ISSN 1995-459X print E-ISSN 2312-9972 online ISSN 2500-2597 online English
Editor-in-chief Leonid Gokhberg
|
2012. vol. 6. No. 4
|
Strategies
|
6–18
|
Anna Kachkaeva — Dean, the Faculty of Media Communications. E-mail: akachkaeva@hse.ru Ilya Kiriya — Professor, the Faculty of Media Communications. E-mail: ikiria@hse.ru National Research University — Higher School of Economics Address: National Research University — Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000 The paper is part of a large foresight study carried out by the authors at the HSE Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge for the Russian Ministry of Telecommunication and Mass Communications. It is important that mass communication, with its virtual product is related to two other sectors: telecommunications and information and communication technology. Technological transformations affect these three industries alike; the growth of bandwidth, convergence of terminals and growth of their computational performance are transforming products and markets in all three. Long-term trends in these markets have been well defined by a range of industrial experts. The conclusion of the paper provides recommendations for the revision of public policy. The authors note only a few new tendencies in services and products. However, wide diffusion of these trends due to cheap technologies will lead to radical changes in the sector. New markets will appear as a result of expansion and adjustment of industrial relations between agents, previously independent of each other. Key trends are the abandonment of linear-media in favor of "user-controlled" consumption, with a growing amount of content produced by the user, and the spread of social interactions. The trends are interrelated and determine the transformation of business models, the sources of income, and the value of goods produced by the media industry. The most negative trend according to experts is "deprofessionalization" of content, which poses a risk for institutionalized forms of media. With such turbulent changes regulation in mass communications will inevitably undergo transformation. Henceforth it will not be able to rely upon content filtering and setting quotas. Instead the regulation should be built upon enabling a diversity of information sources to create the news agenda at the request of the audience. |
Innovation and Economy
|
20–31
|
Dirk Meissner — Deputy Head, Research Laboratory for Science and Technology Studies, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge, National Research University — Higher School of Economics. Address: National Research University — Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000. E-mail: dmeissner@hse.ru In light of globalisation of knowledge generation, Science and Technology have opened up previously distinct borderlines now favoring overlapping if not merged fields. Hence innovation becomes more complex by bundling different technological solutions in new products, processes, services and business models, which stem from different scientific and technological roots. Thus spillovers are an essential precondition towards the establishment of new interdisciplinary fields of knowledge, science and technology. The paper reviews and synthesizes literature on spillovers, introduces a typology of spillovers and a taxonomy of spillover channels, estimates the economic impact of spillovers. Special attention is paid to assessing recipient’s capabilities to absorb new knowledge thus gaining advantages for own development. The author concludes that knowledge spillovers have a positive impact on performance of a recipient (company, country or region) as long as it possesses sufficient absorptive capacity. Spillovers might under certain circumstances lead to strengthening competition between knowledge recipients at the cost of the place of origin. Nonetheless the latter still is in a position to use instruments of legal protection of own knowledge (under certain circumstances), build on the existing competences and capacities and invest in the next frontier of knowledge and technology in certain fields and moreover create a boom in the field of knowledge and technology generated using marketing instruments extensively. |
Science
|
32–47
|
Natalia Shmatko — Head, Division for Human Capital Studies, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics and Knowledge, National Research University — Higher School of Economics. E-mail: nshmatko@hse.ru Address: National Research University — Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000. This paper assesses knowledge and skill levels required for engineers in an ideal labor market. Understanding the demand and supply of engineers’ skills is important for modernization policies, and it is also important to know how to measure skill absorption by employees. Based on empirical research, the author evaluates the skill levels and absorption capacities of Russian engineers to measure what knowledge they can mobilize to resolve professional tasks. It constructs profiles of the different categories of engineering personnel. It compares demand and supply of engineering skills in Russia and EU countries in five categories: use of professional knowledge, individual performance, team work, managerial and communication skills. The analysis shows significant distinctions among compared countries. To summarize, the level of general and special competencies for Russian engineers is well below what is required by their workplace. The contrary can be said about their European counterparts, who have the required skills. Serious discrepancies between Russian and European engineers (favouring Europeans) are observed for organization and coordination skills, team work, effective use of time, ability to evaluate critically their own and others’ ideas, use the computer and the Internet for professional purposes. The availability of specialized engineering skills alone is insufficient in today's job market: employers expect a more proactive approach by the engineers, including the promotion of the products. In view of various "distortions" in the training of engineers, not only in Russia but also in other countries, where the patterns of portfolios in the labour market do not match the demand for them, the possession of social skills is of particular value. |
|
48–58
|
Stanislav Zaichenko — Senior Research Fellow, Laboratory for Economics of Innovation, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge, National Research University — Higher School of Economics. E-mail: szaichenko@hse.ru. Address: National Research University — Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000 Science, technology and innovation policy in Russiais at thethreshold of the transitionto a complexsystem of flexibletargetedregulation andthe development of innovation activities.In parallel, increasing attention is paid to the definition of guidelines and typologies to distinguish behaviors of key actors in the innovation processes, their development strategies, and features of individual performance. The paper analyzes the basic strategies that guide domestic organizations engaged in research and development when transferring the results of their activities to industry. The study is based on micro data collected by the HSE ISSEK experts in 2011 in the framework of the project “Innovation Activities of the Innovation Process Actors Monitoring” and it uses factor analysis. Depending on the degree of novelty of the transferred technologies there are three identified segments of scientific organizations manifesting one of the following behavioral patterns: innovation (introduction of developments that are unique both in domestic and foreign markets, and feature qualitatively new characteristics matching or surpassing current standards), modification (introduction of technologies new to the implementing organization, although not to the market and adaptation (modification and improvement of technology previously used by the implementing organization). Analyzing the key features of research organizations allows composing an average depiction of separate segments. The study reveals significant differences between these segments in their methods and means of technology transfer and required public support mechanisms. The conclusion presents policy recommendations. |
Master Class
|
60–72
|
Marcus T. Anthony — Director, MindFutures (Australia). Email: marcus.a@mindfutures.com Address: 32 Grant St., Morwell, Victoria, Australia, 3840 The world has been in a state of economic uncertainty since the 2008 financial crisis. Despite efforts by governments worldwide to stabilize the system and return to business as usual, the future remains unclear. Times of crisis are opportunities to introspect and to question deeply the foundations of society, culture and education. According to Einstein, “problems cannot be solved by the level of awareness that createdthem». The hegemony of a critical/rational worldview in modern society, science and education results in the shaping of an artificially narrow, «money and machines” future that diminishes universal values and deeper psycho-spiritual needs of human beings. Such a narrow focus of policy will likely aggravate social and psychological problems. The solution according to the author lies in the concept of Deep Futures, which is the base for the emerging discipline of Postconventional Futures Studies. Deep Futures has evolved from earlier expressions of Futures Studies. Deep Futures utilises recognised Futures methodologies and philosophies, but expands the depth of analysis and insight by incorporating additional tools and other ways of knowing not traditionally utilized by Futures practitioners. A primary function of Deep Futures is to act as a provocation to dominant discourses. It provides an enhanced capacity for dissent – to challenge conventional Foresight and Futures work. Deep Futures thus allows overcoming boundaries of the critical/rational worldview, deepening the perceptions of the past, present, and future, and developing more performing strategies. The author examines the tools and processes of Deep Futures in detail and provides practical examples for their application. |
Events
|
73–79
|
In recent years innovation has been under the scrutiny of international development institutes. Innovation is considered as a key driver to foster economic growth and overcome crises. Innovation processes are among the most troubled fields of governance. Today policy-makers and experts face two basic challenges — increasing the complexity of the global context and broadening the range of issues in order to improve the implementation of innovation strategies. This fundamental issue was the focus of discussions held on mid-October 2012 under the HSE ISSEK and OECD joint conference, which coincided with ISSEK’s 10-year anniversary. The agenda included three sessions: STI Policy Futures; Responses to Grand Challenges; Strategic Intelligence Tools. Presentations were made by experts from OECD, University of Manchester (UK), University of Ottawa (Canada), Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (Germany); Georgia Technology University (USA), Science and Technology Policy Institute (Republic of Korea), Higher School of Economics etc. The following issues were discussed: future of STI policy; STI policy agenda for Russia; applying Foresight to setting priorities for STI policy; S&T responses to Global Challenges; and new tools of Foresight. The participants concluded that that there is a necessity to revise policy instruments established in the last century as well as consolidate resources and ideas in order to meet accelerating global changes. It is unlikely that global challenges have ultimate solutions. However tackling them necessitates purposeful, joint and continuous efforts by stakeholders. Foresight as a tool enabling creation of interdisciplinary knowledge and reconciling stakeholders’ interests together can play a crucial role in this process. |
|
|
Marcus T. Anthony — Director, MindFutures (Australia).Address: 32 Grant St., Morwell, Victoria, Australia, 3840. Email: marcus.a@mindfutures.com Anna Kachkaeva — Dean, the Faculty of Media Communications, National Research University — Higher School of Economics. Address: National Research University — Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000. E-mail: akachkaeva@hse.ru Ilya Kiriya — Professor, the Faculty of Media Communications, National Research University — Higher School of Economics. Address: National Research University — Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000. E-mail: ikiria@hse.ru Dirk Meissner —Deputy Head, Research Laboratory for Science and Technology Studies, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge, National Research University — Higher School of Economics. Address: National Research University — Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000. E-mail: dmeissner@hse.ru Natalia Shmatko —Head, Division for Human Capital Studies, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics and Knowledge, National Research University — Higher School of Economics. Address: National Research University — Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000. E-mail: nshmatko@hse.ru Stanislav Zaichenko — Senior Research Fellow, Laboratory for Economics of Innovation, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge, National Research University — Higher School of Economics. Address: National Research University — Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000. E-mail: szaichenko@hse.ru |
|
|