Russian Science Policy in Post-Soviet Period

1. Russian Science Policy in Post-Soviet Period Irina Dezhina Institute for World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences dezhina@imemo.ru

2. Contents • Major characteristics of R&D sector in Russia • Evolution of government reforms (1992-till present). • Successes and failures in support of science as a public good: • new forms of financing • integration of research and education • organizational changes • Successes and failures in support of science as a source of innovations: • involvement of business • infrastructure for commercialization • Evaluation of innovation policy in Russia: InnoTrend Chart • Major flaws in government regulation. • Directions for improvement.

3. R&D in Russia: Major Characteristics • 62% of financing comes from the federal budget. Its share is slowly growing. • 73% of organizations conducting R&D are state-owned (are federal property). • 77% of all personnel in R&D work in state-owned R&D organizations. Russian R&D sector is mostly government-owned and government-financed.

4. Organizations Implementing R&D by Type of Ownership

5. Federal Expenditures on Civilian R&D in Russia

6. Foreign Financing of Russian and Eastern European Science

7. Business Enterprise and Government Expenditures on R&D (data for 2003)

8. Researchers in Russian Science

9. Age Structure of Russian Researchers

10. Researchers in Russia and USA: Distribution by Age Groups(Russia – 2004; USA – 2003)

11. Changes in Financing and R&D Labor Force

12. New Policy Encouraging Mobility • “Brain drain” is now seen as part of international mobility • The discussion is around ways to collaborate with diaspora with the aim to attract some emigrated researchers back to Russian science • Possible way to attract researchers back to Russia: to develop different types of initiatives in research and education stimulating “partial” return

13. Who Constitutes Potential Brain Gain? • Tenured faculty at universities • Researchers completing their second-third post-doc • Researchers working under temporary contracts (70-80% from total diaspora) • “Aging” researchers (around 65 years old) – because of limits established in European countries

14. “Mirror” Laboratories in Russia (Case of Nizhny Novgorod State University) Foreign laboratory “Mirror” laboratory Leadership Russian researcher from diaspora or foreign researcher • Foreign co-leader • Russian co-leader Research tasks • Joint research projects • Own research • Own research • Joint research projects R&D personnel • Staff • Training of researchersfrom “mirror” laboratory • Staff • Invited researchers Financing • Federal budget • Domestic and foreign grants • Joint grants • Federal budget • Goal-oriented projects, Federal goal- oriented programs • Domestic and foreign grants • Joint grants

15. “Mirror” Laboratories: Mutual Interests Foreign laboratory “Mirror” laboratory • Access to high quality workforce • Minimization of expenditures on R&D • Additional sources of financing • “Personal factors” – recognition in home country, linkages with relatives and friends • Access to high quality research expertise • Integration in international R&D Projects • Raising quality of education • Attraction of youth to science • Promotion of mobility • Access to additional sources of financing

16. Research Productivity

17. Patents Granted by USPTO / Million population(average for 2001-2005)

18. Policy Towards Science

19. Major Tasks for Transition Period Infrastructure Status Payments Organizational reform Legal basis Funds

20. Periodization of Reforms • 1992-1996: preservation of science during economic crisis; creation of new organizational and institutional framework. • 1997-2001: frequent changes in science & innovation policy. Development of innovative infrastructure. • 2002-2007: development of strategic vision for science & innovation policy. Attempts to start structural reforms in science, create favorable environment for innovations.

21. Successes and Failures in Supporting Science as a Public Good

22. Forms of Financing of R&D in Russia

23. Changes in Forms of Financing • Introduction of Budgeting Oriented on Results • Grown Share of Program Financing: 75% of Ministry of Education and Science Budget • Share of government foundations stays the same: 8,5% (by-law, total for 3 foundations) of the total civilian expenditures on R&D from the federal budget

24. Russian Science Foundations: General Principals of Operation • “Bottom-up” approach: applications are initiated by groups of researchers • Peer review evaluation of proposals (only domestic experts) • Financing of individual projects rather than institutions • Accountability in the budgets of projects • Obligation to give a full report of results after project is completed

25. Major Government-Supported Science Foundations in Russia

26. Current State of Integration of Research and Education

27. Fundamental Research in Russian Universities and Academy Institutes(in percent to the total expenditures on fundamental research)

28. Problems of Integration • Innovation activity in universities is not considered as primary type of activity and it has many legal limitations. • Teaching loads are high and this prohibits lecturers from active involvement in research. • Research divisions and teaching divisions in universities are regulated differently; research activity is less beneficial in terms of material support and stability.

29. New Charter of the Russian Academy of Sciences • Approved by the Government of RF in November 2007, will come into force January 1, 2009. 2008 – transition period • New status • New scheme of financing – through program of fundamental research, in the form of subsidies • More freedom in innovation activity

30. Changes in Organization and Governance of the RAS

31. Russian Corporation of Nanotechnologies and Nanotechnology Network • Budget released in 2007 – 130 billion rubles (3.5 billion EURO) • Nanotechnology network: 700 R&D organizations and universities conduct nanotechnology research • In 2007 50% of the budget allocated to MES Program “R&D on Priority Directions of Scientific-Technical Complex of Russia” was spent on research in nanotechnology • MES supported 400 nanotech projects in 2007 • Out of 13 megaprojects 8 were related to nanotechnology • Growing number of universities suggest new courses in nanotechnology

32. Russian Corporation of Nanotechnologies: Legal Aspects

33. Russian Corporation of Nanotechnologies: Expectations and Possible Outcomes • Government expectations include: • Development of nanotechnology and related research fields. • Growing business activity including business financing of R&D and commercialization. • New products competitive at international market. • Possible Outcomes: • Disproportional development of research fields damaging to the overall development of science. • Wasting of budget money because of absence in Russia of high tech businesses. • Exporting R&D, as it is now, and not high-tech products.

34. Successes and Failures in Supporting Science as a Source of Innovations

35. Development of Foresight Procedures • Foresight exercise (started in 2007) is one of the first attempts to attract business to strategic planning. • The Foresight procedures were developing simultaneously by three government agencies. • Current shortages: • Lack of coordination (both among agencies and expert communities); • A few experts are acquainted with foresight methodology. • Foresight is viewed as forecast.

36. Public-Private Partnerships Through Megaprojects • 18 large-scale R&D projects (started in 2003) aimed to foster technological development and to bring closer together research organizations and industrial enterprises. • The initiative had to demonstrate that investments made in hi-tech in Russia may be profitable for investors. • Financing is provided on matching basis with industry. • It was expected that volume of sales is 5 times higher then allocated to megaprojects budget financing.

37. Examples of Successful Megaprojects: • «Development and batch production of new generation of packing and fire-protective materials for general industrial needs». The materials developed are used in atomic and thermal power engineering, railroad transport, avia-, space-, oil and gas, and chemical industries. • «Development of technologies and production of equipment for nanotechnologies». The equipment is used in organizations working in the area of bio- and nanotechnologies. The equipment is exported to EU countries, South-East Asia, and USA. • «Creation of technologies and industrial production of metal materials with two-fold excess of operating characteristics». These are dual-use high quality steels and welding materials. Their development allowed to stop import of analogous materials.

38. Megaprojects: Results to the Date • Three megaprojects were considered successful. Volume of sales in them 8-10 times exceeded budgetary investments. • Questionable features of mechanism: • R&D are financed only from the federal budget; • R&D are implemented only in government or academic institutes or universities; • The role of companies – commercialization and manufacturing; • R&D organization collaborates with one company: this is anticompetitive approach and there are no dissemination mechanisms.

39. Innovative Enterprises as Share of Total Industrial Enterprises

40. Types of Innovative Infrastructure in Russia (2006)

41. New Innovative Infrastructure In 2006 the creation of several new types of innovative infrastructure was initiated by the government: • Co-financed by the government venture funds (Fund of funds and IT fund) • IT technology parks (in 7 regions) • Special economic zones (4 high tech development zones)

42. Development of Innovative Infrastructure

43. Positive Developments in Government Approach to Infrastructure Creation • New infrastructure schemes are largely based on elaboration of foreign experience • Previous Russian experience with technology parks and venture financing was taken into account • Government investments are much larger then before – over 380 million EURO in two venture funds • Indirect regulations (tax and custom exemptions for residents) are introduced in zones. IT parks may also receive tax privileges.

44. Problems Affecting Infrastructural Projects • Lack of projects for venture financing because of inadequate support of seed and start-up stages • Underdeveloped legal basis for venture industry • Bias from side of business against infrastructural projects: • Association of managers 2005 survey: only 11% out of 150 surveyed large and medium-size companies welcome creation of zones and venture funds.

45. Evaluation of Innovation Policy Using EU Metrics

46. Components of Policy Measure Fiche in InnoTrend Chart

47. Policy Measures: Major Findings • The actual innovation policy measures are mainly aimed at specific support actions and are largely based on direct support of R&D and innovation activity. • Some set of measures (limited) represent combination of direct support with indirect measures and administrative (legal) regulations. • The discussion is on the possibility to introduce more general innovation climate measures. • Three main policy directions: 1) growing attention towards forecasts and Foresight procedures; 2) further development of indirect measures to stimulate innovation; and 3) support for innovation infrastructure.

48. Positive: Formulation of several strategic policy documents Coordination bodies established on higher federal level. Growing number of ministries and agencies are engaged in the implementation of innovation policy Growing attention to monitoring and evaluation of innovation policy Use of mid-term indicators in research policy setting Development of indirect measures to support innovations and attempts to create general innovation climate Negative: A lot of innovation policy directions and priorities are not accompanied by concrete measures. In conceptual papers measures and mechanisms are often incomplete or too descriptive Lack of cross government coordination Monitoring and evaluation of policy measures implementation are underdeveloped Policy measures are not complex and favor direct support R&D and innovation activity The Positive and Negative Aspects in Russian Innovation Policy Implementation

49. Major Flaws in Government Regulation • Absence of systemic and consistent approach. • No regular evaluation and correction, if necessary, of the government initiatives. • Domination of old management practices in decision-making process (lack of inter-agency coordination, not transparent expert evaluation, no responsibility of government officials for their decisions, no enforcement procedures). • Absence of serious attention and recognition of importance of science at the government level. Science is not seen as part of innovation system.

50. Areas for Improvement of Government Science Policy • Monitoring, analysis and elaboration of previous experience, development of systemic evaluation • Increase of openness of science policy and its results • Strengthening of horizontal linkages among government agencies, responsible for science and innovation policy, and improvement in coordination of their initiatives