Modern directions of development of Russian science. Trends in the development of science in the Russian Federation. Science should be beneficial to those who create it

The destroyed scientific and technological potential that our country possessed during the Soviet era can no longer be restored, and it is not necessary. The main task today is to rapidly create a new, powerful scientific and technological potential in Russia, and for this it is necessary to know exactly the true state of affairs in science and higher education. Only then will decisions on management, support and financing of this area be made on a scientific basis and produce real results, says the chief researcher at the Institute of Scientific Information for Social Sciences (INION) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, head of the Center for Informatization, Socio-Technological Research and Scientific Analysis (ISTINA Center ) Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology and Ministry of Education Anatoly Ilyich Rakitov. From 1991 to 1996, he was an adviser to the President of Russia on issues of scientific and technological policy and informatization, and headed the Information and Analytical Center of the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation. Behind last years under the leadership of A.I. Rakitov and with his participation, several projects were carried out devoted to the analysis of the development of science, technology and education in Russia.

SIMPLE TRUTHS AND SOME PARADOXES

All over the world, at least the majority thinks so, science is done by young people. Our scientific workforce is rapidly aging. In 2000, the average age of RAS academicians was more than 70 years. This can still be understood - a lot of experience and great achievements in science they are not given immediately. But the fact that the average age of doctors of science is 61 years old, and candidates - 52 years old, is alarming. If the situation does not change, then by approximately 2016 the average age of scientific workers will reach 59 years. For Russian men, this is not only the last year of pre-retirement life, but also its average duration. This picture is emerging in the system of the Academy of Sciences. In universities and industry research institutes on an all-Russian scale, the age of doctors of science is 57-59 years, and candidates are 51-52 years old. So in 10-15 years, science may disappear here.

Thanks to their superior performance, supercomputers are able to solve the most difficult tasks. The most powerful computers of this class with a performance of up to 12 teraflops (1 teraflop - 1 trillion operations per second) are produced in the USA and Japan. In August of this year, Russian scientists announced the creation of a supercomputer with a capacity of 1 teraflop. The photo shows footage from television reports dedicated to this event.

But here's what's interesting. According to official data, competitions for admission to universities have been growing over the past 10 years (2001 was a record year in this sense), and postgraduate and doctoral studies have been churning out young highly qualified scientists at an unprecedented pace. If we take the number of students studying at universities in 1991/92 academic year, for 100%, then in 1998/99 they increased by 21.2%. The number of postgraduate students at research institutes increased during this time by almost a third (1,577 people), and postgraduate students at universities - by 2.5 times (82,584 people). Admission to graduate school tripled (28,940 people), and the graduation rate was: in 1992 - 9,532 people (23.2% of them with a thesis defense), and in 1998 - 14,832 people (27.1% with a thesis defense). dissertation).

What is happening in our country with scientific personnel? What is their real scientific potential? Why do they age? Picture in general outline that's how it is. Firstly, after graduating from universities, not all male and female students are eager to go to graduate school; many go there to avoid the army or live freely for three years. Secondly, defended candidates and doctors of sciences, as a rule, can find a salary worthy of their title not in state research institutes, design bureaus, GIPRs and universities, but in commercial structures. And they go there, leaving their titled scientific supervisors the opportunity to grow old in peace.

Leading universities provide students with the opportunity to use modern computer technology.

Employees of the Center for Informatization, Socio-Technological Research and Scientific Analysis (ISTINA Center) studied about a thousand websites of companies and recruiting organizations with job offers. The result was as follows: university graduates are offered a salary of about $300 on average (today it’s almost 9 thousand rubles), economists, accountants, managers and marketers - $400-500, programmers, highly qualified banking specialists and financiers - from $350 to $550, qualified managers - $1,500 or more, but this is already rare. Meanwhile, among all the proposals there is not even a mention of scientists, researchers, etc. This means that a young candidate or doctor of sciences is doomed to either work in an average university or research institute for a salary equivalent to 30-60 dollars, and at the same time constantly rush around looking for outside income, part-time work, private lessons, etc., or to get a job in a commercial company not in his specialty, where neither a master's degree nor a doctorate diploma will be useful to him, except perhaps for prestige.

But there are others important reasons departure of young people from the scientific field. Man does not live by bread alone. He still needs the opportunity to improve, to realize himself, to establish himself in life. He wants to see the future and feel at least on the same level with his foreign colleagues. In our Russian conditions this is almost impossible. And that's why. Firstly, science and the high-tech developments based on it are in very little demand in our country. Secondly, the experimental base, educational and research equipment, apparatus and devices in educational institutions are physically and morally outdated by 20-30 years, and in the best, most advanced universities and research institutes - by 8-11 years. If we consider that in developed countries, technologies in high-tech industries replace each other every 6 months - 2 years, such a lag may become irreversible. Thirdly, the system of organization, management, support of science and scientific research and, most importantly, Information Support remained, at best, at the level of the 1980s. Therefore, almost every truly capable, and even more so talented, young scientist, if he does not want to degrade, strives to go into a commercial structure or go abroad.

According to official statistics, in 2000, 890.1 thousand people were employed in science (in 1990, more than 2 times more - 1943.3 thousand people). If we evaluate the potential of science not by the number of employees, but by results, that is, by the number of patents registered, especially abroad, sold, including abroad, licenses and publications in prestigious international publications, then it turns out that we are inferior to the most developed countries tens or even hundreds of times. In the USA, for example, in 1998, 12.5 million people were employed in science, of which 505 thousand were doctors of science. No more than 5% of them come from CIS countries, and many grew up, studied and received academic degrees there, and not here. Thus, it would be wrong to say that the West lives off our scientific and intellectual potential, but it is worth assessing its real state and prospects.

SCIENTIFIC AND INTELLECTUAL AND SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL POTENTIAL

There is an opinion that, despite all the difficulties and losses, aging and outflow of personnel from science, we still retain scientific and intellectual potential, which allows Russia to remain among the leading powers in the world, and our scientific and technological developments are still attractive to foreign and domestic investors, however, investments are scanty.

In fact, for our products to conquer the domestic and foreign markets, they must be qualitatively superior to the products of competitors. But the quality of products directly depends on technology, and modern, especially high technologies (they are the most cost-effective) - on the level of scientific research and technological development. In turn, their quality is higher, the higher the qualifications of scientists and engineers, and its level depends on the entire education system, especially higher education.

If we talk about scientific and technological potential, this concept includes not only scientists. Its components also include an instrumentation and experimental park, access to information and its completeness, a system for managing and supporting science, as well as the entire infrastructure that ensures the rapid development of science and the information sector. Without them, neither technology nor the economy simply can work.

A very important issue is the training of specialists in universities. Let's try to figure out how they are prepared using the example of the fastest growing sectors modern science, which include biomedical research, research in the field information technologies and creation of new materials. According to the latest “Science and engineering indicators” reference book published in the United States in 2000, in 1998 spending on these areas alone was comparable to spending on defense and exceeding spending on space research. In total, $220.6 billion was spent on the development of science in the United States, of which two thirds ($167 billion) came from the corporate and private sectors. A significant part of these gigantic funds went to biomedical and especially biotechnological research. This means that they were highly profitable, since money in the corporate and private sectors is spent only on what makes a profit. Thanks to the implementation of the results of these studies, healthcare, the condition of environment, productivity increased Agriculture.

In 2000, specialists from Tomsk State University, together with scientists from the TRUTH Center and several leading Russian universities, examined the quality of training of biologists in Russian universities. Scientists have come to the conclusion that classical universities teach mainly traditional biological disciplines. Botany, zoology, human and animal physiology are in 100% of universities, plant physiology - in 72%, and subjects such as biochemistry, genetics, microbiology, soil science - in only 55% of universities, ecology - in 45% of universities. At the same time, modern disciplines: plant biotechnology, physical and chemical biology, electron microscopy are taught in only 9% of universities. Thus, according to the most important and promising directions biological science Students are trained in less than 10% of classical universities. There are, of course, exceptions. For example, Moscow State University. Lomonosov and especially Pushchinsky State University, operating on the campus, graduates only masters, graduate students and doctoral students, and the ratio of students and supervisors is approximately 1:1.

Such exceptions highlight that biology students may receive vocational training at the level of the beginning of the 21st century only in a few universities, and even then it is not flawless. Why? Let me explain with an example. To solve problems of genetic engineering, use of transgene technology in animal husbandry and crop production, synthesis of new medicines We need modern supercomputers. In the USA, Japan, and European Union countries they exist - these are powerful computers with a productivity of at least 1 teraflop (1 trillion operations per second). At Saint Louis University, students had access to a 3.8 teraflop supercomputer two years ago. Today, the performance of the most powerful supercomputers has reached 12 teraflops, and in 2004 they are going to release a supercomputer with a capacity of 100 teraflops. In Russia there are no such machines; our best supercomputer centers operate on computers of much lower power. True, this summer Russian specialists announced the creation of a domestic supercomputer with a capacity of 1 teraflop.

Our lag in information technology is directly related to the training of Russia's future intellectual personnel, including biologists, since computer synthesis, for example, of molecules, genes, deciphering the genome of humans, animals and plants can give a real effect only on the basis of the most powerful computing systems.

Finally one more interesting fact. Tomsk researchers selectively surveyed teachers of biological faculties of universities and found that only 9% of them use the Internet more or less regularly. With a chronic lack of scientific information received in traditional form, not having access to the Internet or not being able to use its resources means only one thing - a growing lag in biological, biotechnological, genetic engineering and other research and the absence of international connections that are absolutely necessary in science.

Today's students, even at the most advanced biological faculties, receive training at the level of the 70-80s of the last century, although they are entering life in the 21st century. As for research institutes, only about 35 biological research institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences have more or less modern equipment, and therefore only there research is carried out at an advanced level. Only a few students from several universities can participate in them and Educational center RAS (created within the framework of the program "Integration of Science and Education" and has the status of a university), receiving training on the basis of academic research institutes.

Another example. First place among high technology occupied by the aerospace industry. Everything is involved in it: computers, modern control systems, precision instrumentation, engine and rocket engineering, etc. Although Russia occupies a fairly strong position in this industry, the lag is noticeable here too. It concerns, to a large extent, aviation universities countries. Specialists from the MAI Technological University who participated in our research named several of the most painful problems associated with training personnel for the aerospace industry. In their opinion, the level of training of teachers in applied departments (design, technology, calculations) in the field of modern information technologies is still low. This is largely due to the lack of an influx of young teaching staff. The aging teaching staff is not able to intensively master constantly improving software products, not only because of gaps in computer training, but also because of the lack of modern technical means and software and information systems and, most importantly, due to the lack of material incentives .

Another important industry is the chemical industry. Today, chemistry is unthinkable without scientific research and high-tech production systems. In fact, chemistry is new building materials, medicines, fertilizers, varnishes and paints, synthesis of materials with specified properties, superhard materials, films and abrasives for instrument and mechanical engineering, processing of energy resources, creation of drilling units, etc.

What is the situation in the chemical industry and especially in the field of applied experimental research? For what industries do we train specialists - chemists? Where and how will they “chemically”?

Yaroslavsky scientists University of Technology, who studied this issue together with specialists from the TRUTH Center, provide the following information: today the entire Russian chemical industry accounts for about 2% of global chemical production. This is only 10% of the volume of chemical production in the United States and no more than 50-75% of the volume of chemical production in countries such as France, Great Britain or Italy. As for applied and experimental research, especially in universities, the picture is this: by 2000, only 11 scientific research projects had been completed in Russia, and the number of experimental developments had dropped to almost zero with a complete lack of funding. The technologies used in the chemical industry are outdated compared to the technologies of developed industrial countries, where they are updated every 7-8 years. Even our large factories, for example those producing fertilizers, which received a large share of investments, operate without modernization for an average of 18 years, and in the industry as a whole, equipment and technologies are updated after 13-26 years. For comparison: average age chemical plants USA is six years.

PLACE AND ROLE OF BASIC RESEARCH

Main generator basic research in our country - the Russian Academy of Sciences, but its more or less well-equipped institutes employ only about 90 thousand employees (together with service personnel), the rest (more than 650 thousand people) work in research institutes and universities. Fundamental research is also carried out there. According to the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation, in 1999, about 5 thousand were completed in 317 universities. The average budget cost for one basic research is 34,214 rubles. If we consider that this includes the purchase of equipment and research objects, energy costs, overhead costs, etc., then only 30 to 40% remains for salaries. It is not difficult to calculate that if at least 2-3 researchers or teachers participate in fundamental research, then they can count on a salary increase of 400-500 rubles per month at best.

As for students' interest in scientific research, it is based more on enthusiasm rather than material interest, and there are very few enthusiasts these days. At the same time, the topics of university research are very traditional and far from current problems. In 1999, universities conducted 561 studies in physics, and only 8 in biotechnology. This was the case thirty years ago, but it should not be the case today. In addition, fundamental research costs millions, or even tens of millions of dollars - they have not been carried out with the help of wires, tin cans and other homemade devices for a long time.

Of course, there are additional sources of funding. In 1999, 56% of scientific research in universities was financed through self-supporting work, but it was not fundamental and could not radically solve the problem of creating new human resources. The leaders are the most prestigious universities who receive orders for research work from commercial clients or foreign firms, realizing how much “new blood” is needed in science, have in recent years begun to pay extra for those graduate students and doctoral students whom they would like to keep at the university for research or teaching work, to purchase new equipment. But only very few universities have such opportunities.

BET ON CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES

Concept " critical technologies" first appeared in America. This is the name of the list technological directions and developments that were primarily supported by the US government in the interests of economic and military primacy. They were selected based on an extremely thorough, complex and multi-stage procedure, which included the examination of each item on the list by financiers and professional scientists, politicians, businessmen, analysts, Pentagon and CIA representatives, congressmen and senators. Critical technologies were carefully studied by specialists in the field of scientific studies, science and echnometry.

A few years ago, the Russian Government also approved the work prepared by the Ministry of Science and technical policy(in 2000 it was renamed the Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology) a list of critical technologies from more than 70 main headings, each of which included several specific technologies. Their total number exceeded 250. This is much more than, for example, in England, a country with very high scientific potential. Russia could not create and implement such a quantity of technologies neither in terms of funds, nor in terms of personnel, nor in terms of equipment. Three years ago, the same ministry prepared a new list of critical technologies, including 52 headings (still, by the way, not approved by the government), but we can’t afford it either.

To present the true state of affairs, I will present some results of the analysis of two critical technologies from the latest list carried out by the TRUTH Center. These are immunocorrection (in the West they use the term “immunotherapy” or “immunomodulation”) and the synthesis of superhard materials. Both technologies are based on serious fundamental research and are aimed at industrial implementation. The first is important for maintaining human health, the second is for the radical modernization of many industrial production, including defense, civil instrument and mechanical engineering, drilling rigs, etc.

Immunocorrection primarily involves the creation of new drugs. This also includes technologies for the production of immunostimulants to combat allergies, cancer, a number of colds and viral infections, etc. It turned out that, despite the general similarity of the structure, research conducted in Russia is clearly lagging behind. For example, in the USA, in the most important area - immunotherapy with dendritic cells, which is successfully used in the treatment of cancer, the number of publications has increased more than 6 times over 10 years, but we have had no publications on this topic. I admit that we are conducting research, but if it is not recorded in publications, patents and licenses, it is unlikely to be of much importance.

Over the past decade, the Russian Pharmacological Committee has registered 17 domestic immunomodulatory drugs, 8 of them belong to the class of peptides, which are now almost not in demand on the international market. As for domestic immunoglobulins, their low quality forces them to meet demand at the expense of foreign-made drugs.

And here are some results related to another critical technology - the synthesis of superhard materials. Research by the famous scientist Yu. V. Granovsky showed that there is an “implementation effect”: the results obtained by Russian scientists are implemented in specific products (abrasives, films, etc.) produced by domestic enterprises. However, here too the situation is far from favorable.

The situation with patenting is especially alarming. scientific discoveries and inventions in this field. Some patents of the Institute of High Pressure Physics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, issued in 2000, were declared back in 1964, 1969, 1972, 1973, 1975. Of course, it is not scientists who are to blame for this, but the examination and patenting systems. A paradoxical picture has emerged: on the one hand, the results of scientific research are recognized as original, but on the other hand, they are obviously useless, since they are based on technological developments that are long gone. These discoveries are hopelessly outdated, and licenses for them are unlikely to be in demand.

This is the state of our scientific and technological potential, if you delve into its structure not from an amateurish, but from a scientific standpoint. But we're talking about about the most important, from the point of view of the state, critical technologies.

SCIENCE SHOULD BE BENEFITABLE TO THOSE WHO CREATE IT

Back in the 17th century, the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes wrote that people are motivated by profit. 200 years later, Karl Marx, developing this idea, argued that history is nothing more than the activity of people pursuing their goals. If this or that activity is not profitable (in this case we are talking about science, scientists, developers modern technologies), then there is nothing to expect that the most talented, first-class trained young scientists will go into science, who will move it forward almost for nothing and in the absence of an appropriate infrastructure.

Today scientists say that it is not profitable for them to patent the results of their research in Russia. They turn out to be the property of research institutes and, more broadly, of the state. But the state, as you know, has almost no funds for their implementation. If new developments do reach the stage of industrial production, then their authors, at best, receive a bonus of 500 rubles, or even nothing at all. It is much more profitable to put the documentation and prototypes in your briefcase and fly to some highly developed country where the work of scientists is valued differently. “If we were our own,” one foreign businessman told me, “we would pay for a certain scientific work 250-300 thousand dollars, then we will pay yours 25 thousand dollars for it. Agree that this is better than 500 rubles."

Until intellectual property belongs to the one who creates it, until scientists begin to receive direct benefits from it, until they make radical changes on this issue to our imperfect legislation, to the progress of science and technology, to the development of scientific and technological potential, and therefore , and there is no point in hoping for an economic recovery in our country. If the situation does not change, the state may be left without modern technologies, and therefore without competitive products. So in a market economy, profit is not a shame, but the most important incentive for social and economic development.

A BREAKTHROUGH INTO THE FUTURE IS STILL POSSIBLE

What can and should be done so that science, which is still preserved in our country, begins to develop and becomes a powerful factor in economic growth and improvement social spheres s?

Firstly, it is necessary, without delaying for a year or even six months, to radically improve the quality of training of at least that part of students, graduate students and doctoral students who are ready to stay in domestic science.

Secondly, to concentrate the extremely limited financial resources allocated for the development of science and education on several priority areas and critical technologies, focused exclusively on the rise of the domestic economy, social sphere and government needs.

Thirdly, to send basic financial, personnel, information and technical resources on those projects that can give truly new results, and not scatter funds on many thousands of pseudo-fundamental scientific topics.

Fourthly, it’s time to create on the basis of the best higher educational institutions federal research universities that meet the highest international standards in the field of scientific infrastructure (information, experimental equipment, modern network communications and information technology). They will train first-class young specialists to work in domestic academic and industrial science and higher education.

Fifthly, it is time to make a decision at the state level to create scientific, technological and educational consortia that will unite research universities, advanced research institutes and industrial enterprises. Their activities should be focused on Scientific research, innovation and radical technological modernization. This will allow us to produce high-quality, constantly updated, competitive products.

Sixth, in the shortest possible time, the government decision needs to entrust the Ministry of Industry and Science, the Ministry of Education, other ministries, departments and regional administrations where there are state universities and research institutes, begin to develop legislative initiatives on issues of intellectual property, improvement of patenting processes, scientific marketing, scientific and educational management. It is necessary to legislate the possibility of a sharp (stage-by-stage) increase in the salaries of scientists, starting primarily with state scientific academies (RAN, RAMS, RAAS), state scientific and technical centers and research universities.

Seventh and finally, there is an urgent need to adopt a new list of critical technologies. It should contain no more than 12-15 main positions, focused primarily on the interests of society. These are exactly what the state should formulate, involving in this work, for example, the Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology, the Ministry of Education, the Russian Academy of Sciences and state branch academies.

Naturally, the ideas about critical technologies developed in this way, on the one hand, should be based on the fundamental achievements of modern science, and on the other, take into account the specifics of the country. For example, for the tiny Principality of Liechtenstein, which has a network of first-class roads and highly developed transport services, transport technologies have not been critical for a long time. As for Russia, a country with a huge territory, scattered settlements and complex climatic conditions, then for it the creation of the latest transport technologies (air, land and water) is a truly decisive issue from an economic, social, defense, environmental and even geopolitical point of view, because our country can connect Europe and the Pacific region with a main highway.

Taking into account the achievements of science, the specifics of Russia and the limitations of its financial and other resources, we can offer a very short list of truly critical technologies that will give quick and tangible results and ensure sustainable development and growth in people's well-being.

The critical ones include:

* energy technologies: nuclear energy, including the processing of radioactive waste, and deep modernization of traditional thermal energy resources. Without this, the country could freeze out, and industry, agriculture and cities could be left without electricity;
* transport technologies. For Russia, modern cheap, reliable, ergonomic vehicles are the most important condition for social and economic development;
* information Technology. Without modern means information and communications management, development of production, science and education, even simple human communication will simply be impossible;
* biotechnological research and technology. Only their rapid development will make it possible to create modern, profitable agriculture, competitive food industries, and raise pharmacology, medicine and healthcare to the level of the requirements of the 21st century;
* environmental technologies. This is especially true for the urban economy, since up to 80% of the population lives in cities today;
* rational environmental management and geological exploration. If these technologies are not modernized, the country will be left without raw materials;
* mechanical engineering and instrument making as the basis of industry and agriculture;
* a whole range of technologies for light industry and the production of household goods, as well as for housing and road construction. Without them, talking about the welfare and social well-being of the population is completely pointless.

If such recommendations are accepted and we begin to finance not generally priority areas and critical technologies, but only those that are really needed by society, then we will not only solve Russia’s problems today, but also build a springboard for a leap into the future.

EIGHT CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES CAPABLE OF IMPROVING THE ECONOMY AND WELFARE OF RUSSIANS:

3. 4.

5. Rational environmental management and geological exploration. 6.

Academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences A. RAKITOV.

Literature

Alferov Zh., academician RAS. Physics on the threshold of the 21st century. - No. 3, 2000

Alferov Zh., academician RAS. Russia cannot do without its own electronics. - No. 4, 2001

Belokoneva O. Technology of the XXI century in Russia. To be or not to be. - No. 1, 2001

Voevodin V. Supercomputers: yesterday, today, tomorrow. - No. 5, 2000

Gleba Yu., academician NASU. Once again about biotechnology, but more about how we get out into the world. - No. 4, 2000

Paton B., President of NASU, acad. RAS. Welding and related technologies in the 21st century. - No. 6, 2000

Historical excursion. In Russia, the number of scientific and pedagogical workers in 1913 was 11.6 thousand, in the USA in 1910 almost three times more - 33.6 thousand. In Russia there were 414 chemists, almost 15 times less than in the USA, in 8 times less than in Germany and England, 2.5 times less than in France. Flaw scientific personnel in Russia during this period, he restrained scientific and technological progress and became especially intolerant in the context of the new revolution in natural science that had begun.

The high level of Soviet science was confirmed by assessments sufficiently large number results of work that was not carried out abroad or was just started. This, first of all, applied to certain areas of physics (acoustics, optics and quantum electronics, solid state physics), general and technical chemistry (colloid chemistry and physical-chemical mechanics, chemical physics, including problems of combustion and explosion, electrochemistry, inorganic chemistry, high energy chemistry), physical chemistry and technology of inorganic materials ( physico-chemical fundamentals metallurgy, new processes for obtaining and processing metal materials, theoretical basis chemical technology), energy (use of superconductivity in energy, nuclear energy), geological sciences, computer science, research in the field of physiological, biochemical and structural foundations of human life, etc.

The development of many scientific areas was associated with the country's defense strategy, which was specific to the USSR. The level of equipment and technology in high-tech sectors of the defense industry was close to the world level.

Modern scientific, technical and educational potential modern Russia has compared to Soviet period certain specifics.

In the period after the breakup Soviet Union and the beginning of market reforms in Russia, there was essentially a landslide decline in funding for the scientific sphere, and cooperative ties with scientific institutions of other former USSR republics were significantly disrupted. This led to a sharp reduction in both the general front of scientific research and the virtual disappearance of some areas in this area, as well as to a reduction in the scale of research and development work itself and the outflow of qualified scientific personnel from them.

Currently, according to the Russian Academy of Sciences, in terms of government spending on R&D per capita ($86), Russia lags behind the leaders by 4-5 times, and in terms of private spending ($40) - by 15-20 times. In terms of per capita private sector spending on R&D, China is already almost 1.5 times ahead of Russia, where the level of spending per scientific researcher is extremely low. According to this indicator, Russia is 3 times behind the world average.

However, since 1999 the situation began to change in a positive direction.

Today, the only policy basis for Russia to gain a high status in the world economic community is the management of scientific and technological progress and the creation of a technological environment compatible with developed countries. Of course, it is necessary to continue to develop market mechanisms for managing the economy and carry out appropriate institutional reforms. But this does not yet resolve the issue of a decent future for Russia in the scientific and technical field.

Setting the task of increasing the volume and improving the structure of financing of the scientific and technical sphere must take into account critical threshold indicators of national security, and achieving these indicators has encountered certain difficulties. Thus, in 2009, R&D expenditures amounted to only slightly more than 1% of Russia’s GDP (as already noted, by 2020 this figure is planned to increase to 2.5%).

Scientific, technical and educational policy should be based on a two-stage transition from the current to an innovative model of economic development. At the first stage (medium term), the real goal is to achieve the specified threshold values ​​in relation to the share of expenditure on science in GDP (for comparison: currently in Sweden it is 3.7%, Japan - 3.2%, USA - 2.8 %), the share of allocations for basic research in total expenditures on science and the share of costs for innovation in the total volume of industrial output.

The progress achieved will help Russia become more competitive in the world market of science-intensive products and increase its share in it to at least 2% versus 0.3% in 2002. To solve this problem, it is necessary to overcome the crisis in Russian fundamental and applied science.

Russian science has unique potential. In terms of the number of research scientists (410 thousand people, or less than 8% of their global number), it is ahead of most developed countries, except the USA and Japan. And although, according to the World Economic Forum, Russia consistently ranks 3rd in this indicator, in 2006 it was in 32nd place in terms of the level of scientific research, and in 44th place in terms of R&D expenditures.

Hinders development Russian science and the so-called brain drain. By expert assessments More than 30 thousand Russian scientists are currently working abroad, including up to 18 thousand in the field of fundamental research. There is information that from 100 to 250 thousand scientists have left the country over the past 20 years. This is largely a consequence of the fact that the salary of a Russian scientist equal qualifications 40-50 times less than in developed countries. According to many forecasts, the brain drain will increase, especially in the field of information technology (in developed countries only in beginning of XXI V. there was a shortage of 850 thousand such specialists).

Another reason for the crisis in Russian science is that the domestic economy is not able to adopt modern developments. International trade technologies in Russia is clearly unequal in nature: within the framework of concluded agreements, technologies imported from abroad are valued significantly more expensive than technologies created in Russia. On average, the purchase price of technologies is 3.2 times higher than the selling price, and in some cases almost 80 times. It should also be noted that many foreign technologies are of Russian origin. Thus, according to experts from Rospatent, Russian developments in the field of electronic, laser, fiber-optic technology, oil and gas processing technologies have been patented in the United States, organic chemistry, medical and environmental technology. Only in 1992-2000. In the United States, more than 1,000 patents have been registered for military and dual-use technologies, where the authors are Russian inventors, and the owners of the patents and, therefore, exclusive rights- foreign legal entities and individuals.

Thus, Russia is extremely ineffective in participating in international technology exchange. Receipts from the export of scientific research amounted to at the beginning of the 21st century. approximately 63 million dollars, and patents and licenses - only 1.7 million dollars. At the same time, revenues in the USA from the sale of licenses alone amounted to about 40 billion dollars, Japan - more than 10 billion, Great Britain - about 8 billion, Germany - more than $3 billion

A particularly unfavorable situation has developed in the sphere of the military-industrial complex (DIC), despite the fact that Russia ranks second in the world in terms of the volume of exports of arms and military equipment (more than $8 billion in 2008) after the United States. The reduction in state orders forced defense industry enterprises to export the most modern equipment abroad (state orders for military equipment began to grow quite dynamically since 2005).

Due to Russia's historical system of priority of military technologies, about 75% of R&D is carried out by defense industry enterprises. It follows from this that in the near future, without modernizing the defense industry, the development of high-tech industries is impossible. Realizing this situation, the leadership of the defense industry is consolidating assets and financial flows, forming unified industry holdings under state control. In the process of its reform, 700-800 viable enterprises within 40-50 basic holdings with a controlling stake in the state are focused on integration, which will purposefully introduce basic technologies of high-tech production.

Currently, venture funds, which are the basis for stimulating innovation processes in developed countries, practically do not operate in Russia. The Venture Innovation Fund - VIF, created in accordance with the order of the Government of the Russian Federation in March 2000 with the aim of forming the organizational structure of the venture investment system, is still insufficiently financed by the state.

Significant potential for scientific and technological development lies in such a form of innovative infrastructure as science cities. Currently, the status of a science city of the Russian Federation has been assigned to the city of Obninsk, Kaluga region (2000), the cities of Korolev and Dubna, Moscow region (2001), and the working village of Koltsovo Novosibirsk region(2003), Michurinsk, Tambov region (2003), the cities of Reutov and Fryazino, Moscow region (2003), Peterhof, St. Petersburg (2005), Pushchino, Moscow region (2005). ). On March 23, 2010, the Russian leadership decided to create the Center latest technologies in Skolkovo, Moscow region.

In general, the budgets of leading Russian research institutes, according to American experts, amount to only 3-5% of the material support of similar institutions in the United States.

The volume of funding for science cities is constantly increasing, although it is not sufficient to overcome the crisis in Russian science and education.

Priority measures to stimulate scientific, technical and innovation activity relate:

■ increasing the share of expenditures on scientific research as a percentage of GDP;

■ support for the export of science-intensive products and training of managers for the commercialization of scientific developments and the introduction of intellectual property into economic circulation;

■ state order for personnel training highly qualified, as well as economic, primarily tax measures to stimulate personnel training at the expense of their own industries and types of activities;

■ increasing the efficiency of using the results of fundamental research and R&D and their implementation in industrial production, using existing scientific, technical and intellectual potential and introducing intellectual property into economic circulation;

■ determining the priorities of knowledge-intensive industries and technologies, taking into account that the restoration of their entire range is economically prohibitive and irrational even in developed countries;

■ restructuring of the scientific and technological complex in accordance with established priorities;

■ increasing innovation activity through the development of small businesses in the scientific and technical sphere and the formation of a new infrastructure for the innovation process, part of which should be innovation and consulting firms, innovation and technology centers and technology parks;

■ development and use of an economic mechanism that stimulates the introduction of innovations in production (including: differentiation of tax reductions on profits from the production and sale of products produced using certified intellectual property objects, improvement of the pricing mechanism for high-tech products, provision of interest-free state loans to enterprises for the purchase and development of certified innovative innovations, provision of free licenses to enterprises for the industrial development of intellectual property created at the expense of budgetary funds and owned by the state).

According to the director of the Institute of the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences S. M. Rogov, Russia’s emergence as a leader in global scientific and technological development requires the accelerated implementation of the state strategy for supporting R&D and innovation. Taking into account global experience and features current state For the Russian economy, such a strategy should include, as he believes, two complementary components. First, it is necessary to increase budget funding for priority areas of fundamental research, as well as (in the defense sector) applied R&D. Second, a sound tax policy to stimulate private sector R&D spending ("tax spending") and an effective government science policy are required.

At the first stage, the task is to increase R&D spending to at least 2% of GDP in the coming years (1% through public funding and 1% through private spending). In 2012, Russia can and should reach 50% of the level of leaders in spending per researcher - about $50 billion per year in 2010 prices.

At the second stage (until 2020), R&D spending should reach 3% of GDP - 75% of the level of leaders in spending per researcher in order to reach an average level of $70-80 billion per year in constant prices.

At the third stage (mid-21st century), Russia’s R&D expenditures need to be increased to 4-5% of GDP ($100-120 billion per year in constant prices), which will allow it to join the group of world leaders in expenditures per researcher.

The prospects for Russia's place and role in global scientific and technological development depend on how focused and consistent the Russian state's policy will be to ensure necessary conditions to support and implement the powerful scientific, technical, intellectual potential that our country has in the scientific and educational spheres.

Doctrine of the development of Russian science

APPROVED
President Russian Federation 06/13/1996 (decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated 06/13/1996 N 884)

The doctrine of the development of Russian science is a system of views on the role and importance of science in ensuring the independence and prosperity of Russia, as well as the principles that determine the mechanism of state regulation scientific activity, which, taking into account the specific socio-economic situation, are guided by federal executive authorities, executive authorities of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, scientists, research organizations, scientific and technical societies and associations.

1. Over its centuries-old history, Russian science has made a huge contribution to the development of the country and the world community. Russia owes its position as a great world power largely to the achievements of domestic scientists.

IN modern conditions the practical use of natural science, humanitarian and scientific-technical knowledge is increasingly becoming a source of ensuring the life of society, its spiritual and physical health.

The level of development of science largely determines the effectiveness of economic activity, defense capability, spiritual and political culture of the country's population, the protection of individuals and society from the effects of adverse natural and anthropogenic factors.

2. An important condition for the formation of domestic science was the desire to cover all areas of research. The country has formed an extensive network of research organizations of both fundamental and applied nature. In many areas, domestic science occupied leading positions in the world. This was achieved due to the high level of leading scientific schools, the prestige of a scientist’s work and attracting a large number of researchers to science, as well as through full budget funding. However, the administrative-command mechanism in the economy, the high degree of closedness of the scientific and technical sphere, and unjustified restrictions on intellectual property rights reduced the efficiency of using the country's scientific potential.

At present, when opportunities for freedom of scientific creativity, open exchange of information and international cooperation are expanding, the position of Russian science could change qualitatively. However, the systemic crisis accompanying the period of socio-political reorganization of the country has led to the fact that domestic science is faced with new serious difficulties: extremely insufficient budget funding for research and development work does not ensure timely updating of the material and technical base of science and the creation of normal conditions life and work of scientists complicates effective government regulation in the scientific field. The prestige of the scientific profession has fallen in society to an unacceptably low level; science has ceased to be attractive to talented young people. Clearly, there was a need for a radical reorganization of the field of science and attraction of additional sources of funding. The problem of more efficient use of scientific research results in economics remains acute.

3. New trends in the development of the world community have become the expansion of cooperation and collaboration between states in solving global problems related to the preservation of the environment, ensuring a decent spiritual and physical standard of living for people, and maintaining human health. The efforts of scientists and engineers from developed countries are joining in the search and use of new energy sources, space exploration, and the creation of an open information environment. The new strategy for the development of science gives priority to research that is significant for the very prospects for the existence of the world community, for its sustainable and safe development.

4. Modern trends in interstate integration do not mean, however, the disappearance of national interests, including in the field of science. Moreover, national scientific potential will largely determine the country’s place in the world community, prospects for competition in the foreign market, and opportunities for solving its internal problems.

The scale and pace of development of domestic science must ensure that Russia's potential matches the level of world scientific and technological progress. Priority areas of scientific research are also determined by economic and geopolitical situation Russia, availability natural resources, having global significance, needs spiritual development our society, the humanistic traditions of Russian science. Global trends in the development of human civilization at the turn of two millennia continue to have a significant influence on the choice of priorities.

5. For the real transformation of life in Russia, the development of science in the regions is of utmost importance, promoting their progress, taking into account economic, resource, environmental and cultural characteristics.

Since 2005, the attention of government authorities to the scientific, technical and innovation sphere has noticeably increased. This article presents the authors’ view of the situation developing today in the field of science and innovation in Russia, and also identifies trends in the development of this field based on the analysis.

On September 14, 2006, by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 563, the Government Commission on the Development of Industry and Technology was created. The emergence of this body is quite logical in view of the large-scale changes carried out over the past 2 years, mainly in terms of organizing innovation processes in the Russian Federation (the emergence of state and mixed funds (venture, investment) promoting the implementation of scientific developments, the creation of special economic zones of technology-innovation type and etc.). The main task of the new commission is “to ensure interaction between executive authorities in the development and implementation of the main directions public policy on issues related to increasing the rate of economic growth, diversifying the structure of industrial production, increasing the competitiveness of domestic products, developing the scientific, technical and innovative potential of the country, and qualitatively changing the structure of exports.”

The creation of the commission, as well as a wide range of issues related to the field of science and innovation within its competence, indicates the Government’s intention to qualitatively change the structure of the Russian economy, making the development of high-tech industries the basis of the state’s economic growth. “According to the Ministry of Economic Development, the share of the “new economy” (communications, electronics, IT, precision engineering, space development, aircraft and shipbuilding) should grow from the current 5.6% of GDP to 8-10% in 2009-2010.” Today, the main share of Russia's GDP is made up of such industries as the fuel industry, ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy, chemistry and petrochemistry, and metalworking. At the same time, the main factor of economic growth was oil prices, which have been growing over the past three and a half years. Record oil prices guarantee us high rates of economic growth, but do not allow us to really judge its quality. In this sense, the Stabilization Fund being formed is nothing more than an instrument that restrains inflationary processes in the country. On the other hand, it is high energy prices today that make it possible to change the structure of the Russian economy, placing emphasis on the development of high-tech industries. To achieve this, it is necessary to take measures at the state level that would facilitate the commercialization of scientific developments. It is the implementation stage that is the most problematic in Russia today. A possible reason for this lies in the organizational structure of modern Russian science.

Today, the organizational structure of the field of science and innovation can be presented as follows (see Diagram 1).

Scheme 1. Organizations in the scientific and technical field

As already noted, the organizational core of the structure is the Government Commission for the Development of Industry and Technology, which is the coordinator of activities carried out by state executive authorities in the field of science and innovation, represented by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Information technology and communications. At the same time, the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS) plays a special role in conducting scientific research and implementing developments.

The Russian Academy of Sciences is an independent non-profit organization with state status. The RAS is mainly engaged in conducting fundamental research in various fields of knowledge. At the same time, there are funds at the Russian Academy of Sciences that promote the implementation of the most promising scientific developments. These are the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR), the Russian Humanitarian Science Foundation (RGNF), the Foundation for Assistance to the Development of Small Enterprises in the Scientific and Technical Sphere. In the context of the need to maintain the integrity of the state and stabilize the economy in the first half of the 90s of the 20th century, the creation of these funds was the only measure taken to support ongoing scientific research and to facilitate the implementation of their results.

The RFBR was established by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of April 27, 1992 No. 426 “On urgent measures to preserve the scientific and technical potential of the Russian Federation.” The fund is “financed from the state budget and supports scientists on a non-repayable basis.” One of the important directions in the work of the RFBR is the creation of databases on scientific developments and the provision of information about them to interested parties. RGNF separated from the RFBR in 1994. The main objectives of the foundation are “supporting humanitarian scientific research and disseminating humanitarian scientific knowledge about society". The Russian Humanitarian Fund is financed by allocations in the amount of 0.5% of funds from the federal budget allocated for the development of science. The Fund for Assistance to the Development of Small Enterprises in the Scientific and Technical Sphere was established on February 3, 1994. Since 2001, its funding has increased from 0.5 to 1.5% of funds allocated for science from the federal budget. The Fund provides financial support to highly effective, knowledge-intensive projects developed by small enterprises. Project financing is carried out on a parity basis with small innovative enterprises. The selection of projects supported by RAS funds is carried out on a competitive basis.

Another equally important body in the field of science and innovation due to latest changes is the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade (MEDT), which focuses on the stage of implementation of developments, investing in innovative projects. Within the framework of the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade, the Federal Agency for the Management of Special Economic Zones was recently formed, which is also responsible for the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation. Among the types of special economic zones (SEZs) that have already been created and are being created, within the framework of the topic we are considering, it is important to highlight technology-innovative SEZs. To date, four such zones have been created in various regions of the Russian Federation, each with their own specialization:

• in Dubna - research in the field of nuclear technology;
• in Zelenograd - microelectronics;
• in St. Petersburg - information technology;
• in Tomsk - new materials.

The purpose of creating a SEZ of a technology-innovative type is state support for innovative enterprises by providing SEZ residents with tax benefits and simplifying the customs regime. At the same time, the state undertakes to build the infrastructure of the SEZ. The procedure for financing the creation of a SEZ is established by an Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation represented by the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade, the constituent entity of the Russian Federation and the administration of the city in whose territory the SEZ was created. It should be noted that the validity period of the SEZ is 20 years. The main requirement for companies that wish to become residents of a technology-innovation SEZ is the technology-innovation nature of their activities in the territory of such a SEZ. In the spring of 2006, applications began to be accepted from companies that expressed their intention to become residents of these SEZs, however, contrary to the expectations of the federal and efforts of local authorities, only 7 residents are now registered in the SEZ of the technology-innovative type (see).

Another government measure aimed at qualitatively changing the structure of the Russian economy should be the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation. It is one of the objects of state support for the implementation of investment projects. This fund was created by Government Decree No. 694 of November 23, 2005. The sources of the fund are excess income from the federal budget. Its volume in 2006 is 72 billion rubles and, according to the former head of the Federal Agency for the Management of Special Economic Zones, Yuri Nikolaevich Zhdanov, in 2007 it can be increased to 200 billion rubles. However, on this moment funds from the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation are used primarily for the construction of socio-economic infrastructure facilities that are of great national importance.

In turn, to invest specifically in innovative projects, the Russian Venture Company OJSC (RVC OJSC) was recently created. Interestingly, the creation of the company is financed by the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the Regulations on the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation clearly define the criteria that projects applying for financing from the fund must meet. OJSC RVC does not meet these criteria. In particular, this concerns the need to go through the project selection procedure and provide 25% of the funds necessary for the implementation of the project by the commercial organizations participating in it. In 2006, 5 billion rubles were allocated from the fund, and in 2007 - 10 billion. Responsibility for the creation of this joint-stock company rests with the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade, namely, it needs to ensure an increase in the company’s authorized capital, as well as “approve the rules for conducting a competitive selection of candidates for members of the board of directors of the company who are not government employees."

Through RVC OJSC, it is planned to create 10-12 regional venture funds in the form of closed-end mutual investment funds (closed mutual investment funds), 49% of the shares of which will belong to the state. To date, management companies of five regional venture funds have been officially created and identified in Moscow, the Republic of Tatarstan, Perm region, Krasnoyarsk Territory, Tomsk Region. 1020 million rubles are allocated from the federal budget for these purposes.

The goal that the Government sets for itself in implementing these measures is the creation of a venture industry in Russia to implement priority innovative projects by attracting private capital, since this is the most profitable tool for supporting the ideas of small innovative enterprises. However, the conditions for the functioning of the funds (a high level of control of closed-end mutual funds by the Federal Financial Markets Service, strict requirements for the management company, in particular, the long period of its operation in this market in Russia, the MEDT’s focus on a stable, low rate of return) rather indicate the Government’s intention to develop investment projects, sold by stable Russian companies. Therefore, it is necessary to clearly distinguish between conventional and venture investments and to promote the development of the former if the state seeks to obtain significant economic benefits from innovation.

One of the industries that the Government is relying on when creating a “new” economy is the information technology industry. This is understandable, given the growth rates demonstrated recently by both the global and domestic IT industries. According to the Minister of Information Technologies and Communications of the Russian Federation Leonid Reiman, in 2005 alone, the average growth rate of the information and communication technologies (ICT) market “relative to 2004 ranged from 27 to 40%, while the volume of software exports increased in 2005 by 50% - up to $994 million." In general, in recent years the information technology market has grown by 20-25% per year. In 2005, the share of ICT in the Russian Federation's GDP was 5%. On the other hand, the organization of companies in this industry does not require significant investments of public and private capital; moreover, already at this stage there are Russian companies known on the world market. An example is the Kaspersky Lab Company. Today it is " international group companies with a central office in Moscow and representative offices in the UK, China, France, USA, Germany, Romania, Japan, South Korea, the Netherlands and Poland. The Company’s partner network unites more than 500 companies in more than 60 countries around the world.” However, this is an example of individual large companies and does not characterize the ICT industry as a whole, which is represented mainly by companies with a turnover of less than $1 million. These companies operate in conditions of fierce competition with Western corporations, so they need government support. To obtain a positive economic effect, effective measures would be to provide tax benefits to companies in the IT industry and reduce administrative barriers (in particular, simplifying the licensing process individual species activities and conducting export-import activities). The implementation of these measures is currently slowing down.

At the same time, the Government is taking other steps that may stimulate the development of the industry. Namely, by the end of 2006, within the framework of the Ministry of Information Technologies and Communications of the Russian Federation, a Federal Agency for the Development of Exports in the Field of Information Technologies should be created, which should contribute to a significant increase in the share of Russian IT products on the world market.

Another measure of government support for the industry is the formation of the Russian Investment Fund for Information and Communication Technologies OJSC (RIF ICT OJSC). The goal set by the Government in creating this fund is to support the implementation of innovative projects in the IT industry. This fund should become an impetus to ensure a constant flow of private investment into this industry. Oddly enough, financing for the creation of the fund, as in the case of RVC OJSC, is carried out at the expense of the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation, while canceling a number of requirements for projects financed from it.

Finally, another step by the state to implement the developments of IT companies was the state program “Creation of high-tech technology parks in the Russian Federation” approved by the Government. Technoparks operating to date have been created in various sectors of the economy thanks to private initiatives. For example, the Kalininsky technology park, created in the Voronezh region on the initiative of enterprises operating on the basis of Voronezhpress OJSC and with the support of the regional authorities in November 2005, specializes in the electrical and metalworking industries. Within the framework of the state program, it is planned to develop high-tech industries (nano-, biotechnologies, etc.), the catalyst for the development of which, according to the government authorities, should be the information technology industry. This is probably why the Ministry of Information Technologies and Communications is responsible for the implementation of this program. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain the jurisdiction of these technology parks to this ministry.

Despite the fact that the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade and the Ministry of Information Technologies and Communications of the Russian Federation have a fairly wide range of powers in implementing state policy in the scientific, technical and innovation sphere, the main body developing and implementing state policy in this area is the Ministry of Education and science of the Russian Federation and, in particular, the Federal Agency for Science and Innovation.

One of the oldest tools for supporting the scientific sphere, implemented within the framework of this ministry, is the creation of science cities on the territory of the Russian Federation. The federal law defining the status of a science city was adopted back in 1999. In the conditions of the post-crisis state of the economy, in our opinion, this was the only possible measure to support science at that time in order to preserve scientific potential and ensure the strategic goals of the state. Solving problems in the economic and social spheres, which was of paramount importance at that stage, the lack of financial resources from the state, the gigantic amount of external debt of the Russian Federation accumulated by that time - all this and much more relegated the solution of deep-seated problems of science to the background. At the same time, one could not forget about maintaining state security.

Thus, the adoption of the law on the status of a science city and the assignment of this status to certain territories of the Russian Federation was a formal measure at that time, promoting the preservation of old scientific centers. At that stage of development, the choice of territories for assigning status was determined, in our opinion, first of all, by the specialization of the scientific activity of the territories and its compliance with the strategic goals of state defense since Soviet times. Secondly, there was a unique technological base, which did not require the state to invest funds for the construction of infrastructure. Thus, science cities made it possible to preserve the existing scientific potential of some territories and became a tool for ensuring state interests in the scientific and technical field.

It can be said that only modern stage development, the science city has finally become a truly functioning instrument for the development of strategic areas of science. Since 2003, the status of a science city was assigned to new territories, while the very concept of a science city in the Russian Federation was clarified. Since January 1, 2006, the science city has been “ municipality with the status of an urban district, with high scientific and technical potential, with a city-forming scientific and production complex" (see).

Thus, it is necessary to emphasize the following trends based on the material studied.

Firstly, as already noted, science cities have become and are currently scientific centers that ensure the implementation of the strategic goals of the state, including increasing defense capability, strengthening food security, and searching for new types of medicines.

Secondly, when choosing territories that were assigned the status of a science city, priority was given to those territories that were old Soviet scientific centers and retained their potential. This trend in the implementation of government policy in the field of science and innovation continues today, not only in relation to science cities, but also to technology-innovation special economic zones. For example, Tomsk, where a special economic zone of this type was created, was a Russian scientific center back in the 19th century. The Imperial Tomsk University was founded in 1878 and was the first university in Siberia and on Far East. Tomsk State University actively participates in competitions for grants from the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and the Russian Humanitarian Foundation (over the past 5 years, more than 500 studies have been carried out) and is a leader among Russian universities in the number of laureates of various prizes and awards.

Thirdly, it should be noted the trend of the last two years, manifested in the wide scope of the state campaign to develop the scientific, technical and innovation sphere of Russia. This is confirmed by the analysis of government activities presented in the first part of this work.

Fourthly, the ongoing state scientific, technical and innovation policy is unbalanced on a territorial basis. Thus, we can identify 2-3 regions where the state has concentrated its efforts. In the European part of Russia, these are Moscow and the Moscow region, in Siberia and the Far East, which represents 2/3 of the territory of Russia, these are the Novosibirsk and Tomsk regions. The Urals remained virtually untouched in this regard. For example, only in the Perm region are government measures being implemented to develop an innovative environment. Two venture funds are being created there, one of them on the initiative of AFK Sistema. This situation causes dissatisfaction, for example, in the Sverdlovsk region, where the Ural Venture Fund recently ceased to exist. At the same time, many territories of the Russian Federation, where significant scientific research was carried out during the USSR, could be potentially priority scientific centers (Sarov Nizhny Novgorod region, Zheleznogorsk, Krasnoyarsk Territory).

Finally, it is important to note that when the state implements measures aimed at developing science and innovation, the political component of the campaign largely outstrips the economic one. Here a shining example are all the same SEZs. Companies are not yet seeking to become residents. This may be caused by high requirements for companies wishing to become residents, as well as insufficient work by government agencies to clarify the procedure for assigning SEZ resident status.

Sometimes, observing the actions of our government, one gets the feeling that it strives to solve problems with quantity rather than quality. And it is to solve problems instead of changing the system. In solving the existing problem, the state is ready to direct all the resources at its disposal to this end. At the same time, sometimes it is quite enough to take several measures in time, interconnected with each other, and implement them from beginning to end.

One gets the impression that the measures taken today by our Government are aimed at supporting individual scientific centers and territories. How these measures are implemented will largely determine possible development paths. The first scenario may lead to the emergence of a small number of large scientific centers, which, with proper management, can become “locomotives” of scientific and technological progress and ensure the implementation of the state’s goals of building a “new” economy and a full-fledged national innovation environment. In the second development option, priority government support for individual research centers may lead to a gap between them and other centers, which are unlikely to receive similar support. A possible outcome will be either the disappearance of the latter, or, what is much worse, the unreasonable waste of resources on them without obtaining any economic or scientific effect. As a result, our aspirations to build an innovative economy will remain only aspirations, which we can judge only from archival documents.

Thus, we have outlined the latest measures taken by the state in the field of science and innovation, identified trends and possible options for its development. Unfortunately, behind the grandeur of the events being carried out, the state often does not notice small shortcomings, which become significant barriers that slow down the process of building a full-fledged innovation environment in Russia. What will be the results of government measures taken today, we will be able to see and evaluate them only after a few years.

Annex 1

Appendix 2

Current and potential science cities of the Russian Federation

Literature

1. “On licensing of certain types of activities.” Law of the Russian Federation of August 8, 2001 No. 128-FZ

2. “On the status of the science city of the Russian Federation.” Law of the Russian Federation of April 7, 1999 No. 70-FZ

3. “On special economic zones in the Russian Federation.” Law of the Russian Federation of July 22, 2005 No. 116-FZ

4. “On the Federal Agency for the Management of Special Economic Zones.” Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of July 22, 2005 No. 855

5. “On the creation of an open joint-stock company “Russian Investment Fund of Information and Communication Technologies”. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of August 9, 2006 No. 476

6. “On the Federal Agency for the Management of Special Economic Zones.” Government Decree of August 19, 2005 No. 530

7. “On the Fund for Assistance to the Development of Small Enterprises in the Scientific and Technical Sphere.” Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 3, 1994 No. 65

8. “On the open joint-stock company “Russian Venture Company”. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of August 24, 2006 No. 516

10. Areas of scientific, scientific-technical and innovative activity, experimental development, testing and training, which are priorities for the city of Dubna as a science city of the Russian Federation in 2001-2006. Approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of December 20, 2001 No. 1472

11. Areas of scientific, scientific-technical and innovative activity, experimental development, testing and training, which are priorities for the city of Korolev as a science city of the Russian Federation in 2002-2006. Approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of September 16, 2002 No. 987

12. Areas of scientific, scientific-technical and innovative activity, experimental development, testing and personnel training, which are priorities for the city of Michurinsk as a science city of the Russian Federation in 2003-2007. Approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of November 4, 2003 No. 1306

13. Areas of scientific, scientific-technical and innovative activity, experimental development, testing and personnel training, which are priorities for the city of Reutov as a science city of the Russian Federation in 2003-2007. Approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of December 29, 2003 No. 1530

14. Areas of scientific, scientific-technical and innovative activity, experimental development, testing and personnel training, which are priorities for the city of Fryazino as a science city of the Russian Federation in 2003-2007. Approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of December 29, 2003 No. 1531

15. Areas of scientific, scientific-technical and innovative activity, experimental development, testing and training, which are priorities for the working village of Koltsovo, Novosibirsk region, as a science city of the Russian Federation in 2003-2007. Approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of January 17, 2003 No. 45

16. Regulations on the Government Commission for the Development of Industry and Technology. Approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of September 14, 2006 No. 563

17. Areas of scientific, scientific-technical and innovative activity, experimental development, testing and training, which are priorities for the city of Biysk (Altai Territory) as a science city of the Russian Federation and corresponding to the priority areas of development of science, technology and engineering of the Russian Federation. Approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 21, 2005 No. 688

18. Areas of scientific, scientific-technical and innovative activity, experimental development, testing and personnel training that are priorities for the city of Peterhof as a science city of the Russian Federation and corresponding to the priority directions of the development of science, technology and engineering of the Russian Federation. Approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of July 23, 2005 No. 449

19. Areas of scientific, scientific-technical and innovative activity, experimental development, testing and training, which are priorities for the city of Pushchino (Moscow region) as a science city of the Russian Federation and corresponding to the priority areas of development of science, technology and engineering of the Russian Federation. Approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 27, 2005 No. 642

20. Agreement on the creation of a special economic zone of technology-innovation type on the territory of Dubna (Moscow region) dated January 18, 2006.

21. Agreement on the creation of a special economic zone of technology-innovation type on the territory of Moscow dated January 18, 2006.

22. Agreement on the creation of a special economic zone of technology-innovation type on the territory of St. Petersburg dated January 18, 2006.

23. Agreement on the creation of a special economic zone of technology-innovation type on the territory of Tomsk dated January 18, 2006.

24. Charter of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Approved General meeting Russian Academy of Sciences November 14, 2001

25. Charter of the Russian Humanitarian Scientific Foundation. Approved by Government Decree of May 7, 2001 No. 347

26. Country of Science - RFBR // Bulletin of the RFBR. - 2000. - No. 2

27. Visloguzov V. The government will deny the “new economy” tax benefits // Kommersant. - 2006. - September 18

Notes

Regulations on the Government Commission for the Development of Industry and Technology. Approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of September 14, 2006 No. 563. - P. 4.

Visloguzov V. The government will deny the “new economy” tax benefits // Kommersant. - 2006. - September 18.

Charter of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Approved by the General Meeting of the Russian Academy of Sciences on November 14, 2001 - P. 1.

Alfimov M.V., Minin V.A., Libkind A.N. Country of Science - RFBR // Bulletin of the RFBR. - 2000. - No. 2.

Charter of the Russian Humanitarian Scientific Foundation. Approved by Government Decree of May 7, 2001 No. 347. - Clause 6.

“On the Fund for Assistance to the Development of Small Enterprises in the Scientific and Technical Sphere.” Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 3, 1994 No. 65. - Clauses. 1.3.

"On the Federal Agency for the Management of Special Economic Zones." Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of July 22, 2005 No. 855. - Clause 1.

"On the Federal Agency for the Management of Special Economic Zones." Government Decree of August 19, 2005 No. 530. - Clause 5.7. - Pp. 8-11.

“On special economic zones in the Russian Federation.” Law of the Russian Federation of July 22, 2005 No. 116-FZ. — St. 6. - P. 6.

Alexey Zhurov, Financial Academy under the Government of the Russian Federation, Institute mathematical methods in economics and crisis management.