and China, the transformation from command to increasingly market economies.
Added: Aug 28, 2012
Панина Н. В. В кн.: История науки и техники. М.: Московский государственный институт электроники и математики, 2010. С. 72-83.
Added: Apr 19, 2012
Exploring innovation modes of Russian companies: what does the diversity of actors mean for policymaking?
Gokhberg L., Kuznetsova T., Roud V. Science, Technology and Innovation. WP BRP. Высшая школа экономики, 2012. No. 01.
Recent studies of innovation behavior characteristics focus on analysis of microdata (enterprise level) as the key instrument to reveal facts and hypotheses describing the innovation activities under diverse economic, political and infrastructural conditions. This paper applies the state-of-the-art innovation modes approach [OECD, 2008] to provide insights on the Russian innovation environment, highlighting the variation of innovation strategies across sectors of Russian industry. Cross-country comparison based on the OECD data and Russian firm-level findings is presented along with the discussion of possible development of systemic instruments and evidence-based methods for policymaking.
Added: Oct 13, 2012