voprecotestВопросы экономикиVoprosy Ekonomiki0042-8736Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP10.32609/0042-8736-2014-7-4-34voprecotest-660Research ArticleЭКОНОМИКА ИННОВАЦИЙECONOMICS OF INNOVATIONВзаимодействие российских компаний и исследовательских организаций в проведении НИОКР: третий не лишний?R&d cooperation between Russian firms and researchorganizations: Is there a need for state assistance?СимачевЮ. В.SimachevY.

к. т. н., замдиректора Межведомственного аналитического центра (МАЦ) (Москва)

simachev@iacenter.ruКузыкМ. Г.KuzykM.

к. э. н., руководитель направления МАЦ

noemail@neicon.ruФейгинаВ. В.FeyginaV.

младший научный сотрудник МАЦ

noemail@neicon.ruМежведомственный аналитический центр (МАЦ) (Москва)РоссияInterdepartmental Analytical Center (Moscow, Russia)Russian Federation20142007201407434Copyright © Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP, 20142014Voprosy Ekonomiki, NPVoprosy Ekonomiki, NPhttps://www.vopreco.ru/jour/about/submissions#copyrightNoticehttps://www.vopreco.ru/jour/article/view/660

В статье исследуется кооперация российских компаний с исследовательскими организациями в проведении НИОКР при осуществлении технологических инноваций. Для оценки поведенческих изменений анализ проводится на микроуровне и основывается на эмпирических данных анкетирования руководителей более чем 600 российских производственных компаний (2011-2012 гг.) и около 350 научных организаций и вузов (2012 г.) Выделены ключевые факторы спроса компаний на взаимодействие с исследовательскими организациями, основные барьеры на пути развития научно-производственной кооперации и их специфика для различных субъектов взаимодействия. Рассмотрены инструментарий и особенности российской инновационной политики по стимулированию партнерств, при этом оценивается ее влияние на кооперационное поведение компаний.

The study is focused on the cooperation of Russian companies with research organizations in implementing R&D projects during technological innovation. Taking into account behavioral changes, the authors carry out a micro-level analysis based on empirical data of executive survey of over 600 Russian industrial firms (2011-2012) and about 350 research organizations and universities (2012). The authors emphasize the key factors of firms’ demand for outsourcing R&D, reveal the main barriers to the development of university-industry cooperation and their particularities for different cooperation actors. The study examines how Russian innovation policy toolkit affects partnerships with regard to changes in the actors’ cooperative behavior.

инновациинаучно-производственная кооперацияповедение компанийнаучно-технологическая политикаинновационная политикаinnovationsuniversity-industry cooperationfirm behaviorSTI policyinnovation policyReferencesДежина И. Г., Киселева В. В. (2008). Государство, наука и бизнес в инновационной системе России. М.: ИЭПП.Dezhina I.  G., Kiseleva V.  V. (2008). State, Science, and Business in Russian Innovation System. Moscow: Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy Publ.Дежина И. Г., Симачев Ю. В. (2013). Связные гранты для стимулирования партнерства компаний и университетов в инновационной сфере: стартовые эффекты применения в России // Журнал Новой экономической ассоциации. Т. 3, № 19. C. 99-122.Dezhina I.  G., Simachev Yu.  V. (2013). Matching Grants for Stimulating Partnerships Between Companies and Universities in Innovation Aria: Initial Effects in Russia // Zhurnal Novoy ekonomicheskoy assotsiatsii. Vol. 3, No 19. P. 99—122.Иванов Д. С., Кузык М. Г., Симачев Ю. В. (2012). Стимулирование инновационной деятельности российских производственных компаний: возможности и ограничения // Форсайт. Т. 6, № 3. С. 18-42.Ivanov D.  S., Kuzyk M.  G., Simachev Yu.  V. (2012). Fostering Innovaion Perfomance of Russian Manufacturing Enterprises: New Opportunities and Limitations // Forsait. Vol. 6, No 3. P. 18—42.Заиченко С., Кузнецова Т., Рудь В. (2014). Особенности взаимодействия российских предприятий и организаций в инновационной сфере // Форсайт. Т. 8, № 1. C. 6-22.Zaichenko S., Kuznetsova T., Roud V. (2014). Features of Interaction Between Russian Enterprises and Research Organizations in the Field of Innovation // Forsait. Vol. 8, No 1. P. 6—22.Засимова Л. С., Кузнецов Б. В., Кузык М. Г., Симачев Ю. В., Чулок А. А. (2008). Проблемы перехода промышленности на путь инновационного развития: микро экономический анализ особенностей поведения фирм, динамики и структуры спроса на технологические инновации // Серия «Научные доклады: независимый экономический анализ». № 201. М.: Московский общественный научный фонд.Zasimova L.  S., Kuznetsov B.  V., Kuzyk M.  G., Simachev Yu.V., Chulok A.  A. (2008). Problems of Switching Industry to Innovation-Driven Path // Scientific report Series. No 201. Moscow: Moscow Public Science Foundation.Смородинская Н. (2011). Тройная спираль как матрица экономических систем // Инновации. №4. С. 66-78.Smorodinskaya N. (2011). Triple Helix as a New Matrix of Economic Systems // Innovatsii. No 4. P. 66—78.Antonelli C., Crespi F. (2011). Matthew Effects and R&D Subsidies: Knowledge Cumulability in High-tech and Low-tech Industries // University Roma Tre Working Paper. No 11/2011.Antonelli C., Crespi F. (2011). Matthew Effects and R&D Subsidies: Knowledge Cumulability in High-tech and Low-tech Industries // University Roma Tre Working Paper. No 11/2011.Arundel A., Geuna A. (2004). Proximity and the Use of Public Science by Innovative European Firms // Economics of Innovation and New Technologies. Vol. 13, No 6. P. 559-580.Arundel A., Geuna A. (2004). Proximity and the Use of Public Science by Innovative European Firms // Economics of Innovation and New Technologies. Vol. 13, No 6. P. 559-580.Bach L., Mats M. (2005). From Economic Foundations to S&T Policy Tools: A Comparative Analysis of the Dominant Paradigms // Innovation Policy in a Knowledge-Based Economy: Theory and Practice / M. Matt, P. Llerena (eds). Heidelberg: Springer.Bach L., Mats M. (2005). From Economic Foundations to S&T Policy Tools: A Comparative Analysis of the Dominant Paradigms // Innovation Policy in a Knowledge-Based Economy: Theory and Practice / M. Matt, P. Llerena (eds). Heidelberg: Springer.Barnes T., Pashby I., Gibbons A. (2002). Effective University - Industry Interaction: A Multi-case Evaluation of collaborative R&D Projects // European Management Journal. Vol. 20, No 3. P. 272-285.Barnes T., Pashby I., Gibbons A. (2002). Effective University - Industry Interaction: A Multi-case Evaluation of collaborative R&D Projects // European Management Journal. Vol. 20, No 3. P. 272-285.Bjerregaard T. (2009). Universities-Industry Collaboration Strategies: A Micro-Level Perspective // European Journal Of Innovation Management. Vol. 12, No 2. P. 161-176.Bjerregaard T. (2009). Universities-Industry Collaboration Strategies: A Micro-Level Perspective // European Journal Of Innovation Management. Vol. 12, No 2. P. 161-176.Borrell Damian L. (2009). Collaborative Doctoral Education: University-Industry Partnerships for Enhancing Knowledge Exchange // Doc CAREERS Project. EUA Publications.Borrell Damian L. (2009). Collaborative Doctoral Education: University-Industry Partnerships for Enhancing Knowledge Exchange // Doc CAREERS Project. EUA Publications.Bowie N. (1994). University-Business Partnerships: An Assessment. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Bowie N. (1994). University-Business Partnerships: An Assessment. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Casey J. (2004). Developing Harmonious University-industry Partnership // University of Dayton Law Review. Vol. 30, No 2. P. 245-263.Casey J. (2004). Developing Harmonious University-industry Partnership // University of Dayton Law Review. Vol. 30, No 2. P. 245-263.Cohen W., Nelson R. R., Walsh J. P. (2002). Links and Impacts: the Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D // Management Science. Vol. 48, No 1. P. 1-23.Cohen W., Nelson R. R., Walsh J. P. (2002). Links and Impacts: the Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D // Management Science. Vol. 48, No 1. P. 1-23.D’Este P., Perkmann M. (2011). Why do Academics Engage with Industry? The Entrepreneurial University and Individual Motivations // Journal of Technology Transfer. Vol. 36, No 3. P. 316-339.D’Este P., Perkmann M. (2011). Why do Academics Engage with Industry? The Entrepreneurial University and Individual Motivations // Journal of Technology Transfer. Vol. 36, No 3. P. 316-339.Edquist C. (19 97). System of Innovation Approaches - Their Emergence and Characteristics // System of Innovation. Technologies, Institutions A nd Organizations / C. Edquist (ed.). L.: Pinter. P. 1-35.Edquist C. (19 97). System of Innovation Approaches - Their Emergence and Characteristics // System of Innovation. Technologies, Institutions A nd Organizations / C. Edquist (ed.). L.: Pinter. P. 1-35.Ervin D. et al. (2002). University-Industry Relationship: Framing the Issues for Academic Research in Agricultural Biotechnology / Report of Workshop “University-Industry Relationships and the Public Good: Framing the Issues in Agricultural Biotechnology”, November 19-20. http://www.agri-biotech.pdx.edu/Pew_ UIRreport-FINAL%20use%20this.pdf.Ervin D. et al. (2002). University-Industry Relationship: Framing the Issues for Academic Research in Agricultural Biotechnology / Report of Workshop “University-Industry Relationships and the Public Good: Framing the Issues in Agricultural Biotechnology”, November 19-20. http://www.agri-biotech.pdx.edu/Pew_UIRreport-FINAL%20use%20this.pdf.Etzkowitz H. (2008). The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government in Action. L.: Routledge.Etzkowitz H. (2008). The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government in Action. L.: Routledge.Etzkowitz H., Leydesdorf L. (2000). The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations // Research Policy. Vol. 29, No 2. P. 109-123.Etzkowitz H., Leydesdorf L. (2000). The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations // Research Policy. Vol. 29, No 2. P. 109-123.Fontana R., Geuna A., Matt M. (2006). Factors Affecting University-Industry R&D Projects: The Importance of Searching, Screening and Signalling // Research Policy. Vol. 35, No 2. P. 309-323.Fontana R., Geuna A., Matt M. (2006). Factors Affecting University-Industry R&D Projects: The Importance of Searching, Screening and Signalling // Research Policy. Vol. 35, No 2. P. 309-323.Freitas I. M. B, Verspagen B. (2009). The Motivations, Organization and Outcomes of University-Industry Interaction in the Netherlands // UNU-MERIT Working Papers. No 2009-011.Freitas I. M. B, Verspagen B. (2009). The Motivations, Organization and Outcomes of University-Industry Interaction in the Netherlands // UNU-MERIT Working Papers. No 2009-011.Ghani N. (1991). European collaborative research projects // Engeneering Management Journal. Vol. 1, No 2. P. 63-70.Ghani N. (1991). European collaborative research projects // Engeneering Management Journal. Vol. 1, No 2. P. 63-70.Goldberg I., Gobbard G., Racin J. (2011). Igniting Innovations: Rethinking the Role of Government in Emerging Europe and Central Asia. Washington, DC: World Bank.Goldberg I., Gobbard G., Racin J. (2011). Igniting Innovations: Rethinking the Role of Government in Emerging Europe and Central Asia. Washington, DC: World Bank.Hall B. H., Link A. N., Scott J. T. (2000). Universities as Research Partners // NBER Working Papers. No 7643.Hall B. H., Link A. N., Scott J. T. (2000). Universities as Research Partners // NBER Working Papers. No 7643.Kaymaz K., Eryigit K. Y. (2011). Determining Factors Hindering University-Industry Collaboration: An Analysis from the Perspective of Academicians in the Context of Entrepreneurial Science Paradigm // International Journal of Social Inquiry. Vol. 4, No 1. P. 85-213.Kaymaz K., Eryigit K. Y. (2011). Determining Factors Hindering University-Industry Collaboration: An Analysis from the Perspective of Academicians in the Context of Entrepreneurial Science Paradigm // International Journal of Social Inquiry. Vol. 4, No 1. P. 85-213.Kodcharat Ya., Chaikeaw A. (2012). University and Industrial Sector Collaboration: the Key Factors Affecting Knowledge Transfer // International Journal of Business and Social Science. Vol. 3, No 23. P. 130-137.Kodcharat Ya., Chaikeaw A. (2012). University and Industrial Sector Collaboration: the Key Factors Affecting Knowledge Transfer // International Journal of Business and Social Science. Vol. 3, No 23. P. 130-137.Laursen K., Salter A. (2004). Searching High and Low: What Types of Firms use Universities as a Source of Innovation? // Research Policy. Vol. 33, No 8. P. 1201-1215.Laursen K., Salter A. (2004). Searching High and Low: What Types of Firms use Universities as a Source of Innovation? // Research Policy. Vol. 33, No 8. P. 1201-1215.Lee Y. S. (2000). The Sustainability of University-Industry Research Collaboration: An Empirical Assessment // Journal of Technology Transfer. Vol. 25, No 2. P. 111-133.Lee Y. S. (2000). The Sustainability of University-Industry Research Collaboration: An Empirical Assessment // Journal of Technology Transfer. Vol. 25, No 2. P. 111-133.Liu W. H. (2009). Academia-Industry Linkages and the Role of Active Innovation Policies - Firm-level Evidence in Hong Kong // Kiel Working Papers. No 1577.Liu W. H. (2009). Academia-Industry Linkages and the Role of Active Innovation Policies - Firm-level Evidence in Hong Kong // Kiel Working Papers. No 1577.Mohnen P., Hoareau C. (2003). What Type of Enterprise Forges Close Links With Universities and Government Labs? Evidence from CIS 2 // Managerial & Decision Economics. Vol. 24, No 2/3. P. 133-146.Mohnen P., Hoareau C. (2003). What Type of Enterprise Forges Close Links With Universities and Government Labs? Evidence from CIS 2 // Managerial & Decision Economics. Vol. 24, No 2/3. P. 133-146.Metcalfe J. S. (1994). Evolutionary Economics and Public Policy // Economic Journal. Vol. 104, No 425. P. 931-944.Metcalfe J. S. (1994). Evolutionary Economics and Public Policy // Economic Journal. Vol. 104, No 425. P. 931-944.Meyer Krahmer F., Schmoch U. (1998). Science-based Technologies University-Industry Interactions in Four Fields // Research Policy. Vol. 27, No 8. P. 835-852.Meyer Krahmer F., Schmoch U. (1998). Science-based Technologies University-Industry Interactions in Four Fields // Research Policy. Vol. 27, No 8. P. 835-852.OECD (2001). Innovative Networks: Co-operation Innovation Systems. OECD (2011). OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: Russian Federation 2011.OECD (2001). Innovative Networks: Co-operation Innovation Systems. OECD (2011). OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: Russian Federation 2011.OECD (2013). OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2013.OECD (2013). OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2013.Ortega Argiles R., Piva M., Potters L., Vivarelli M. (2009). Is Corporate R&D Investment in Hightech Sectors more Efficient? Some Guidelines for European Research Policy // IPTS Working Papers. No 09/2009 / Institute for Prospective Technological Studies.Ortega Argiles R., Piva M., Potters L., Vivarelli M. (2009). Is Corporate R&D Investment in Hightech Sectors more Efficient? Some Guidelines for European Research Policy // IPTS Working Papers. No 09/2009 / Institute for Prospective Technological Studies.Pavitt K. (1998). The Social Shaping of the National Science Base // Research policy. Vol. 27, No 8. P. 793-805.Pavitt K. (1998). The Social Shaping of the National Science Base // Research policy. Vol. 27, No 8. P. 793-805.Schartinger D., Schibany A., Gassler H. (2001). Interactive Relations between Universities and Firms: Empirical Evidence for Austria // Journal of Technology Transfer. Vol. 26, No 3. P. 255-269.Schartinger D., Schibany A., Gassler H. (2001). Interactive Relations between Universities and Firms: Empirical Evidence for Austria // Journal of Technology Transfer. Vol. 26, No 3. P. 255-269.Schibany A., Jörg L., Polt W. (1999). Towards Realistic Expectations. The Science System as a Contributor to Industrial Innovation. Seibersdorf: Österreichisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung.Schibany A., Jörg L., Polt W. (1999). Towards Realistic Expectations. The Science System as a Contributor to Industrial Innovation. Seibersdorf: Österreichisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung.Simachev Yu., Kuzyk M., Feygina V. (2014). The Nature of Innovation Channels at the Micro Level: Evidence from Russian Manufacturing Firms // Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies. Vol. 12, No 2. P. 103-123.Simachev Yu., Kuzyk M., Feygina V. (2014). The Nature of Innovation Channels at the Micro Level: Evidence from Russian Manufacturing Firms // Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies. Vol. 12, No 2. P. 103-123.Smith K. (1995). Interactions in Knowledge Systems: Foundations, Policy Implications and Empirical Methods // STI-Review. No 16. P. 69-102.Smith K. (1995). Interactions in Knowledge Systems: Foundations, Policy Implications and Empirical Methods // STI-Review. No 16. P. 69-102.Tether B. S., Tajar A. (2008). Beyond Industry-University Links: Sourcing Knowledge for Innovation From Consultants, Private Research Organizations And the Public // Research Policy. Vol. 37, No 6/7. P. 1079-1095.Tether B. S., Tajar A. (2008). Beyond Industry-University Links: Sourcing Knowledge for Innovation From Consultants, Private Research Organizations And the Public // Research Policy. Vol. 37, No 6/7. P. 1079-1095.Teubal M. (1996). R&D and technology policy in NICs as learning processes // World Development. Vol. 24, No 3. P. 449-460.Teubal M. (1996). R&D and technology policy in NICs as learning processes // World Development. Vol. 24, No 3. P. 449-460.Teubal M. (2002). What is the Systems Perspective to Innovation and Technology Policy (ITP) and How Can We Apply It to Developing and Newly Industrialized Economies? // Journal of Evolutionary Economics. Vol. 12, No 1. P. 233-257.Teubal M. (2002). What is the Systems Perspective to Innovation and Technology Policy (ITP) and How Can We Apply It to Developing and Newly Industrialized Economies? // Journal of Evolutionary Economics. Vol. 12, No 1. P. 233-257.World Economic Forum (2013). The Global Competitiveness Report 2013-2014: Full Data Edition. Geneva.World Economic Forum (2013). The Global Competitiveness Report 2013-2014: Full Data Edition. Geneva.Wu V. F.S. (2000). An Empirical Study of University-Industry Research Cooperation - The Case of Taiwan // Workshop of the OECD-NIS Focus Group on Innovation Firm and Networks. Rome. P. 1-15.Wu V. F.S. (2000). An Empirical Study of University-Industry Research Cooperation - The Case of Taiwan // Workshop of the OECD-NIS Focus Group on Innovation Firm and Networks. Rome. P. 1-15.Zucker L. G., Darby M. R. (2000). Capturing Technological Opportunity via Japan’s Star Scientists: Evidence from Japanese Firms’ Biotech Patents and Products // Journal of Technology Transfer. Vol. 26, No 1/2. P. 37-58.Zucker L. G., Darby M. R. (2000). Capturing Technological Opportunity via Japan’s Star Scientists: Evidence from Japanese Firms’ Biotech Patents and Products // Journal of Technology Transfer. Vol. 26, No 1/2. P. 37-58.

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