Innovative Development of Russian Regions: Assessment and Dynamics in the Context of Sustainable Development
[ad_1]
2. Background and Literature Review
2.1. Background
According to the Strategy for Socio-Economic Development of Russia until 2020, within the next five years, the Russian Federation should become a leader in the world markets of knowledge-intensive products, as well as take a strong global position in the production of innovative and high-tech products and provision of intellectual services. At the same time, as rightly noted by the developers of the Strategy, a serious threat to Russia’s competitiveness is that it is lagging behind in the development of new technologies of the latest generation [19]. The innovation component is the most important aspect of regional policy. Of all post-Soviet countries, Russia has a huge scientific and technical potential, a fairly high level of science development, scientific schools known abroad and a significant share of specialists with higher education. The problems of innovative development of regions are constantly at the center of the attention of representatives of the science and business community. This is due to the fact that in the process of achieving maximum competitive stability of the state, entering domestic products into international markets and increasing the turnover of exports and technology imports, the innovation system of the regions is given a paramount role.
2.2. Literature Review
Innovation, flexibility and the ability to adapt to change are now key elements in ensuring competitiveness. Innovation is the process of introducing a new product, service or method that results in improved productivity or quality. This concept was introduced by Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter. He believed that innovation is the engine of economic development and contributes to the productivity and competitiveness of companies. Schumpeter also distinguished four main types of innovation: product improvements, new products, new production methods and new organizational forms. These innovations can be the result of research and development, technological improvements or changes in business models. They can be applied in both manufacturing and service industries and their aim is to increase efficiency and improve the quality of work [20].
The development of innovation in regions is directly related to their socio-economic condition and their ability to meet the challenges of regional growth. The definition of the strategy of innovative development of the region is aimed at solving problems related to life support within the socio-economic system and at creating an effective management approach that promotes informed decision making to improve the sustainability of this system.
Methodological and conceptual foundations of the innovation development trajectory in Russia, as an important component of the state economic policy, still continue to develop, while globalization and integration processes require qualitative systematization and improvement. In general, the trajectory of innovative development implies the directions of the region’s development that allow it to move from one stage of development to another, in particular, to the stage of advanced innovative growth.
However, there is a problem of assessing such development, since innovation processes require both quantitative and qualitative assessment, with the need to take into account systemic gaps arising both in a certain period of time and due to imbalances in the socio-economic development of different regions of the state.
This is primarily due to the incompatibility of the development of techniques and technologies, the system of using management methods, the potential of the region, different standards of quality of life, mentality, etc.
The ability to generate and implement knowledge and innovation is perceived as the most important driving factor for regional development.
The recognition of the importance of knowledge in shaping economic development has roots in the theories of Schumpeter, who emphasized the importance of “new combinations of knowledge” as a driver of innovation and entrepreneurial activity. Innovation output is seen as the product of knowledge adoption within knowledge production [20].
In Romer’s long-run growth model, an increase in the stock of knowledge leads to a proportional increase in the productivity of the knowledge sector. The generation of new ideas within the knowledge production function for each region depends on the level of knowledge stock and human resources engaged in innovation activities. Since regions are not “isolated islands”, regional growth models need to take into account the spatial interaction effects that result from the spatial diffusion of technologies. Because knowledge is readily available and its resources are unevenly distributed in space, the location of knowledge production and the characteristics of knowledge flows become key factors in understanding economic growth. Knowledge production models are thought to be better suited to regional units of observation than to enterprises isolated from spatial context Research has shown that the region provides a platform on which new economic knowledge can emerge and translate into innovation [21].
In modern Russian socio-economic science and practice, considerable attention is paid to the issues of innovative development of regions. The works of such authors as T.R. Akhmetov [22] consider the regularities and contradictions of the development of scientific and innovation activity in the regions of the Russian Federation during pandemic conditions.
Well-known researchers, including I.A. Azarov [23], A. Baluch, I.A. Pavlova [24], Gusejnov, et al. [25] and A.L. Zelezinsky et al. [26], as well as many others [27,28,29], consider methodological approaches to the assessment and formation of prospects for innovative development of regions, the renewal of the innovation system of regions and the role of innovative development in the spatial development strategy of the Russian Federation.
Among researchers from abroad, it is worth noting the works devoted to regional innovation systems [30,31,32], as well as the impact of innovation on the socio-economic and sustainable development of regions [33,34].
The need for and importance of innovative development at the regional level is now receiving more and more attention.
Previously, scientists focused on innovation in individual enterprises, but today, the effectiveness of innovation is possible only in a specific territory.
The scale of modern scientific research and innovation requires the integration of new knowledge, commercialization of innovations and resource support for all participants of the innovation process, as well as the development of a comprehensive program of innovative development of the territory.
This requires the mobilization of all available resources within a specific specialization, the existence of proximity of “intellectual capital”, “technological resources” and business, as well as public management of innovation activities [35].
The category “innovation activity of the region” reflects the real results of the application of innovations in the production process. The analysis of different levels of innovation activity in the regions through the use of specific numerical indicators makes it possible to assess the level of innovation activity and the efficiency of the use of available resources.
To study the level of innovation activity, it is necessary to conduct a comprehensive analysis of several related indicators, which are combined into a single integral indicator. This approach allows us to accurately assess the level of innovation development in the region.
In a sense, shifting attention to the innovative development of a new object, namely the region (territory), does not represent novelty. Earlier, M. Porter noted that in the conditions of globalization, competitive advantages are often associated with a specific location. Organizations now choose their partners based on geographical, cognitive, organizational, institutional and social proximity, leading to joint R&D projects. The process of integration of regional and sectoral innovation systems is intensifying, resulting in a new spatial architecture of innovation.
The proximity of innovation activity participants naturally leads to their clustering, operative work and coordination of managerial decisions. Specialization of innovation activity participants contributes to the efficient distribution of innovation labor.
The development of innovations in the regions is characterized by several important aspects. Firstly, it is the creation of favorable conditions for the development of human resources, including access to educational and research resources.
Secondly, it is to support and stimulate the innovative activity of enterprises and organizations in the region. Thirdly, it is the expansion of innovation activity in the public sector at the regional level, which includes the provision and support of various innovation initiatives.
The main aim of the innovative development of the region is to form an innovation system that unites enterprises and organizations engaged in the creation of new knowledge and its practical application. This system contributes to the socio-economic development of the region by creating sustainable innovation processes and incentivizing innovation.
In general, the development of innovation in the regions is aimed at creating a favorable environment for the growth and development of the innovation system, which contributes to the progress and improvement of the quality of life in the region.
The innovation soundness of the region is determined by the total quality and quantity of innovations that ensure the level of innovation activity and meet the goals and objectives of the region’s development.
The innovative development of the region has unique characteristics that distinguish it from other development paths. These characteristics include a specific focus on goals and methods of achievement, as well as a unique innovative development mechanism.
Innovative development of the region is a balanced innovative state of the territory, which is manifested in the increase in innovative potential, increase in the intensity of the use of this potential and increase in the production of innovative products.
We consider the balanced innovation state of the region, or innovation statefulness, as a set of qualitative and quantitative characteristics that determine innovation activity in a given territory. This state provides the necessary resources and potential for economic development of the region on the basis of innovation activity, taking into account both the formation and optimal use of resources and potential in accordance with the goals and objectives of development [36,37].
The characteristics of the region’s innovative development that distinguish it from other possible development paths include the following features (Figure 1).
Yükçü, S. and Polat, E. state that “Sustainability has emerged as a critical issue in contemporary society, often evoking parallels with a newly discovered, unprophecied “religion”. However, upon closer examination of the world, it becomes apparent that adherence to this “religion of sustainability” is not as widespread as one might expect. The concept of sustainability centers on the concern for future generations and their ability to enjoy the same resources and quality of life as the present generation. This concern encompasses environmental, social, and economic aspects, including responsible consumption, transportation choices, and the consequences of natural disasters” [38].
In the opinion of a number of authors, “In the opinion of a number of authors, “sustainable development” can be seen as an adaptation to society, economy and in general the problems that humanity is facing today: climate change, water crisis, drought, desertification, resource depletion, waste problem, loss of biodiversity, population growth, poverty, migration, etc.
In order to prevent, counteract and address the consequences of the above challenges, as well as to ensure economic development, social progress and human development, specific actions that have measurable and concrete objectives are needed. This is precisely the subject of national sustainable development strategies” [39].
Russian and foreign scientists attach special importance to innovation in their research. Innovation is a new or improved product, process, technology, method or service that can improve the quality of life and increase the efficiency of production and the economy as a whole. Current research in the literature focuses on the creation of a new model that considers aspects of investment economics, management of innovation projects, international innovation implementation and the use of best practices [40,41].
Some of the scientists study the factors that influence the innovative development of regions and large cities. They study subsystems of regional innovation systems and also investigate the conditions that influence their functioning [42,43]. Undeniable attention in recent scientific publications has been paid to the development of conceptual approaches to the formation of innovation strategies of regions, as well as profiles of innovative development in the Russian Federation [44,45].
The literature review shows that cluster management at the level of regional socio-economic systems is discussed in a limited number of scientific publications, while the study of clusters is quite active. Traditionally, in studies on cluster issues, foreign and domestic scientists use statistical data published by the state statistical service, ministries and agencies. Empirical works oriented on official statistics are diverse and are presented in large numbers.
Thus, for example, D.B. Audretsch, E.E. Lehmann and M. Menter conducted a study of the impact of state cluster policy on regional entrepreneurial activity, having accumulated statistics of labor markets in 150 regions of Germany [46].
In the paper by S. Bakhtiari and R. Breunig on the basis of econometric analysis of data from the Australian Department of Industry and Innovation on firms’ expenditures on R&D, an assessment of the spillover effects of innovation is given, taking into account the geographical proximity of firms and clustering processes in industry [47]. E. Feser, H. Renski and J. Koo proposed to supplement the regional industry cluster analysis with benchmarking [48], which, as E. Feser points out in his later study, constitutes an alternative methodology for identifying value chains on the basis of data from the North American Industry Classification System, indicating the functioning of clusters in the region.
Methodological foundations for the identification and analysis of territorial clusters through a comprehensive analysis of the regional economy in the context of branch statistics and its modifications are laid by M.E. Porter [49,50,51], E. M. Bergman, E. J. Feser [52], N. Harmancioglu and G. Tellis [53]. In turn, M.E. Porter points out the need to improve the system of information and analytical support for cluster research, because “the system of industrial classification standards (Standard Industrial Classification System) is poorly aligned with clusters and the real nature of competition”, while “clusters offer the government a different way of collecting and organizing information” [52].
This “other way” was developed by the research group of M.E. Porter. Porter created a classification that translates all sectors of the Standard Industrial Classification and Standard International Trade Classification into clusters for the purposes of their subsequent analysis [49]. This classification is the basis for the procedure of mapping regional clusters in the American open project Cluster Mapping.
In the practice of domestic regional cluster analysis, scientists rely on the All-Russian Classifier of Economic Activities (hereinafter—OKVED), according to which sectoral statistics are generalized in the Russian Federation ъ; in particular, statistical measurements of various local effects are generalized in order to identify cluster groups and analyze clusters on the basis of the All-Russian classifier of types of economic activity.
To identify promising industries that form the basis of cluster spatial development of regions, state statistics data on the number of firms, their revenues, productivity and employment should be grouped by types of economic activity in accordance with the specialization of clusters.
The most comprehensive analysis was conducted by a team of scientists from the Institute of Applied Economic Research of the National Research University Higher School of Economics and other researchers. They note that to date there is a lack of statistical information on various types of economic activities to identify promising industries with high potential for cluster development [54].
Their research required both the development of a special algorithm for assessing the conditions for the formation of clusters from the sectoral and regional perspective, based on the principles of the European Cluster Observatory methodology, and the use of specialized paid databases SPARK and RUSLANA. The innovative development of Russian regions is one of the key factors in increasing their competitiveness both domestically and globally. Modern economy requires constant updating and creation of new technologies, products and services, which stimulates the development of innovation activities.
The importance of innovation development for Russia’s regions is as follows:
-
Improving competitiveness. Innovations allow enterprises and regions to produce higher quality and high-tech goods and services, which improves their competitiveness in the domestic and global markets.
-
Creating new jobs and raising living standards. Innovative projects contribute to creating new jobs, attracting investment and improving living standards.
-
Development of scientific and technological potential. Innovative projects require highly qualified specialists and modern infrastructure, which contributes to the development of the scientific and technological potential of the region.
-
Improvement of the economic situation. Innovative development of the regions contributes to the increase in production volumes, increase in export opportunities and improvement of the economic situation in general.
Thus, innovative development is a prerequisite for the sustainable development of Russian regions in the modern economic environment. In the modern world, innovation is understood primarily as technical innovation. However, even a closer look at technical innovation shows that technical inventions lead to widespread innovation only when the social conditions for it already exist or when social innovations are added. It becomes obvious that innovation can only be understood in relation to the relevant regional or cultural context. What has long been commonplace in one region may be an innovation in another region. If innovation is something specific to a particular region, there can be no universal innovation strategies; at best, there are some basic rules. To develop regions means to find specific, adapted combinations of social and technical innovations.
4. Results
The results of the analysis indicate that there is a significant difference in the efficiency of mastering new knowledge and creating innovative products due to the historical peculiarities of regional development and financial capabilities.
All regions of the Russian Federation are characterized by raw material, scientific, industrial and other types of potential with different levels and focus on economic, social, environmental and other problems.
The Russian regions are also characterized by the territorial remoteness of the majority of scientific institutions and industrial enterprises from each other and extremely poor (by world standards) development of an information support system, as well as modern telecommunication systems.
Intensive innovation activity simultaneously acts as a stimulating factor and one of the criteria of investment performance, providing investment attractiveness to the region and its competitiveness (taking into account the deterrent effect manifested in high riskiness).
The main factors influencing the level of innovative development are presented in Table 2.
In Russia, the largest number of functioning innovation infrastructure organizations belong to the production–technological and expert-consulting blocks. More than one-third of all infrastructure organizations of the regional innovation system are concentrated in the Central Federal District. The Central Federal District is characterized by high indicators of innovative development. The Volga Federal District also stands out. Together, these districts occupy about 10% of the territory area and contain 48% of the population. They produce 66% of innovative goods, works and services; in addition, the cost of technological innovation of organizations is quite high and amounts to about 61%. Advanced technologies are actively used and about half of all innovative production technologies have been created.
In the above-mentioned districts, the largest specialized innovation structures are concentrated, for example, the Skolkovo center, science cities and ZATO (closed territorial entities): Sarov, Obninsk, Dubna, Zhukovsky, Korolev, Pushchino, Reutov, etc. The range of investment and financial institutions, namely, venture capital industry enterprises, is also quite wide. The innovation development indicators of the Northwestern and Urals Federal Districts are at the average level. These districts have quite high scientific and technical potential, and many large enterprises of the military–industrial complex are based there, which use the most advanced technologies. The regions of the Southern and North Caucasian Federal Districts are characterized by a low level of innovative development. The share of innovative products in the total Russian volume is not even 3%. The low level of indicators is due to the insufficient level of socio-economic development of the regions of these districts, as well as the fact that the innovation infrastructure has not been formed.
Consequently, by the level of innovative development, Russian regions can be categorized into three conditional groups:
- –
-
Regions—generators of innovations. They have the following tendency: innovations are created much more than they are consumed.
- –
-
Regions—“acceptors”. Here, the situation is exactly the opposite: innovations are consumed much more than they are created.
- –
-
Promising regions. Their economy occupies an intermediate position between the first and the second groups [55].
In recent years, Russia has also formed a number of approaches to the comparative assessment of innovation activity and investment attractiveness of regions; their ratings are used to develop the most effective solutions in the implementation of economic policy both at the national and regional levels.
The results of innovative development of regions are statistically observable and measurable, and various methodologies are used to assess them, including various indicators in different groupings.
The presented methodology was used to assess the level of innovative development of Russian regions.
After categorizing all indicators into groups, the data for 85 subjects are ranked with respect to each indicator, where 1 is the worst value and 85 is the best value. Then, all obtained rank values are summed for each subject of the indicators. According to the central limit theorem, the sum of a sufficiently large number of weakly dependent random variables with approximately the same magnitude has a distribution close to normal. The indices for 2010 and 2020 were calculated using the formula (4). Figure 2 and Figure 3 show the results of cluster analysis.
To obtain a normal distribution of data, the values of the following subjects of the Russian Federation were excluded: the Nenets Autonomous Okrug, St. Petersburg, the Primorsky Region, the Khabarovsk Region and the Jewish Autonomous Okrug, as their values were extreme points by regions.
For cluster analysis, we used the STATISTICA program. The analysis of the statistical characteristics of clusters allows us to conclude that it is reasonable to divide the regions into four clusters (Table 3).
Cluster 1 includes the regions with higher values of innovative development, while cluster 4 includes the regions with the lowest indicators of innovative development. Considering the dynamics of changes in the composition of clusters, we note that in the period from 2010 to 2020, the number of subjects included in cluster 4 significantly decreased (5 units) and the number of subjects that fell into cluster 1 increased (4 units) (Figure 4).
This fact indicates that there is a gradual introduction of innovations in the economy of subjects and the production of innovative goods, works and services is increasing, as well as growth of the research and development and experimental design development spheres. However, it should be noted that the pace of these processes is rather slow. The number of subjects in cluster 2 and cluster 3 remained almost unchanged (Figure 2 and Figure 3).
Innovative development is influenced by a number of factors, both endogenous and exogenous.
The first cluster, which includes 15 regions (2020) (Figure 3), represents the regions of the Russian Federation where most innovation infrastructure facilities are concentrated. It should be noted that their number (10) has increased compared to 2010.
Belgorod, Voronezh, Lipetsk, Tula and Rostov regions improved their positions. This cluster has a wide variety of investment and financial institutions, including both federal and regional venture capital funds.
In addition, there is a well-developed network of information network communications, which allows prompt reception and transmission of relevant information.
The above regions, located in Russia, are home to leading defense industry enterprises specializing in advanced technologies. They play a key role in the development and production of defense and space systems.
A few important enterprises to highlight include the Progress Rocket and Space Center, which develops and manufactures rocket and space technology.
Uralvagonzavod is one of the largest machine-building companies, specializing in the production of military and civilian equipment, including tanks and railway cars. The Ural Optical and Mechanical Plant manufactures optical instruments and systems for various applications, including military applications.
Other leading enterprises in the region include the Votkinsk Plant, which specializes in the production of small arms and ammunition, and the Izhevsk Machine Building Plant, which is one of the largest manufacturers of small arms and automatic weapons in Russia.
Admiralty shipyards, located in St. Petersburg, are engaged in the construction of military and civilian vessels. The Motovilikhinskiye plants are engaged in the production of heavy equipment and military hardware. At the same time, several large science cities and closed cities specializing in nuclear technologies are located in this region.
They are centers of research and production work in the field of nuclear power and nuclear weapons. Lesnoy, Snezhinsk, Novouralsk and Ozersk are the main science cities in this region.
They are closed cities granting special status because of their specialization in nuclear technology.
In addition, there are other settlements and enterprises specializing in the defense industry and nuclear technologies. Tryokhgorny is another science city with a focus on nuclear research and development.
In general, these regions play an important role in the development of the defense industry and are key centers for advanced technologies in Russia. It is also worth noting the strong influence of Moscow and St. Petersburg, i.e., the so-called “capital effect”
The second cluster includes 24 subjects (Figure 3). This group has slightly expanded due to the subjects that have increased their level of innovative development. Among them, we should note the Kursk, Vologda, Kirov, Ulyanovsk, Penza, Kemerovo and Krasnodar regions and the Republic of Mordovia.
At the same time, there are a number of subjects that moved from the second cluster to the third cluster. Despite all the efforts and potential, regional innovation activity in these subjects remains at a low level.
The transition of some regions from cluster 2 to cluster 3 indicates changes in the structure of innovation activity. Perhaps, these subjects redirected their efforts and resources to other development priorities.
In recent years, there has been a decline in all indicators of innovation activity in the regions of this type compared to previous periods. Expenditures on innovations have decreased almost six times, which indicates a significant reduction in innovation activity.
At the same time, it is worth noting that these regions are actively investing in the development of innovation infrastructure. This suggests that the regions recognize the importance of innovation and seek to create an environment that fosters the growth and development of innovative enterprises.
Business incubators provide assistance and support to startups in the early stages of development, helping them overcome challenges and succeed. Technoparks provide infrastructure and resources for innovative companies, as well as facilitate networking and interaction between participants in the innovation ecosystem.
Technology Transfer Centers serve as a bridge between the academic sector and business, helping to commercialize research results. All these efforts demonstrate the desire to create a favorable and supportive environment for innovation and entrepreneurship.
The volume of innovative goods and services in these regions exceeds seven times, which can speak about the growth of competition and demand for innovative products in the market.
In addition, these regions have significant scientific and technological potential, which may become the basis for the future development of the innovation sphere. However, at the moment, regional innovation activity remains low, and further work on its development is required.
Thus, despite the relatively low level of expenditures on innovation, these regions continue to actively develop innovation infrastructure and successfully produce innovative goods and services on the market, which means their potential for further development and investment attraction.
The third cluster unites 22 regions (Figure 3), whereas in 2010, their number amounted to 24 subjects. This cluster unites the northwest and north of Russia, certain regions of central Russia, as well as western and eastern Siberia, which have significantly lower innovation development indicators compared to the first type of regions.
The main indicators of innovative development here are already dozens of times lower than in the first type. However, most of these regions can be considered promising, as they have all the necessary prerequisites for active innovative development.
The strengthening of the regions’ prospects is due to several factors. Firstly, the favorable economic and geographical position is one of the main advantages of these regions.
Their geographical location provides convenient trade and transportation links with other regions and countries, which contributes to the development of international business and attraction of foreign investment.
Secondly, the significant availability of scientific and technological potential in these regions is a significant factor contributing to innovative development.
The availability of qualified scientific researchers and specialists in various fields of science and technology makes it possible to create and develop new technologies and innovative products.
In addition, the presence of large local innovation centers in these regions plays an important role in their development. These centers provide a platform for research and innovation projects and stimulate active interaction between scientific, technical and business communities.
They provide various opportunities to attract funding and share knowledge and experience with other innovation centers to further develop and expand innovation activities.
Moreover, the main indicators of innovation activity development in these regions exceed the average indicators of the first type of region. This indicates a higher level of innovation activity and the degree of involvement of regions in the processes of development and implementation of innovations.
High innovation performance is reflected in higher labor productivity and increased exports of innovative goods and services, as well as job creation and capital attraction.
Thus, favorable economic and geographical location, significant availability of scientific and technical potential and the presence of large local innovation centers are the key factors contributing to the strengthening of the regions’ prospects.
The improved indicators of innovation activities confirm the successful development of these regions in innovation and provide opportunities for further progress and prosperity.
The fourth cluster consists of 19 regions that have a low level of innovative development. They are located in the north of the European part of Russia, in the North Caucasus, in the south of eastern Siberia and in the Far East. New regions are also included in this cluster.
The Kostroma Region is particularly noteworthy, where the level of innovation activity of organizations has decreased approximately twice over the last 10 years. In this cluster, there is a large group of entities whose main activity is tourism.
Accordingly, regions mainly engaged in agricultural and tourism activities and labor spend less on innovation.
This cluster is an “innovation periphery” with minimal values of innovation development indicators. The costs of technological innovation in these regions are significantly lower, approximately eight times lower, compared to other types of regions.
In addition, the volume of innovative goods, works and services is at a very low level, about seven times lower. The number of advanced production technologies used in these regions is also noticeably lower, about three times lower, compared to the central regions.
However, it is worth noting that the number of created or developed advanced production technologies in the “innovation periphery” is much higher—by a factor of 5. This means that, although these regions lag behind in terms of innovation development, they are actively engaged in the development and implementation of new production technologies.
Thus, the “innovation periphery” represents regions that have not yet achieved high indicators in innovative development but are active in the development and implementation of new technologies.
This gives them the potential for growth and development, as innovation is a key driver of competitiveness and economic development.
Considering the trends of innovative development of Russian regions in 2020 and 2020, we note the following.
In 2010, the innovative development of Russia’s regions was much less active than in 2020. At that time, the regions lagged behind the world leaders in innovation and had rather limited opportunities for development.
Limited funding, insufficient government support and lack of necessary infrastructure have hindered more active development of innovations.
However, by 2020, the situation had changed significantly. Thanks to the active government policy of innovation development, Russia’s regions received additional investment and support. As a result, many regions have significantly improved their innovation performance.
There have been significant changes in the structure of innovation projects. While in 2010, the main focus was on information technology projects, in 2020, we saw an increase in interest in environmental and health-related projects. Moreover, innovative development took place not only in large cities but also in small regions.
The introduction of new technologies and the digitalization of processes has also been an important change. In 2010, the use of digital capabilities was not as widespread as in 2020.
Now, many regions have created digital platforms and developed applications and systems that simplify people’s lives and make it easier to conduct business.
Considering the dynamics of innovative development of Russian regions in 2020, we note the following trends:
Firstly, there has been an increase in the total number of innovation projects, especially in the central and developed regions of the country. This indicates a growing awareness of the importance of innovation for economic development and regional competitiveness.
Secondly, the share of R&D and innovation expenditures in total financial investments of the regions has increased. This indicates more active public and private financing of innovation projects, including the promotion of the creation and development of technoparks and innovation centers.
Thirdly, there is an increase in the number of patents and other intellectual property rights obtained by Russian enterprises. This may indicate an increase in innovation activity and awareness of the importance of intellectual property for regional development.
However, despite the positive dynamics, the innovative development of Russia’s regions in 2020 still had its limitations and problems. Some regions had too low innovation activity, which requires increased efforts and support from the government and the business community.
Another problem is the insufficient linkage between R&D and business. Collaboration and technology transfers between universities, research institutes and businesses need to be more actively promoted in order to increase the commercial success of innovation.
Also, the innovative development of the regions faces the lack of a quality human resource base and a shrinking number of researchers. This calls for increased investment in education and support for young professionals, as well as the attraction of experienced foreign personnel.
Thus, despite some achievements, the innovative development of Russia’s regions still needs further support and improvement.
This requires joint actions on the part of both the state, business and scientific–academic sphere to create a favorable innovation environment and ensure economic growth and development of the country’s regions.
5. Discussion
Innovation activity is the most important condition for the formation of regional strategy. Assessment of its state, control of changes and analysis of development peculiarities in condition when searching for new solutions for economic development are necessary for stable growth of production within the state.
The impact of the level of regional innovation development on the economic and social well-being of territories and structural diversification of production and services is studied by many scientists in Russia and abroad.
A comparative analysis of the results of the innovative development index assessment leads to an unambiguous and predictable conclusion that the leaders—Moscow, the Republic of Tatarstan and St. Petersburg—have a significantly higher level of the index.
The system of indicators includes significant, already accomplished and accumulated innovative investments. In addition, the leaders of the rating are well-known centers of scientific research with a strong educational and scientific base.
This study proposes a new methodological approach to assessing the level of innovative development of Russian regions.
The presented results can be compared with other studies, for example, the work of Ketova K.V. and her colleagues [56], where five regional clusters were identified using the K-means method.
In the work of Mityakov S.N. and his colleagues [57], the “nearest-neighbor method” was used, in which the Euclidean distance between the values of relevant indicators was used to determine the level of innovative development of regions.
In addition, the level of innovative development of the regions was determined using the method of cluster analysis.
The found data of Polina E.A. and Solovieva I.A. [58] confirm the results of this study, namely, that Moscow, St. Petersburg, the Republic of Tatarstan and the Moscow Region effectively use their resources for innovative development, since all spheres of innovation activity in these regions have a high level.
The analyses conducted by Inevatova O.A. [59] and Mudarisova Z.R. and Yunusbaeva V.F. [60] show that the regions with an increased level of innovativeness have a higher competitive attractiveness in terms of economy and quality of life and develop more sustainably.
Thus, the conclusions from this study are that the innovative development of Russian regions plays a key role in their sustainable development [61,62,63].
Despite extensive research on this topic in the Russian Federation, there is still no single unified methodology for assessing the level of innovative development taking into account sustainability.
More in-depth work will be required to determine the relationship between the level of innovative development and the sustainability of regions.
The limitations of this study are as follows.
Currently, there are no global standards and unified methodologies for assessing and verifying the quality of ratings of the innovative development of regions.
Evaluating individual indicators that are not included in a unified framework leads to different conclusions and recommendations for policy decisions.
In future studies, factor analysis can be used to assess the variability and stability of innovation processes. The identification of “weaknesses” in the process of development of regional innovation systems will help to identify priority problems to be solved.
A set of key innovation development indicators should also be systematically measured to provide reliable information on the results of decisions and their utilization.
In future research, it is recommended to apply the maximum criticality method using simulation design and modeling of innovation processes based on statistical and empirical data analysis, probabilistic analysis and threat graphing.
This study did not take into account social factors such as demographic processes, the structure and quality of the labor force and the skill level and quality of human capital, as well as social mobility of the population, which affect the level of innovative development of regions.
Future research should take into account the demographic factor that determines the overall level of need due to changes in population size and structure, which in turn will determine the redistribution of the demographic burden on the working-age population.
In light of the above, a promising direction for further research is to improve the methodology for assessing the level of innovative development of regions, which reflects not only the potential of the region but also determines the main guidelines for the development of an effective strategy for sustainable regional growth.
[ad_2]
