O. Smorodinov’s scientific contributions

The article deals with the issues related to the monitoring of R&D projects supported by the public funds. In accordance with the current legislation, monitoring of scientific, technical and innovation projects is carried out within the framework of the structural elements of state programs. To conduct monitoring, results, control points and objects of scientific and technical activities should be established. At the same time, however, within the framework of the three forms of financial support for the implementation of R&D projects – grant financing, subsidies for the implementation of public assignments, public procurement – different monitoring methods and procedures are applied. Further, the names of the control points are not linked to the results of projects in terms of technology readiness levels (TRL). Finally, information systems that support the monitoring and evaluation of R&D results are not fully compatible with each other. As a result, the overall effectiveness of monitoring decreases, which leads to delays in making managerial decisions and entails wasteful spending of budget funds. In the leading OECD countries, there is a practice of centralized methodological support of the implementation of R&D and innovation, which provides an unified approach to management of such projects and conjugation of state support at all stages of innovation cycle. Successful project management involves application of such specific management tools as the stage gates model and TRL methodology, which provide effective monitoring of results and flexibility in making management decisions, including the possibility of adjusting the basic parameters of projects at different stages of their implementation. The experience of foreign countries shows that in order to improve the quality and effectiveness of monitoring of R&D projects in Russia, it is necessary to ensure the harmonization of general and sectoral legislation governing the monitoring of the results of research, development and innovation projects, which will ensure the formation of a unified approach within the framework of project management of state programs. It is advisable to extend the rules for monitoring the results of R&D adopted in the system of grant financial support to the systems of public assignment and public procurement in this area of activity, creating conditions for the conjugation of various forms of public support. Finally, it is necessary to improve operation of the existing state information resources for the management of scientific, technical and innovation projects.

The article discusses characteristic features of public-private partnerships (PPPs) as an instrument of public management of innovative development. It is noted that after the global financial crisis of 2008–2009, strategic PPPs play an increasingly important role in the implementation of large-scale research and technical programs and projects. They are characterized by a focus on solving long-term issues of innovative and socio-economic development, long implementation periods and significant scale, an emphasis on the development of critical technologies, complexity and expansion of functions of a public partner, as well as high risks of research and development. There are two types of such partnerships – institutional (Joint Technology Initiatives) and contractual. Both of these types are formed based on the European Technology Platforms, however, institutional partnerships involve formation of a legal entity, and contractual PPPs are formed based on agreements between the European Commission and industry associations. It is argued that a variety of forms and types of PPPs, in which public entities and corporations, research and educational institutions, and innovative small and medium-sized companies participate, can contribute to solving the priority tasks of Russia’s innovative development. To do this, first of all, it is necessary to amend the current legislation, which lacks norms regulating general principles and rules for the formation and functioning of PPPs in science and technology sectors. Russia’s regulations contain an extremely narrow definition of the purpose and objects of PPP agreements. The goals are not related to the public innovation policy, and the objects are represented by a closed list of 21 objects, which, with the exception of computer programs and databases, belong to technological complexes of real estate and transport infrastructure. According to the authors, adoption of such a legal act will contribute to implementation of the key national programs, projects and initiatives and boost innovation development of the country.

The article describes evolution of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale and analyzes prospects of using TRL methodology as an instrument of public financing of R&D and innovation in OECD. It is noted that TRL was first applied at the end of 1960s by NASA, where it was used as a means of measuring progress in technology development. In the beginning of 2000s, it has become a widespread project management tool. Advantages and limitations of the TRL scale application in R&D project management are revealed in the article. In 2010s, several countries and regions started using TRL methodology in different capacity – as an instrument of public funding of national innovation systems. EU also announced plans to build TRL into the foundation of its new innovation policy. The plans were partially implemented in the subsequent EU Framework program Horizon 2020. Application of TRL scale was limited to tender documents and applications for project funding. It was not applied in the program budget planning or in assessment of project results. The authors claim that in order to use TRL methodology in public funding at full length, it is necessary to create certain conditions. The most important of them are: a} clear definition of the stages (types) and results of scientific and technical activities in accordance with the TRL methodology and linking them with the instruments of public support; b) development and application of appropriate number of industry-specific TRL scales; c) wider usage of TRL methodology and other indices of readiness in planning, implementation and integral evaluation of the results of R&D projects; d) introduction of TRL methodology into national systems of accounting and reporting on R&D projects and development of science, technology and innovation sphere.

At present, the methodology of technology readiness levels (TRL) is used worldwide by both public organizations and private companies to address a number of issues. In the system of public support for the development of the science, technology and innovation (STI) sector, TRL is increasingly used as a tool for R&D project management and funding. At the same time, the TRL methodology is not integrated into the budget process in any country in the world, which does not allow the full potential of TRL to be actualized. For Russia, where the role of state scientific and research organizations and public funding of STI is extremely important, this task is a real challenge. As the authors conclude, not only should the TRL methodology be adapted to the tasks of managing budget expenditures for R&D, but the public funding system with its financial instruments should also be adjusted taking into account the requirements of TRL. The key direction of integrating the TRL methodology into the budgetary process is linking of TRLs with elements of types of budgetary expenditures. This task could be accomplished after having taken the following measures: improvement of the budget classification in terms of R&D expenditures; application of a unified project approach to all instruments of state financial support and a unified classification of R&D projects; provision of a unified system for recording expenditures on science; improvement of public support instruments; and determination of the required ratio of R&D funding from budgetary and extrabudgetary sources for various TRL intervals. This work should include development and implementation of a new approach to understanding the boundaries of the STI sector, stages (types) of scientific activities, planning methods and conditions for the provision of public support, as well as improvements in the conceptual apparatus and tools of the support.