IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eco/journ1/2016-01-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technology Platforms as an Efficient Tool to Modernize Russia's Economy

Author

Listed:
  • Farida F. Galimulina

    (Kazan National Research Technological University, Kazan, Russia,)

  • Alexey I. Shinkevich

    (Kazan National Research Technological University, Kazan, Russia,)

  • Irina P. Komissarova

    (National Research Nuclear University Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia,)

  • Albina N. Mayorova

    (National Research Nuclear University Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia)

  • Irina A. Astafyeva

    (Moscow State University of Mechanical Engineering, Moscow, Russia,)

  • Natalia V. Klimova

    (Kuban State Agrarian University, Krasnodar, Russia,)

  • Karina R. Nabiullina

    (Kazan State University of Architecture and Engineering, Kazan, Russia,)

  • Irina V. Zhukovskaya

    (Kazan National Research Technological University, Kazan, Russia.)

Abstract

There is an urgent need to consider the dynamic development of the global economy from the point of view of its positive impact on competitiveness improvement in national manufacturing industries, and the best ways to modernize the country economy. The purpose of the paper is to provide with perspectives for development of instruments related to technology platforms (TP) within the framework of innovation management and adapted to the conditions of Russia's economic reality. The major method in studying this issue is mathematical economic modeling which has made it possible to facilitate expediency in determining a TP as an effective innovation control instrument. The paper considers European and Russian experience in deploying TP, and identifies national features characteristic to the performance of the innovation management instrument. A mathematical economic model is used for justifying the efficiency of introducing TP into Russian institutional innovation system. The practical significance of results and conclusions is in its ability to improve the mechanisms of developing and implementing federal and regional innovation development programs, development of the innovation infrastructure, stimulation of the innovation activity, use of a set of TP instruments by public authorities.

Suggested Citation

  • Farida F. Galimulina & Alexey I. Shinkevich & Irina P. Komissarova & Albina N. Mayorova & Irina A. Astafyeva & Natalia V. Klimova & Karina R. Nabiullina & Irina V. Zhukovskaya, 2016. "Technology Platforms as an Efficient Tool to Modernize Russia's Economy," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 6(1), pages 163-168.
    • Handle: RePEc:eco:journ1:2016-01-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/download/1678/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/view/1678/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Irina Dezhina, 2013. "Technology platforms and innovation clusters: together or separately?," Research Paper Series, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy, issue 164P, pages 120-120.
    2. Irina Dezhina & V. Kiseleva, 2008. "State, Science and Business in Russia's Innovation System," Research Paper Series, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy, issue 115P.
    3. Henry Etzkowitz, 2002. "Incubation of incubators: innovation as a triple helix of university-industry-government networks," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 115-128, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alsu A. Lubnina & Marina V. Shinkevich & Svetlana I. Ashmarina & Natalia A. Zaitseva & Guzel B. Sayfutdinova & Izida I. Ishmuradova, 2016. "Resource Saving Innovative Forms of the Industrial Enterprises," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 6(2), pages 479-483.
    2. Cong Gu & Benfu Lv & Geng Peng, 2022. "Google and Alibaba s Different Stock Performances after Antitrust Investigations, the Reasons and Enlightenment," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 12(2), pages 26-36, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tan Yigitcanlar & Ingi Runar Edvardsson & Hjalti Johannesson & Md Kamruzzaman & Giuseppe Ioppolo & Surabhi Pancholi, 2017. "Knowledge-based development dynamics in less favoured regions: insights from Australian and Icelandic university towns," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(12), pages 2272-2292, December.
    2. Rippa, Pierluigi & Secundo, Giustina, 2019. "Digital academic entrepreneurship: The potential of digital technologies on academic entrepreneurship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 900-911.
    3. Adalberto Rangone & Luca Busolli, 2021. "Managing charity 4.0 with Blockchain: a case study at the time of Covid-19," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 18(4), pages 491-521, December.
    4. Dmitry Kochetkov & Viola Larionova & Darko Vukovic, 2017. "Entrepreneurial Capacity Of Universities And Its Impact On Regional Economic Growth," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(2), pages 477-488.
    5. O’Kane, Conor & Mangematin, Vincent & Geoghegan, Will & Fitzgerald, Ciara, 2015. "University technology transfer offices: The search for identity to build legitimacy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 421-437.
    6. Ana Rosado-Cubero & Adolfo Hernández & Francisco José Blanco-Jiménez & Teresa Freire-Rubio, 2024. "Keys of accelerators success: evidence from Spain," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 2423-2446, September.
    7. Noriko Yoda & Kenichi Kuwashima, 2020. "Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations in Japan: Transitions of Collaborations and Interactions," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(3), pages 1120-1144, September.
    8. Riviezzo, Angelo & Santos, Susana C. & Liñán, Francisco & Napolitano, Maria Rosaria & Fusco, Floriana, 2019. "European universities seeking entrepreneurial paths: the moderating effect of contextual variables on the entrepreneurial orientation-performance relationship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 232-248.
    9. Danny P Soetanot & Marina van Geenhuizen, 2007. "Technology Incubators and Knowledge Networks: A Rough Set Approach in Comparative Project Analysis," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 34(6), pages 1011-1029, December.
    10. Julie Vardhan & Madhuri Mahato, 2022. "Business Incubation Centres in Universities and Their Role in Developing Entrepreneurial Ecosystem," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 8(1), pages 143-157, January.
    11. Evangelia Sofouli & Nicholas Vonortas, 2007. "S&T Parks and business incubators in middle-sized countries: the case of greece," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 525-544, October.
    12. Tischler, Joachim & Walter, Sascha, 2014. "Das Patentierverhalten akademischer Gründer nach Abschaffung des Hochschullehrerprivilegs," EconStor Preprints 96157, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    13. van Weele, Marijn & van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Nauta, Frans, 2017. "You can't always get what you want: How entrepreneur's perceived resource needs affect the incubator's assertiveness," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 18-33.
    14. Wu, Jinxi & Ye, Ran (Michelle) & Ding, Ling & Lu, Chao & Euwema, Martin, 2018. "From “transplant with the soil” toward the establishment of the innovation ecosystem: A case study of a leading high-tech company in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 222-234.
    15. Laurent R Bergé & Thorsten Doherr & Katrin Hussinger, 2023. "How patent rights affect university science," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 32(3), pages 673-699.
    16. Elisabeth Bustos-Contell & Gregorio Labatut-Serer & Samuel Ribeiro-Navarrete & Salvador Climent-Serrano, 2019. "Beyond Subsidies: A Study of Sustainable Public Subordinated Debt in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-7, February.
    17. Conor O'Kane & Vincent Mangematin & Will Geoghegan & Ciara Fitzgerald, 2015. "University Technology Transfer offices : the search for identity to build legimacy," Post-Print hal-01072998, HAL.
    18. Muhammad Nawaz Tunio & Iffat Sabir Chaudhry & Sadia Shaikh & Mushtaque Ali Jariko & Mohsen Brahmi, 2021. "Determinants of the Sustainable Entrepreneurial Engagement of Youth in Developing Country—An Empirical Evidence from Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-17, July.
    19. Mian, Sarfraz & Lamine, Wadid & Fayolle, Alain, 2016. "Technology Business Incubation: An overview of the state of knowledge," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 50, pages 1-12.
    20. Francisco García Fernández & José Sevilla Morales & Jesús Delgado Rivas & Mónica Sánchez Limón, 2017. "The Assembly Enterprises in the Electric Electronic Sector in Tamaulipas, Mexico: Their Knowledge Ties," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(5), pages 1-64, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technology Platforms; Innovative Development; Modernization; Triple Helix;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C02 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Mathematical Economics
    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General
    • O21 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Planning Models; Planning Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eco:journ1:2016-01-21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ilhan Ozturk (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.econjournals.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.