voprecotestВопросы экономикиVoprosy Ekonomiki0042-8736Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP10.32609/0042-8736-2025-6-114-136voprecotest-5398Research ArticleЭКОНОМИКА ИННОВАЦИЙ И ТЕХНИЧЕСКОГО ПРОГРЕССАECONOMICS OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGEИсследование делового климата в российской науке: апробация подходаStudy of the business climate in Russian science: Testing the approachhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0443-9267ГершманМ. А.GershmanM. A.

Гершман Михаил Анатольевич, к. э. н., директор Центра научно-технической, инновационной и информационной политики Института статистических исследований и экономики знаний 

Москва

Mikhail A. Gershman

Moscow

mgershman@hse.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-3544-7219ГохбергЛ МGokhbergL. A.

Гохберг Леонид Маркович

, д. э. н., проф., первый проректор, директор ИСИЭЗ НИУ ВШЭ

Москва

Leonid M. Gokhberg

Moscow

lgokhberg@hse.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3492-8056КузнецоваТ. ЕKuznetsovaT. E.

Кузнецова Татьяна Евгеньевна, к. э. н., научный руководитель Центра научно-технической, инновационной и информационной политики ИСИЭЗ

Москва

Tatiana E. Kuznetsova

Moscow

tkuznetzova@hse.ruНациональный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики»РоссияHSE UniversityRussian Federation20250706202506114126Copyright © Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP, 20252025Voprosy Ekonomiki, NPVoprosy Ekonomiki, NPhttps://www.vopreco.ru/jour/about/submissions#copyrightNoticehttps://www.vopreco.ru/jour/article/view/5398

Представлены новаторский подход к оценке ситуации (делового климата) в сфере науки и технологий, а также краткие результаты его апробации в ходе трех масштабных опросов руководителей научных организаций и вузов, проведенных в 2017, 2022 и 2024 гг. Методология основана на теории и практике количественных, в том числе статистических, измерений этой сферы, проведения конъюнктурных обследований организаций, оценки научно-технологической политики и ее инструментов. Продемонстрированы возможности и преимущества предложенного аналитического инструментария для выявления драйверов и барьеров на пути развития данной сферы в России, исследования изменений, определения востребованности мер государственной поддержки.

In this article, we discuss a novel approach to the assessment of the situation (business climate) in the science and technology (S&T) field, as well as the results of its testing within three large-scale surveys of top-managers of R&D organizations and universities conducted in 2017, 2022 and 2024. The methodology is based on the theory and practice of quantitative (including statistical) measurement of this area, business tendency surveys, and evaluation of S&T policy and its instruments. The opportunities and advantages of using the proposed analytical tools for identifying drivers and barriers to the development of this area in Russia, studying the dynamics of ongoing changes, and the demand for government support measures are demonstrated.

сфера науки и технологийделовой климатмеханизм обратной связиоценка политикиРоссияscience and technologybusiness climatefeedback mechanismpolicy evaluationRussiaСтатья подготовлена в рамках Программы фундаментальных исследований НИУ ВШЭThe article was prepared within the framework of the HSE University Basic Research Program.ReferencesВласова В., Кузнецова Т., Рудь В. (2017). Анализ драйверов и ограничений развития России на основе информации Глобального инновационного индекса // Вопросы экономики. № 8. С. 24—41. https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2017-8-24-41Vlasova V., Kuznetsova T., Roud V. (2017). Drivers and limitations of Russia’s development based on the evidence provided by the Global Innovation Index. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 8, pp. 24—41. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2017-8-24-41Гершман М. А., Евсеева М. В., Каменева Е. Г., Лапочкина В. В. (2025). Субсидирование научно-производственной кооперации в России: оценка эффектов // Вопросы экономики. № 3. С. 48—75. https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2025-3-48-75Gershman M. A., Evseeva M. V., Kameneva E. G., Lapochkina V. V. (2025). Impact assessment of subsidized academia—industry cooperation in Russia. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 3, pp. 48—75. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2025-3-48-75Гершман М., Кузнецова Т. (2014). Оплата труда по результатам в российском секторе исследований и разработок // Форсайт. Т. 8, № 3. С. 58—69. [Gershman M., Kuznetsova T. (2014). Performance-related pay in the Russian R&D sector. Foresight—Russia, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 58—69.Gershman M., Kuznetsova T. (2014). Performance-related pay in the Russian R&D sector. Foresight—Russia, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 58—69.Гохберг Л. M. (2003). Статистика науки. М.: Теис.Gokhberg L. M. (2003). Statistics of science. Moscow: Teis. (In Russian).Гохберг Л. М. (ред.) (2019). Деловой климат в российской науке — Doing science. М.: НИУ ВШЭ.Gokhberg L. M. (ed.) (2019). Business climate in the Russian R&D sector — Doing science. Moscow: HSE University. (In Russian).Гохберг Л. М. (ред.) (2024). Будущее мировой науки. М.: Издат. дом ВШЭ.Gokhberg L. M. (ed.) (2024). The future of world science. Moscow: HSE Publ. (In Russian).Гохберг Л. М., Гершман М. А. (ред.) (2023). Делаем науку в России: деловой климат в сфере науки и технологий. М.: ИСИЭЗ ВШЭ. https://doi.org/10.17323/978-5-7598-3003-0Gokhberg L. M., Gershman M. A. (eds.) (2023). Doing science in Russia: Business climate in the R&D sector. Moscow: HSE ISSEK. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17323/978-5-7598-3003-0НИУ ВШЭ (2025). Индикаторы науки: 2025: стат. сб. М.: ИСИЭЗ ВШЭ.HSE University (2025). Science and technology indicators in the Russian Federation: 2025: Data book. Moscow: HSE ISSEK. (In Russian).Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A., Caprasecca A. (2009). Allocative efficiency in public research funding: Can bibliometrics help? Research Policy, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 206—215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.11.001Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A., Caprasecca A. (2009). Allocative efficiency in public research funding: Can bibliometrics help? Research Policy, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 206—215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.11.001Allard G., Martinez C. A., Williams C. (2012). Political instability, pro-business market reforms and national systems of innovations. Research Policy, Vol. 41, pp. 638— 651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.12.005Allard G., Martinez C. A., Williams C. (2012). Political instability, pro-business market reforms and national systems of innovations. Research Policy, Vol. 41, pp. 638— 651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.12.005Ankrah S., Omar A. T. (2015). Universities—industry collaboration: A systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 387—408. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2015.02.003Ankrah S., Omar A. T. (2015). Universities—industry collaboration: A systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 387—408. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2015.02.003Bartle D., Morris M. (2010). Evaluating the impacts of government business assistance programmes: Approaches to testing additionality. Research Evaluation, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 275—280. https://doi.org/10.1093/reeval/19.4.275Bartle D., Morris M. (2010). Evaluating the impacts of government business assistance programmes: Approaches to testing additionality. Research Evaluation, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 275—280. https://doi.org/10.1093/reeval/19.4.275Becker S., Wohlrabe K. (2008). Micro data at the Ifo Institute for Economic Research — The “Ifo Business Survey” usage and access. Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 128, No. 2, pp. 307—319. https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.128.2.307.Becker S., Wohlrabe K. (2008). Micro data at the Ifo Institute for Economic Research — The “Ifo Business Survey” usage and access. Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 128, No. 2, pp. 307—319. https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.128.2.307.Bell S., Cingranelli D., Murdie A., Caglayan A. (2013). Coercion, capacity and coordination: Predictors of political violence. Conflict Management and Peace Science, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 240—262. https://doi.org/10.1177/0738894213484032Bell S., Cingranelli D., Murdie A., Caglayan A. (2013). Coercion, capacity and coordination: Predictors of political violence. Conflict Management and Peace Science, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 240—262. https://doi.org/10.1177/0738894213484032Bloch C., Sørensen M. P., Graversen E. K., Schneider J. W., Schmidt E. K., Aagaard K., Mejlgaard N. (2014). Developing a methodology to assess the impact of research grant funding: A mixed methods approach. Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 43, pp. 105—117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.12.005Bloch C., Sørensen M. P., Graversen E. K., Schneider J. W., Schmidt E. K., Aagaard K., Mejlgaard N. (2014). Developing a methodology to assess the impact of research grant funding: A mixed methods approach. Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 43, pp. 105—117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.12.005Blume-Kohout M. E. (2022). The case of the interrupting funder: Dynamic effects of R&D funding and patenting in U.S. universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 48, No. 4, pp. 1221—1242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-022-09965-7Blume-Kohout M. E. (2022). The case of the interrupting funder: Dynamic effects of R&D funding and patenting in U.S. universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 48, No. 4, pp. 1221—1242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-022-09965-7Carvalho А. (2018). Wishful thinking about R&D policy targets: What governments promise and what they actually deliver. Science and Public Policy, Vol. 45, No. 3, pp. 373—391. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scx069Carvalho А. (2018). Wishful thinking about R&D policy targets: What governments promise and what they actually deliver. Science and Public Policy, Vol. 45, No. 3, pp. 373—391. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scx069Cerny P., Prichard A. (2017). The new anarchy: Globalisation and fragmentation in world politics. Journal of International Political Theory, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 378—394. https://doi.org/10.1177/1755088217713765.Cerny P., Prichard A. (2017). The new anarchy: Globalisation and fragmentation in world politics. Journal of International Political Theory, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 378—394. https://doi.org/10.1177/1755088217713765.Chou Y.-C., Hsu Y.-Y., Yen H.-Y. (2008). Human resources for science and technology: Analyzing competitiveness using the analytic hierarchy process. Technology in Society, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 141—153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2007.12.007Chou Y.-C., Hsu Y.-Y., Yen H.-Y. (2008). Human resources for science and technology: Analyzing competitiveness using the analytic hierarchy process. Technology in Society, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 141—153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2007.12.007Crespi F., Caravella S. et al. (2021). European technological sovereignty: An emerging framework for policy strategy. Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy Centre for European Policy Studies, Vol. 56, No. 6, pp. 348—354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-021-1013-6Crespi F., Caravella S. et al. (2021). European technological sovereignty: An emerging framework for policy strategy. Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy Centre for European Policy Studies, Vol. 56, No. 6, pp. 348—354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-021-1013-6Cunningham P., Gök A., Larédo P. (2016). The impact of direct support to R & D and innovation in firms. In: J. Edler, P. Cunningham, A. Gök, P. Shapira (eds.). Handbook of innovation policy impact. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 54—107. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784711856.00010Cunningham P., Gök A., Larédo P. (2016). The impact of direct support to R & D and innovation in firms. In: J. Edler, P. Cunningham, A. Gök, P. Shapira (eds.). Handbook of innovation policy impact. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 54—107. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784711856.00010Edler J., Blind K., Kroll H., Schubert T. (2023). Technology sovereignty as an emerging frame for innovation policy. Defining rationales, ends and means. Research Policy, Vol. 52, No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104765Edler J., Blind K., Kroll H., Schubert T. (2023). Technology sovereignty as an emerging frame for innovation policy. Defining rationales, ends and means. Research Policy, Vol. 52, No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104765Edler J., Cunningham P., Gök A., Shapira P. (eds.) (2016). Handbook of innovation policy impact. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Edler J., Cunningham P., Gök A., Shapira P. (eds.) (2016). Handbook of innovation policy impact. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Erkel-Rousse H., Minodier C. (2009). Do business trend surveys in industry and services help in forecasting GDP growth? A real-time analysis on French data. INSEE Working Paper, No. G2009/03. Institut National de la Statistique et des Études Économiques.Erkel-Rousse H., Minodier C. (2009). Do business trend surveys in industry and services help in forecasting GDP growth? A real-time analysis on French data. INSEE Working Paper, No. G2009/03. Institut National de la Statistique et des Études Économiques.European Commission (2004). Evaluating EU activities: A practical guide for the Commission services. Brussels: European Commission.European Commission (2004). Evaluating EU activities: A practical guide for the Commission services. Brussels: European Commission.European Commission (2016). The joint harmonised EU programme of business and consumer surveys: User guide. Brussels: European Commission.European Commission (2016). The joint harmonised EU programme of business and consumer surveys: User guide. Brussels: European Commission.European Commission (2023a). Research, innovation, and technology policy in times of geopolitical competition. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2777/745596European Commission (2023a). Research, innovation, and technology policy in times of geopolitical competition. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2777/745596European Commission (2023b). S&T&I for 2050: Science, technology and innovation for ecosystem performance — Accelerating sustainability transitions. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2777/100029European Commission (2023b). S&T&I for 2050: Science, technology and innovation for ecosystem performance — Accelerating sustainability transitions. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2777/100029Freeman C. (1995). The “national system of innovation” in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 5—24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309Freeman C. (1995). The “national system of innovation” in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 5—24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309Frietsch R., Reiß T., Schmoch U. (2024). Development of innovation monitoring and innovation indicators in the past 50 years. In: J. Edler, R. Walz (eds.). Systems and innovation research in transition. Research questions and trends in historical perspective. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66100-6_3Frietsch R., Reiß T., Schmoch U. (2024). Development of innovation monitoring and innovation indicators in the past 50 years. In: J. Edler, R. Walz (eds.). Systems and innovation research in transition. Research questions and trends in historical perspective. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66100-6_3Gassler H., Schibany A. (2011). “Useless” science: How to evaluate performance of basic research. Foresight—Russia, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 40—47. https://doi.org/ 10.17323/1995-459x.2011.1.40.47Gassler H., Schibany A. (2011). “Useless” science: How to evaluate performance of basic research. Foresight—Russia, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 40—47. https://doi.org/ 10.17323/1995-459x.2011.1.40.47Georghiou L. (1995). Research evaluation in European national science and technology systems. Research Evaluation, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 3—10. https://doi.org/10.1093/rev/5.1.3Georghiou L. (1995). Research evaluation in European national science and technology systems. Research Evaluation, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 3—10. https://doi.org/10.1093/rev/5.1.3Gershman M., Kuznetsova T. (2016). The future of Russian science through the prism of public policy. Foresight, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 320—339. https://doi.org/10.1108/ FS-06-2014-0037Gershman M., Kuznetsova T. (2016). The future of Russian science through the prism of public policy. Foresight, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 320—339. https://doi.org/10.1108/ FS-06-2014-0037Godin B. (2001). Measuring output: When economics drive science and technology measurements. Project on the history and sociology of S&T statistics. Montreal: OST.Godin B. (2001). Measuring output: When economics drive science and technology measurements. Project on the history and sociology of S&T statistics. Montreal: OST.Godin B. (2009). What is science? Defining science by numbers, 1920—2000 (part 2). Foresight—Russia, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 68—81. https://doi.org/10.17323/1995- 459x.2009.3.68.81Godin B. (2009). What is science? Defining science by numbers, 1920—2000 (part 2). Foresight—Russia, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 68—81. https://doi.org/10.17323/1995- 459x.2009.3.68.81Godin B. (2010). Conceptual frameworks of science, technology and innovation policy. Foresight—Russia, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 34—43. https://doi.org/10.17323/1995- 459x.201.2.34.43Godin B. (2010). Conceptual frameworks of science, technology and innovation policy. Foresight—Russia, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 34—43. https://doi.org/10.17323/1995- 459x.201.2.34.43Gök A., Edler J. (2012). The use of behavioural additionality evaluation in innovation policy making. Research Evaluation, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 306—318. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvs015Gök A., Edler J. (2012). The use of behavioural additionality evaluation in innovation policy making. Research Evaluation, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 306—318. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvs015Gokhberg L. (2013). Indicators for science, technology and innovation on the crossroad to foresight. In: D. Meissner, L. Gokhberg, A. Sokolov (eds.). Science, technology and innovation policy for the future: Potentials and limits of foresight studies. Berlin: Springer, pp. 257—288. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31827-6_15Gokhberg L. (2013). Indicators for science, technology and innovation on the crossroad to foresight. In: D. Meissner, L. Gokhberg, A. Sokolov (eds.). Science, technology and innovation policy for the future: Potentials and limits of foresight studies. Berlin: Springer, pp. 257—288. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31827-6_15Gokhberg L., Shmatko N., Auriol L. (eds.) (2016). The science and technology labor force: The value of doctorate holders and development of professional careers. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27210-8Gokhberg L., Shmatko N., Auriol L. (eds.) (2016). The science and technology labor force: The value of doctorate holders and development of professional careers. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27210-8Industrial Research Institute (2017). 2017 R&D trends forecast: Results from the Industrial Research Institute’s annual survey: Slowing economies slow R&D investments and mute optimism. Research—Technology Management, Vol. 60, No. 1, pp. 18—25. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2017.1255049Industrial Research Institute (2017). 2017 R&D trends forecast: Results from the Industrial Research Institute’s annual survey: Slowing economies slow R&D investments and mute optimism. Research—Technology Management, Vol. 60, No. 1, pp. 18—25. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2017.1255049IMF (2023). World economic outlook: Navigating global divergences. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400235801.081 Jordan G. B. (2010). A theory-based logic model for innovation policy and evaluation. Research Evaluation, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 263—273. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820210x12827366906445IMF (2023). World economic outlook: Navigating global divergences. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400235801.081 Jordan G. B. (2010). A theory-based logic model for innovation policy and evaluation. Research Evaluation, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 263—273. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820210x12827366906445Kuhlmann S. (2003). Evaluation of research and innovation policies: A discussion of trends with examples from Germany. International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 26, No. 2—4, pp. 131—149. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.2003.003366Kuhlmann S. (2003). Evaluation of research and innovation policies: A discussion of trends with examples from Germany. International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 26, No. 2—4, pp. 131—149. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.2003.003366Lakomý M., Hlavová R., Machackova H. (2019). Open science and the science—society relationship. Society, Vol. 56, pp. 246—255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-019- 00361-wLakomý M., Hlavová R., Machackova H. (2019). Open science and the science—society relationship. Society, Vol. 56, pp. 246—255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-019- 00361-wLipkind T., Kitrar L., Ostapkovich G. (2019). Russian business tendency surveys by HSE and Rosstat. In: S. Smirnov, A. Ozyildirim, P. Picchetti (eds.). Business cycles in BRICS. Cham: Springer, pp. 233—251. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-319-90017-9_13Lipkind T., Kitrar L., Ostapkovich G. (2019). Russian business tendency surveys by HSE and Rosstat. In: S. Smirnov, A. Ozyildirim, P. Picchetti (eds.). Business cycles in BRICS. Cham: Springer, pp. 233—251. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-319-90017-9_13Lola I., Bakeev M. (2024). Technology adoption expectations in the face of temporal uncertainty: An analysis of survey data from manufacturing firms. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 45—58. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2021.2020751Lola I., Bakeev M. (2024). Technology adoption expectations in the face of temporal uncertainty: An analysis of survey data from manufacturing firms. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 45—58. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2021.2020751Lundvall B.-Е. (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter.Lundvall B.-Е. (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter.McLaughlin J. A., Jordan G. B. (2015). Using logic models. In: K. E. Newcomer, P. Hatry, J. S. Wholey (eds.). Handbook of practical program evaluation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 62—87. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119171386.ch3McLaughlin J. A., Jordan G. B. (2015). Using logic models. In: K. E. Newcomer, P. Hatry, J. S. Wholey (eds.). Handbook of practical program evaluation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 62—87. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119171386.ch3Meissner D., Gokhberg L., Kuzminov Y., Cervantes M., Schwaag Serger S. (2021). Knowledge triangle targeted science, technology and innovation policy. In: The knowledge triangle. Changing higher education and research management paradigm. Cham: Springer, pp. 3—15. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81346- 8_1Meissner D., Gokhberg L., Kuzminov Y., Cervantes M., Schwaag Serger S. (2021). Knowledge triangle targeted science, technology and innovation policy. In: The knowledge triangle. Changing higher education and research management paradigm. Cham: Springer, pp. 3—15. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81346- 8_1Meissner D., Kergroach S. (2021). Innovation policy mix: Mapping and measurement. Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 46, pp. 197—222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09767-4Meissner D., Kergroach S. (2021). Innovation policy mix: Mapping and measurement. Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 46, pp. 197—222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09767-4Nelson R. R. (1993). National innovation systems: A comparative study. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195076165.001.0001Nelson R. R. (1993). National innovation systems: A comparative study. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195076165.001.0001OECD (2003). Business tendency surveys: A handbook. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264177444-enOECD (2003). Business tendency surveys: A handbook. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264177444-enOECD (2012). OECD science, technology and industry outlook 2012. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/sti_outlook-2012-enOECD (2012). OECD science, technology and industry outlook 2012. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/sti_outlook-2012-enOECD (2013). Commercialising public research: New trends and strategies. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264193321-enOECD (2013). Commercialising public research: New trends and strategies. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264193321-enOECD (2015). Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for collecting and reporting data on research and experimental development, the measurement of scientific, technological and innovation activities. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239012-enOECD (2015). Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for collecting and reporting data on research and experimental development, the measurement of scientific, technological and innovation activities. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239012-enOECD (2019). University—industry collaboration: New evidence and policy options. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/e9c1e648-enOECD (2019). University—industry collaboration: New evidence and policy options. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/e9c1e648-enOECD (2023). Science, technology and innovation outlook 2023: Enabling transitions in times of disruption. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/0b55736e-enOECD (2023). Science, technology and innovation outlook 2023: Enabling transitions in times of disruption. Paris: OECD Publ. https://doi.org/10.1787/0b55736e-enPriem R. L., Butler J. E. (2001). Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Academy of Management Review, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 22—40. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4011928Priem R. L., Butler J. E. (2001). Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Academy of Management Review, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 22—40. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4011928Shapira P., Furukawa R. (2003). Evaluating a large-scale research and development program in Japan: Methods, findings and insights. International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 26, No. 2—4, pp. 166—190. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.2003.003368Shapira P., Furukawa R. (2003). Evaluating a large-scale research and development program in Japan: Methods, findings and insights. International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 26, No. 2—4, pp. 166—190. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.2003.003368Stern E. (1993). Ongoing and participative evaluation: Purpose, design and role in the evaluation of a large-scale R&D programme. Research Evaluation, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 75—82. https://doi.org/10.1093/rev/3.2.75Stern E. (1993). Ongoing and participative evaluation: Purpose, design and role in the evaluation of a large-scale R&D programme. Research Evaluation, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 75—82. https://doi.org/10.1093/rev/3.2.75Teirlinck P., Delanghe H., Padilla P., Verbeek A. (2013). Closing the policy cycle: Increasing the utilization of evaluation findings in research, technological development and innovation policy design. Science and Public Policy, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 366—377. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs123Teirlinck P., Delanghe H., Padilla P., Verbeek A. (2013). Closing the policy cycle: Increasing the utilization of evaluation findings in research, technological development and innovation policy design. Science and Public Policy, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 366—377. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs123Weiss C. (1999). The interface between evaluation and public policy. Evaluation, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 468—486. https://doi.org/10.1177/135638909900500408Weiss C. (1999). The interface between evaluation and public policy. Evaluation, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 468—486. https://doi.org/10.1177/135638909900500408

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.