Lines of antagonism in the scientific community and the aggravating youth factor

Мұқаба

Дәйексөз келтіру

Толық мәтін

Ашық рұқсат Ашық рұқсат
Рұқсат жабық Рұқсат берілді
Рұқсат жабық Тек жазылушылар үшін

Аннотация

The work is devoted to the analysis of key attitudes within the scientific community, on which, as expected, the image of the scientific and technological future of Russia directly depends. It has been established that the civilizational self-identification of researchers largely does not coincide with the sentiments of the general public. A cautious and often skeptical attitude towards the mobilization of science, increased emigration sentiments among scientists, primarily young ones, allowed the authors to conclude that the country’s scientific community is in crisis, antagonistically divided by contradictions regarding basic value orientations and management issues. The unifying factor is the need for comfortable working conditions and the demand for science by the state and society.

It was quantitatively determined that only half of the researchers adhere to pro-state sentiments and could potentially be usefully involved in solving scientific and technical problems. The other half of the scientific community becomes at least a group of opponents who have doubts or are undecided regarding the scientific and technological course. The youth wing of science, as it turns out, is largely imbued with cosmopolitanism and therefore does not represent an anti-crisis force. Strengthening the mobilization readiness of the scientific community and resolving its internal conflicts is considered from the point of view of improving the quality of science management, including effective personnel policies.

Толық мәтін

Рұқсат жабық

Авторлар туралы

A. Gusev

Sociological service “Decisive Voice”

Хат алмасуға жауапты Автор.
Email: info@castingvote.ru

кандидат экономических наук, директор

Ресей, Moscow

M. Yurevich

Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation

Email: mayurevich@fa.ru

Center for Macroeconomic Research

Ресей, Moscow

Әдебиет тізімі

  1. Gusev A.B., Yurevich M.A. Scientific and technological policy of Russia – 2022: a profession is not more expensive than the Motherland. M.: Pero, 2022. http://castingvote.ru/results/8
  2. Gusev A.B., Yurevich M.A., Nestik T.A., Zadorin I.V. Results of the sociological study “The Future of Russian Science: Academy and Knowledge-Intensive Industries”, autumn 2022. M.: Pero, 2022. http://castingvote.ru/results/9
  3. Gusev A.B., Yurevich M.A. Scientific and technological policy of Russia - 2023: overcoming the identity crisis. M.: Pero, 2024. http://castingvote.ru/results/10
  4. Gui Q., Liu C., Du D. Globalization of science and international scientific collaboration: A network perspective // Geoforum. 2019, vol. 105, pp. 1–12.
  5. Bunnell T.G., Coe N.M. Spaces and scales of innovation // Progress in Human geography. 2001, no. 4 (25), pp. 569–589.
  6. Jonkers K., Sachwald F. The dual impact of ‘excellent’ research on science and innovation: the case of Europe // Science and Public Policy. 2018, no. 2 (45), pp. 159–174.
  7. Balyshev A.V., Konnov V.I. Global science and national scientific cultures // International processes. 2016, no. 3 (14), pp. 96–111.
  8. Chen K., Zhang Y., Fu X. International research collaboration: An emerging domain of innovation studies? Research Policy. 2019, no. 1 (48), pp. 149–168.
  9. Marginson S. What drives global science? The four competing narratives // Studies in higher education. 2022, no. 8 (47), pp. 1566–1584.
  10. Marginson S. Global science and national comparisons: Beyond bibliometrics and scientometrics // Comparative Education. 2022, no. 2 (58), pp. 125–146.
  11. Ivanova N.I. Innovation policy: theory and practice // World economy and international relations. 2016, no. 1 (60), pp. 5–16.
  12. Aghion P., David P.A., Foray D. Science, technology and innovation for economic growth: linking policy research and practice in ‘STIG Systems’ // Research policy. 2009, no. 4 (38), pp. 681–693.
  13. Wagner C.S., Park H.W., Leydesdorff L. The continuing growth of global cooperation networks in research: A co-nundrum for national governments // PloS one. 2015, no. 7 (10), pp. e0131816.
  14. Ivanov V.V. Science reforms – a new vector // Economics of science. 2023, no. 1 (9), pp. 8–20.
  15. Simon M. Russian science and higher education in the context of globalization // Issues of education. 2014, no. 4, pp. 8–35.
  16. Yurevich A.V. On the problem of assessing the contribution of Russian socio-humanitarian science to the world // Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2011, no. 7 (81), pp. 613–621.
  17. Lenchuk E.B. Scientific and technological development as a strategic national priority of Russia // Economic revival of Russia. 2022, no. 1 (71), pp. 58–65.
  18. Lenchuk E.B. On the quality of public management of scientific and technological development // Economic revival of Russia. 2021, no. 1 (67), pp. 31–38.
  19. Chernysh M.F. Reform of Russian science as institutional design // Science management: theory and practice. 2020, no. 2 (2), pp. 47–64.
  20. Dezhina I.G. Science policy in Russia in 2018–2022: conflicting signals // Sociological Journal. 2023, no. 2, pp. 132–149.
  21. Vedomosti. How Putin discussed with scientists the translation of science into a practical plane. https://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/articles/2023/02/09/962272-kak-putin-obsuzhdal-perevod-nauki
  22. Russian newspaper. Valery Falkov spoke about the new system of higher education. https://rg.ru/2024/01/25/kliuch-ot-znanij.html
  23. Yurevich M.A. Scientific and technological development in the model of Juche socialism // Journal of Economic Regulation. 2023, no. 3 (14), pp. 6–15.
  24. Heshmati A., Dibaji S.M. Science, technology, and innovation status in Iran: main challenges // Science, Technology and Society. 2019, no. 3 (24), pp. 545–578.
  25. Danilin I.V. From technological sanctions to technological wars: the impact of the US-Chinese conflict on sanctions policy and high-tech markets // Journal of the New Economic Association. 2022, no. 3 (55), pp. 212–217.
  26. Zhang L., Sivertsen G. The new research assessment reform in China and its implementation // Towards a New Research Era. 2023, pp. 239–252.
  27. Poo M. New focus on basic research in China’s advancement in science and technology // National Science Review. 2022, no. 2 (9), pp. nwac014. https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwac014
  28. Xu F., Li X. Review on reform of research evaluation in past decade // Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences. 2022, № 5 (37), pp. 603-612.
  29. Cressey D. et al. Scientists say ‘no’ to UK exit from Europe in Nature poll // Nature. 2016, no. 7596 (531), pp. 559–559.
  30. Science|Business. Science|Business survey: Most European researchers support science sanctions on Russia. https://sciencebusiness.net/news/sciencebusiness-survey-most-european-researchers-support-science-sanctions-russia
  31. DG COMM’s Public Opinion Monitoring Unit. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/at-your-service/files/be-heard/eurobarometer/2022/public-opinion-on-the-war-in-ukraine/en-public-opinion-on-the-war-against-Ukraine-20230615.pdf
  32. Pew Research Center. Public and Scientists’ Views on Science and Society. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2015/01/PI_ScienceandSociety_Report_012915.pdf
  33. VTsIOM. About modern Russian patriotism. https://wciom.ru/analytical-reviews/analiticheskii-obzor/o-sovremennom-rossiiskom-patriotizme

© Russian Academy of Sciences, 2024

Осы сайт cookie-файлдарды пайдаланады

Біздің сайтты пайдалануды жалғастыра отырып, сіз сайттың дұрыс жұмыс істеуін қамтамасыз ететін cookie файлдарын өңдеуге келісім бересіз.< / br>< / br>cookie файлдары туралы< / a>