Transcript Presentation of L Gohberg

S&T and Innovation Policy for Russia
Prof. Leonid Gokhberg
National Research University –
Higher School of Economics
Russian-Dutch University Partnerships: Shaping Innovative Academic and Research Agenda
Moscow, November 15–16, 2012
Contents
•
Challenges for STI policy in Russia
•
Strategy 2020: a new STI policy for Russia
•
Key STI policy targets: 2013-2020
•
Recent STI policy agenda
photo
photo
Higher School of Economics, Moscow 2012
2
Global challenges for S&T and innovation
policy: moving to a new agenda
Challenges for science policy
Challenges for innovation policy
• Selectivity
• Framework conditions
Which fields to support and how much
focus to give priorities?
Shift from thematic priorities to
socioeconomic objectives
• Concentration
Which institutions or research teams
to support and how concentrated
should funding be?
• Sustainability
Are the basic resources of people,
money, infrastructure and institutions
renewing themselves?
Source: L. Georghiou
Higher School of Economics, Moscow 2012
IP framework, human resources,
photo consumer
competition, health & safety,
regulation
• Mobility of
knowledge, people, money, services,
business
• Governance
Open innovation model
Coordination versus integration
Moving towards a more horizontal and
cross-cutting innovation policy
approach
photo
A need for less conventional
innovation policy
3
Challenges for STI policy in Russia
Constraints
Challenges
Russia is a developed economy with
educated population and high GDP per
capita level on global scale
Unsustainable model of integration
into global economy
• Development of global cooperation,
decrease of its costs, barriers and risks
• Low competitiveness in the global arena
• Unfavorable climate for entrepreneurship and
innovations
• Contre-innovative institutions
• Increased speed of knowledge
generation, new technologic fields and
markets development
• Sectoral disbalance (focus on raw materials
export, import of equipment, “traditional hightech“)
• Domination of vertical organisation of
manufacturing and technologic linkages
• Development of network model of
interaction at global and national level
• Consumption level depends on the income from
raw resources and does not depend on labour
effectiveness
• Enhanced paternalistic approach of public policy,
« ignoration » of creative class
• Crisis of traditional models of social
policy, stimulation of initiative and
entrepreneurship
Higher School of Economics, Moscow 2012
4
Current STI policy in Russia: an
overview
Strengths
STI is amongst top-level declared public policy
priorities
Implementation of new policy tools (tax
incentives, innovation infrastructure, spin-offs at
universities and R&D institutes, grants to involve
leading scholars, etc.)
Introduction of policy instruments providing
support to the best (national research centers,
research universities, etc.)
Weaknesses
Absence of a strategic agenda (e.g. long-term
vision)
Tight budgetary constraints, socially-oriented
budget
Multiplicity and discoordination of “innovation”
signals from the state
Attempts to involve new actors (state-owned
companies, leading universities, regional
clusters, etc.)
“Imitation” of innovation economy institutions
(“inflation of concepts”), low quality of policy
implementation
Growth in public R&D funding
Slow progress in business environment and
investment climate
Too high expectations (in terms of scale and
speed of achieving tangible results)
Higher School of Economics, Moscow 2012
5
Innovative activity of enterprises
Per cent
20
18
19.5
17.3
16.3
16
14
12
10.6
9.6
9.8
10.3
10.5
9.3
10
9.4
9.4
9.6
9.4
9.3
9.6
8
6.2
6
5.5
5.2
4.7
6.1
5.4
5.0
4.4
4
4.7
4.2
0.9
0.9
0.8
4.7
5
5.5
5.1
4.6
4.9
3.8 3.7
4.7
3.3
2
4.3
5.5
1.1
1.1
1.4
1.4
1.8
1.6
1.5
1.2
1.4
1.2
1.4
1.9
1.5
1.5
0
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Enterprises engaged in technological innovation as per cent of all enterprises
Innovative goods and services as a per cent of total sales
Ratio of expenditure on technological innovation to total sales of enterprises
6
Gross domestic expenditure on R&D
(million $ PPP)
USA
China
Japan
Germany
Korea
France
401576.0
178980.7
140832.8
86299.4
53184.9
49990.8
United
Kingdom
39137.8
Russia
33725.2
Brazil
26016.5
Canada
24345.9
India
24324.7
Italy
24269.2
Netherlands
12968.7
Percentage of Gross domestic expenditure on R&D
financed by government, %
GERD
90
TJ
80
ID
AR
70
AZ
RU
CY
60
PL
BY
LT
KG
IR
BG
RO
UA MT
50
IN
BR
SK
HR
ES
ZA
NZ EE
GR
40
AT
CL
30
LV
20
MX
NO
CZ
NL
FR
HU
SG
SI AU
IS
CA EU-27
OECD
LU
UK
US
DE
IE
TR
SE DK
FI
BE
CH
IL
TW
KR
CN
JP
10
MY
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Percentage of Gross domestic expenditure on R&D
financed by industry, %
7
90
Strategy 2020: imperatives
• Transition to innovation-based economy within the context of
globalization
• Internationalization and openness of the Russian economy and
its integration into global value chains at all levels
• Relief of existing “innovation cleavages”
Institutional
Regional
Education
Science
Business
Social
Discrimination of certain social groups in
terms of access to innovations
Cross-regional polarization by
innovation activity
“Innovation
сleavages”
Sectoral
Cross-sectoral differentiation of technological
level and innovation activity
8
Strategy 2020: key trade-offs &
options for innovation policy
Model
• Project-based support of
innovative activities in earmarked
priority areas
• Stimulating mass innovation across all economy sectors
• Creating favourable environment for innovative companies and
unfavourable one for non-innovative companies
• Rigid hierarchy-based policy
• Redistribution of state functions to regions, development
institutions, business associations
• Promoting cooperation at all levels
• Universal instruments
• Differenciated policy instruments for specific economy sectors and
types of innovators
Markets
• Continuous support of high-tech sectors
related to the former technology paradigm
(aircraft, nuclear power generation, etc.)
• Priority support of the new economy
(«novel» high-tech, services, «green industries», etc.)
• Stimulating innovation in low-tech sectors
• Supporting non-technological innovations
Priorities/Criteria
• Focus on political arguments in decision-making
Socio-economic objectives
• Technological and non-technological innovations to increase
economic efficiency and to benefit from the Schumpeterian
(innovation) rent – “innovation for business”
• Social priorities – inclusive innovations
• Thematic priorities
• Functional priorities (design, engineering, technology transfer,
networking, training, etc.)
Higher School of Economics, Moscow 2012
Strategy 2020: proposed policy mix
ENHANCED
EFFICIENCY OF
INNOVATIVE
POLICIES
MASS INNOVATIONS
ACROSS ALL
SECTORS
Incentives for
innovating
enterprises
Support to
small
innovative
enterprises
Enhancement
of innovative
focus of
public
procurement
Regulation of
technology
imports
Enhancement of
efficiency in
resource
utilization
Functional
priorities:
compensation of
failures in the
innovation cycle
Decentralization
of STI policies
INNOVATIONBASED
DEVELOPMENT
OF
TRADITIONAL
SECTORS
AND
GENERATION
OF NEW ONES
Priority
support to
new economy
sectors and
to entry of
innovative
goods and
services to
growing
markets
IMPROVED
QUALITY OF
INNOVATION
SUPPLY
Improving
R&D sector
efficiency
Increasing
efficiency of
public R&D
funding
Incentives for
business
investment in
STI
SOCIAL
FUNCTIONS OF
INNOVATION
Human capital
development
Support to
creative class
Integrating
vulnerable
population
groups into
innovative
processes
(inclusive
innovations)
Improving
public
perception of
innovation
Need for a long-term vision
Higher School of Economics, Moscow 2012
10
Key STI policy targets for 2013-2020
Innovation
Total investment increase by
25% over the 2011 level
Share of innovation sales in
manufacturing exports: 12%
(2011 – 5.5%)
Total investment increase by
27% over the 2011 level
Promoting Russia in the
World Bank Doing Business
Index: 50th (2011 – 120th)
2011
Share of innovative enterprises
in manufacturing: 15%
(2011 – 11%)
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Share of Russian publications in the
Web of Science journals: 2.44%
(2011 – 2.06%)
Share of high-tech and
knowledge intensive sectors
in exports:
130% of 2011 level
Share of innovative enterprises
in manufacturing: 60%
(2011 – 11%)
Creation and modernisation
of 25 mln jobs with high
labor productivity
Labor productivity increase
by 150% over the 2011 level
2017
2018
2019
2020
Share of non-budget
expenditure in GERD: 57%
(2011 – 32.9%)
GERD-to-GDP-ratio: 1.77%
(2011 – 1.12%)
Share of universities in GERD: 11.4%
(2011 – 8.4%)
Share of innovation sales in
manufacturing exports: 15%
(2011 – 5.5%)
Promoting Russia in the
World Bank Doing Business
Index: 20th (2011 – 120th)
Budget of science funds:
25 bln roubles
(2011 – 11 bln roubles)
Patent applications per 10,000
population: 2.8
(2011 – 1.85)
Russian universities in the Top-100
world leading universities: >5
(2011 – n/a)
GERD-to-GDP-ratio: 3%
(2011 – 1.12%)
Salaries of researchers
(200% of regional averages)
Share of universities in
GERD: 15%
(2011 – 8.4%)
Share of Russian publications in Web of
Science journals: 3%
(2011 – 2.06%)
S&T
Higher School of Economics, Moscow 2012
11
President’s Decrees, May 2012
Innovation Strategy, December 2011
Recent STI policy agenda: an
itinerary action plan
S&T
• RF Basic Research Programme
• State Programme for S&T–2020
• Reform of the HE sector
― Federal universities
― National research universities
― Closures & mergers
― Cooperation with companies
• Mapping national S&T/research evaluation 
transformation of the government R&D sector:
focus on centres of excellence
•
•
•
•
Priority development of globally competitive
basic & applied research
Mega-science (e.g. co-financing of 6 large research
installations)
Integration of Russian leading universities into global
networks (e.g. Programme 5/100)
International academic mobility: inward (leading
international scientists) & outward (governmentsupported traineeships)
Innovation
• Partnerships between companies & RTD organisations/universities
• Innovation development programmes of state-owned companies
• Promoting networking: technology platforms, regionall innovation clusters, technology transfer (open
innovation centres)
• Attraction of transnational high-tech companies, technology investors & competences to Russia; localisation
of technology
• Technology & equipment imports
• Increasing efficiency of tax incentives for STI
Higher School of Economics, Moscow 2012
12
Thank you!
[email protected]