rus
Issue #4/2014
A.Alekseyev, A.Useinov, I.Yaminsky
How Effective is State Support of Innovations in Russia??
How Effective is State Support of Innovations in Russia??
State support is needed to enterprises working in the field of innovation. In order to a promising idea has passed all stages of development up to a wide industrial implementation usually considerable resources are required. Small businesses whose employees are often the authors of the most promising developments often do not have sufficient resources. Therefore, in countries with developed innovative economy, they receive assistance from the state. How are things going with the support of business innovation in general, and the nanotechnology industry in particular in Russia, and what steps should be taken by the state in this area? These questions are answered by our experts .
Теги: development institutions government support innovative economy государственная поддержка инновационная экономика институты развития
The great efforts in creation various support measures were made for developing nanotechnology industry at the state level in Russia over the last 10 years. In particular, several federal targeted programmes were launched in 2005–2007, and different development institutions like Rusnano Corporation, Skolkovo Foundation and etc. were established shortly after. Among the key outcomes of those efforts was start of dozens various projects in nanotechnology. Not all of them were equally successful due to overly optimistic assessment of various projects market prospects. Nevertheless, the government efforts expressed in reasonably affordable financial support gave a significant impetus to the development of Russian innovative economics especially taking into account low activity of commercial banks in lending to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). An important state support instrument became the federal targeted program "Research and Development in Priority Fields of Science and Technology Sector of Russia in 2007–2012" which was extended till 2013. I want to mention the effective support the program implementation by the Russian Ministry of Education and Science. SemiTEq JSC successfully implemented several projects thanks to funding under the federal programs in 2005–2011. Those projects aimed at developing of special process equipment which necessary for advanced electronic components R&D. Of course, the return on investment rate (ROI) from the R&D projects focusing on topics initiated by the business community cannot be high for Government and requires an independent expertise. However, the nanotechnology area like any other Hi-tech industries is both promising and risky in terms of achieving the parameters included in the project financial model. In our opinion, the logical state policy would be to follow up with strategically important projects for the development of Hi-tech industries, which need in investment support. Today the industry need the government continue to act as a responsible partner by assuming a prominent part of the financial risks.
The new version of the federal targeted program "Research and Development in Priority Fields of Science and Technology Sector of Russia in 2014–2020" is quite different from its predecessor, and is mostly focused on R&D projects with a relatively low funding level. The industrial partner applicants are fully responsible for the financial risks related not only to launching new products but also to previous R&D. Obviously, the government tends to increase the efficiency of spending on science and new technologies in the tightened economic situation, as well as ROI rate. In my opinion, an abrupt transition to a rigid and largely curtailed to financial part of the innovation support strategy may lead not so much to savings but reduced results from funding obtained in previous years. Undoubtedly, increase of funding efficiency is an important component of any project but a radical change in development vector can destroy the innovation infrastructure already underdeveloped. Most part of nanotechnology sector companies resumed at the end of 2013 decline in equipment sales on Russian market in comparison with the previous period. This fact mostly linked with the additional growth of pent-up demand from potential customers.
Another example of SemiTEq JSC cooperation with Russian development institutions is an infrastructure project with Rusnano launched in 2011. The project aims at expanding small-scale production and further commercialisation of SemiTEq products. In particular, the Application laboratory was created and fully equipped under this project. Its activity is focused on demonstrating the potential customers basic technological processes as well as comprehensive testing of key functional characteristics of SemiTEq equipment. The project resulted in a significant expansion of our capacity to develop new types of equipment as well as a significant growth of commercial sales of SemiTEq products. In general, we appreciate our cooperation with Rusnano although when we joined the project we expected the Rusnano participation in the development of our business not only as a committed financial investor but also as a strategic partner providing opportunities to expand our product distribution.
Recently Rusnano has also adjusted its policies to finance new project companies. Taking into account the experience in implementing projects already launched has not always been positive, the procedure for considering new applications has become significantly rigid. The Rusnano's Fund for Infrastructure and Educational Programs despite opening a nanocentre network shows no hurry in the implementation of costly infrastructure projects with a long-term ROI there.
Separately I want to stay on evaluating the effectiveness of state support to nanotechnology-based enterprises at the regional level. Despite the fact that in St. Petersburg there are a number of instruments to support SMEs, we, as the Rusnano project company, cannot use them. In compliance with all formal criterias (total revenue, number of employees) our company is one of the SMEs, however, Rusnano participation in equity formally equals us to large enterprises not eligible to involvement in such programmes. I’mconvinced that this issue affects many innovative companies throughout Russia created with the participation of public corporations. Repeated discussions with the city authorities in charge of industry development and support show that the problem should be resolved not at the regional but the federal level.
In conclusion, I should note that the state support to innovation, albeit not 100% effective, led to quite a serious step forward in the development of the nanotechnology industry in general. Given such a large change in the science as the reorganisation of the Russian Academy of Sciences, government agencies should be cautious in axing funds and reforming the financial support tools for innovations in order to enable the young, emerging industry to really turn into one of the engines of development of the non-oil sector of the economy. One should continue to finance infrastructure projects with a long payback period while performing a more assertive pre-examination, pay more attention to the development of support programmes at the local level and quickly make the necessary changes in federal laws to facilitate their implementation. I would also like to highlight the importance of government measures to stimulate exports of the high technology products including preferential loans for producers, otherwise it is very difficult for domestic companies to enter overseas markets.
Alexey
Useinov
Head of Department of Research
of Physicomechanical Properties
Technological Institute for Superhard
and Novel Carbon Materials, Ph.D.
The existing programs for support of innovations are undoubtedly important for promotion of scientific and technical ideas in Russia today. The number of activities in this sphere is overwhelming and the applicants for funding projects outnumber the applicants for studies in the best universities of Moscow. On the one hand, these processes are important as they play the role of a "fertilizer " on the intellectual soil of Russian high technologies. On the other hand, a number of trends appear to be worrisome.
If you look carefully at the selection of startups and the disbursement of investments, innovations seem to be too far from the real economy today. The venture funds RVС and Skolkovo focus mainly on computer and bio-medical technologies. Although Rosnano is building new outstanding plants and high technology factories, oil wells are still drilled using the 40-year-old technologies, and the equipment of most industrial and processing enterprises has been inherited from the 1960s or 1970s, or it is new but imported from abroad.
This must be greatly due to the demolishment of the network of sector-based R&D institutions, which used to introduce innovations into real technological processes that worked. Thus, the innovators have to focus on something intangible nowadays. Generally, the reason is clear: if a software application stops working, rebooting the computer should be enough, but if a new generation rig at an oil well breaks down, you cannot get away with it by just pressing Ctrl+Alt+Del. Therefore, investors reject high-risk projects and innovations do not happen where they are so much expected. The government is supposed to interfere to change the situation. It could interfere in a number of ways, either by sharing investors’ risks or by providing benefits to innovational real economy projects.
A similar situation is happening with the designing of measurement devices. It has been a long time since I last saw new Russian mass spectrometers or X-ray diffraction meters. Even samplers are now mostly Dutch or French. The Technological Institute of Super-Hard and New Carbon Materials is the leader in designing high technologies for testing physical and mechanical properties of linear size materials in the scale of micrometers and nanometers. Our devices – Nanoscan hardness nano-metering scanners – have been developed and produced since 1995. We exactly know what it is like to manufacture high quality devices, to market them and to provide technical and methodological aftercare for years.
Somebody may wonder, "Why on earth would you want to make it if you can buy it readily available among imported gadgets?" Besides, IT investments return a few times sooner. It is true, but you can buy only what somebody offers you. Now, we have already experienced the sanctions and restrictions imposed by the US and the EU. Although these sanctions did not affect mass equipment so far, buying certain unique devices has become somewhat complicated. God forbid worse time may come when mass equipment might become unavailable.
Now, a few words about the performance. No questions at all about the performance of project selection. The websites of funds publish exhaustive information on tenders, winners and the money given to them. It is not clear enough whether the performance of new enterprises should be evaluated from the perspective of financial return of their commercial operations. What is really desired is that startups should be Russian residents. The government must monitor it very closely.
In general, those who want to do real business seem to have enough opportunities for finding partners. Our company is very active in this process: we have joined the Troitsk Innovational Territorial Cluster called “New materials, Laser and Radiation Technologies” and we work with Skolkovo Fund.
In conclusion, the injected financial “fertilizers” will hopefully create good innovational “soil” that will produce the lush meadow of Russian technologies.
Igor
Yaminsky
Director General of the Advanced
Technologies Center Co., Professor
of the Lomonosov Moscow State University,
D.Sc.
Successful small innovational businesses contribute to technological prosperity of a country. Huge investments are required to promote a large industry, whereas small and medium businesses are able to develop very fast with much smaller support.
From the early 1990s, Russia continuously declared its commitment to develop small and medium businesses. However, these were just idle words uttered by officials of different ranks. It is a confident statement that nobody would do anything to resolve the problems of small and medium businesses for fifteen years (from 1985 to 2000). During the era of total privatization, there was no place for innovations. In fact, privatization was anti-innovational. However, it is worth noting that the legislation of the Soviet time included some revolutionary steps for the development of innovational businesses, such as passing the Laws on Cooperatives (1986) and Small Entrepreneurship (1990).
In spite of the lacking care for businesses from the government and infrastructure and the creation of numerous obstacles, Russia had a thin but viable stratum of innovational enterprises. Since the beginning of this century, the existing and new institutions and programs for innovational entrepreneurship development have become more active. Thus, the Fund for promotion of small forms of enterprises in scientific and technical sphere, headed by I.Bortnik, has launched a successful and thoroughly planned program called Start, which is still running. An innovational idea has to undergo scientific, technological and financial examination in the fund. In case of a positive decision, the newly created enterprise receives one, two and three million rubles in the first three years, respectively, and supplementary funding from alternative sources must be obtained in the second and third years. As a result, new innovational enterprises are created.
Russian Corporation of Nanotechnologies was created in 2007 and was later transformed into OJSC Rusnano. Its operations are funded heavily even compared to international standards: 130 billion rubles. The obligatory condition for receiving support from the corporation is to organize a Russian manufacture in the sphere of nanotechnologies. This choice was intentional. Firstly, almost all industrially developed countries have already launched national nanotechnology programs. The initiator was the USA in 1999, when their strategic nano-initiative was approved by the Congress and the President Bill Clinton. European countries and Japan followed this example.
Rusnano ran into an unexpected barrier in its work: the number of breakthrough projects that are worth supporting was to be much less than expected. On the one hand, it reflected the real situation, that although the innovational stratum existed, it was very thin. On the other hand, some existing innovational enterprises were not prepared or did not have sufficient resources to carry out long and complicated procedures of project examination. Besides, the politics of Rusnano suggest that the corporation should participate not only in the funding but also in the capital of the existing or new company. The reason for this is quite clear: one needs to provide an additional guarantee that the investment will return. It would be fair to note that the share of the state corporation in the charter capital correlates with the value of the new intellectual property. Prior to that, no Russian financial institutions (a venture fund, a bank loan department) would look at the value of patents, knowhow, software and other types of intellectual property.
From the very beginning, the state corporation decided to build legitimate, legally justified and protected business. Following the American business practice, lawyers have become key assistants to the managers. However, Russia is not the USA. Doing legal business in an organization, whilst many Russian laws and regulations are contradictory, is extremely hard and, sometimes, impossible. This is why many active innovational companies did not ask Rusnano for help or support. By the end of 2012, Rusnano had funded 61 projects. It may be a very small number, but many great acts started with small steps. Creation of new technologies is very complicated. Therefore, it is natural that some projects are unsuccessful. Failures and rejections cannot be avoided. However, there is some success and it is very important.
Undoubtedly, the Fund for Infrastructure and Educational Programs carries out a very helpful mission on professional training of staff for nano-industry. We wrote about that earlier1.
In 2010, a new development institution called Skolkovo Innovation Center was created. It was founded in parallel with another important event that is also worth describing. Since 2010, the simplified taxation system, which many innovational enterprises fruitfully enjoyed, has been gradually reduced. The goal of this system was to provide a real support to small businesses. In 2013, it was almost fully cancelled and that was a bad stroke for Russian innovational businesses, which mostly remained medium or small. Thus, adoption or cancellation of state regulations may have both a positive effect and a negative impact on the development of innovational businesses.
In the first place, Skolkovo Innovation Center fully restored the simplified taxation for its participants and even raised its threshold to one billion rubles. However, the well-grounded decision-making then ceded in the face of administrative caution. In particular, the decision on canceling some accounting requirements was overruled.
Skolkovo is somewhere between the Fund for promotion of small forms of enterprises in scientific and technical sphere and Rusnano. While the Fund helps future young entrepreneurs, mostly, from among university students and graduates, Rusnano provides support to large innovational projects with the funding needs of one billion or more rubles. The Fund supports ideas at their inception stage and Rusnano supports mature production. In contrast, the mission of Skolkovo is to make the intellectual property rights work in Russia. Above all, the supported projects must create commercially viable ideas in the form of inventions and technologies. The participant of Skolkovo is supposed to sell intellectual property to manufacturing companies. The priorities of Skolkovo are computing, energy efficiency, nuclear, space and bio-medical technologies.
All the mentioned development institutions focus on innovational ideas that have to work and eventually deliver an innovational product. Russia has never had problems with generating ideas. The organisation of production and realization of ideas have been an issue. This may be the reason why Skolkovo decided to focus on what is done well in the country and leave what is not done well (organisation of production) to those who are able to do it professionally. Some foreign and few Russian successful companies are capable of creating a manufacture, and they access the new breaking ideas in the emerging intellectual property market.
Another strategy of Skolkovo is to create success stories in selected locations and disseminate them all over the country. It was decided to create the Center in a new location, not in the old sites, because converting the existing infrastructure for the needs of new tasks is more difficult than building from a scratch. Although a few lags in the implementation of ideas prevents Skolkovo from becoming the leader in innovational development in Russia, it remains very attractive. In fact, the Center is a dynamic structure open for new ideas.
In general, Russia has made some successful steps in innovational development. The existing development institutions have been upgraded and a number of new institutions have been created. This is a good progress.
To conclude, one should mention the significant support provided to innovational businesses by various and creative projects of the Government of Moscow implemented by the Department of Science, Industrial Policy and Entrepreneurship. One of such initiative is the establishment of Youth innovation creativity centres described in this issue of the magazine.
In the end, here is a small hint: remember to read the Nanoindustry Magazine. It has a lot of helpful ideas and information. Nano-industry continues moving forward. ■
The new version of the federal targeted program "Research and Development in Priority Fields of Science and Technology Sector of Russia in 2014–2020" is quite different from its predecessor, and is mostly focused on R&D projects with a relatively low funding level. The industrial partner applicants are fully responsible for the financial risks related not only to launching new products but also to previous R&D. Obviously, the government tends to increase the efficiency of spending on science and new technologies in the tightened economic situation, as well as ROI rate. In my opinion, an abrupt transition to a rigid and largely curtailed to financial part of the innovation support strategy may lead not so much to savings but reduced results from funding obtained in previous years. Undoubtedly, increase of funding efficiency is an important component of any project but a radical change in development vector can destroy the innovation infrastructure already underdeveloped. Most part of nanotechnology sector companies resumed at the end of 2013 decline in equipment sales on Russian market in comparison with the previous period. This fact mostly linked with the additional growth of pent-up demand from potential customers.
Another example of SemiTEq JSC cooperation with Russian development institutions is an infrastructure project with Rusnano launched in 2011. The project aims at expanding small-scale production and further commercialisation of SemiTEq products. In particular, the Application laboratory was created and fully equipped under this project. Its activity is focused on demonstrating the potential customers basic technological processes as well as comprehensive testing of key functional characteristics of SemiTEq equipment. The project resulted in a significant expansion of our capacity to develop new types of equipment as well as a significant growth of commercial sales of SemiTEq products. In general, we appreciate our cooperation with Rusnano although when we joined the project we expected the Rusnano participation in the development of our business not only as a committed financial investor but also as a strategic partner providing opportunities to expand our product distribution.
Recently Rusnano has also adjusted its policies to finance new project companies. Taking into account the experience in implementing projects already launched has not always been positive, the procedure for considering new applications has become significantly rigid. The Rusnano's Fund for Infrastructure and Educational Programs despite opening a nanocentre network shows no hurry in the implementation of costly infrastructure projects with a long-term ROI there.
Separately I want to stay on evaluating the effectiveness of state support to nanotechnology-based enterprises at the regional level. Despite the fact that in St. Petersburg there are a number of instruments to support SMEs, we, as the Rusnano project company, cannot use them. In compliance with all formal criterias (total revenue, number of employees) our company is one of the SMEs, however, Rusnano participation in equity formally equals us to large enterprises not eligible to involvement in such programmes. I’mconvinced that this issue affects many innovative companies throughout Russia created with the participation of public corporations. Repeated discussions with the city authorities in charge of industry development and support show that the problem should be resolved not at the regional but the federal level.
In conclusion, I should note that the state support to innovation, albeit not 100% effective, led to quite a serious step forward in the development of the nanotechnology industry in general. Given such a large change in the science as the reorganisation of the Russian Academy of Sciences, government agencies should be cautious in axing funds and reforming the financial support tools for innovations in order to enable the young, emerging industry to really turn into one of the engines of development of the non-oil sector of the economy. One should continue to finance infrastructure projects with a long payback period while performing a more assertive pre-examination, pay more attention to the development of support programmes at the local level and quickly make the necessary changes in federal laws to facilitate their implementation. I would also like to highlight the importance of government measures to stimulate exports of the high technology products including preferential loans for producers, otherwise it is very difficult for domestic companies to enter overseas markets.
Alexey
Useinov
Head of Department of Research
of Physicomechanical Properties
Technological Institute for Superhard
and Novel Carbon Materials, Ph.D.
The existing programs for support of innovations are undoubtedly important for promotion of scientific and technical ideas in Russia today. The number of activities in this sphere is overwhelming and the applicants for funding projects outnumber the applicants for studies in the best universities of Moscow. On the one hand, these processes are important as they play the role of a "fertilizer " on the intellectual soil of Russian high technologies. On the other hand, a number of trends appear to be worrisome.
If you look carefully at the selection of startups and the disbursement of investments, innovations seem to be too far from the real economy today. The venture funds RVС and Skolkovo focus mainly on computer and bio-medical technologies. Although Rosnano is building new outstanding plants and high technology factories, oil wells are still drilled using the 40-year-old technologies, and the equipment of most industrial and processing enterprises has been inherited from the 1960s or 1970s, or it is new but imported from abroad.
This must be greatly due to the demolishment of the network of sector-based R&D institutions, which used to introduce innovations into real technological processes that worked. Thus, the innovators have to focus on something intangible nowadays. Generally, the reason is clear: if a software application stops working, rebooting the computer should be enough, but if a new generation rig at an oil well breaks down, you cannot get away with it by just pressing Ctrl+Alt+Del. Therefore, investors reject high-risk projects and innovations do not happen where they are so much expected. The government is supposed to interfere to change the situation. It could interfere in a number of ways, either by sharing investors’ risks or by providing benefits to innovational real economy projects.
A similar situation is happening with the designing of measurement devices. It has been a long time since I last saw new Russian mass spectrometers or X-ray diffraction meters. Even samplers are now mostly Dutch or French. The Technological Institute of Super-Hard and New Carbon Materials is the leader in designing high technologies for testing physical and mechanical properties of linear size materials in the scale of micrometers and nanometers. Our devices – Nanoscan hardness nano-metering scanners – have been developed and produced since 1995. We exactly know what it is like to manufacture high quality devices, to market them and to provide technical and methodological aftercare for years.
Somebody may wonder, "Why on earth would you want to make it if you can buy it readily available among imported gadgets?" Besides, IT investments return a few times sooner. It is true, but you can buy only what somebody offers you. Now, we have already experienced the sanctions and restrictions imposed by the US and the EU. Although these sanctions did not affect mass equipment so far, buying certain unique devices has become somewhat complicated. God forbid worse time may come when mass equipment might become unavailable.
Now, a few words about the performance. No questions at all about the performance of project selection. The websites of funds publish exhaustive information on tenders, winners and the money given to them. It is not clear enough whether the performance of new enterprises should be evaluated from the perspective of financial return of their commercial operations. What is really desired is that startups should be Russian residents. The government must monitor it very closely.
In general, those who want to do real business seem to have enough opportunities for finding partners. Our company is very active in this process: we have joined the Troitsk Innovational Territorial Cluster called “New materials, Laser and Radiation Technologies” and we work with Skolkovo Fund.
In conclusion, the injected financial “fertilizers” will hopefully create good innovational “soil” that will produce the lush meadow of Russian technologies.
Igor
Yaminsky
Director General of the Advanced
Technologies Center Co., Professor
of the Lomonosov Moscow State University,
D.Sc.
Successful small innovational businesses contribute to technological prosperity of a country. Huge investments are required to promote a large industry, whereas small and medium businesses are able to develop very fast with much smaller support.
From the early 1990s, Russia continuously declared its commitment to develop small and medium businesses. However, these were just idle words uttered by officials of different ranks. It is a confident statement that nobody would do anything to resolve the problems of small and medium businesses for fifteen years (from 1985 to 2000). During the era of total privatization, there was no place for innovations. In fact, privatization was anti-innovational. However, it is worth noting that the legislation of the Soviet time included some revolutionary steps for the development of innovational businesses, such as passing the Laws on Cooperatives (1986) and Small Entrepreneurship (1990).
In spite of the lacking care for businesses from the government and infrastructure and the creation of numerous obstacles, Russia had a thin but viable stratum of innovational enterprises. Since the beginning of this century, the existing and new institutions and programs for innovational entrepreneurship development have become more active. Thus, the Fund for promotion of small forms of enterprises in scientific and technical sphere, headed by I.Bortnik, has launched a successful and thoroughly planned program called Start, which is still running. An innovational idea has to undergo scientific, technological and financial examination in the fund. In case of a positive decision, the newly created enterprise receives one, two and three million rubles in the first three years, respectively, and supplementary funding from alternative sources must be obtained in the second and third years. As a result, new innovational enterprises are created.
Russian Corporation of Nanotechnologies was created in 2007 and was later transformed into OJSC Rusnano. Its operations are funded heavily even compared to international standards: 130 billion rubles. The obligatory condition for receiving support from the corporation is to organize a Russian manufacture in the sphere of nanotechnologies. This choice was intentional. Firstly, almost all industrially developed countries have already launched national nanotechnology programs. The initiator was the USA in 1999, when their strategic nano-initiative was approved by the Congress and the President Bill Clinton. European countries and Japan followed this example.
Rusnano ran into an unexpected barrier in its work: the number of breakthrough projects that are worth supporting was to be much less than expected. On the one hand, it reflected the real situation, that although the innovational stratum existed, it was very thin. On the other hand, some existing innovational enterprises were not prepared or did not have sufficient resources to carry out long and complicated procedures of project examination. Besides, the politics of Rusnano suggest that the corporation should participate not only in the funding but also in the capital of the existing or new company. The reason for this is quite clear: one needs to provide an additional guarantee that the investment will return. It would be fair to note that the share of the state corporation in the charter capital correlates with the value of the new intellectual property. Prior to that, no Russian financial institutions (a venture fund, a bank loan department) would look at the value of patents, knowhow, software and other types of intellectual property.
From the very beginning, the state corporation decided to build legitimate, legally justified and protected business. Following the American business practice, lawyers have become key assistants to the managers. However, Russia is not the USA. Doing legal business in an organization, whilst many Russian laws and regulations are contradictory, is extremely hard and, sometimes, impossible. This is why many active innovational companies did not ask Rusnano for help or support. By the end of 2012, Rusnano had funded 61 projects. It may be a very small number, but many great acts started with small steps. Creation of new technologies is very complicated. Therefore, it is natural that some projects are unsuccessful. Failures and rejections cannot be avoided. However, there is some success and it is very important.
Undoubtedly, the Fund for Infrastructure and Educational Programs carries out a very helpful mission on professional training of staff for nano-industry. We wrote about that earlier1.
In 2010, a new development institution called Skolkovo Innovation Center was created. It was founded in parallel with another important event that is also worth describing. Since 2010, the simplified taxation system, which many innovational enterprises fruitfully enjoyed, has been gradually reduced. The goal of this system was to provide a real support to small businesses. In 2013, it was almost fully cancelled and that was a bad stroke for Russian innovational businesses, which mostly remained medium or small. Thus, adoption or cancellation of state regulations may have both a positive effect and a negative impact on the development of innovational businesses.
In the first place, Skolkovo Innovation Center fully restored the simplified taxation for its participants and even raised its threshold to one billion rubles. However, the well-grounded decision-making then ceded in the face of administrative caution. In particular, the decision on canceling some accounting requirements was overruled.
Skolkovo is somewhere between the Fund for promotion of small forms of enterprises in scientific and technical sphere and Rusnano. While the Fund helps future young entrepreneurs, mostly, from among university students and graduates, Rusnano provides support to large innovational projects with the funding needs of one billion or more rubles. The Fund supports ideas at their inception stage and Rusnano supports mature production. In contrast, the mission of Skolkovo is to make the intellectual property rights work in Russia. Above all, the supported projects must create commercially viable ideas in the form of inventions and technologies. The participant of Skolkovo is supposed to sell intellectual property to manufacturing companies. The priorities of Skolkovo are computing, energy efficiency, nuclear, space and bio-medical technologies.
All the mentioned development institutions focus on innovational ideas that have to work and eventually deliver an innovational product. Russia has never had problems with generating ideas. The organisation of production and realization of ideas have been an issue. This may be the reason why Skolkovo decided to focus on what is done well in the country and leave what is not done well (organisation of production) to those who are able to do it professionally. Some foreign and few Russian successful companies are capable of creating a manufacture, and they access the new breaking ideas in the emerging intellectual property market.
Another strategy of Skolkovo is to create success stories in selected locations and disseminate them all over the country. It was decided to create the Center in a new location, not in the old sites, because converting the existing infrastructure for the needs of new tasks is more difficult than building from a scratch. Although a few lags in the implementation of ideas prevents Skolkovo from becoming the leader in innovational development in Russia, it remains very attractive. In fact, the Center is a dynamic structure open for new ideas.
In general, Russia has made some successful steps in innovational development. The existing development institutions have been upgraded and a number of new institutions have been created. This is a good progress.
To conclude, one should mention the significant support provided to innovational businesses by various and creative projects of the Government of Moscow implemented by the Department of Science, Industrial Policy and Entrepreneurship. One of such initiative is the establishment of Youth innovation creativity centres described in this issue of the magazine.
In the end, here is a small hint: remember to read the Nanoindustry Magazine. It has a lot of helpful ideas and information. Nano-industry continues moving forward. ■
Readers feedback
