FEATURES OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS IN THE REGIONS  OF THE EUROPEAN NORTH OF RUSSIA: A POPULATION PERSPECTIVE

Original article

Download article

Semyon L. Ivanov1, Svetlana V. Terebova2

1,2Vologda Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Vologda, Russia

1slivanov2020@mail.ru, http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4647-5824

2svetlana-ter@mail.ru, http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2044-9521

Abstract. This study contributes to and extends the theoretical and analytical foundations of the theory of the creative class, in which the population’s perception of science and innovation processes is considered to be one of the key factors influencing the level of scientific and technological progress. The relevance of the study lies in the fact that the transition of the domestic economy to an innovative business model is of particular importance at present, when there is an unfavorable economic situation and high geopolitical risks. In this regard, it is necessary to identify the attitude of Russian society towards science and innovation, with due consideration for regional nuances. The study hypothesizes that by understanding the nature  of innovation processes, the factors influencing them, their relationships, and the interplay between individual interests  and social values, it becomes possible to explain the forms and nature of the influence of communities on scientific  and technological progress. The goal of the study is to analyze the perception of science and innovation by the population  at the regional level. The object of the study is the population of the regions of the European North. The subject of the study is the population’s perception of science and innovation. The study relies on systems analysis and uses the core methods  of socio-economic research (quantitative, qualitative, and predictive). Particular emphasis is placed on the questionnaire method; it was used to survey the population of the Vologda region, which is representative of the European North of Russia. The novelty of the study lies in the development and testing of sociological tools for assessing the population’s perspectives on the problems and prospects associated with progress in science and innovation at the regional level. Our survey results reveal that, overall, the region’s population holds a positive view of national achievements in research. The results correlate with those of surveys conducted earlier on the same topic, which enables us to conclude that the perception of science and innovation by the population of the Vologda region does not differ significantly from the general opinion of Russians. However, the Vologda region’s population places lower trust in national researchers and the Russian Academy of Sciences — almost 25% lower than the national average. In the final part of the article, conceptual recommendations are proposed  to enhance an innovative culture and public receptivity. The outcomes of this research contribute to the advancement  of economic science and provide insights into the latest tools in this sphere. They can also be used to improve population engagement in economic progress by fostering an innovative culture. Moreover, they can inform key projects in public policy.

Keywords: science, innovation, innovation process, population, region, digitalization, Industry 4.0, public opinion

Acknowledgments: This study was supported by the Russian Science Foundation under Grant No. 23-28-01841 (https://rscf.ru/project/23-28-01841).

For citation: Ivanov S. L., Terebova S. V. Features of scientific and technological progress in the regions of the European North of Russia: A population perspective. Sever i rynok: formirovanie ekonomicheskogo poryadka [The North and the Market: Forming the Economic Order], 2023, no. 2, рр. 107–125. https://doi:10.37614/2220-802X.3.2023.81.004. (In Russ.).

References

  1. Kozhevnikov S. A. Innovacionnoe razvitie Evropejskogo Severa Rossii v kontekste integracii ekonomicheskogo prostranstva strany [Innovative development of the Russian North in the context of integration of the country’s economic space]. Problemy razvitiya territorii [Problems of Territory Development], 2021, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 123–137. (In Russ.). https://doi:15838/ptd.2021.1.111.7.
  2. Kozhevnikov S. A., Patrakova S. S. Integracionnye processy na Evropejskom Severe v rakurse mezhregional’nyh migracij naseleniya [Integration processes in the European North from the perspective of the interregional population migrations]. Problemy razvitiya territorii [Problems of Territory’s Development], 2020, no. 5 (109), 134–150. (In Russ.). https://doi:10.15838/ptd.2020.5.109.9.
  3. Kutsenko S. Yu. Upravlenie innovacionnym razvitiem depressivnyh regionov severa evropejskoj chasti Rossii [Management of innovative development of depressed regions of the north of the European part of Russia]. Prilozhenie k zhurnalu Izvestiya vuzov. Geodeziya i aerofotos”emka [Supplement to the journal Izvestiya vuzov. Geodesy and aerial photography], 2009, no. 2–2, pp. 139–142. (In Russ.).
  4. Tishkov S. V., Egorov N. E., Volkov A. D. Ocenka sovremennogo sostoyaniya innovacionnogo razvitiya severnyh i arkticheskih territorij [Assessment of the current state of innovative development of the Northern and Arctic territories]. Arktika i Sever [Arctic and North], 2022, no. 47, pp. 57–75. (In Russ.).
  5. Fiorida R. Cities and the Creative Class. Routledge, 2004. 208 p.
  6. Fiorida R. The flight of the creative class: The new global competition for talent. Liberal education, 2006, pp. 22–
  7. Zhdanova O. A. Rol’ innovacij v sovremennoj ekonomike [The role of innovation in the modern economy]. Ekonomika, upravlenie, finansy [Economics, management, finance], 2011, pp. 38–40. (In Russ.).
  8. Vologova Yu. V. Innovacionnoe razvitie rossijskoj ekonomiki: sostoyanie i analiz mer gosudarstvennoj podderzhki [Innovative development of the Russian economy: status and analysis of state support measures]. Vestnik instituta ekonomiki RAN [The bulletin of the institute of economics of the Russian academy of sciences], 2022, no. 2, 153–168. (In Russ.). https://doi:10.52180/2073-6487_2022_2_153_168.
  9. Gafurova L. S. Rol’ innovacij v sovremennoj ekonomike [The role of innovation in the modern economy]. Aktual’nye voprosy sovremennoj ekonomiki [Topical issues of the modern economy], 2022, no. 4, pp. 617–620. (In Russ.).
  10. Kadirova R. A. Rol’ innovacij, nauki i gosudarstva v razvitii ekonomiki [The role of innovation, science and the state in economic development]. Universum: ekonomika i yurisprudenciya [Universum: economics and law], 2021, 1–2 (77), pp. 8–10. (In Russ.).
  11. Pishnyak A., Khalina N. Perception of New Technologies: Constructing an Innovation Openness Index. Foresight and STI Governance, 2021, no. 15 (1), рр. 39– https://doi:10.17323/25002597.2021.1.39.54.
  12. Kandrichina I. N. Sociologiya obshchestvennogo mneniya: problemnoe pole metodologii [Methodological problems of contemporary sociology of public opinion]. Filosofiya i social’nye nauki [Philosophy and social sciences], 2008, no. 2, pp. 12–16. (In Russ.).
  13. Shuvalova O.R. Nauka glazami rossiyan [Science from the view of Russians] // Forsajt [Foresight and STI Governance], 2007, Vol. 1, No 1. pp. 38-43 (In Russian).
  14. Korchagina Yu. S. Osobennosti vzaimodejstviya nauki i obshchestva: analiz kommunikativnogo prostranstva [Features of the interaction between science and society: analysis of the communicative space]. Aktual’nye problemy social’noj kommunikacii: materialy vtoroj Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii [Actual problems of social communication: materials of the second International scientific and practical conference], 2011, pp. 30–32. (In Russ.).
  15. Dickel S., Franzen M. The “problem of extension” revisited: new modes of digital participation in science. Journal of science communication, 2016, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1–
  16. Schrögel Ph., Kolleck A. The many faces of participation in science: literature review and proposal for a Three-Dimensional Framework. Science and technology studies, 2019, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 77–99. https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.59519.
  17. Vohland K., Land-Zandstra A., Ceccaroni L., Lemmens R., Perelló J., Ponti M., Samson R., Wagenknecht The science of citizen science. Springer, 2021. 529 p.
  18. Rowe G., Frewer L. J. A typology of public engagement mechanisms. Science, technology, and human values, 2005, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 251–
  19. Bucchi M., Neresini F. Science and public participation. The handbook of science and technology studies. 2008, 449–472.
  20. Irwin A. Citizen science: a study of people, expertise and sustainable development. Routledge, 1995, 265 p.
  21. Lorenz L. Addressing diversity in science communication through citizen social science. Journal of science communication, 2020, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.19040204.
  22. Shuvalova O. R. Prestizh professii uchenogo v mire i v Rossii [The prestige of the profession of a scientist in the world and in Russia]. Naukovedcheskie issledovaniya [Scientific research], 2015, no. 2015, pp. 19–42. (In Russ.).
  23. Zuhba O. Innovacionnye effekty deyatel’nosti domohozyajstva [Innovative effects of household activities]. Vestnik Kievskogo nacional’nogo universiteta imeni Tarasa SHevchenko. Ekonomika [Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Economy], 2013, no. 145, pp. 30– (In Russ.).
  24. Venkatesh V., Davis F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 2000, no. 46 (2), pp. 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.
  25. Venkatesh V., Morris M., Davis G., Davis F. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 2003, no. 27 (3), pp. 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540.
  26. Rumyantsev A. A. Nauchno-innovacionnaya deyatel’nost’ v regione kak faktor ego ustojchivogo ekonomicheskogo razvitiya [Research and innovation activity in the region as a driver of its sustainable economic development]. Ekonomicheskie i social’nye peremeny: fakty, tendencii, prognoz [Economic and social changes: facts, trends, forecast], 2018, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 84–99. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.15838/esc.2018.2.56.6
  27. Rumyantsev A. A. Naukoemkost’ ekonomiki regionov severo-zapada Rossii [Knowledge-intensive economy of the North-Western regions of Russia]. Zhurnal ekonomicheskoj teorii [Russian journal of economic theory], 2021, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 584–595. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.31063/2073-6517/2021.18-4.8.
  28. Voroshen O. G. Prestizh professii nauchnogo rabotnika v ocenkah molodyh uchenyh [The prestige of the profession of a scientist in the assessments of young scientists]. Sovremennye tendencii razvitiya nauki i tekhnologij [Modern trends in the development of science and technology], 2016, no. 2–5, pp. 12–14. (In Russ.).
  29. Shuvalova O. R. Prestizh professii uchenogo v mire i v Rossii [The prestige of the profession of a scientist in the world and in Russia]. Naukovedcheskie issledovaniya [Scientific research], 2015, pp. 19–42. (In Russ.).
  30. Adylgareev V. I. Uroven’ dohoda naseleniya v Rossii: problema i puti resheniya [Income level of the population in Russia: the problem and solutions]. Ekonomika i upravlenie: nauchno-prakticheskij zhurnal [Economics  and management: scientific and practical journal], 2022, no. 1 (163), pp. 28–32. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.34773/EU.2022.1.5.
  31. Gamukin V. V., Miroshnichenko O. S. Vliyanie srednedushevyh dohodov na kreditnoe i sberegatel’noe povedenie naseleniya v Rossii [The influence of per capita income on the credit and savings behavior of the population in Russia]. Uroven’ zhizni naseleniya regionov Rossii [The standard of living of the population of the regions  of Russia], 2021, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 57–66 (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.19181/lsprr.2021.17.1.5.
  32. Kuz’mina E. V., Zamyckaya A. D. Predprinimatel’stvo kak faktor razvitiya regiona [Entrepreneurship as a factor in the development of the region]. Journal of Economy and Business [Journal of Economy and Business], 2021,   2–1 (72), pp. 122–124 (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24412/2411-0450-2021-2-1-122-124.