If authorities in a region challenge their local companies with “Reporting Good Innovation Achievements”, there are methods to do this

19 august 2015 | Izvestia

The most “innovative” regions of the country became known in late July. Eleven constituent entities of the Russian Federation whose innovative development indices exceeded 130% of the country’s average were recognized as the leaders. The top four includes Moscow, Saint-Petersburg, the Republic of Tatarstan and the Nizhniy Novgorod Oblast for the second consecutive year.

Yuri Ammosov
Yuri Ammosov
Adviser to Director General of the Analytical Center

The rating used to score regions based on 23 indicators has been in place since 2012 as an initiative of the Association of Innovative Regions of Russia with the participation of the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia, regional administrations and leading specialized experts. Regions are scored based on 23 indicators. Yuri Ammosov, the Adviser to the Head of the Analytical Center, appraised the correctness of the results of the Russian innovation rating for regions.

“It is always reasonable to raise the question of how the rating correlates with the reality evaluated thereby,” said Mr. Ammosov to a correspondent of Izvestia. “The rating of the Association of Innovative Regions of Russia (AIRR) comprises 3 groups of indicators: scientific research and development, innovative activities and general social and economic conditions. Evaluation criteria are disclosed for each of the groups and it is quite clear what the place of a certain region in the rating is based on. The other question is to what extent regions are compared with each other correctly in the rating from the methodological standpoint. AIRR uses data from the Federal State Statistic Service (Rosstat), the Federal Service for Intellectual Property, the Patents and Trademarks (Rospatent) and open publications as the basis, so the comparison and results are deemed correct. However, there is an open question regarding the methodology for collection of primary indicators, especially by Rosstat; the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation gave an instruction to revise and upgrade it as early as last year, but this work has not been done yet. Existing methods allow different interpretations when preparing and filing reports; and if authorities in a region challenge their local companies with “reporting good innovation achievements,” there are methods to do this. This may have an impact on final results”.