JUSTIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT TARGETS FOR THE NATIONAL INNOVATION SYSTEMS
Abstract
Each national innovation system (NSI) evolves within a certain basic system, which goes beyond administrative boundaries, and with it, what needs to be taken into account when developing strategies. At the same time, political opportunities to effectively influence such systems are limited, which requires justifying priorities on the Pareto principle and maximizing the effect while minimizing costs. NSI are complex implicitly designed institutions that are built on the co-evolutionary interaction of the scientific sphere, established technologies and innovations, economic relations at the global and local levels, as well as the dominant institutional rules of behavior of entrepreneurs and consumers in society. Consequently, their development in time and space is specific and is due to the coevolution and accumulation of many factors that are heterogeneous, with non-obvious causal connections and with an uncertain force of influence on the final result. Methodology for reliable identification and characteristics of the existing basic types of supranational innovation systems, as well as substantiation of regulators (targets), which the government can effectively influence through policy measures, maximizing the quality development of the system as a whole are proposed. Identification of the basic types of innovation systems and the distribution of NSI between them are built on the methods of cluster analysis, genetic algorithms and neural network training, that is, the methodology of artificial intelligence. The search for targets for the development of national innovation systems is based on the methods of genetic truncation, ranking and Pareto-selection. The priority imperatives of the development of the national innovation system of Ukraine in the medium term are the following: improving the quality of the institutional environment, the development of scientific and educational complex and strengthening its integration with industry, improving the quality of human capital, infrastructure development, the formation of a favorable investment climate.
References
1. Asheim B., Gertler M., Fagerberg J., Mowery D., Nelson R. (eds.) (2004). Regional systems of innovation. The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
2. Balzat M., Pyka A. (2006). Mapping national innovation systems in the OECD area. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 2 (1-2), 158–176.
3. Carlsson B., Jacobsson S. (1997). In search of a useful technology policy – general lessons and key issues for policy makers. Technological Systems and Industrial Dynamics. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
4. Freeman С. (1982). Technological Infrastructure and International Competitiveness. URL: http://redesist.ie.ufrj.br/globelics/pdfs/GLOBELICS_0079_Freeman.pdf. (accessed 17 September 2019).
5. Godinho M., Mendonça S., Pereira T. (2005). Towards a taxonomy of innovation systems. Working Papers Department of Economics 2005/13, ISEG – Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
6. IMF country information. International Monetary Fund. 2019. URL: https://www.imf.org/en/countries (accessed 5 January 2019).
7. Jackson P.C. (2014). Towards a Regional (Supra-national) Innovation System for CARICOM Countries. Science and Technology Unit, Government of St. Vincent and the Grenadines.
8. Lundvall В.-А. (2007). National Innovation Systems – Analytical Concept and Development Tool. Industry and Innovation, 14(1), 95–119.
9. Malerba F., Fagerberg J., Mowery D. and Nelson R. (eds.) (2004). Sectoral Systems: How and Why Innovation Differs Across Sectors. The Oxford Hand-book of Innovation. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
10. Metcalfe S., Dosi G., Freeman C., Nelson R. (eds.) (1988). The Diffusion of Innovations: An Interpretative Survey. Technology and Economic Theory. London : Pinter.
11. Saxenian A. (1994). Regional advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valleyand route 128. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.
12. These Are the World’s Most Innovative Countries Bloomberg. 2019. URL: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-22/germany-nearly-catches-korea-as-innovation-champ-u-s-rebounds (accessed 5 January 2019).
13. Vishnevsky V.P., Kniaziev S.I. (2018). Yak pidvyshchyty hotovnist promyslovosti Ukrainy do smart-transformatsii [How to increase the readiness of Ukraine’s industry to smart transformations]. Nauka innov, 14(4), 55–69. [in Ukrainian]
14. Kravchenko S.I., Zanizdra M.Yu. (2019). Tipologizatsiya bazovyih nadnatsionalnyih innovatsionnyih sistem [Typology of basic supranational innovation systems]. Ekonomika promyishlennosti, 1(85). 5–29. doi: http://doi.org/10.15407/econindustry2019.01.005 [in Russian]
15. Krasil'nikov O.Yu. (2007). Analiz Internet-ekonomiki na mikrourovne [Analysis of the Internet economy at the micro level]. Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Economy Series. Management. Law, 7(2), 3–13. [in Russian]
16. Nіkolaenko A.І. (2016). Mekhanizm zabezpechennia rozvytku natsionalnoi innovatsiinoi systemy Ukrainy [Mechanism of ensuring the development of the national innovation system of Ukraine]. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian]
17. Fonotov A.G., Kashinova E.A. (2015). Natsionalnaya innovatsionnaya sistema Rossii: sostoyanie i perspektivyi razvitiya [National innovation system of Russia: state and prospects of development]. Upravlenie Innovacionnymi Processami, 11(205), 25–29. [in Russian]
18. Harrison L. (2014). Evrei, konfutsiantsyi i protestantyi. Kulturnyiy kapital i konets multikulturalizma [Jews, Confucians and Protestants. Cultural capital and the end of multiculturalism]. Moskva : Mysl'. [in Russian]
19. Harchenko O.S. (2015). Orhanizatsiino-ekonomichnyi mekhanizm rozvytku natsionalnoi innovatsiinoi systemy [Organizational and economic mechanism of development of the national innovation system]. Kramatorsk. [in Ukrainian]
