THE INTERACTIVE MODEL OF THE STATE REGULATION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER TO THE NATIONAL ECONOMY AS A FACTOR OF ITS INNOVATIVE DEVELOPMENT


Keywords: knowledge economy, scientific knowledge transfer, innovative development of the national economy, state regulation of the scientific knowledge transfer, interactive model of scientific knowledge transfer.

Abstract

Topicality. In modern conditions, science and technology play a decisive role in the effective development of the economies of advanced countries. At the same time, in Ukraine during the years of independence science has lost its influence on socio-economic development due to the lack of an effective system of converting research results into concrete economic achievements, and the state's inability to create the necessary conditions and incentives for knowledge transfer.
Aim and tasks. The purpose of the article is to substantiate the interactive model of scientific knowledge transfer to the national economy as a basis for developing practical recommendations for state regulation in this sphere, in the conditions of transition to the knowledge economy.
Research results. The conceptual base of the interactive model of scientific knowledge transfer to the national economy is substantiated. In particular, the characteristics of the knowledge economy that determine the features of state regulation of the scientific knowledge transfer, namely, the emphasis on the dissemination of knowledge, not on their creation; resource approach to knowledge, and their focus on action. The classification of types of knowledge in the knowledge economy is given, and the special role of implicit knowledge is emphasized, which requires direct contact for its transfer or active participation and presence of persons who possess it. The models of the innovation process in the knowledge economy are considered and the predominance of the interactive model of innovations is shown, according to which the innovation arises as a result of interaction between knowledge producers and consumers of knowledge, which exchange both with codified and implicit knowledge.
An interactive model of scientific knowledge transfer to the national economy has been developed and its distinction from the linear model of scientific knowledge transfer has been shown. Approaches to the state regulation of the scientific knowledge transfer have been formed, according to linear and interactive models based on the concept of "market failures".
Conclusion. State regulation of the scientific knowledge transfer to the national economy of Ukraine should move away from a narrow understanding of this activity as the commercialization of technology, and reduction of regulatory measures in this area to intellectual property rights protection and "technology push" measures. There is a need for a broader understanding of knowledge transfer as an interactive process involving interaction between different stakeholders, and state regulation in this area should be aimed at mitigation the risks associated with the coordination and network failure of knowledge transfer actors; funding infrastructure and activities aimed at stimulating interaction between knowledge transfer stakeholders, encouraging the exchange and joint creation of knowledge.

Author Biography

O.Yu. BILOUS

Researcher
Institute of Market Problems and Economic&Ecological Research of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Frantsuzskiy Boulevard, 29, Odesa, Ukraine, 65044

References

1. «The Global Competitiveness Report» (2017–2018): World Economic Forum Site. Retrieved from: http://reports.weforum.org/global-competitiveness-report-2017-2018 [in English].
2. Goden, B. (2010). Konceptual'nye osnovy nauchnoj, tehnologicheskoj i innovacionnoj [Conceptual bases of scientific, technological and innovation policy]. Forsajt – Foresight, 2, 34-43 [in Russian].
3. Rein, M., Schon, D. (1993). Refraining Policy Discourse. The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning, (pp. 145–166). Durham: Duke University Press [in English].
4. Godin, B. (2008). «The Knowledge Economy: Fritz Machlup‘s Construction of a Synthetic Concept». Project on the History and Sociology of S&T Statistics Working Paper, 37, 33 p. [in English].
5. Machlup, F. (1962). The Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States. Princeton: University Press [in English].
6. Druker, P. (2007). Biznes i innovacii [Business and innovation]. Moscow: Viljams [in Russian].
7. Fedulova, L.I. (2009). Ekonomіka znan': pіdruch. [Knowledge economy: textbook]. Kyiv: NAN Ukraini; In-t ekon. ta prognozuv. [in Ukrainian].
8. Smith, K. (1995). Interactions in Knowledge Systems: Foundations, Policy Implications and Empirical Methods. STI Review, 16, 72 [in English].
9. Lundvall, B.-Å. et al. (2007). Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy, 36, 680–693. [in English].
10. OECD (1996). The knowledge-based economy. Paris, 125 p. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd.org/sti/sci-tech/1913021.pdf [in English].
11. Bilous, O. (2015). Derzhavne reguljuvannja u sferі transferu znan' ta tehnologіj jak chinnik іnnovacіjnogo rozvitku ekonomіki Ukraїni [State regulation of knowledge and technology transfer as a factor of innovative development of Ukraine's economy]. Vіsnik socіal'no-ekonomіchnih doslіdzhen' – Socio-economic research bulletin, 57, 100-107 [in Ukrainian].
12. Burkinskyi, B.V. (Ed.). (2019). Instytutsionalne zabezpechennia sotsialno-ekonomichnoho rozvytku rehioniv Ukrainy v umovakh detsentralizatsii [Institutional support of socio-economic development of the regions of Ukraine in the conditions of decentralization]. (Vols 1-2). ІPREED NAN Ukrainy. Odessa. [in Ukrainian].
13. Burkinskyi, B.V. (Ed.). (2020). Dominanty staloho rozvytku rehioniv Ukrainy [Dominants of sustainable development of the regions of Ukraine]. ІPREED NAN Ukrainy. Odessa. 620 p.
Published
2021-03-20
How to Cite
BILOUS, O. (2021). THE INTERACTIVE MODEL OF THE STATE REGULATION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER TO THE NATIONAL ECONOMY AS A FACTOR OF ITS INNOVATIVE DEVELOPMENT. Economic Innovations, 23(1(78), 22-28. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31520/ei.2021.23.1(78).22-28