DOI: 10.33917/mic-4.117.2024.18-26

The author defines a development institution in relation to domestic realities, and also provides a brief overview of the world experience in the functioning of development institutions. The author points out that until recently, Russian development institutions demonstrated a low degree of efficiency, which necessitated reforms in the area under consideration. However, the reforms did not fully solve the assigned tasks, since the foreign policy situation changed dramatically. It is concluded that the basis for low efficiency is insufficient attention to the relationship between the concepts of «institute» and «institution». The author offers a list of activities that are key to improving the situation in the field of development institutions.

References:

1. Kostin K.B., Khomchenko E.A., Burmistrov A.N., Melikova E.F. Foreign direct investment and transnational corporations as potential factors of economic growth of states. Economic relations. 2021;11(4):633–664.

2. GE Global Innovation Barometer 2018. URL: https://www.ge.com/sites/default/files/GE_Global_Innovation_Barometer_2018-Summary_Report.pdf

3. Mapping 500+ Development Banks Qualification criteria, stylized facts and development trends. URL: https://financeincommon.org/sites/default/files/2021-10/mapping-development-banks.pdf

4. SWFI Total Asset Ratings. URL: https://www.swfinstitute.org/fund-rankings/development-bank

5. Kuzenkova V.M. Concepts of development institutions: a retrospective analysis. Bulletin of the Plekhanov Russian University of Economics. 2020;17(1 (109)):40.

6. Monastyrsky E.A., Saklakov V.M. Classification of development institutions. Innovations. 2013;9 (179):65.

7. Sokolov A. Development institutions have failed innovations. Vedomosti, 02.03.2021. URL: https://www.vedomosti.ru/economics/articles/2021/03/01/859742-instituti-razvitiya

8. Botoroeva E. The effectiveness of development institutions will be assessed by 10 indicators. URL: https://www.pnp.ru/economics/effektivnost-institutov-razvitiya-ocenyat-po-10-pokazatelyam.html

9. Skolkovo approved a new KPI system and indicators for 2024–2026. URL: https://ria.ru/20231225/skolkovo-1917898633.html

10. Petrov A.N., Varlamov K.V., Komarov A.V., Matveev D.A. Efficiency of development institutions. Shift in the paradigm of development institutions in the medium term. Economics of Science. 2017;3(4):234.

11. Putin called for support for development institutions that fell under sanctions. URL: https://360tv.ru/news/vlast/putin-prizval-podderzhat-instituty-razvitija-popavshie-pod-sanktsii/

12. Inshakov O.V. Institution and institution: problems of categorical differentiation and integration. Economic science of modern Russia. 2010;3(50):26–38.

13. Deming W. Edwards, Out of the Crisis, The MIT Press, 1994. 524 p.

14. Towards harmonized management and measurement of impact: The experience of development finance institutions. URL: https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD(2021)30/en/pdf

15. OECD-UNDP Impact Standards for Financing Sustainable DEVELOPMENT OECD, UNDP 2021.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33917/es-2.176.2021.128-133

The purpose of the present article is to draw the specialists’ attention to the fact that in order to create a self-sufficient and competitive national economy, it is necessary to start developing a new generation information service, primarily for its production cluster. The submission discusses how this can be done

DOI: 10.33917/es-5.163.2019.90-99

Innovative development is a strategy for creating a new technological and social structure. The implementation of this agenda requires the solution of a complex of problems created by the phenomenon of innovation. The article identifies seven problem areas that impede the formation of a sustainable innovation system in modern Russia. The problem of definitions is associated with a lack of understanding of the deep essence of the innovation culture, which gives rise to a superficial understanding of innovation only as a commercialized innovation, and not as a way of life. The problem of operationalization and evaluation of innovations is associated with the dominance of technocratic and statistical approaches, which leads to linear conclusions and forms a biased picture of the development potential of Russia. The problem of spontaneity of innovation and the focus solely on the investment aspects of innovation policy can turn into significant financial losses and a decrease in the creative potential of people involved in certain branches of science and economics. The problem of the subject forms the wrong idea of innovation as an exclusive product of individual creativity, while they are the result of complex social interaction. The problem of the institutional environment is associated not so much with incubators, venture funds, technology parks and research laboratories, as with the indispensable role of the school and basic science. Last but not least, are the problems of the socio-cultural environment of innovations and their unpredictable consequences. The efficiency and sustainability of the innovation system is directly dependent on the prevailing attitude in society towards unsuccessful attempts to introduce innovations. Negative perception can generate apathy towards innovation at best, and aggression at worst. A calm assessment of failures can be the key to success. The solution of the identified problems – the constraining factors of innovation – is possible with the unidirectional energy of political, economic and research subjects

This article presents a multi-factorial regression analysis of budgetary efficiency of the special economic zones functioning in the Russian market. Special economic zones are the current form of public-private partnership in Russia, which has got significant development prospects. Public-private partnership is one of the most important institutions of economic relations between government and business, being among other things one of the key tools for investing into development of the real sector of economy. On the other hand, at present the social and budgetary efficiency of special economic zones in Russia is called into question by the state. Specific factors affecting the efficiency of special economic zones development, as well as their degree of influence, often remain unclear. In this regard, it seems important to study the budgetary efficiency of special economic zones through the prism of specific macroeconomic and specific factors published by the Russian Ministry of Economic Development. The study time frame covers the period of 2012-2016. Based on the results obtained, it seems possible to have more clear and deep understanding of the areas for developing interaction between the state and business in Russia.

The article presents philosophical and methodological analysis of the innovative development basic models, taking into account the specificity of these models the article evaluates individual projects and strategic documents defining the current state of Russia’s innovative development, it discusses perspective directions of improving the innovative development mechanisms.

The article discusses approaches to applying research potential of universities to accelerate competitive development of individual enterprises and regional entities.

Presence of the region in the growing innovation market means an increased need for financial resources for development.

The subjectlessness has affected in varying degree all the major players of the modernization process (state, public and political communities, social institutions).