CC BY
46
Международный научно-исследовательский журнал ■ № 9(40) ■ Часть 1 ■ Октябрь
12. Rogozhin, S. Vlijanie kitajskih proizvoditelej stali na rossijskuju metallurgiju / S. Rogozhin // Metall-Kur'er. - 2014. -№7. - S.33-37.
13. Rynok trubnoj produkcii: neuteshitel'nye prognozy [Jelektronnyj resurs]. - Rezhim dostupa:
http ://www. rspmp.ru/ru/about/news/?id=12222&subj ect=smi
14. Stepanenko, A. Tendencii mirovogo rynka stali / A. Stepanenko// Metallosnabzhenie i sbyt. - 2014. - №10. - S. 7-8.
15. Tarnavskij, V. Novyj rossijskij prokat / V. Tarnavskij // Metallosnabzhenie i sbyt. - 2014. - №8. - S.25-28.
16. Tarnavskij, V. Potesnites' vse - kitajcy prishli! Rasshirenie kitajskogo jeksporta stali / V. Tarnavskij // Metallosnabzhenie i sbyt. - 2014. - №5. - S.20-22.
17. Fathutdinov R.A. Upravlenie konkurentosposobnost'ju organizacii / R.A. Fathutdinov. - Moskva: Market DS, 2008. -432 s.
18. Shahov, M. Jeffektivnost' proizvodstva stali /M. Shahov// Metallosnabzhenie i sbyt. - 2013. - № 12. - S. 5-7.
19. Shinokin, E. Sostojanie rynka besshovnyh trub RF / E. Shinokin // Metall-Kur'er. - 2013. -№22. - S.21-25.
Брюханова О.И.
Аспирант экономических наук, РАНХиГС при Президенте РФ ГОСУДАРСТВЕННАЯ ПОДДЕРЖКА ИННОВАЦИОННОЙ ДЕЯТЕЛЬНОСТИ В РАЗВИТЫХ СТРАНАХ
Аннотация
В данной статье рассмотрено - регулирование и стимулирование инновационной деятельности в развитых странах, таких как США, Франция, Германия, Япония, а также построена модель, на основе опыта данных стран, которая была бы применима для России и способствовала ее развитию в сфере инноваций.
Ключевые слова: инновации, государства, инновационная политика.
Bryukhanova O.I.
Postgraduate, RANEPA
STATE SUPPORT OF INNOVATION IN CORPORATIONS OF DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
Abstract
This article discusses the regulation and promotion of innovative activity in developed countries such as USA, France, Germany, Japan, and built the model, based on the experience of these countries, which would be applicable for Russia and contributed to its development in the field of innovation.
Keywords: innovation, states, innovation policy.
Currently, in the developed society, more and more interest is paid to the innovative activities of companies. Innovation has become the engine of progress, stimulating consumer demand and increasing competition, thereby encouraging firms to increase innovation. However, any R&D require a considerable investment from the company, especially when it comes to high-tech innovation, impact, future, global restructuring and the functioning of the production processes of the economy. As a result, many organizations do not have the resources or priorities in investing significant funds in R&D. In this regard, a major role in the innovative development belong to the government. If we compare R&D expenditure of the public sector in different countries in 2010 and 2012, we will see the following picture:
Table 1 - The internal structure of R&D expenditures by source of funding in 2010 and 2012
Country Funds of the State 2010 Funds of the State 2012 Funds of business enterprise sector 2010 Funds of business enterprise sector 2012 Other national sources 2010 Other national sources 2012 Foreign sources2010 Foreign sources 2012
Russia 70.3% 67.8% 25.5% 27.2% 0.6% 1.0% 3.5% 4.0%
Italy 42.1% 41.9% 44.2% 45.1% 4.3% 3.9% 9.4% 9.1%
France 39.7% 35.4% 51.0% 55.0% 2.0% 1.9% 7.3% 7.7%
Canada 34.3% 34.5% 46.5% 48.4% 11.9% 11.3% 7.3% 5.8%
USA 31.3% 30.8% 61.6% 59.1% 7.1% 6.3% 0.0% 3.8%
Germany 29.7% 29.8% 66.1% 65.6% 0.3% 0.3% 3.8% 4.2%
UK 32.1% 28.9% 45.1% 45.6% 6.3% 5.7% 16.4% 19.7%
Es Republic of Korea 26.7% 23.8% 71.8% 74.7% 1.2% 1.1% 0.2% 0.3%
China 24.0% 21.6% 71.7% 74.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 1.0%
Japany 17.2% 16.8% 75.9% 76.1% 6.4% 6.6% 0.4% 0.4%
15
Международный научно-исследовательский журнал ■ № 9(40) ■ Часть 1 ■ Октябрь
For comparison we have selected the 10 countries with the highest R&D expenditures in 2010-2012 (table 2, below). Analyzing the table above, we can conclude that Russia is the leader in terms of public R&D funding. This indicator in Russia in 2012 amounted to 67.8% of total R&D expenditures. In addition, in 2010 this figure was 70.3%, while costs at the expense of the business sector accounted for only 25.5%. For comparison, the USA, who are leaders on spending R&D in dollars in 2012 funded R&D by business sector - 59.1% (in Russia this indicator is equal to 27.2%), and by state only 30.8%.
Currently a large number of different studies occur relating to R&D expenditures in different countries. So in the period 2005-2012 by State Statistics was made analysis of the R&D costs. We identified the 10 largest countries of these costs, using data of the Federal Service of State Statistics (table 2. R&D expenditure 2005-2012).
Table 2 - R&D expenditure 2005 to 2012. In millions dollars
Country 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
USA 328,128 380,316 407,238 406,000 409,599 429,143 453,544
China 85,743 123,029 144,765 184,457 213,010 247,808 293,550
Japan 128,695 147,604 148,719 137,017 140,657 148,389 151,728
Germany 64,299 73,957 81,971 83,134 87,832 96,972 102,238
The Republic Of Korea 30,618 40,695 43,906 46,130 52,100 58,380 65,395
France 39,236 43,976 46,548 49,944 50,736 53,311 55,352
UK 34,081 38,700 39,397 39,581 38,144 39,217 39,110
Russia 18,115 26,544 30,061 34,628 33,062 35,183 37,851
Italy 17,999 22,297 24,076 24,742 25,154 25,781 26,321
Canada 23,090 24,778 24,917 25,052 24,703 24,757 24,801
We see that for 8 years, the USA is the leader on this indicator and R&D costs in this country are increasing every year. Russia occupy only in 8th place in this rating. What is driving these costs and can affect their growth. Based on the analysis above, we see that somehow public policy plays a significant role in the promotion of innovation activities of enterprises. However, we also can see that in some countries R&D are large enough, and in some not. For data analysis, this situation we consider the policies of the following countries: USA, Germany, France and Japan, in respect of R&D and analyze the possible use of these tools in Russia.
Based on data of conducted research we can see that the U.S. is a leader in the field of investment in innovation. This is because the US is using an innovative strategy, which is focused on high profits from high-cost technologies and leadership in science, by decentralizing the regulation of innovation, creating favorable conditions for innovative actors. The U.S. is constantly increasing innovation capital, inviting foreign scientists. At the state level, the U.S. established the national Innovation System (NIS), which brings together professionals from government, business, education and science. This system regulates the sphere of innovation in the country, which is constructed in such a way that all innovations are mainly the amount of special scientific institutes, and then redistributed to the use of the private sector.
Over a long period created a solid legislative framework for the regulation of innovative activity. These include such laws as the Law of the Bay-Dole and the Law of Stevenson-Wydler (1980), regulating the use of private sector innovation, created for the regulation of innovative activity in the private sector and Government decision No. 12591 "Facilitating access to science and technology" (1987), regulating the area of remuneration to the scientists who are the authors of inventions, and also controls the brain drain and transition of employees between organizations. The law of the Bay-Dole regulates public funding of innovation. In addition, the law provides an opportunity to the authors of inventions (state-funded) to patent inventions and to grant them a license. However, the United States retains the right to choose the owner of the intellectual property in a number of cases, and the ability to request the issuance of a license by force. Thus, in the case where the developer reserves the right, subject to certain obligations relating to the use of this invention.
In cases where innovations are created by national laboratories, the law of Stevenson-Wydler is used to regulate such situations. In these situation findings from outside can be attracted (grants, cooperation with non-profit organizations, industry and other). According to the results of the study, national laboratories can conclude license agreements with investee organization.
The above methods of regulation of innovative activity are direct methods. Besides them, there are the indirect methods of regulation, which include the use of tax incentives (tax holidays, reduced tax rates on income and other), antitrust law, accelerated depreciation of fixed assets.
From the above we can conclude that the U.S. succeed in innovation due to the fact that the state is actively involved in the development and provision of conditions for development and innovation, the formation of innovation infrastructure and attracting science and education, development of legislative fields to regulate innovative relations. Unlike the USA, which provide the necessary environment for the private sector as a key in the development of the country's innovation, Germany policy is configured such way that the state plays an active role in innovative development. The government finances about 80% of all research undertaken in universities. In addition, the government invests in cash and other innovative projects and creates an environment for increased innovation activity in the country. For example, the government funds a fundamental, long-term and risky research and development in the most important spheres of activity.
The government actively supports projects involving private investors and entrepreneurs. For these purposes, the government have developed the Law on the promotion of risk capital by providing tax incentives. In addition, the government created funds to support enterprises.
16
Международный научно-исследовательский журнал ■ № 9(40) ■ Часть 1 ■ Октябрь
Important role in the formation of the information field in the innovative sphere plays the Patent office of Germany. The Agency facilitates access to information for small and medium businesses. It also considers applications for granting the right of use of innovative inventions.
In addition, in Germany there is a network of technological centers and parks and incubation centers. This system was developed based on technology parks in the USA, using the experience and technology of the European countries and Japan, resulting in the Germany could get a complex linking innovative patterns, including developers, government and investors in a single chain, the transmission of technology from science to industry. This network includes more than 3700 innovative enterprises, research institutes, organizations and agencies for the transfer of developments.
France in 2012 ranked 6th place in R&D expenses and amounted to $ 55,352 billion. The country increased its spending over 7 years in $ 16,116 billion.
In France, much attention is paid to the protection of consumer rights. These rights are governed by the Code of intellectual property (1992) and describe the rights of employees of private and public companies, members of the inventions. This code sets out the rights on the invention in accordance with the invention was created (direct assignment from the company, using company funds or other).
In France Educational, institutions are offered commercially to use their innovation outcomes. Research institutions and universities have the right to enter into contracts to conduct research, to use the results of its activities, and to provide licenses for commercial purposes. All rights of state universities prescribed in the regulations of the Education code.
Scientists working as public servants, under the laws of France, may participate in the adoption and use of innovations for commercial purposes. Workers have the right to be members of the organization as a founder, if the company is assessing the R&D activities. Thus, workers should act as public servants. Also, these workers have the right to use the results of such activities. These rules are governed by law No. 83-634 "On the rights and duties of civil servants" (1983). In addition to these workers have the right to own shares, but not more than 49% of the capital and voting rights.
France, like many other countries, is developing various measures to aid the research - tax incentives, such as incentives on the cost of patents, special tax regimes, and tax deductions for research.
Japan, like many other countries policy supports the development of innovation sector through financial support from the state, and to use various measures, such as preferential loans, grants, training, counselling and more. Japan conducts various exhibitions and fairs of innovative developments to simplify their presentation and subsequent implementation and operation for different organizations small and medium businesses. Japan has its own Agency that supports small and medium enterprises. It includes offices in the regions, universities, and more than 800 employers and more than 3,000 experts. Japan pays special attention to innovative developments that are of interest for the development of the state at national, regional and local level.
Important role in the development of R&D in Japan plays MFTI (Ministry of foreign trade and industry), which among other things is engaged in import and export licenses. MFTI organizes the laboratory in which the research is conducted by leading scientific figures of universities with the participation of large corporations, and Finance projects. All test results and any valuable for the economy, are available to interested organizations. Thus, apart from the fact that the Japanese government does not Finance projects, it also does not provide a market for our products. However, the state is actively involved in the development of protective measures of the national market; therefore, the company does not suffer from external competition.
In addition, the Japanese government provides preferential tax treatment to organizations that are engaged in promising research and development, provides companies large subsidies for the acquisition of licenses for the use of innovations and other conditions to help develop the innovative sphere of the state.
Exploring methods of state policy innovation, we see that each country has its own methods of successful development in these areas. At the present time in Russia also pays considerable attention to innovation. However, in this field, our country is still far from leading countries such as USA, Europe, China, India and others. In the 21st century made many attempts to rectify the situation, issued new laws which collectively already taken, developed preferential system of the taxation and credit. Opened SKOLKOVO high-tech innovation project. Also strongly encouraged various projects developed by organizations by providing funds to ready a scientific innovative ideas with regard to developed business plans. Development continues, but our country is still far from strong, competing against innovation.
What can we offer against our country, using the experience of foreign countries. Through research, we can conclude that innovation is successful, if they are a big part adopts the private sector. In this case, the state must fill the gap between the private sector and producer innovation. If you build a system of innovative development of the country, it may look like the following:
17
Международный научно-исследовательский журнал ■ № 9(40) ■ Часть 1 ■ Октябрь
Fig. 1 - Innovative system of the state (Russia)
In this chart, there are several agents of relations: Government, Research centers and institutes, Enterprises and corporations, other States. Government is an agent who arranges innovative structure in the country and is the connecting link between other agents. Institutes and research centers represent all workers and scientists directly involved in the development of innovations. Businesses and companies, large holding companies - consumers of innovation that will be created to implement this innovative technology in the market. Other States are a source of new innovative ideas, technologies, scientists and information field for innovation. These agents are the quality of the experience and work force that helps enhance the innovative environment of the country.
Between agents exist certain relationships and commitments that help build a successful innovation system of the state. Consider the following relationship:
1) Sector of the country, which includes the Government, corporations, organizations, and enterprises and institutions and scientific center. The state in this case is obliged to provide an innovative environment for the functioning of all systems. Its responsibilities include the development of legal framework regulating innovative activity, development of systems for promoting innovation, including tax and credit conditions (incentives, tax breaks, easier credit conditions, etc.). In this case, you need to consider the specificity of Russia in connection with its size and variation in the development of territories. If you consider the fact that over the last decade, it was abandoned a large number of plants throughout the country and lost jobs, widespread changes in the country, aimed at innovative breakthrough can be the chance for many regions to escape in front of the development and provide jobs, and the state of the new technologies.
2) The relationship between the government and the developers of the innovation is to develop a regulatory environment that would contribute to the creation of scientific centers of innovation, job creation, and provision of equipment by attracting investors (corporations). Also, the state is developing regulations and laws governing and protecting the rights of inventors, as well as describing the terms of use of innovation in the future. It is very important that environment be developed in which it was provided sufficient conditions for scientists who would prefer to work in Russia, not abroad. It is also important that the developed innovation is not idle, and had the opportunity to be realized in the market. It is important to link the needs of the economy with that in fact invented and implemented. The government should organize this relationship.
3) Financing. The state must align the minds with Finance, which can be expressed in various grants and other things. Companies trading on the market and want to increase its share on it, realize how important it is to have innovation in their organization. However, often they cannot find enough resources, including workers who could these innovations to produce. In this case, the state must intervene by joining the Corporation, who are willing to invest in your future with innovative centers and institutes that are willing these innovations to produce and implement into the organization.
4) The relationship of companies and developers of innovations is very important. There should be developed a clear framework of relations between the two entities with regard to the location of innovation research, the role of companies in these studies, the terms, conditions, financing, further implementation and, of course, the rights of each participant.
5) Due to the fact that the whole world is actively developing innovative attitude, there are many different forums, conferences and institutes, which have data and scientists who should have a choice of work place and country in which they wish to work. In this case, the state should actively cooperate with such sources or data systems to give the opportunity to as easier integration with other innovation systems in the country.
6) Exchange of experience. It is very important that scientists from other countries, the best minds, had the ability and interest to work in our country and to share experiences that they pass the knowledge developed in another system and our country and improved, transformed it for the better. We need to provide conditions for them to operate in our country and attract them to work here.
Altogether, forms a successful innovation environment of the state and allows you not only to take good positions in the ranking of most innovative countries, but also to increase the competitiveness of the country. If you add up all of the above, it can be concluded that the constructed model of the innovation system to base on the systems of the USA, France and Japan. The United States actively uses the institutions and science, uniting all spheres of activity in one country, while actively engaging the minds of all States and protecting innovations, from leaking to other countries. Japan has a policy of financing of innovation through the private sector by joining the developers of the innovation with corporations, regulating the relationship between them and allowing them to more successfully introduce innovations to the market. France places great emphasis on protecting the rights of developers and clearly prescribing the relationship between developers and corporations. All these structures together will create a more successful environment for Russia to reach world leaders.
18
Международный научно-исследовательский журнал ■ № 9(40) ■ Часть 1 ■ Октябрь
References
1. Dynkin A. A. "A New stage of scientific and technological revolution". - M.: Science, 1991.
2. Zavaruhin V. "Management of scientific and technological development in the U.S.".
3. Zubarev I., Shevchenko V. "Features of state regulation of innovation processes: from the experience of countries with developed market economies". M.: Info-Code - 1996.
4. Calatin V. O., Naumov V. B., Nikiforov, T. S. "The Experience in Europe, USA and India in the sphere of state support of innovation". Russian law journal - 2011
5. Leontiev, B. B., "Innovation Policy of the USA", the Portal 9000 Innovation - 2013.
6. Politizdat, "Modern United States Of America" - 2006.
7. Napalkov, A. A., "Foreign experience of state support of innovative activity in the regions." Corporate governance and innovative development of economy of the North. Bulletin of the research center of corporate law, management and venture investment of Syktyvkar State University - 2014.
8. Hour A., "Innovation Policy of the USA, Maxpark - 2013.
9. Smart Management. "Innovation Japan", http://www.smartmanage.ru/deels-312-1.html
Вдовин А.Н.
Соискатель,
Институт Дальнего Востока РАН БАНКИ ИНОСТРАННОГО КАПИТАЛА В КИТАЕ:
ОСНОВНЫЕ ПРОБЛЕМЫ ТЕКУЩЕГО ЭТАПА РАЗВИТИЯ
Аннотация
Рассмотрены особенности работы иностранных банков в рамках современной банковской системы Китайской Народной Республики. Выявлены и проанализированы принципиальные сложности и вызовы иностранных банков в Китае, оценен масштаб и значимость этих вызовов для перспектив дальнейшего развития зарубежных финансовых институтов в КНР.
Ключевые слова: Китай, экономика, иностранные банки, банковская система.
Vdovin A.N.
Applicant,
Institute for Far Eastern Studies of Russian Academy of Sciences FOREIGN BANKS IN CHINA: THE KEY CHALLENGES OF THE PRESENT
Abstract
The article provides comprehensive analysis offoreign banks in China key challenges of the present. The author arranged all challenges according the degree of influence on banking institutions from the most serious to the least. The general view of the foreign banks current position in China is also given.
Keywords: China economy, foreign banks, banking system.
Иностранные банки активно действуют в КНР практически с самого начала политики реформ и открытости, то есть «китайский» опыт некоторых из них уже перевалил за тридцатилетнюю отметку. Несмотря на имевший место этап относительно активного проникновения иностранных банковских структур в материковый Китай в 90-х -2000-х годах и вступление Китайской Народной Республики в ВТО, можно утверждать, что темпы развития иностранного банковского сектора в последние годы в целом заметно сократились, наступил своеобразный период охлаждения активности, стабилизации. Особенности текущего этапа совершенно естественно объясняются как общим состоянием мировой экономики, так и конкретными специфическими условиями работы на китайском рынке. Ограничения и квоты на кредитные, депозитные и валютообменные операции, существенные начальные требования к капиталу создаваемых банков и филиалов, регистрационные и административные сложности, а также медленные и непрозрачные процедуры получения разрешений с начала 2000-х годов превратились в постоянную характеристику местного рынка, определяющую формат и скорость развития банков иностранного капитала.
В результате по данным китайского банковского регулятора China Banking Regulatory Commission (CBRC) активы банков иностранного капитала в составе общих активов банковского сектора не только прекратили свой рост, но и продемонстрировали сокращение с 2.38% в 2007 году, до 1.93% в 2011 и 1.82% в 2012 г.
Не способствует особо динамичному развитию иностранного банковского присутствия в Китае и то, что с устоявшейся точки зрения местных властей и регуляторов, основная роль инобанков на текущем этапе состоит в привнесении передового опыта в банковской сфере (менеджмент, оценка рисков, проведение сложных операций, корпоративное управление и т.д.), обеспечении притока иностранного капитала, обслуживании иностранного корпоративного сектора (т.е. их собственных иностранных клиентов) и в строго дозированном и контролируемом увеличении конкуренции на внутреннем рынке банковско-финансовых услуг.
Рассмотрение условий работы и в особенности вызовов и сложностей, с которыми сталкиваются иностранные банки в КНР безусловно полезно для более глубокого понимания как характеристик самой банковской системы Китая, так и специфики ее взаимодействия с иностранными кредитными структурами. Это в свою очередь открывает путь к пониманию и прогнозированию возможных проблем российских банков при работе на китайском рынке и рынках других стран БРИКС. Кроме того, изучение китайского опыта работы с иностранными банками в национальном поле будет также полезно для выработки и совершенствования правил организации деятельности иностранных кредитно -финансовых учреждений в России.
19
