CRITERIA FOR CHOOSING PRIORITY TECHNOLOGICAL FIELDS FOR DEVELOPMENT – VIABILITY OF TECHNOLOGICAL INVENTIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL IMPLEMENTATION
Abstract
There has been a review done of indicators for defining the viability of new technological inventions for industrial implementation, used by international organisations. The article demonstrates the advantage of the latter system compared to the GOST system and challenges of technical circumstances, which prevent the commercialisation of technologies. Grantmaking organisations are recommended to employ a method where levels of technological inventions’ viability in the market act as main criteria for evaluating scientific-technological projects, as well as when choosing the priority fields for the scientific-technological development of the country.
About the Author
A. M. Khamatkanova
Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. 2016: Global R&D Funding Forecast (2016) / Battelle, R&D Magazine. http://csis.org/files/publication/151116_Cohen_GlobalForecast2016_Web.pdf.
2. What prevents Russian science from being effective (2015) / The strategy of scientific and technological development of the Russian Federation. http://sntr-rf.ru/discussions/chto-meshaet-rossiyskoy-naukebyt-effektivnoy/.
3. Experts gave their opinion on development of innovations in Russia (2015) / RBK. http://www.rusventure.ru/ru/press-service/massmedia/detail.php?ID=59222.
4. Support programmes of domestic manufacturers should be selective (2015) / Analytical centre affiliated with the Government of Russian Federation http://ac.gov.ru/events/04614.html.
5. Birjukov I. (2011) Standards for realizing Research & Development / R&D. http://wiki.itorum.ru/2011/04/standarty-na-vypolnenie-niokr/.
6. Federal Law dated 27 December 2002 № 184-ФЗ (ed. dated 28 November 2015) (2002) On technical regulations / Techexpert. http://docs.cntd.ru/document/901836556.
7. Programme documents (2016) / The federal agency on technical regulation and metrology. Informational portal on standardization. http://standard.gost.ru/wps/portal/!ut/p/c4/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3gLHzeXU FNLYwN_gzBzA09vjxBXr0AXAwtHc_2CbEdFAPFxR0E!/.
8. Classification of types (formats) of scientific-research work. Management of Scientific-Research body of work using indicators of levels of technologies viability as a measurement tool (2012) / Technological platform «Aviation mobility and aviation technologies». http://www.aviatp.ru/upload/iblock/839/fokzgydz%20uvjluo%20-%20fgnmpmxdltzicbzhrevb%20ebahbvckgwyldmytyw.pdf.
9. Popov Je.V., Savinich V.S., Sosunov Ja.A., Shvedov A.G. (2014) Evaluation of technological preparedness / Online magazine «Aviaglobus». http://aviaglobus.ru/2014/06/30/8346/.
10. Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA).Technology Maturation Plan (TMP). Process Implementation Guide (2013) / U.S. Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management. http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/03/f12/ATTACHMENT-TRA%20Guide%20%20%209–3–13.pdf.
11. Rolls-Royce and R&D: instruction for use (2014) / Atom expert. http://atomicexpert.com/content/rolls-royce-%D0%B8-rd-%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D1%83%D0%BA%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F-%D0%BF%D0%BE-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8E.
12. Slivickij A.B. (2013) Enhancing instruments for selecting state priorities, mechanisms of development and realization of strategies for innovative development / MSU. http://conf.msu.ru/archive/spa.msu.2013/2356/3967_8487.pdf.
13. Kasimov B.R. Security Indicators of technical objects/ Rusnauka.com. http://www.rusnauka.com/2_KAND_2011/Tecnic/78588.doc.htm.
Review
For citations:
Khamatkanova A.M. CRITERIA FOR CHOOSING PRIORITY TECHNOLOGICAL FIELDS FOR DEVELOPMENT – VIABILITY OF TECHNOLOGICAL INVENTIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL IMPLEMENTATION. Economics of Science. 2016;2(1):23-34. (In Russ.)
Views:
687
Email this article 