Проблемы регулирования абсорбции знаний в России

Samovoleva, Svetlana (2023): Проблемы регулирования абсорбции знаний в России. Published in:

Abstract

Improving of knowledge transfer is a key part of documents that determine the vector of development of science, technology and innovation, both in Russia and abroad. However, even with the accumulated considerable experience in the organization of knowledge transfer processes, the problem of low activity of domestic business in these processes remains unresolved. One of the main reasons is the lack of proper attention both in domestic science and policy to the absorption capacities of enterprises and knowledge absorption. The aim of this study is to identify the bottlenecks that hinder promoting knowledge absorption in Russia. For this purpose, firstly, the theoretical foundations for analyzing knowledge absorption are investigated. Secondly, the conceptual documents that define the current framework for regulating knowledge transfer in Russia are examined. Unlike the papers that aim to analyze the general advantages or disadvantages of innovation policy, this study focuses on finding bottlenecks in the regulation of knowledge absorption. The results of the paper can be useful to fine-tune the policy measures.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• English Title: The Challenges of Regulating Knowledge Absorption in Russia
• Language: Russian
• Keywords: absorptive capacity, science and technology policy, national innovation system, regions, technological development, knowledge transfer
• Subjects: O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O1 - Economic Development > O10 - General; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O2 - Development Planning and Policy > O25 - Industrial Policy; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O32 - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O33 - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences ; Diffusion Processes; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O4 - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity > O43 - Institutions and Growth

References

1. Polterovich, V. (2008). National innovation system formation principles. Problems of management theory and practice. No. 11. P. 8–19. (In Russ.).

2. Samovoleva, S. A. (2019). Technological knowledge absorption as a factor of innovation development. Voprosy Ekonomiki. No. 11. P. 150–158. DOI 10.32609/0042-8736-2019-11-150-158 (In Russ.).

3. Nooteboom, B. (2000). Learning by interaction: absorptive capacity, cognitive distance and governance. Journal of management and governance. No. 4. P. 69–92.

4. Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Triple Helix-University-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge based economic development. EASST review. No. 14 (1). P. 14–19.

5. Dezhina, I. and Kiseleva, V. (2017). “Triple Helix” in Russia’s Innovation System. Voprosy Ekonomiki. No. 12. P. 123–135. DOI 10.32609/0042-8736-2007-12-123-135 (In Russ.)

6. Zhou, C. and Etzkowitz, H. (2021). Triple helix twins: a framework for achieving innovation and UN sustainable development goals. Sustainability. Vol. 13, no. 12, art. 6535.

7. Etzkowitz, H. and Zhou, C. (2017). The triple helix: University–industry–government innovation and entrepreneurship. Routledge.

8. Golichenko, O. G., Balycheva, Yu. E., Malkova, A. A., Pronichkin, S. V. and Samovoleva, S. A. (2016). Gosudarstvennaya politika i modeli povedeniya aktorov v natsional'noi innovatsionnoi sisteme [State policy and models of behavior of actors in the national innovation system]. Ed. by O. G. Golichenko, S. A. Samovoleva. Moscow: RUDN. 254 p. (In Russ.).

9. Cai, Y. (2022). Neo-Triple Helix model of innovation ecosystems: integrating Triple, Quadruple and Quintuple Helix models. Triple Helix. Vol. 9, no. 1. P. 76–106. DOI 10.1163/21971927-bja10029.

10. Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly. Vol. 35. P. 128–152.

11. Samovoleva, S. and Balycheva, Y. (2018). Absorptive capacity as a factor of firms' innovative behaviour. In: International Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Academic Conferences International Limited. P. 709–716.

12. Schmidt, T. (2010). Absorptive capacity—one size fits all? A firm‐level analysis of absorptive capacity for different kinds of knowledge. Managerial and Decision Economics. No. 31 (1). P. 1–18.

13. Arrow, K. (1962). Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention. In: Nelson, R. R. (Ed). The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. Princeton University Press, Princeton. P. 609–625.

14. Easterby-Smith, M., Graca, M., Antonacopoulou, E., and Ferdinand, J. (2008). Absorptive capacity: A process perspective. Management learning. No. 39 (5). P. 483–501.

15. Liao, S. H., Wu, C. C., Hu, D. C., and Tsui, K. A. (2010). Relationships between knowledge acquisition, absorptive capacity and innovation capability: an empirical study on Taiwan’s financial and manufacturing industries. Journal of information science. No. 36 (1). P. 19–35.

16. Zhou, K. Z. and Li, C. B. (2012). How knowledge affects radical innovation: Knowledge base, market knowledge acquisition, and internal knowledge sharing. Strategic management journal. No. 33 (9). P. 1090–1102.

17. Samovoleva, S. A. (2019). Challenges for Developing National Innovation Systems: the Possibilities and Limitations of Business and Science Cooperation. Science Management: Theory and Practice. Vol. 1б no. 2. P. 70–89. DOI 10.19181/smtp.2019.1.2.4 (In Russ.).

18. Dement'ev, V. E. (2009). Dogonyayushchee razvitie cherez prizmu teorii “dlinnovolnovoi” tekhnologicheskoi dinamiki: aspect “okon vozmozhnostei” v krizisnykh usloviyakh [Catching up development through the prism of the theory of “long-wave” technological dynamics: the aspect of “windows of opportunity” in crisis conditions]. Rossiiskii ekonomicheskii zhurnal. No. 1–2. P. 34–48. (In Russ.).

19. Dementiev, V. E. (2023). Technological sovereignty and priorities of localization of production. Terra Economicus. No. 21 (1). P. 6–18. DOI 10.18522/2073-6606-2023-21-1-6-18. (In Russ.). 20. Polterovich, V. М. (2022). Once again about where to go: Toward a development strategy in isolation from the West. Journal of the New Economic Association, Vol. 3 (55), P. 238–244. DOI: 10.31737/2221-2264-2022-55-3-17 (In Russ.).

21. Polterovich, V. M. (2023). Catching-up development under sanctions: the strategy of positive collaboration. MPRA Paper. No. 117659.

22. Ratner, S. V. (2010). Scenarios of Stratification in Innovation Network. Large-Scale Systems Control. No. 30-1. P. 774–798. (In Russ.).

23. Untura, G. A. (2020). Absorptive Knowledge Capacity of Companies and Projects with Complete Innovation Cycle. World of Economics and Management. Vol. 20, no. 1. P. 46–66. DOI 10.25205/2542-0429-2020-20-1-46-66 (In Russ.).

24. Fedyunina, A. A., Gerina, Y. Y. and Averyanova, Yu. V. (2020). Academics in manufacturing companies: Empirical analysis of publication activity and export quality. Voprosy Ekonomiki. No. 2. P. 125–140. DOI 10.32609/0042-8736-2020-2-125-140 (In Russ.).

25. Murtuzalieva, S. Ju. and Tsvetkova, T. A. (2021). The value of organizational problems in enterprises of high technology industries in modern conditions of development of science and society on the example of the Russian Federation. Moscow economic journal. No. 3. P. 374–389. DOI 10.24411/2413-046X-2021-10132. (In Russ.).

26. Samovoleva, S. A. (2022). Innovation policy development: former objectives and new challenges. Innovations. No. 1 (279). P. 71–80. DOI 10.26310/2071-3010.2022.279.1.009 (In Russ.).

27. Sun, P. Y. and Anderson, M. H. (2010). An examination of the relationship between absorptive capacity and organizational learning, and a proposed integration. International journal of management reviews. No. 12 (2). P. 130–150. DOI 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00256.x.

28. Dosi, G. and Grazzi, M. (2006). Technologies as problem-solving procedures and technologies as input–output relations: some perspectives on the theory of production. Industrial and Corporate Change. No. 15 (1). P. 173–202.

29. Zahra, S. A. and George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of management review. No. 27 (2). P. 185–203.

30. OECD (2022). Good practices in Europe for supporting employers to promote skills development. OECD.ORG. URL: https://www.oecd.org/skills/Good-practices-in-Europe-for-supporting-employers-to-promote-skills-development.pdf (accessed: 08.08.2023).

31. Kaneva, M. A. and Untura, G.A. (2021). Modeli otsenki vliyaniya ekonomiki znaniĭ na ekonomicheskii rost i innovatsii regionov [Models for assessing the impact of the knowledge economy on the economic growth and innovation of regions]. Ed. by V. I. Suslov. Novosibirsk: IEIE SB RAS. 256 p. (In Russ.).

32. Dezhina, I. G. and Ponomarev, A. K. (2022). Approaches to Ensuring Russia’s Technological Self-Sufficiency. Science Management: Theory and Practice. Vol. 4, no. 3. P. 53–68. DOI 10.19181/smtp.2022.4.3.5 (In Russ.).

33. Belov, F. D., Bilczak, V. S., Malyutin, A. A. and Smirnova, A. A. (2020). Improving the Mechanisms for Attracting Foreign Researchers to World-Class Research Centres: Practical Aspects. Science Governance and Scientometrics. Vol. 15, no. 3. P. 270–306. DOI 10.33873/2686-6706.2020.15-3.270-306. (In Russ.).

34. Rotemberg, J. J. and Saloner, G. (2000). Competition and human capital accumulation: a theory of interregional specialization and trade. Regional Science and Urban Economics. No. 30 (4). P. 373–404.

35. Zemtsov, S. and Barinova, V. (2016). The paradigm changing of regional innovation policy in Russia: from equalization to smart specialization. Voprosy Ekonomiki. No. 10. P. 65–81. DOI 10.32609/0042-8736-2016-10-65-81 (In Russ.).

36. Volkova, G. L. and Nikishin, G. A. (2022). Interregional Mobility Patterns of Russian Scientists and Their Willingness to Move in the Future. Economy of Regions. Vol. 18, no.1. P. 175–192. (In Russ.).

37. Zubarevich, N. V. (2015). Spatial strategy after the crisis: from the big projects to institutional modernization. Journal of the New Economic Association. No. 2 (26). P. 226–230. (In Russ.).

38. Lenchuk, E. B. (2020). Strategic planning in russia: challenges and solution. Innovations. No. 2 (256). P. 24–28. DOI 10.26310/2071-3010.2020.256.2.003. (In Russ.).

39. Makarov, V., Ayvazyan, S., Afanasyev, M., Bakhtizin, A. and Nanavyan, A. (2016). Modeling the Development of Regional Economy and an Innovation Space Efficiency. Foresight and STI Governance. Vol. 10, no 3. P. 76–90. DOI 10.17323/1995-459X.2016.3.76.9.

40. Zemtsov, S. P. (2022). Technological entrepreneurship as a development factor of Russia. Journal of the New Economic Association. No. 1 (53). P. 212–223. DOI 10.31737/2221-2264-2022-53-1-11. (In Russ.).

41. Samovoleva, S. A. (2021). Identifying the factors of innovative firms' export based on association rules. Drukerovskij vestnik. No. 5. P. 49–62. DOI 10.17213/2312-6469-2021-5-49-62. (In Russ.).

42. Regional'naya ekonomika: kommentarii GU [Regional economy: comments of GU]. (2022). Central Bank of the Russian Federation. No. 16. December. URL: https://www.cbr.ru/Collection/Collection/File/43537/report_08122022.pdf (accessed: 08.08.2023).

43. Dobretsov, N. L. (2017). Dostoinstva i nedostatki novio “Strategii nauchno-tekhnologicheskogo razvitiya rossiiskoi Federatsii” [Advantages and disadvantages of the new “Strategy of scientific and technological development of the Russian Federation”]. ECO. No. 1 (511). P. 94–101. (In Russ.).