Comprehensive Analysis Of The Innovative Development Dynamics Of The Chelyabinsk Region[Комплексный Анализ Динамики Инновационного Развития Челябинской Области]

Introduction. The article is focused on a comprehensive analysis of the dynamics of the regional innovation system development of the Chelyabinsk region in comparison with other Russia’s regions. The aim of the study is to draw up the Chelyabinsk region’s individual profile in dynamics, detailing the results for all innovative development indicators and making it possible to identify the features of the region’s innovative system. Methods. The analysis of the Chelyabinsk region’s innovative development is based on the methodology — a system of quantitative and qualitative indicators of the regions’ innovative development proposed in 2010 by the Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge (ISSEK) of the Higher School of Economics of the National Research University (NRU HSE). In addition, the authors present the results of analyzing the socio-cultural profile of a number of the Russian Federation’s regions using G. Hofstede’s methodology of VSM-2013. In the research process, the authors used static and dynamic analysis methods, an index method, a graphical method, and a desk research method. The empirical information base of the study is the data from the Federal State Statistics Service, NRU HSE, JSC “Russian Venture Company” (JSC RVC), and secondary sociological data. The scientific novelty of the study. The ranking of innovative development of the Russian Federation’s constituent entities, published annually by the Higher School of Economics, presents individual regional profiles for a maximum of 2 years. In this study, we compiled an individual profile of the Chelyabinsk region’s innovative development in dynamics over the period from 2008 to 2017 in comparison with the leading regions of the Ural Federal District. The profile of the Chelyabinsk region, in addition to statistical indicators, is also characterized by sociocultural factors of innovative activity. Conclusions. A comparative analysis of the sub-indexes values of the Chelyabinsk region’s innovative development for the period from 2008 to 2017 showed the sub-indexes relative balance, in contrast to many regions of Russia, where there is an extremely large gap between the ranks according to the Regions’ Innovative Development Ranking and thematic sub-indexes. Almost all Chelyabinsk regions’ sub-indexes have a positive trend, except for the “Innovation Activities” sub-index. In these conditions, the Chelyabinsk region’s innovation policy requires substantial changes: efforts must be directed not only to development, but also to ensure implementing innovative technology products. From the view point of sociocultural factors, the drivers of innovative activity of the Chelyabinsk region’s population can be relatively high values of individualism and a fairly positive attitude to new products. Prospects for the Chelyabinsk region’s innovative development are favorable. The authors underline scientific, technological and innovative orientation of the Chelyabinsk region’s strategy.