IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/scn/financ/y2017i6p166-177.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Сравнительный Анализ Методологии Организации Финансирования Научно-Исследовательских Работ На Примере Российской Федерации, Стран Западной Европы И Азии // Comparative Analysis Of The Organization Of Financing Of Scientific And Research Works On The Example Of The Russian Federation, Western Europe And Asia

Author

Listed:
  • R. Alandarov A.

    (Financial University)

  • K. Tarkhanovsky O.

    (Financial University)

  • Р. Аландаров А.

    (Финансовый университет)

  • К. Тархановский О.

    (Финансовый университет)

Abstract

Topic. The article presents a review of existing approaches to the funding of science in the various countries of the world. The system of financing scientific research is a complex of legal, financial and administrative measures aimed at creating an effective infrastructure allowing for high performance of basic research and applied design and experimental works as well.Purpose. The purpose of this paper is a comprehensive analysis of the peculiarities of financing of scientificresearch and experimental-design works in the Russian Federation and justification of the choice on the basis of this study, the most suitable for Russian reality approach to the formation of mechanisms of research funding. To achieve the addressed purpose we performed the following tasks: analysis of the working principles and characteristics of each approach; a comparative analysis of the application of these approaches on the example of Western Europe, Asia, and the Russian Federation.Methodology. The methodological basis for this research were economic-statistical, systematic, and comparative analysis methods.Results. This article discusses and analyzes in details the main approaches to financing scientific-research and experimental-design works — Newtonian, Baconian, and Jeffersonian. It is presented the essence of selected approaches, their advantages and disadvantages, examples and statistical data from practices of different countries.Conclusions. Based on comprehensive analysis of statistical data, the authors recommend to the appropriate executive and legislative authorities of the Russian Federation to begin the transformation of the instruments of financing of scientific-research works in the direction of Jeffersonian approach, i.e. to develop program funding and grants for scientific research for civilian use. Предмет. Сделан обзор существующих подходов к финансированию науки в различных странах мира. Система финансирования научных исследований представляет собой целый комплекс правовых, финансовых и административных мер, направленных на создание эффективной инфраструктуры, позволяющей проводить с высокой результативностью как фундаментальные научные исследования, так и прикладные опытно-конструкторские работы.Цель. Всесторонний анализ особенностей финансирования научно-исследовательских и опытно-конструкторских работ в Российской Федерации и в зарубежных странах, обоснование выбора наиболее подходящего для российских реалий подхода формирования механизмов финансирования научных исследований. Для достижения поставленных целей решены следующие задачи: проанализированы принципы работы и особенности каждого подхода; проведен сравнительный анализ применения данных подходов на примере стран Западной Европы, Азии и Российской Федерации.Методология. Методической основой данной статьи являются экономико-статистические, системные, а также сравнительные методы анализа.Результаты. В статье подробно рассмотрены и проанализированы основные подходы к финансированию научно-исследовательских работ и опытно-конструкторских разработок — Ньютоновский, Бэконовский и Джефферсонский. Излагается суть выделенных подходов, их достоинства и недостатки, приводятся примеры и статистические данные из практик различных стран.Выводы. На основе всестороннего анализа статистических данных авторы рекомендуют соответствующим органам исполнительной и законодательной власти Российской Федерации начать трансформацию инструментов финансирования научно-исследовательских работ в направлении Джефферсонского подхода, т.е. развивать программное финансирование и гранты на научные исследования гражданского назначения. Также делается вывод, что в России необходимо активизировать внебюджетные источники финансирования НИР.

Suggested Citation

  • R. Alandarov A. & K. Tarkhanovsky O. & Р. Аландаров А. & К. Тархановский О., 2017. "Сравнительный Анализ Методологии Организации Финансирования Научно-Исследовательских Работ На Примере Российской Федерации, Стран Западной Европы И Азии // Comparative Analysis Of The Organization Of ," Финансы: теория и практика/Finance: Theory and Practice // Finance: Theory and Practice, ФГОБУВО Финансовый университет при Правительстве Российской Федерации // Financial University under The Government of Russian Federation, vol. 21(6), pages 166-177.
  • Handle: RePEc:scn:financ:y:2017:i:6:p:166-177
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://financetp.fa.ru/jour/article/viewFile/598/463.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carter Bloch & Mads P. Sørensen, 2015. "The size of research funding: Trends and implications," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(1), pages 30-43.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dawud Ansari & Regine Schönenberg & Melissa Abud & Laura Becerra & Anne Cristina de la Vega-Leinert & Nigel Dudley & Michael Dunlop & Carolina Figueroa & Oscar Guevara & Philipp Hauser & Hannes Hobbie, 2021. "Communications on Climate Change and Biodiversity Loss with Local Populations: Exploring Best-practices and Postcolonial Moments in Eight Case Studies from across the Globe," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1945, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Hua Cheng & Shiqian Huang & Yinhong Yu & Zhiying Zhang & Meifen Jiang, 2023. "The 2011 Collaborative Innovation Plan, University-Industry Collaboration and Achievement Transformation of Universities: Evidence from China," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 1249-1274, June.
    3. Zhe Cheng & Yihuan Zou & Yueyang Zheng, 2024. "A method for identifying different types of university research teams," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Yumei Fu, 2023. "The impact of government funding on research innovation: An empirical analysis of Chinese universities," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(1), pages 285-296, January.
    5. Leila Jabrane, 2022. "Individual excellence funding: effects on research autonomy and the creation of protected spaces," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, December.
    6. Peter T. Jacobs & Alexis Habiyaremye & Bhekiwe Fakudze & Kgabo Ramoroka & Siyanda Jonas, 2019. "Producing Knowledge to Raise Rural Living Standards: How Universities Connect with Resource-Poor Municipalities in South Africa," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(4), pages 881-901, September.
    7. Peixin Duan, 2022. "How large of a grant size is appropriate? Evidence from the National Natural Science Foundation of China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-14, February.
    8. Marta Entradas & João M. Santos, 2021. "Returns of research funding are maximised in media visibility for excellent institutes," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:scn:financ:y:2017:i:6:p:166-177. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Алексей Скалабан (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://financetp.fa.ru .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.