Эксоцман
на главную поиск contacts

Institutional Problems and Development Perspectives Innovative Entrepreneurship in Resource Economics

русская версия

Опубликовано на портале: 30-01-2016
The paper justifies the necessity to transit towards the mobilization model "triple helix" (strategic partnership of science and education organizations, business and government, the public). Innovation as a product of entrepreneurship permeate the system of relations from top to bottom - from more efficient ways of doing home Ho households, and to design mechanisms of state regulation of the economy. However, at the theoretical level, the relationship remains poorly studied in-novations as a function of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship as social phenomenon in the system of institutional relations "business-authorities-society". Modern russian economy has features of "dual enclave economy" with isolated more productive export-oriented resource sector. Innovative entrepreneurs do not become actors of change because of weak protection of property rights, manipulated state, weak sanctions for rent-seeking. The transition from innovative system "technology push" (fundamental knowledge on demand of state) towards innovation system "market pull" (innovations on demand of business) is complicated within Y-matrix of competitive institutional environment. It could turn out to be more effective to transit to the mobilization model "triple helix" (strategic partnership of science and education organizations, business and government, the public) in compliance with X-matrix of cooperative institutional environment of redistribution. This will allow to create the necessary mechanisms for the exchange of missing codified knowledge (for those who imitate innovations) and tacit knowledge (for pure innovators) in the cross-sectoral technological chains. The design of institutional change in compliance with real needs of participants of innovative processes requires formal analysis of the region economic development type through assessing its key spheres, revealing and modeling prevailing type of entrepreneurship as well as identifying the relationship between development type and entrepreneurship type within institutional environment.
PDF Document
сохранить
[803 КБ]
BiBTeX
RIS
Ключевые слова

См. также:
Евгений Всеволодович Балацкий
Общественные науки и современность. 2019.  № 5. С. 156-174. 
[Статья]
Игорь Сергеевич Пыжев, Вадим Петрович Горячев
TERRA ECONOMICUS. 2018.  Т. 16. № 2. С. 99-113. 
[Статья]
Игорь Сергеевич Пыжев, Вадим Петрович Горячев
Journal of Institutional Studies (Журнал институциональных исследований). 2018.  Т. 10. № 3. С. 85-101. 
[Статья]
Андрей Евгеньевич Шаститко, Анастасия Андреевна Комкова, Александр Александрович Курдин
Общественные науки и современность. 2016.  № 1. С. 47- 62. 
[Статья]
Рустем Махмутович Нуреев, Евгений Георгиевич Бусыгин
Journal of Institutional Studies (Журнал институциональных исследований). 2017.  Т. 9. № 3. С. 97-118. 
[Статья]
Вячеслав Витальевич Вольчик
Journal of Institutional Studies (Журнал институциональных исследований). 2017.  Т. 9. № 4. С. 132-143. 
[Статья]
Вячеслав Михайлович Широнин
Общественные науки и современность. 2016.  № 1. С. 141-156. 
[Статья]