IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ura/ecregj/v1y2017i1p290-307.html

Inventive Activity of Researchers: Cross-Country Rating Assessments

Author

Listed:
  • Tatyana Volkova

    (Institute of Economics)

  • Ivan Usoltsev

Abstract

In recent years, the study of the research capacity of the country and regions has become more active not only from the point of view of their leading components (personnel, financial, information, organizational, material-and-technical ones) but also from the perspective of the assessment of productivity and effectiveness of researchers’ work. In the cross-country analysis, the certain highly aggregative parameters, which values, as a rule, are not in favour of Russia, are used. At the same time, at profound studying of this topic, these estimates cannot represent correctly the real trends of inventive activity in the scientific and technological sphere of the country and its regions. Moreover, the measurement of the researchers’ creative potential realization is carried out mainly through the assessment systems of their printing activity. Little attention is paid to the problem of the rating assessments of the researchers’ inventive and patent activity and its products from a cross-country perspective (especially to the detailed ones) as well as to its institutional determinants. Therefore, the authors have chosen this subject-matter of the research. Its empirical basis is the statistical materials of both the national database and those which are recognized by the world scientific community. This research has both theoretical and methodological orientations. The purpose is the development of methodological and methodical tools of the research and assessment of researchers’ inventive activity including methodological support of cross-country comparative assessments. The authors have based the hypothesis on their previous research: in the conditions of the decreasing level of financial security, continuous reduction of a number of researchers, institutional restrictions and contradictions, the inventive activity of national researchers is still exist, and in a number of its leading parameters is implemented at the level of the advanced countries of the world. From the point of view of the purpose and objectives of the research, we have used the parametrical model with the allocation and assessment of such parameters, methods and indicators, which provide the integrated assessment of the dynamics of inventive and patent productivity and effectiveness allowing to reach the high level of reliability. The authors have applied the following methods: dialectic and gnoseological one, structural and logical one, structurally functional one, the method of decomposition, the method of statistical groups and index method. A transition from the traditional analysis with parameters and indicators of the high aggregated level to the level of their expedient specification has been carried out. The authors have introduced the specified new key indicators grouped by the criteria: inventive activity; patent activity and effectiveness. The article proves the rationale for a dialectic combination of the process oriented estimates, efficiency evaluations and vector (reflecting development trends) estimates. The results of this research can be considered in the case of the development of management decisions by the relevant structures, which are responsible for scientific and technological, and innovation policy at all levels of the power and management.

Suggested Citation

  • Tatyana Volkova & Ivan Usoltsev, 2017. "Inventive Activity of Researchers: Cross-Country Rating Assessments," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(1), pages 290-307.
  • Handle: RePEc:ura:ecregj:v:1:y:2017:i:1:p:290-307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://economyofregion.ru/Data/Issues/ER2017/March_2017/ERMarch2017_290_307.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Aleksandr Tatarkin, 2010. "Intellectual resource of the society and its role in reproduction process," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(3), pages 20-32.
    3. Bottazzi, Laura & Da Rin, Marco & Hellmann, Thomas, 2008. "Who are the active investors?: Evidence from venture capital," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(3), pages 488-512, September.
    4. Aleksandr Tatarkin, 2010. "Intellectual resource of the society and its role in reproduction process," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(3), pages 32-42.
    5. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    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. Tatyana Volkova, 2019. "Implementing the Potential of Intellectual Products’ Commercialisation in the International Trading System," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(1), pages 242-255.

    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. Heijs, Joost, 2003. "Freerider behaviour and the public finance of R&D activities in enterprises: the case of the Spanish low interest credits for R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 445-461, March.
    2. Bottai, Carlo & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Raiteri, Emilio, 2025. "A new approach to measuring invention commercialization: An application to the SBIR program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(9).
    3. Christoph Meister & Bart Verspagen & Guntram B. Wolff, 2006. "European Productivity Gaps: Is R&D the Solution?," Chapters, in: Susanne Mundschenk & Michael H. Stierle & Ulrike Stierle-von Schütz & Iulia Traistaru-Siedschlag (ed.), Competitiveness and Growth in Europe, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Grafström, Jonas & Poudineh, Rahmat, 2023. "No evidence of counteracting policy effects on European solar power invention and diffusion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    5. GUILLAIN, Rachel & HURIOT, Jean-Marie, 1999. "How information shapes cities: theory and facts," LATEC - Document de travail - Economie (1991-2003) 1999-05, LATEC, Laboratoire d'Analyse et des Techniques EConomiques, CNRS UMR 5118, Université de Bourgogne.
    6. repec:got:cegedp:102 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Dechezlepretre, Antoine & Einiö, Elias & Martin, Ralf & Nguyen, Kieu-Trang & Reenen, John Van, 2016. "Do tax incentives for research increase firm innovation? An RD design for R&D, patents and spillovers," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 66428, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Andrew Copus & Dimitris Skuras & Kyriaki Tsegenidi, 2006. "Innovation and Peripherality: A Comparative Study in Six EU Member Countries," ERSA conference papers ersa06p295, European Regional Science Association.
    9. Beugelsdijk, S. & Cornet, M., 2001. "How far do They Reach? The Localization of Industrial and Academic Knowledge Spillovers in the Netherlands," Other publications TiSEM 303b1186-e227-43ce-a118-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Karine Pellier, 2007. "Convergence, Patenting Activity and Geographic Spillovers: A Spatial Econometric Analysis for European Regions," Working Papers 07-14, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Dec 2007.
    11. Francesco Macheda, 2025. "China’s Road towards Decarbonization: Unrealistic Promise or a Credible Commitment?," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(3), pages 354-382, July.
    12. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Technological regimes and sectoral differences in productivity growth ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 1105-1145, December.
    13. Castelnovo, Paolo & Florio, Massimo & Forte, Stefano & Rossi, Lucio & Sirtori, Emanuela, 2018. "The economic impact of technological procurement for large-scale research infrastructures: Evidence from the Large Hadron Collider at CERN," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1853-1867.
    14. Pedro de Faria & Francisco Lima, 2012. "Interdependence and spillovers: is firm performance affected by others’ innovation activities?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(36), pages 4765-4775, December.
    15. Daniel Nepelski & Giuditta De Prato, 2020. "Technological complexity and economic development," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 448-470, May.
    16. Fedderke, Johannes W., 2018. "Exploring unbalanced growth: Understanding the sectoral structure of the South African economy," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 177-189.
    17. Seema Sharma & V. J. Thomas, 2008. "Inter-country R&D efficiency analysis: An application of data envelopment analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 76(3), pages 483-501, September.
    18. Bravo-Ortega, Claudio & García Marín, Álvaro, 2011. "R&D and Productivity: A Two Way Avenue?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 1090-1107, July.
    19. Michael Peneder & Karl Aiginger & Gernot Hutschenreiter & Markus Marterbauer, 2001. "Structural Change and Economic Growth," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 20668.
    20. Capolupo, Rosa, 2009. "The New Growth Theories and Their Empirics after Twenty Years," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy, vol. 3, pages 1-72.
    21. Lach, Saul, 1995. "Patents and productivity growth at the industry level: A first look," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 101-108, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:ura:ecregj:v:1:y:2017:i:1:p:290-307. 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: Alexey Naydenov (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.economyofregion.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.