The significant lag of domestic science from foreign ones, the insufficient effectiveness of university science, the lack of its strategic planning, the problems of Russian graduate school - all these are manifestations of the general crisis of science and education in Russia. This is the opinion of Leonid PERELOMOV, associate professor of Tula State University, candidate of biological sciences.
|
PERELOMOV Leonid Viktorovich - Associate Professor of Tula State University, Candidate of Biological Sciences. |
Leonid Viktorovich, how would you define the state of university science in Russia today? Does it need modernization? What needs to be done first for this?
Science as a complex human activity aimed at obtaining objective knowledge about nature and society, by definition, will always need constant development and updating. Scientific activity includes various components, a number of which - such as the education system and scientific information - are well developed in our country. However, the domestic scientific infrastructure (scientific institutions, experimental and laboratory equipment), and research methods lag significantly behind those in post-industrial and highly industrialized countries. The measures taken by the country's leadership to develop science are clearly insufficient and are often only of an image nature. There is a feeling that decision-makers have a certain misunderstanding of the role of science in a modern state, an underestimation of its potential effectiveness even from the standpoint of forming the country’s authority: for example, the launch of the first artificial satellite went down in the history of mankind forever, but this is what happened at the World Championships football in Sweden in 1958, only specialists remember.
We should not forget that science is one of the spheres of a person’s spiritual life, part of his culture. Therefore, a crisis in science inevitably leads to a crisis in culture. In our country there is a unique unified system of scientific institutions - the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Few countries can afford to have such a government organization, whose main task should be the production of scientific knowledge. In this regard, university science has traditionally occupied a secondary position in our country. However, today the world is changing so quickly that classical, fundamental knowledge is no longer enough to train a good specialist - he must master the full range of modern knowledge in his field. This also puts forward new requirements for university teachers, who are required to freely navigate the latest achievements of science, which is impossible if the university teacher is not engaged in scientific work himself. The involvement of students in research work is of great importance - mastering the methodology of scientific work contributes to the development of logical thinking and forms creative approaches to solving professional problems.
In addition, I would like to quote the words of V.I. Vernadsky, who believed that “strengthening scientific work related to local or national life makes it possible to use the spiritual forces of the people as much as it will never be possible to use them in a unitary centralist organization. The local center uses and calls to life spiritual forces that are otherwise inaccessible to stimulation. In this way, the maximum intensification of scientific work is achieved.” 1 At the moment, only higher educational institutions cover the entire territory of our huge country, and only on their basis is it possible to realize the scientific potential of a wide range of our citizens. Moreover, if we look at the university system of, say, Germany, the most famous and significant universities there are by no means the capital’s universities. All these arguments emphasize the urgent need for the widespread development of university science in Russia.
There is an opinion that receiving grants is not an easy story. You have a lot of experience in this regard. You were the owner of a grant from the President of the Russian Federation to support young candidates of science, and underwent scientific internships in Germany, Italy, and Japan. All this happened not so long ago. There was an element of luck in this, a happy coincidence, or your successes are the result of hard work, perseverance, determination and, of course, the talent to learn. What advice would you give to young scientists and researchers who do not want to leave their country and want to be useful to it?
Grants are a form of competitive funding for science. Please note that the terms “win” and “win the competition” are different from each other. Winning a game always has a significant element of chance and luck. And winning the competition means that you have demonstrated the best compliance with the conditions of this competition. Moreover, these conditions are quite simple: publications, previous grants (the so-called scientific foundation) and your ideas for solving the problem. The presence of a chain of these conditions is the key to the successful completion of your grant application. Therefore, for a novice researcher, the publication of the first article is extremely important in financial support for his work - a scientific supervisor should help with this. As for ideas, here, if you want to become an independent and self-respecting scientist, you need not to borrow ideas, but to generate them yourself. The minimum conditions required for this are your head and the presence of a good library. As a friend of mine says: “Two hours in the library saves two months in the laboratory.”
In addition, in our country there are sometimes, frankly speaking, strange selection criteria - such as the cost of work and the time it takes to complete it.
Of course, the work of the experts evaluating your grant application is not without subjectivity. But this subjectivity should normally manifest itself not in sympathy for your personality, but in interest in your idea and its support. Unfortunately, this is not always observed, especially in our country, especially at the level of provincial universities, but I don’t want to talk about it, since such phenomena have nothing to do with scientific expertise and real science.
Analyzing the practice of receiving domestic and foreign grants, I can say that in my case, of the above factors, success was associated with hard work and determination. You should not expect that every (or even every third) application you make will receive support. The lack of bias in the assessment of my projects is evidenced by the list of various organizations that provided support for research: the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, the German Academic Exchange Service, the Japan-Russia Youth Exchange Center, INTAS, the Volta Center - Landau Scientific Network, the Australian government.
I am happy to share my experience, but I really don’t like giving advice to anyone, so I will answer with quotes. One of them belongs to the poet Yu. Levitansky: “Everyone chooses for himself a woman, a religion, a path. Whether to serve the devil or the prophet - everyone chooses for himself.” Another quote from K. Ushinsky: “If you successfully choose work and put your soul into it, then happiness will find you on its own.”
As for stimulating the influx of young people into science, in my opinion, this can provide the opportunity for their self-realization in this area and a decent salary.
Do you agree that studying in Russian graduate school is fraught with problems? Why are the criteria by which graduate graduates in Russia are determined not valued in America and Europe? What is the main difference between Russian and foreign (European) scientists?
We should not talk about differences between scientists, but about differences in the organization and financial support of scientific research. In terms of these indicators, we differ sharply not only from Europe, but also from the countries of Latin America.
Of course, studying in Russian graduate school is associated with a number of problems, but I would not single them out separately - all these are manifestations of the general crisis of science and education in the country. Please note that in Europe and America, the evaluation criteria for our graduate students are not quoted, but the graduate students themselves are, for the most part, gladly accepted. This once again confirms that we need to unify the criteria for assessing the effectiveness of scientific activity with post-industrial countries if we ourselves want to follow the path of development.
The system of training postgraduate students (precisely postgraduate students, since few of them get to the point of defending a dissertation) in Russian universities is often distorted, from the purposes of admission to graduate school to the defense. Sometimes the real purpose of admission to graduate school is not work on a scientific problem, but, say, the additional teaching load of a teacher. That is, in this case we are not talking about science, but, in fact, about the social security of the scientific director. With decent salaries for university staff, such incidents would disappear on their own. Some managers, who still have non-material motivation, take on graduate students to obtain another academic title or to satisfy their own vanity.
As I understand, today there are no clear requirements for the publication of a dissertation candidate by the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation: I have seen abstracts where the lists of published works included only abstracts of regional conferences and monographs of university publishing houses on free topics. The abstracts themselves were similar to reviews from the Internet, in which it was impossible to make out what was done by the dissertation author and what was borrowed from literary sources. Therefore, the supervisor must be responsible for the final result of the graduate student’s preparation - the defense of a high-quality dissertation.
This is not to say that work is not being done to improve the quality of dissertation papers - the number of dissertation councils has been radically reduced, abstracts must be posted on the website, etc. Just the other day, information was received that the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation is tightening the rules for opening postgraduate courses in universities. Despite this, reforming Russian postgraduate education will obviously require a long time.
How do you evaluate the criteria of the all-Russian system for assessing the effectiveness of higher education institutions in the research field from the Indicative List of June 19, 2012. Are they related to the topic of scientific development?
In my opinion, the Approximate list of criteria for assessing research activities is proposed correctly. I understand that it will not be easy for regional universities to adapt to such an assessment system. But this is the only way to become part of the modern world. The criteria, in fact, set the goals for the development of science in universities. The next logical step should be a comprehensive government program to ensure the achievement of these goals.
I am glad that the list does not include the “number of monographs” criterion, since publications of this kind, often not seriously reviewed, can be published in unlimited quantities with proper financial support.
Patent activity is assessed by the volume of funds from the management of intellectual property, which is also very rational.
- How would you define the relationship between university science and RAS organizations? How to avoid conflicts of interest?
At the moment, it seems to me that conflict relations have developed more between areas of research than between the Russian Academy of Sciences and universities, which is a normal situation. The Russian Foundation for Basic Research, Russian Humanitarian Foundation and other respected foundations finance projects regardless of the departmental affiliation of their authors. The situation could radically change if the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, within the framework of its federal targeted programs, finances projects exclusively in universities, and the size of grants from “supra-departmental” funds does not radically increase.
It seems that it would be in the public interest to reserve the exclusive right for the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation to finance infrastructure scientific projects for universities, and to finance initiative scientific projects through national scientific foundations, making their work more transparent.
For the development of university science, it would be very useful to recall and continue the Federal Target Program for the integration of university science and the Russian Academy of Sciences. At our university (Tula State University - Ed.), especially at the Faculty of Natural Sciences, this kind of cooperation has been quite productive and continues to this day.
- What is your attitude to the third wave megagrant competition?
I support holding a mega-grant competition as an opportunity to create growth points for domestic science. It is and only through megagrants that modern analytical equipment can be purchased. For example, the only EXAFS station (External X-ray Absorption Fine Structure - extended fine structure of X-ray absorption spectra) in our country operates at the synchrotron in Novosibirsk, despite the presence of powerful theoretical schools on this method in other cities.
The megagrant is one of the real opportunities to expand the geography of this method. I will share my experience of participating in the megagrant competition.
Together with Antonio Violante, a professor at the Friedrich II University of Naples, we took part in two previous competitions with a project to create a laboratory for the biogeochemistry of microelements at Tula State University. The conclusion that can be drawn based on our experience is poor-quality scientific examination of projects. On our last application there were four expert opinions - two foreign and two Russian. Two foreign and one domestic experts made a number of comments on the project, but generally approved it. The second Russian expert categorically stated that our project did not meet the objectives of the competition, namely the absence of plans to create a research laboratory in the application. It was obvious that he either did not read the application at all, or was guided by some of his own considerations. I hope that the organization of the third wave of megagrants, as well as the examination of projects, will be held at a higher level. A prerequisite for this may be the participation of the scientific community in the formation of an expert council on megagrants. Thus, the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation appealed to the Society of Scientific Workers with a request to nominate their candidacies for the expert council. The society nominated 10 specialists, 5 of them were approved by the ministry (one subsequently refused).
How do you feel about the idea of reorganizing universities in the country, reducing state universities by 20 percent, and branches by 30. Will this benefit university science or will it lead to new problems?
I have a very negative attitude towards the reduction of universities, primarily because universities in many regions are cultural edifiers. It seems to me that it would be more effective to go through the reform of existing universities - to optimize their management structure (including by appointing rectors directly from the ministry), to introduce areas of training that meet the needs of the time, to create a minimum scientific infrastructure with the possibility of its further development at the expense of scientific funds .
- Vernadsky V.I. “Tasks of science in connection with state policy in Russia” // “Biosphere and Noosphere”, M.: Iris-Press, 2002.
February 27, starting at 9.00.
Embed code for the site
The future of medical science begins today! This is how we can characterize the International Medical Forum “University Science. INNOVATIONS", which will be held on February 27-28, 2019 at the First Moscow State Medical University named after. THEM. Sechenov.
The forum is held under the auspices of the Association “Council of Rectors of Medical and Pharmaceutical Universities of Russia” with the aim of supporting leading scientific teams carrying out research activities in priority areas of development of medical science, focused on the creation of high-tech innovative products that ensure the preservation and strengthening of public health. It is a platform for summing up the results of the work of scientific teams and researchers from all over Russia.
On February 28, the key event of the Forum will be held - the Plenary session “Sechenov University - University of Life Sciences”. The following speakers will speak at the meeting:
Pyotr Glybochko, rector of the First Moscow State Medical University named after. THEM. Sechenov;
Gennady Onishchenko, first deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on Education and Science;
Natalya Polushkina, Vice President, Executive Director of the Biological and Medical Technologies Cluster of the Skolkovo Foundation.
Also invited to participate in the Forum are the Minister of Health of the Russian Federation Veronika Skvortsova, the Minister of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation Mikhail Kotyukov and others.
On this day, the following sections will be held in the halls of the Sechenov University Congress Center: “Invasive Technologies”, “Reproductive Health”, “Therapy”, “Tissue Bioengineering”, “Applied Bioengineering”.
Summing up the results of the all-Russian scientific and practical event for young scientists “UNIVERSITY SCIENCE RELAY”, presenting the best innovative projects in the field of healthcare of leading universities of the Russian Federation, and the All-Russian scientific and practical conference with international participation “MEDICAL SPRING - 2019” will be one of the main events of the Forum.
This year, about 450 projects from 48 Russian universities were announced to participate in the “University Science Relay” on scientific platforms approved by the Russian Ministry of Health: innovative activities of medical and pharmaceutical universities in Russia, fundamental technologies in medicine, oncology, cardiology and angiology, neurology, endocrinology, pediatrics, psychiatry and addictions, immunology, microbiology, pharmacology, preventive environment, reproductive health, regenerative medicine and invasive technologies. The regional expert commission selected 173 projects, 42 of which became finalists.
654 projects from 50 universities were submitted to the competition of student scientific projects “Medical Spring”. This year, the platforms were supplemented with a therapy section and a section of the Sechenovsky Pre-University Resource Center. The winners of the “University Science Relay” and “Medical Spring” will be awarded valuable prizes. The winners who took first place in the all-Russian scientific and practical event “University Science Relay” will receive the opportunity to have a two-week internship at the clinical bases of Sechenov University.
Over the course of two days, forum guests will take part in scientific and practical conferences in the format of panel discussions and round tables. Main topics of discussion: innovative activities of medical and pharmaceutical universities in Russia, innovative fundamental technologies in medicine, regenerative medicine, invasive solutions, preventive environment, reproductive health, cardiology and other areas of medicine.
The Forum program includes plenary lectures on the latest research in the field of bionic nutrition, genomic sequencing, oncology, master classes for young researchers on academic writing and rules for submitting documents for grants.
An exhibition of scientific research from Russian universities and student scientific circles of Sechenov University will be organized at the event site. Russian publishing houses will present their periodicals.
The Forum will also feature two sections of the Resource Center “Medical Sechenov Pre-University” for students in grades 10 and 11.
“University Science” will present unique opportunities for students of all ages and young scientists: students from the Pre-University, representatives of student science and young researchers from 48 medical universities in Russia will present their works on the sidelines of the Forum. Their joint participation in the conference is not just an exchange of information, but a transfer of knowledge from generation to generation. We can say that a mentoring system will be formed within the framework of the conference. In addition, participation in the forum will allow you to see new trends in the development of scientific areas, understand which areas are most interesting for young people, and identify bright, promising scientific projects,” noted the Chairman of the Association “Council of Rectors of Medical and Pharmaceutical Universities of Russia”, Rector of Sechenov University Petr Glybochko.
Every year the International Medical Forum “University Science. INNOVATIONS" brings together more than 800 participants covering various areas of medical science.
Participants in the event will be professors, heads of scientific schools, recognized in the professional community, representatives of investment funds and research and production companies that shape the vector of development of medical science, and commercial structures that have made a significant contribution to the development of domestic medicine. The forum will be of interest to novice specialists who have as their goal the promotion of scientific ideas and developments.
The event will take place at the Congress Center of the First Moscow State Medical University named after. THEM. Sechenov at the address: Moscow, st. Trubetskaya, 8. The opening will take place February 27, starting at 9.00.
Copy to clipboard
SCIENCE AND EDUCATION
L. GOCHBERG, Dr. econ. Sciences, Vice-Rector
I. KUZNETSOVA, Ph.D. econ. Sciences, Director of the Center for Statistics and Monitoring of Science and Innovation State University - Higher School of Economics
University science, which is a key element of the country’s scientific potential, largely determines the quality of training of highly qualified specialists in the higher education system.
In leading industrial countries, universities, along with industrial companies, play a leading role in the development of science. Performed on the basis of universities
University science:
prospects
development*
the volume of its financing by industry, the creation of small research and technology firms on a massive scale.
The institutional structure of Russian science, its internal relationships, and functioning mechanisms were basically formed long before the start of radical political and economic reforms. Transformations in recent years
Table 1. Organizations performing research and development
1990 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Total 4646 4059 4122 4137 4019 4089 4099 4037
Research 1762 2284 2360 2528 2549 2410 2686 2676
organizations Design bureaus 937 548 513 438 381 543 318 289
Design and design and survey 593 207 165 135 108 118 85 81
organizations Pilot plants 28 23 24 30 27 36 33 31
Higher education 453 395 405 405 393 387 390 388
establishments Industrial enterprises 449 325 342 299 240 279 284 288
Others 424 277 313 302 321 316 303 284
A significant part of fundamental research is involved. The latest trends in university science are associated with its growing contribution to the innovative and economic potential in general, the increase
* The authors express their gratitude to their colleagues at the Higher School of Economics I.Yu. Ivanova, I.A. Rozhkov, L.A. Rosovetskaya, G.S. Sagieva, A.V. Sokolov for valuable advice in preparing this publication.
despite changes in forms of ownership, the liquidation of most line ministries, the emergence of new organizational structures, etc., have not yet affected the fundamental foundations of the institutional model of science that emerged in Soviet times. The main form of organization of science in Russia remains legally independent academic and industrial research institutes, separated from universities and enterprises in the real sector of the economy (Table 1). Moreover, the dynamics of the last decade indicate that the development of a network of scientific organizations continues the tradition of creating new legal entities in the form of research institutes, rather than strengthening the research base of universities and enterprises. They account for 67.3% of all organizations performing research and development (58% in 1990), while the shares of universities and enterprises do not exceed 10 and 6.5%, respectively. The share of research institutes in the number of people employed in science is equally high - 82.7% in 2002 (in 1990 - 55%).
The consequence of this situation was the imbalance of the national innovation system. Its main elements - research institutes, design bureaus, universities, enterprises, innovation infrastructure - exist in isolation from each other. This institutional model of science is archaic, does not meet market requirements, and is characterized by low efficiency. Science in its current form is not able to effectively interact with industry and adequately respond to the needs of the economy. The level of innovation activity in the economy ultimately does not exceed 10%, which is almost five times lower than the average for EU countries.
Science in the former USSR was largely divorced from the higher education system, which caused significant damage to the scientific authority of higher education. With the exception of some elite universities, this often gave second-rate
the special nature of research and development carried out in universities, which, in turn, was reflected in the state of affairs with the financing of university science and the state of its material and technical base.
The university sector of science covers research units of higher educational institutions, research institutes (centers), design, design and engineering organizations subordinate to universities or the Ministry of Education of Russia, experimental (experimental) enterprises subordinate to universities, other organizations and enterprises (Table 2 ).
The main component of this sector of science
Universities and other institutions carrying out research and development. Their number (390 at the beginning of 2003) certainly does not meet modern requirements. In Germany, for example, there is not a single university where scientific research is not conducted. For us, for the period 1990-2002. the number of universities performing research and development decreased by 14%; Taking into account the fact that the private universities that have emerged in recent years practically do not conduct scientific work, as a result, only 38% of Russian universities are engaged in it.
Continuation of this trend could lead to irreversible consequences not only for science itself, but also for the quality of training of specialists.
The basis of the scientific potential of universities is highly qualified personnel. The number of full-time teaching staff in 2003 was 291.8 thousand people. for state and 19.5 thousand people. for non-state universities (for comparison: the number of researchers in the country is only 414.7 thousand people), the number of doctors of science working in them, respectively, is 32.3 and 2.3 thousand people. (for science in general - 22.6 thousand people), candidates of sciences 135.5 and 7.7 thousand people. (for science in general
79.8 thousand people). Postgraduate students of the university can be actively involved in scientific research.
Table 2. Main indicators of research and development in the university science sector
1995 1999 2000 2001 2002
University sector of science - total Number of organizations 511 529 526 529 531
Number of personnel engaged in research and development, people. 52065 40781 40787 43463 44135
Internal costs for research and development, million rubles. 657.4 2292.5 3489.3 5487.7 7322.9
Fixed assets for research and development, million rubles. 7432.1 17186.6 14550.0 21900.0 20334.8
Universities and other institutions of higher education performing research and development Number of organizations 395 387 390 388 390
Number of personnel engaged in research and development, people. 40015 30855 31110 31149 31053
Internal costs for research and development, million rubles. 518.9 1815.0 2777.4 4122.7 5433.0
Fixed assets for research and development, million rubles. 5854.0 15808.0 13050.0 18064.2 16280.6
Research institutes (centers) subordinate to universities and (or) the Ministry of Education of Russia Number of organizations 88 111 107 111 113
Number of personnel engaged in research and development, people. 9458 7482 7254 9637 10313
Internal costs for research and development, million rubles. 1 02.7 356.9 528.4 1082.1 1449.2
Fixed assets for research and development, million rubles. 1480.3 1047.5 1161.4 3507.7 3693.2
Design, design and engineering organizations subordinate to universities and (or) the Ministry of Education of Russia Number of organizations 18 19 19 19 17
Number of personnel engaged in research and development, people. 2170 2145 2198 2302 2325
Internal costs for research and development, million rubles. 32.2 100.4 157.8 243.1 393.3
Fixed assets for research and development, million rubles. 91.1 293.0 290.3 295.0 290.3
call (117.9 thousand people) and senior students (472.9 thousand people). It is difficult to assess the use of their potential for scientific purposes today; unfortunately, relevant statistical data are not available. (According to our estimates, if in the late 1980s and early 1990s more than 70% of graduate students and almost 30% of full-time students participated in research and development, today the numbers are approximately 3-4 times lower).
The high qualification level of university personnel is evidenced by the fact that the share of specialists with academic degrees in the total number of teaching staff (57.5%) is more than twice the same value for researchers employed in Russian science as a whole (24.7%).
As for the research departments of universities, by the beginning of 2003 the total number of their personnel had reached
There were only 31.1 thousand people, including approximately 10 thousand doctors and candidates of science. In the overall structure of those employed in science, their share was 3.6%.
The higher education sector is characterized by the largest decline in employment compared to other sectors of Russian science - by 73.7% for the period 1989-
2002 versus 60.7% national average. This was reflected not only in a decrease in the number of personnel in research departments of universities, but also in a fall in the employment of part-time faculty in research and development. Research work in conditions of a lack of financial resources in higher educational institutions is paid much lower than, for example, teaching in paid universities and in various types of courses, which does not contribute to its attractiveness in the eyes of teachers. Today, as five years ago, salaries in university science departments are approximately 1.2-1.3 times lower than the average for universities.
Nevertheless, the scientific departments of universities continue to actively attract part-time workers, whose number is more than twice that of full-time staff. For many university teachers, combining teaching and scientific activities has always been and remains a good tradition. At the beginning of 2003, the number of people working in scientific departments of universities on a part-time basis or under labor agreements or contracts amounted to 75.1 thousand people. (including researchers - 54.7 thousand people). At the same time, the majority of the teaching staff is not engaged in scientific activities: according to our estimates, only a fifth of university teachers take part in research and development.
The key function of universities, which closely integrates them with science, is the training of highly qualified scientific personnel. Almost two thirds of universities have postgraduate courses, where they teach
There are 87% of the total number of graduate students in the country. It was thanks to universities that it was possible to expand the scope of training of highly qualified scientific personnel against the background of its reduction in research institutes.
The indicators of financing university science are clearly not adequate to its personnel potential. The share of the Russian Ministry of Education in federal budget expenditures on civil science (under section 06 “Fundamental research and promotion of scientific and technological progress”) in 1999–2003 decreased from 7.4% to 6% (Table 3). A separate budget line allocates expenses for research and development of Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, which is another 0.6%. In order to strengthen cooperative ties between science and education, a special federal target program was adopted, the total cost of financing which in 1999-2001. slightly more than one percent. In 2002 on the Federal Target Program “Integration of Science and Education in Russia for 2002-2006” a total of 0.6% was spent, and in
2003 - 0.4% of the funds in the specified section of the budget. Neither the composition of the program’s activities nor the current volumes of its funding make it possible to ensure real integration of scientific and educational activities.
The total costs from all sources of funding for research and development carried out by universities amounted to 5.4 billion rubles in 2002, or 4% of the total costs for science (for the higher education sector as a whole - 7.3 billion rubles, or 5%). This share has remained virtually unchanged over the past decade, which radically contradicts global trends: the share of universities in the structure of spending on science in Russia is on average three times lower than in the USA (13.6%) and Japan (14.5%) and almost five times than in EU countries (20.9%).
Reduction in the scope of scientific research
Table 3. Expenditures on science from the federal budget (under the section “Fundamental research and promotion of scientific and technological progress”)
1999 2000* 2001 2002 2003***
Total, million rubles of which: Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation 11621.5 17091.7 23023.0 29962.5 40206.0
million rubles 859.2 1161.1 1566.1 1908.9 2403.0
percent Moscow State University named after. M.V. Lomonosov 7.4 6.8 6.8 6.4 6.0
million rubles 84.1 125.2 204.0 200.0 228.9
percent Federal target program "Integration of science and higher education in Russia for 2002-2006"** 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.7 0.6
million rubles 138.1 191.8 172.8 170.0 175.0
percent 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.4
*Data is given taking into account account balances.
1999 - Federal Target Program "State support for the integration of higher education and fundamental science (1997-2000)", 2000-2001. - Federal Target Program "State support for the integration of higher education and fundamental science."
innovations and developments in the higher education sector were accompanied by certain shifts in the structure of their funding sources. First of all, it should be noted the gradual increase in the share of non-state funds in university science
From 33.5% in 1994 to 39.1% in 2002 (Fig. 1). However, the state still remains the largest sponsor of all domestic science, including university science. In 2002, the total funds of the budget and public sector organizations amounted to 60.9% of the total cost of university science.
The contribution of the business sector over recent years has remained at the level of 20-21%, which indicates an increase in
freely significant innovative orientation of university research. For comparison, in a number of foreign countries the share of industry funding for university research is 9-13% (Canada, Belgium, Germany, Poland) and 16-19% (Korea, Turkey). Extra-budgetary funds have acquired serious importance for financing research and development in Russian universities: in 2002, their share in the costs for these purposes was 6.8%.
Due to the specifics of the domestic budget classification, funds allocated for the maintenance of universities (almost entirely intended for educational needs) are used for scientific research.
Rice. 1. Structure of internal costs for research and development in the higher education sector by funding sources (%)
□ Budget funds*
□ Extra-budgetary funds
□ Funds from business sector organizations
□ Facilities of higher educational institutions
■ Funds from private non-profit organizations
□ Funds from foreign sources
□ Own funds of scientific organizations
* Including budgetary allocations for the maintenance of universities (1994 - 8.7%; 2002 - 1.6%) and funds from public sector organizations (2002 - 17.2%).
goals on a miniscule scale. They account for only 1.6% of research and development expenditures in the university sector (8.7% in 1994). For Russian science as a whole, this value is 0.1%, while in leading industrial countries the so-called general university funds make a much more noticeable contribution to the financing of national science - up to 710% (Great Britain, Germany, Canada, Finland) and even 20% (Netherlands ).
A qualitatively new trend in the financing of university science has been the strengthening of the role of foreign sources - from 0.7% in 1994 to 6.6% in 2002. Despite the growth rate, in absolute terms this value is relatively small - approximately 481 million rubles. (excluding individual payments to individual scientists under foreign grants and contracts).
The most important component of the scientific potential of universities is the material and technical base for research and development. Its development and constant updating taking into account modern requirements is a key prerequisite for intensifying scientific and educational processes, improving the quality of scientific results, and the competitiveness of scientific, technical and innovative products. As of the beginning of 2003, the cost of fixed assets for research and development in universities amounted to 16.3 billion rubles. (6% of their total volume in the country’s science). The composition of fixed assets is dominated by the passive part (buildings, structures, etc.), and the share of the active part - machinery and equipment - reaches only 23%. University science is faced with the most acute problems in the ma- terial
technical and technical support for the research process: high degree of wear and tear and low rate of renewal of fixed assets, aggravating their physical and moral aging; lack of the latest high-precision equipment, modern instruments, computer science and telecommunications; the deplorable state of pilot production. According to a survey of university heads conducted by the Higher School of Economics in 2003, the level of provision with scientific equipment does not exceed 60%.
The low level of equipment of university science with fixed assets is confirmed by the actual values of the capital-labor ratio. In 2002, its value reached 524.3 thousand rubles/person, which is equivalent to 5.4 thousand rubles. in 1993 prices (twice lower than in 1995). The drop in this indicator was primarily due to the rapid decline in the volume of fixed assets compared to the number of people employed in research and development.
Solving these problems is possible only through the modernization of the innovation system and the education sector. First of all, it is necessary to achieve not declarative, but real recognition of education and science as national priorities. However, it is important to recognize that opportunities for increasing budget allocations will be determined by the overall dynamics of economic growth. In this regard, it is necessary to immediately begin implementing a set of priority measures aimed at developing and strengthening the scientific potential of universities, integrating science and education.
In particular, we should talk about increasing the efficiency of budget financing as an instrument of state scientific, technical and educational policy. In modern conditions, the state in our country is forced to compensate at the expense of budgetary funds for extremely low investment activity in science and innovation.
in the economic sphere, as well as the weak effectiveness of tax and other economic instruments for stimulating scientific and innovative activities.
First of all, it is necessary to carry out a structural maneuver in the expenditure of budget funds in Russian science as a whole. The bulk of the science budget still falls on basic funding of research institutes without taking into account their real scientific productivity. It is advisable to ensure the redistribution of funds in favor of financing projects on a competitive basis and state scientific funds, the shares of which in the budget of civil science in Russia today are unjustifiably small (20-25% and less than 10%, respectively). At the same time, it is absolutely necessary to maintain the volume of basic funding for the scientific activities of leading universities with recognized scientific schools. Such a redistribution should significantly change the structure and mechanisms of budget support for science in favor of competitive, targeted and targeted funding, when a significant part of the budget funds, as is customary in world practice, is allocated through contracts and grants. The share of project financing needs to be increased to 50-60%, and the total share of grant funds - to 20-25%.
Increasing the efficiency of using budget funds is also directly related to the restructuring of the network of state scientific institutions and priority support for new organizational forms, including research universities and centers of advanced research (centers of excellence). Such centers should be formed by uniting the most productive scientific groups from different organizations, selected on a competitive basis without limiting the topics of research performed, and endowed with the necessary financial, material and technical resources (including through reorganization and liquidation
organizations that have lost their scientific potential). This will entail a reduction in the number of budget recipients, getting rid of ballast and concentrating resources on supporting a limited circle of capable organizations. In such a situation, objective conditions will be created for expanding and intensifying the participation of universities in research projects on a competitive basis.
The rational use of financial resources largely depends on how correctly national development guidelines are chosen, what are the mechanisms for choosing priorities and what tools are used for their implementation. Unfortunately, the existing system in Russia for the formation of scientific and technical priorities does not allow concentrating efforts on the truly important scientific areas. Being officially recorded in the form of a certain list of priority areas for the development of science and technology, as well as critical technologies, they are formal in nature, most of them are formulated so vaguely that on their basis it is difficult, if not impossible, to make an informed decision on the financing of certain research projects. projects.
To improve the process of choosing the most important directions for the development of science and technology, it would be necessary to adopt foreign experience in technological foresight (Technology Foresight) as a basis for assessing the prospects of certain areas of research - both applied and fundamental. This will make it possible to significantly more effectively spend the limited resources allocated to science and attract extra-budgetary funds to finance those projects that can bring serious returns in the future.
It is necessary to move to medium- and long-term funding of scientific research while strengthening the role and improving the procedures of competitive
selection of research programs and projects financed from the federal budget. This approach would make it possible to ensure financing of projects for the entire period of their implementation, in contrast to the current system, when funds are allocated according to an annual scheme (as a result of which financing can be terminated even for effective projects). Appropriate conditions must be provided for when concluding and maintaining government contracts for scientific research. Moreover, it is useful to practice advanced planning of work as opposed to the ineffective practice of short-term planning within the calendar year, when holding tenders, approving estimates and concluding contracts with the customer is so delayed that there is no time left to carry out research as such. It is of fundamental importance to ensure the open nature of competitions without any limitation on the range of participants based on the form of ownership, organizational and legal form, and departmental subordination.
Relevant for the effective development of university science remains the need to enlarge research topics and the transition to the formation of large complex projects implemented within the framework of multidisciplinary consortiums based on universities. As a possible option for financing such projects, we can propose a system of two-stage competitions, when at the first stage the lead universities are selected - the leaders of the projects, which, in turn, at the second stage conduct a competitive selection of co-executors.
In order to justify the financing of research units (teams) of universities, both on an estimate and on a competitive basis, it would be good to introduce a mechanism for periodically assessing the results of their activities as a criterion for selecting the most effective and competitive ones.
auxiliary recipients of funds. It is important that such assessments are carried out in accordance with internationally accepted standards and procedures. At the same time, it is necessary to abandon budget support for scientific areas and organizations that do not have development prospects and are not provided with human, material and technical resources.
To expand fundamental and exploratory (academic) research in universities, it is advisable to more actively develop a system of scientific grants. It acts as the basis for selective support for capable teams and individual scientists; serves as a form of their public recognition; promotes independence in choosing research and development topics, including for solving fundamental scientific problems. It is necessary to “legalize” grants in civil legislation as a form of gratuitous support for science, education, and culture.
It is also necessary to ensure stimulation of the flow of extra-budgetary funds into the field of science and education, including through the provision of tax benefits, the introduction of mechanisms for accelerated depreciation of tangible and intangible assets, insurance of credit risks, etc.
The insufficient level of development and use of the scientific potential of universities significantly affects the processes of integration of science and education. Today, these areas of activity are largely separated from each other, both organizationally and economically. As a result, graduates of many universities often do not receive the required fundamental training, which sharply reduces their competitiveness in the labor market. On the other hand, the influx of young people - university graduates into domestic science remains at a minimal level (approximately 10-11% of annual recruitment in the field of science), as a result of which the basis for the reproduction of scientific personnel is lost.
The main aspects of the integration of science and higher education are:
Economic, based on the pooling of resources and harmonization of economic mechanisms for the functioning of scientific and educational complexes to obtain national economic and commercial effects;
Structural, which involves the organizational integration of scientific organizations and universities into unified scientific and educational complexes in order to optimize the structure of science and higher education;
Social, aimed at training young highly educated personnel and forming a modern Russian intellectual elite;
Innovative, ensuring the integration of innovative potentials in the field of science and higher education in order to enhance innovation activity in the Russian economy.
In Russia, the problem of integration of science and higher education is determined by the historical division of higher education, sectoral research institutes and fundamental science, concentrated primarily in the system of the Academy of Sciences. Small volumes of fundamental research in universities have long been considered one of the negative factors hindering the quality development of higher education. This is confirmed by statistical data: universities account for about 10% of the total volume of fundamental research in the country, while, for example, in the USA, university science is primarily fundamental research, accounting for almost 50% of the national volume of fundamental programs. In the structure of university research and development in Russia, the share of fundamental research is 34%, applied research - 43%, development - 23%, in the USA, respectively, 60%, 27%, 13%.
The situation is aggravated by the lack of funds for the purposes of science and education, combined with the current practice of their development.
effective budget planning, which in this case appears as an administrative barrier to integration processes. As noted above, the current budget classification does not allow universities to carry out academic research (including in departments) at the expense of funds allocated for their maintenance. Universities also experience a shortage of funds to attract leading specialists from academic and industry research institutes to teaching activities, who are not interested in this given the current level of remuneration. Similarly, funds spent by academic institutions on their own educational activities are considered non-earmarked. This jeopardizes the existence of basic university departments in academic institutions and work with graduate and senior students.
The gap between university education and fundamental science has received a kind of consolidation in the Law of the Russian Federation “On Education” and the Federal Law “On Higher and Postgraduate Professional Education”, where it is not even mentioned that employees of educational institutions, including universities, must (are obliged to ) conduct scientific activities. On the other hand, it follows from the Federal Law “On Science and Scientific and Technical Policy” that universities do not have the right to be called organizations engaged in research activities, and, as a result, do not have the right to receive budget funding for these purposes. The current practice of accreditation and certification of universities and scientific organizations, restrictions on economic, organizational and managerial activities are typical examples of administrative barriers that impede the effective functioning of university science.
Further actions to integrate science and education should include, first of all, the development of research
Russian universities as the basis of scientific and educational systems and their priority support from the state. A research university should not only be distinguished by the fundamental level of educational programs, but also be distinguished by high indicators of scientific potential - the volume of expenditures on research and development, the number of doctors of science, the number of defended doctoral dissertations, the number of publications in leading peer-reviewed journals, etc. The participation of universities in scientific research must be strictly taken into account during their state accreditation and periodic certification.
It is necessary to actively develop cooperation between universities and the Russian Academy of Sciences, other state academies, leading industry research institutes and design bureaus (including in the defense complex) by sending students for practical training (internship) in scientific organizations, attracting highly qualified researchers to train personnel, and providing scientific organizations with their production base for educational purposes, the creation of basic university departments in academic institutions and the implementation on this basis of master's and graduate student training programs, up to the redistribution of part of the budget allocations for education for these purposes.
Forms of integration of science and education should not be limited to rigid boundaries; these can be either legal entities created on the principles of full or partial integration of science and education, or contractual associations (consortia). In any case, the initial requirement for integration structures of all types is a high level of scientific research and educational activities.
Specific organizational forms of integration of science and education can be:
Joint scientific and educational associations in various organizational and
legal forms - from agreements for the implementation of joint educational programs (where the partners are universities, academic and industry scientific organizations) to the creation of independent scientific and educational centers and the formation of university complexes. It is important that scientific organizations included in such alliances are given the right to use the property assigned to them to carry out educational activities on the basis of their own license or an agreement with a university that has the appropriate license;
Centers of excellence (advanced research), formed on the basis of leading university and academic research teams and funded on a competitive basis. Such centers, as the experience of not only leading industrial countries, but in recent years also of a number of countries in Central and Eastern Europe, has shown, could become an effective tool for overcoming institutional barriers between science and education, while simultaneously solving the problem of restructuring state scientific institutions;
Centers for shared use of scientific equipment and telecommunication networks;
Joint testing centers and testing grounds, scientific and technological parks, scientific, technical and innovative firms;
Joint specialized councils for awarding academic degrees on the basis of leading universities and research institutes.
The development of university science is hampered by numerous administrative and legal barriers associated with both the insufficient elaboration and inconsistency of a number of legislative acts, and departmental arbitrariness. Neutralization and elimination of such barriers should be a priority step in supporting the development of university science by the state.
A striking example of excessive administration, which results in significant economic and moral costs, is the practice of state accreditation of scientific organizations. It is based on the definition of the concept of “scientific organization” used in the Federal Law “On Science and State Scientific and Technical Policy”. Instead of stimulating the development of scientific research and development as a type of activity independent of ownership and organizational and legal forms, the law relies on scientific organizations as legal entities “carrying out scientific and (or) scientific and technical activities as their main activity.” Thus, university and in-house (corporate) science is not only automatically excluded from the scope of certain benefits established for scientific organizations, but is also artificially cut off from participation in competitions for receiving budget funds. This practice not only does not reflect the real structure of Russian science, but also does not meet the long-term goals of its development in a market economy, disorienting governing bodies and the scientific and educational community itself. In conditions where state accreditation of scientific organizations is formal, this leads to unfair competition and prevents universities from equal access to budget funding for scientific research on a competitive basis.
As a measure to counter this trend, it is proposed to cancel state accreditation of scientific organizations as soon as possible and make appropriate changes and additions to the Federal Law “On Science and State Scientific and Technical Policy.”
We cannot ignore the issue of the status of scientific organizations (research institutes, design bureaus, etc.) at universities. The fact is that, according to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, state universities, being institutions themselves, can
act as founders of other legal entities only at the expense of income from the activities and property provided for in the charter. In such a situation, the status of research institutes at universities becomes uncertain, although many of them have great potential. A number of such research institutes, including those working in the field of high technology, have already ceased to exist, which certainly harmed the development of science in the relevant areas. Although the Law of the Russian Federation “On Education” establishes that “branches, departments, structural divisions of an educational institution may, by proxy, exercise fully or partially the powers of a legal entity, including having an independent balance sheet and their own accounts in banking and other credit organizations,” however in practice, when it comes to licensed types of activities, only an independent legal entity is allowed to obtain the appropriate permits. This means that there are two possible options for resolving the issue of the legal status of the above-mentioned scientific organizations: they either must become part of the university complex formed by a state university (university, academy) (the decision to create a university complex in the form of a single legal entity is made by the Government of the Russian Federation), or become structural divisions of the relevant universities.
The most important factor in intensifying scientific research and development in higher educational institutions is to ensure decent wages and social guarantees for university researchers. The current practice of budgetary financing of university science discriminates against full-time employees of scientific departments of universities, thereby acting as a serious barrier preventing them from strengthening their human resources potential and, above all, attracting young people.
Employees of university research departments turned out to be the most socially vulnerable part of the university community. The average monthly salary of this category of workers (3.3 thousand rubles in 2002) is 1.4 times lower than even the meager payment that has developed in the field of science as a whole (4.6 thousand rubles). Since budgetary regulations prohibit spending allocations received under the “Education” section on the salaries of full-time employees of scientific departments of universities, universities are forced to maintain as few of them as possible, attracting specialists mainly under civil contracts and masking actual labor relations. However, working under civil law contracts does not give researchers the rights and guarantees established by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, and explicitly excludes them from the social insurance system. Those researchers who are nevertheless included in the staff of universities on an extra-budgetary basis usually receive a guaranteed salary from extra-budgetary funds of universities at the level of the minimum wages provided for by law, and during periods of lack of funding they are sent on leave without pay.
It is obvious that such a system only contributes to the further outflow of personnel from the scientific departments of universities. In this regard, it would be advisable to equate full-time employees of scientific departments of universities in terms of wages and duration of vacations to the teaching staff and allow them to be paid from funds allocated under the “Education” section.
Equally important is providing researchers with adequate working conditions necessary to conduct scientific work. Sometimes employees simply lack regular jobs, not to mention specialized laboratories or experimental workshops.
An extremely serious barrier to university science is the existing system of government contracts for scientific research and development. Higher education institutions carry out a large number of projects commissioned by ministries and departments, including within the framework of federal target programs. However, the current practice of preparing and concluding government contracts sharply limits the freedom to use the funds won in the competition, not allowing not only to optimally organize the work, but also to ensure transparent accounting of the actual costs of their implementation, observing the requirements of civil, budget and tax legislation.
Thus, ministries (departments) establish various internal standards and regulations that sharply limit the possibility of effective spending of funds from government contracts, including, for example, standards for maximum rates of remuneration, services of co-contractors, overhead costs, material costs, office supplies, sometimes even pencils and paper clips. In a certain sense, it can be argued that the preparation of estimates for government contracts for the implementation of scientific research is regulated by ministries and departments much more strongly than the calculation of estimates for the allocation of budgetary allocations for the maintenance of institutions.
The result of such unreasonable regulation is the impossibility of actually implementing estimates, especially in terms of remuneration rates for scientific workers. When funds from government contracts are spent on wages at estimated rates, it becomes almost impossible to attract leading, most qualified specialists to perform work, whose work requires adequate payment, taking into account their demand in the market for scientific, technical and consulting services.
As a result, the noted regulation of wage rates when drawing up cost estimates for government contracts leaves the contractor with a choice - either to artificially inflate the number of workers established in the estimate to ensure competitive wage rates, or to attract workers to carry out government orders at low wage rates, which obviously affects quality of work.
They require resolving the problems of legal qualifications, accounting and tax accounting and reporting on funds received by universities on the basis of government contracts for R&D. There is legal uncertainty as to which acts - the Civil or Budget Codes - regulate the legal relations that arise between the ministries - customers of work under government contracts and the executing universities, as well as between universities as budgetary institutions and their inspection bodies - the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation, the KRU of the Ministry of Finance of Russia, Ministry of the Russian Federation for Taxes and Duties. In the same regard, many universities cannot determine what type of financing government contracts belong to under the Tax Code: targeted financing or income from the sale of work (services).
Recognition by all interested parties of income from government contracts for R&D as revenue from the sale of work (services) should entail the abolition of the impossible regulation of cost estimates (the estimate remains for the purpose of justifying the contract price and comparing the competitive advantages of organizations of various legal forms participating in competitions). It is also necessary to cancel the requirements for the accurate execution of estimates of government contracts, allow universities to save saved funds and use them for scientific research, and eliminate the associated threats of sanctions for misuse of budget funds.
One of the unresolved problems in the development of Russian science is the lack of demand for its results from both the real sector of the economy and the state.
University science is a fertile environment for the formation of infrastructure for scientific, technical and innovative activities. Currently, in various regions of Russia, 92 technology parks, 129 engineering and 256 scientific and methodological centers, 133 experimental production facilities, and numerous technological and information centers operate on the basis of universities. Universities have created more than 2.2 thousand small innovative enterprises that ensure the development and production of new types of products.
At the same time, Russian universities are characterized by an extremely low level of commercialization of intellectual property objects created in them. Thus, in 2002, universities concluded only 79 technology export agreements, or 6% of all technology export transactions concluded in the country. The net value of technologies exported by universities amounted to 30.5 million rubles, i.e. 0.1% of the volume of technology exports from Russia.
First of all, it is necessary to eliminate as soon as possible the existing uncertainty in the existing system of intellectual property rights in order to enhance the introduction into economic circulation of the results of scientific and technical activities created with the involvement of federal budget funds. This means, first of all, the transfer of ownership rights to the results of scientific and technical activities created with funds from the federal budget or with their involvement, to development organizations with the right to transfer on a licensing basis to third parties who are able to most effectively implement these results in the economy. The copyright holder must ensure compliance with the following obligations:
bodies: registration of documents of protection for the results of scientific and technical activities created with funds from the federal budget; organization of production of high-tech products (services) in Russia; allocation of part of the income to authors; allocation of licensing income to research and development.
For the successful commercialization of research and development results, it is necessary to promote the creation and support of small start-up firms that ensure the development and transfer of new technologies, including by providing them with start-up capital (based on the experience of the American BHS program) and tax incentives, providing legal and information support, as well as organizing technology transfer centers responsible for promoting intellectual property developed at universities into production, conducting patent and marketing research.
Personnel problems are increasingly becoming a serious obstacle to innovation. The training of modern specialists should, if possible, stay ahead of intensive technological changes in the economy. Universities are required to quickly develop new areas of large-scale training of specialists in the commercialization of technologies and management of innovation processes. Such specialists should receive the necessary knowledge on the management of innovative projects, marketing of innovations and innovative products, technology transfer, patenting and other forms of intellectual property protection, and the formation of innovation networks in the scientific and industrial communities.
Literature
1. L.M. Gokhberg. Science statistics. - M., 2003.
2. L. Gokhberg. National Innovation
Russian system in the conditions of the “new economy” // Questions of Economics. - 2003. -
A large and highly qualified contingent of scientific workers is concentrated in universities of the Russian Federation, and scientific and pedagogical personnel are trained here. The scientific work of university teachers is one of the most important qualification indicators when electing and appointing them to relevant positions.
Basic directions The scientific activities of the university include:
- attracting scientific and pedagogical workers to carry out scientific research that contributes to the development of science, engineering and technology;
- use of the results obtained in the educational process;
- promoting the training of highly qualified scientific and pedagogical personnel and improving the scientific qualifications of teaching staff;
- practical familiarization of students with the formulation and resolution of scientific and technical problems and the involvement of the most capable of them in carrying out scientific research.
Basic tasks The scientific activities of universities are as follows:
- development of science and creative activity of scientific and pedagogical workers and students;
- priority development of fundamental research as the basis for the creation of new knowledge, the development of new technologies, the establishment and development of scientific schools and leading scientific and pedagogical teams in the most important areas of progress in science and technology;
- ensuring the training of qualified specialists and highly qualified scientific and pedagogical personnel in universities on the basis of the latest achievements of scientific and technological progress;
- research and development of theoretical and methodological foundations for the formation and development of higher education, strengthening the influence of science on solving educational and educational problems, preserving and strengthening the basic, determining nature of science for the development of higher education;
- effective use of the scientific and technical potential of higher education to solve priority problems of updating production and carrying out socio-economic transformations;
- development of new, progressive and fruitful forms of creative cooperation with scientific, design, technological organizations and industrial enterprises with the aim of jointly solving the most important scientific and technical problems, creating high technologies and expanding the use of university developments in production;
- expansion of innovation activities with the aim of creating and mastering new or improved products, technological processes, services or new solutions that improve organization and management in the scientific, technical and production-technological fields, updating products, services and production;
- improving management in the field of creation and commercialization of intellectual property, as well as stimulating the processes of creation and use of intellectual property by forming an effective university policy in the field of intellectual property as an organizing and intensifying factor in scientific, scientific-technical and innovative activities and the entry of scientific teams into the global high-tech market products that ensure a balance of legal and property interests of subjects of scientific activity in relation to the results they obtain;
- expansion of international scientific and technical cooperation with educational institutions and companies of foreign countries with the aim of entering the world system of science and education and joint development of scientific and technical products;
- creation of a qualitatively new experimental and production base for higher education;
- attracting additional budgetary and extra-budgetary funds to the university science sector.
Scientific research at universities is carried out on the basis of cooperation with scientific institutions of the Russian Academy of Sciences, republican and branch academies of sciences, with scientific organizations and enterprises of all forms of ownership (joint research programs, organization of associations, unions, research and educational centers, temporary creative teams, etc. .). Universities independently resolve issues of concluding contracts and determining obligations. Funding for scientific work is carried out from the relevant budgets and from extra-budgetary sources.
The performers of scientific work at the university are the teaching staff in accordance with individual plans during regular working hours, as well as during non-working hours under contracts, students in the course of completing coursework and dissertations; doctoral students, graduate students, interns.
When conducting university scientific work, the relationship between the educational and scientific processes is ensured.
Significant efforts are aimed at stimulating research activities and innovative development in higher professional education. Currently, a number of activities are being implemented to develop leading universities:
- creation of innovative infrastructure on their basis;
- stimulating cooperation with high-tech companies;
Creation of laboratories under the leadership of leading scientists and others.
One of the global trends in the development of science and technology is increased support for scientific research conducted in universities, which serve as the basis for training personnel for the new technological sphere. In developed countries, research universities are the core of an integrated scientific and educational complex, which ensures the implementation of a significant share of fundamental and applied research. A whole range of measures is being developed aimed at supporting and gradually concentrating scientific research in universities (strengthening the personnel component of university science, updating equipment, participation of universities in technological platforms, in the creation of small enterprises, supporting their cooperation with enterprises, etc.). This trend is one of the defining trends in global scientific and technological development, along with the development of an interdisciplinary research and technological base of the mega-science class in the largest scientific centers (both national and international). There is an integration of the scientific and educational complex with research organizations that have the specified infrastructure.
University science receives the greatest development in national research universities(NIU).
National Research University is a higher educational institution that equally effectively carries out educational and scientific activities based on the principles of integration of science and education. The most important distinctive features of research institutions are the ability to both generate knowledge and ensure the effective transfer of technologies into the economy; conducting a wide range of fundamental and applied research; the presence of a highly effective system for training masters and highly qualified personnel, a developed system of retraining and advanced training programs. In practice, a research university is an integrated scientific and educational center or a group of such centers in the form of a set of structural divisions that carry out research in a general scientific direction and train personnel for certain high-tech sectors of the economy.
University is a higher educational institution that trains specialists in fundamental and applied sciences, and also conducts scientific research on a fairly wide scale. Many modern universities operate as educational, scientific and practical complexes. Universities comprise several institutes and/or faculties, which concentrate a set of various disciplines that form the basis of scientific knowledge.
Institute is an independent higher education institution or an association of departments within a university, training specialists in one or more areas, as well as conducting scientific research in relevant areas.
Academy- a higher educational institution that implements educational programs of higher and/or postgraduate professional education, as well as scientific research in relevant areas of a predominantly applied nature.
Research activities in universities are organized in extremely diverse ways depending on the field of activity, the scale of research, traditions, etc. These can be research institutes, research centers, scientific and educational centers, scientific, innovation and production complexes, technology transfer centers, collective use centers, resource centers, research units, scientific departments, scientific laboratories, student design bureaus, etc. P.
An example of the structure of the research unit (RPR) of Novosibirsk State University is shown in Fig. 10.3.
The revival of the Russian Academy of Sciences is hampered by underfunding, excessive bureaucracy and centralization. All this, and an infinite number of problems, will have to be solved by the elected President of the RAS Fortov and his new Presidium
“From the era of survival to the era of renaissance.” This slogan sounded in the programs of all three contenders for the post of President of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Nobel laureate Academician Zhores Alferov, Academician Alexander Nekipelov and Academician Vladimir Fortov. And their ways of realizing the goals of this slogan were also close.
First, to achieve a sharp (2-3 times) increase in funding for science (at the Academy, universities, and industrial enterprises), mainly for updating the fleet of high-tech equipment for scientific research.
Secondly, to establish a more efficient use of the Academy’s real estate. We are talking about leasing unused premises, buildings and structures, land, etc. After all, it is known that Western universities: Oxford, Cambridge, Berkeley, Illinois, Stanford, etc., receive a significant part of their allocations for science from leasing land and structures they own. In my opinion, instead of taking away real estate and lands from the Academy (given to it for indefinite and free use), on the contrary, we need a law allowing their rental for scientific and production purposes.
The main thing in these two points is good contact with the authorities: the leadership of the Russian Federation, the Duma, etc. I am confident that academic institutions (in particular my Institute of Radio Engineering and Electronics) will be able to effectively take advantage of this and dramatically improve and update the fleet of their necessary high-tech equipment, as well as raise employee salaries to an appropriate level.
For this, by the way, we need another law according to which scientists of the older generation, after leaving leadership positions (I don’t mean age, but health and vital activity) could receive a decent material remuneration in the conditions of our country. Then they will free up places, which will ensure career growth for young scientists.
All this, and an infinite number of problems, will have to be solved by the elected President of the RAS Fortov and his new Presidium.
The academic form of science is a Russian tradition established by Peter I, in contrast to the university form that has developed in Western countries. By the way, the academic form of science presupposes the participation of a university, whose students undergo practical training at the Academy under the guidance of leading scientists. The well-known triad of Peter I: lyceum - university - academy with well-equipped laboratories.
But the academic form of science, the Academy itself, as a living organization, certainly must change, adapt to new conditions in a changing human society. Difficulties and changes in the Russian Academy of Sciences have arisen from time to time over its long, almost 300-year history. They are ripe now. The main one, in my opinion, is the chronic underfunding of the Academy and science in general over the past two decades. In all civilized countries, fundamental science is funded by the state. In our country, budget funding for academic institutions fell almost 20 times in the early 90s.
In business, as a rule, only very large corporations can afford to develop serious fundamental science. In our country, after the collapse of the USSR, industry practically collapsed, leaving about 30% in many industries. That is, financing under agreements and contracts also fell sharply. Accordingly, the high-tech equipment necessary for the development of advanced fundamental science has ceased to be updated.
All this led to a sharp outflow of scientific personnel abroad and into business, especially young scientists who did not see prospects for scientific work in Russia. Today, the generation of scientists of the most fruitful age (30-40 years) is practically absent. The Academy has aged dramatically. But, thank God, I think that an irreversible process has not yet occurred.
The previous Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences, headed by Yuri Osipov, has been waging a stubborn struggle for the survival of the Russian Academy of Sciences and, in general, for the survival of fundamental science in Russia for several years, practically since the notorious 90s.
Vladimir Fortov took an active part in this process. And now it is he, chosen by the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences, who will lead the revival of the Russian Academy of Sciences in new conditions and generally raise the prestige of science in Russian society.
It is especially worth talking about the interaction of the Russian Academy of Sciences with the university community and with the country's industry.
There are practically no problems in the relationship between academic and university science, since almost all members of the Russian Academy of Sciences teach at universities, and university professors do their “big science” in the institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences and in close cooperation with their colleagues from academic institutions. And there is no need to artificially contrast academic and university science, as some officials from the Ministry of Education and Science do. Since the time of Peter I, this has been one single Russian science.
Regarding the interaction of academic and university science with industry, in his program Vladimir Fortov said: “The Academy of Sciences [and universities along with it – ed. Yu. Gulyaeva] in modern conditions must take on a broader function than just the production of scientific knowledge. The Academy should become the ideological center of state economic and innovation policy.”
In his program, Zhores Alferov emphasized: “High science cannot develop normally without the development of high-tech industry.” Question: how to achieve the goals set.
The answer is in various forms in the programs of candidates for the post of President of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Their essence boils down to the fact that in conditions when the market in Russia has already been largely captured by foreign companies working in the field of high technologies, only the scientific achievements of Russian scientists (Academy of Sciences, universities) will make it possible to make a high-tech product better than what is already is on the market. This will allow the Academy of Sciences (together with leading universities) to take its rightful place in the economic and innovation sphere of our country.
But for this, our scientists, RAS staff, and university scientists need to create conditions for living and working at the level of leading civilized countries. And it is known that the Russian land is rich in talents.
It is also necessary to make some urgent changes in the structure of the Russian Academy of Sciences. First of all, increase the role of regional branches and give them greater independence. Excessive centralization is not needed here. It is necessary to reconsider the distribution of institutes among departments. Over the many years of work, the themes of the institutes have changed and are more in line with the areas of other departments.
One of the important points of Fortov’s program is the fight against excessive bureaucracy in the Academy of Sciences, which often interferes with the effective conduct of scientific research. There is a proposal to limit tenure in the same leadership position to two terms of 5 years.
Yuri Gulyaev, academician and member of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences, director of the Institute of Radio Engineering and Electronics of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IRE RAS), scientific director of the Institute of Nanotechnologies of Microelectronics of the Russian Academy of Sciences (INME RAS), professor and head of the Department of Solid State Electronics and Radiophysics FFKE MIPT