The article justifies facilitation of Innovativity index of regional economy as an indicator of a region’s innovative development level. We suggest a method of its evaluation, approbated on materials of Central federal district (CFD)
Dynamic and indefinite environment, exposed to swift qualitative alterations, sets new goals of managing innovative development. In order to evaluate innovative development level, the author suggests using Innovativity index of regional economy (Ria).
The following indexes are included into calculating rating of innovative activity of regions:
X1 – the volume of innovative production according to total GRP (%);
X2 – the part of employees, involved into development and researches according to the total number of employees (%);
X3 – internal expenses for researches and development according to GRP (%);
X4 – expenses for technological innovations according to GRP (%).
The data of all-federal and regional statistics, provided in ROSSTAT annual reports, have been used as informational basis.
Functional model of innovative activity rating is presented as:
(1)
where Ria is rating of innovative activity of regional economy; K1 = K3 = 0,3; K2 = K4 = 0,2 are coefficients that illustrate weight of economical statistic indexes.
The procedure of evaluating innovative activity rating has been carried out along two basic directions: alteration of innovative activity rating value in dynamics; rating value in comparison to other regions of CFD. According to the first criterion, CFD form the following groups: intensively increasing (increase in rating more than 20 %); steady increasing (increase in rating within limits of 15–20 %); steady decreasing (decrease in rating within limits of 15–20 %); intensively decreasing (decrease in rating more than 20 %). According to innovative activity level, we can outline the following groups of regions: high rating (over 3); rating value higher that generally in Russia; rating value lower that generally in Russia; low rating (less than 1). As a result of calculations, rating of CFD regions’ innovative activity for the period 2000–2008 has been defined (Table).
Rating evaluation of CFD regions’ innovative activity
|
Region |
Years |
|||||
|
2000 |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
|
|
Russian Federation |
1,698 |
1,818 |
1,694 |
1,850 |
1,830 |
1,743 |
|
Central federal district |
2,169 |
1,868 |
1,654 |
1,720 |
1,800 |
1,721 |
|
Belgorod region |
0,446 |
0,655 |
0,712 |
0,521 |
1,852 |
3,283 |
|
Bryansk region |
0,586 |
1,792 |
2,315 |
2,160 |
2,667 |
2,640 |
|
Vladimir region |
2,376 |
2,051 |
2,052 |
2,730 |
2,344 |
1,798 |
|
Voronezh region |
1,573 |
1,728 |
2,441 |
1,984 |
3,096 |
2,249 |
|
Ivanovo region |
0,780 |
0,705 |
0,729 |
0,747 |
1,424 |
1,204 |
|
Kaluga region |
4,051 |
3,541 |
2,870 |
3,085 |
3,051 |
2,573 |
|
Kostroma region |
0,558 |
1,699 |
1,317 |
0,577 |
0,540 |
0,756 |
|
Kursk region |
1,210 |
0,775 |
1,049 |
1,591 |
1,356 |
0,849 |
|
Lipetsk region |
0,751 |
1,811 |
1,581 |
1,188 |
1,632 |
2,009 |
|
Moscow region |
3,733 |
3,994 |
3,476 |
3,687 |
3,734 |
3,381 |
|
Oryol region |
1,957 |
1,251 |
0,979 |
1,633 |
1,470 |
1,784 |
|
Ryazan’ region |
1,840 |
1,221 |
1,134 |
0,825 |
1,260 |
1,388 |
|
Smolensk region |
0,368 |
0,635 |
0,424 |
0,705 |
0,918 |
0,986 |
|
Tambov region |
0,777 |
1,180 |
0,874 |
1,061 |
1,471 |
1,238 |
|
Tver region |
2,654 |
1,535 |
1,689 |
2,720 |
1,465 |
2,873 |
|
Tula region |
1,964 |
1,429 |
1,267 |
1,558 |
1,082 |
1,118 |
|
Jaroslav region |
2,638 |
1,851 |
1,745 |
2,284 |
2,385 |
3,521 |
It has been established that Belgorod region has been increasing its innovative potential steadily due to opening new innovative productions: starting biogas stations within the program of developing replenishing sources of energy; deep processing of agricultural wastes and receiving nanoproducts; realizing project of creating production of asphalt-concrete modifier «Unirem» in volume of 4 thousand tons per year and utilization of worn-out tires in volume of 12 thousand tons per year; test output technology of receiving a new generation of medical implants at the basis of nanostructural and submicrocrystallic tital alloys; technology of receiving extremely solid carbon platings for micromechanics, alloyed by nitrous. Since 2010 five enterprises of the region commenced producing nanotechnological products: LLC «Belgorod plant of sapphires «Monocrystal», LLC «Plant «Paints KVIL», LLC «SKIF-M», LLC «Taxifolia», LLC «Techsapphire». At the same time, the part of highly-technological output in gross volume of industrial production remains insignificant (about 2,5 %). We have outlined the following factors that restrain transition towards innovative type of economy in the region:
1) insufficient investment resources of economic subjects that can be directed to realizing innovative projects;
2) low level of commercializing innovative developments and scientific projects;
3) lack of motivation for producing innovative merchandise among enterprises;
4) insufficient development of structure of realizing and managing innovative projects;
5) lack of justified strategy of regional policy, aimed for activation of innovative processes.
Defining innovativity level of regional economy can serve as a basis for future improvement in in practice of planning and carrying out innovative activity in a region, as level of regional economy is that what needs structural improvements most of all, as well as broaden reproduction at modern technological basis, refreshment of funds, and activation of scientific and innovative-investment activity.
The work was submitted to the International Scientific Conference «Science and education in contemporary Russia», Moscow, November, 13–15, 2013, сame to the editorial office on 13.12.2013.