От тройной к пятеричной спирали: эволюция методологии развития инновационной экономики

The presented paper deals with an approach to the evolution of methodology of economy innovative development from the standpoint of analyzing the interaction of its actors – from a Triple to a Penta Helix. The article proposes the provisions for such a methodology based on expanding the range of actors of innovative development as public interests shift from the emergence of a free enterprise economy to a socially oriented knowledge economy and further to a balanced and environmentally friendly production and consumption. A special role in the presented approach is given to the analysis of the place of universities in the fivefold spiral of innovative transformation of economy – as a creator of sustainable development values. The authors proved that the Penta Helixis the result of the evolution of the Quadruple Helix in the conditions of increasing the values of sustainable development. In turn, the core of the QuadrupleHelix– the Triple Helix– acts as the core in the Penta Helix. The article highlights three varieties of the TripleHelix model that is dominant today in industrialized countries, shows their connection with the peculiarities of the innovative development of the Russian economy. On this basis, it was concluded that the progress in building the Penta Helix of innovative development in Russia depends on the emergence of new actors – the subjects of the green economy and civil society, and the full expression of their economic interestsВ представленной статье рассматривается подход к эволюции методологии развития инновационной экономики с позиций анализа взаимодействия ее акторов – от тройной к пятеричной спирали. В статье предлагаются положения методологии, основанной на расширении круга акторов инновационного развития по мере смещения общественного интереса от становления экономики свободного предпринимательства к социально ориентированной экономике знаний и далее – к сбалансированному и экологически безопасному производству и потреблению. Особая роль в представленном подходе отводится анализу места университетов в пятеричной инновационной трансформации экономики – как создателей ценностей устойчивого развития. Авторы доказали, что пятеричная спираль является результатом эволюции четверной спирали инноваций в условиях повышения роли ценностей устойчивого развития. В свою очередь, ядро четверной спирали – тройная спираль – действует и как ядро пятеричной спирали. В статье выделены три разновидности модели тройной спирали, доминирующей сегодня в промышленно развитых странах, показана их связь с особенностями инновационного развития российской экономики. На этом основании сделан вывод, что прогресс в формировании пятеричной спирали инновационного развития в России зависит от появления новых акторов – субъектов зеленой экономики и гражданского общества, полноты выражения их экономических интересо

Структурные сдвиги российской экономики в процессе глобализации

The study tested structural shifts of Russian economy, characterizing it’s involvement into the processes of globalization. The significance of Russian economy was defined within the following markets: capital and investment resources exchange; exchange of natural resources, means of production and consumer goods; exchange of human resources; exchange of technologies and innovations. The level of globalization of Russian economy was expressed through popular indexes. Authors gave their estimation of the place of Russian economy in modern processes of globalization. Russian economy indexes were analyzed by Authors in details and collated with developing countries’ economy indexes. As a result Authors concluded a low level of involvement of Russian economy in global processes and substantiated the importance of Russian domestic implementation of human capital and research capacity, with the necessary application of deliberate government policyИсследованы структурные сдвиги российской экономики, характеризующие ее вовлеченность в процессы глобализации. Определено значение российской экономики на международном рынке обмена капиталом, инвестиционными ресурсами; обмена природными ресурсами, средствами производства и потребительскими товарами; обмена трудовыми ресурсами; научно-технологического развития. Показан уровень глобализации российской экономики согласно известным индексам, а также дана авторская позиция о месте российской экономики в современных процессах глобализации. Проведен детальный анализ собственных показателей российской экономики и их сравнение с развивающимися странами. Сделан вывод о низком уровне вовлеченности российской экономики в глобальные процессы. Обоснована важность внутригосударственной реализации человеческого капитала и научно-исследовательского потенциала, возможной в случае наличия целенаправленной государственной политик

Методика формирования системы показателей для оценки эффективности социально-экономического развития

Globalization has an impact on the socio-economic development of any country. One of the major problems of the interdependent world community is not the cooperation of various socio-economic systems, but the interaction of the multilevel economic structures characterized both by the extent of development and the degree of involvement into the world differentiation of labour and the world economy. As V. Bandurin precisely notes, “state borders gradually lose their value, become more transparent and provide more opportunities for the freedom of movement of all types of resources”На социально-экономическое развитие любой страны влияют факторы, вызванные глобализацией. Одной из важнейших проблем взаимозависимого мирового сообщества является уже не сотрудничество различных социально-экономических систем, а взаимодействие разноуровневых хозяйственных структур, характеризующихся не только степенью развития, но степенью вовлеченности в мировое разделение труда и мировое хозяйство, причем, как точно отмечает В. Бандурин: «…государственные границы постепенно утрачивают свое значение, становятся все более прозрачными, дают все больше возможностей для свободы перемещения всех видов ресурсов» (Bandurin, 1999

Структурные сдвиги российской экономики в процессе глобализации

The study tested structural shifts of Russian economy, characterizing it’s involvement into the processes of globalization. The significance of Russian economy was defined within the following markets: capital and investment resources exchange; exchange of natural resources, means of production and consumer goods; exchange of human resources; exchange of technologies and innovations. The level of globalization of Russian economy was expressed through popular indexes. Authors gave their estimation of the place of Russian economy in modern processes of globalization. Russian economy indexes were analyzed by Authors in details and collated with developing countries’ economy indexes. As a result Authors concluded a low level of involvement of Russian economy in global processes and substantiated the importance of Russian domestic implementation of human capital and research capacity, with the necessary application of deliberate government policyИсследованы структурные сдвиги российской экономики, характеризующие ее вовлеченность в процессы глобализации. Определено значение российской экономики на международном рынке обмена капиталом, инвестиционными ресурсами; обмена природными ресурсами, средствами производства и потребительскими товарами; обмена трудовыми ресурсами; научно-технологического развития. Показан уровень глобализации российской экономики согласно известным индексам, а также дана авторская позиция о месте российской экономики в современных процессах глобализации. Проведен детальный анализ собственных показателей российской экономики и их сравнение с развивающимися странами. Сделан вывод о низком уровне вовлеченности российской экономики в глобальные процессы. Обоснована важность внутригосударственной реализации человеческого капитала и научно-исследовательского потенциала, возможной в случае наличия целенаправленной государственной политик

Методика формирования системы показателей для оценки эффективности социально-экономического развития

Globalization has an impact on the socio-economic development of any country. One of the major problems of the interdependent world community is not the cooperation of various socio-economic systems, but the interaction of the multilevel economic structures characterized both by the extent of development and the degree of involvement into the world differentiation of labour and the world economy. As V. Bandurin precisely notes, “state borders gradually lose their value, become more transparent and provide more opportunities for the freedom of movement of all types of resources”На социально-экономическое развитие любой страны влияют факторы, вызванные глобализацией. Одной из важнейших проблем взаимозависимого мирового сообщества является уже не сотрудничество различных социально-экономических систем, а взаимодействие разноуровневых хозяйственных структур, характеризующихся не только степенью развития, но степенью вовлеченности в мировое разделение труда и мировое хозяйство, причем, как точно отмечает В. Бандурин: «…государственные границы постепенно утрачивают свое значение, становятся все более прозрачными, дают все больше возможностей для свободы перемещения всех видов ресурсов» (Bandurin, 1999

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline

Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used

Ticagrelor in patients with diabetes and stable coronary artery disease with a history of previous percutaneous coronary intervention (THEMIS-PCI) : a phase 3, placebo-controlled, randomised trial

Background: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes with previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), particularly those with previous stenting, are at high risk of ischaemic events. These patients are generally treated with aspirin. In this trial, we aimed to investigate if these patients would benefit from treatment with aspirin plus ticagrelor. Methods: The Effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in diabEtes Mellitus patients Intervention Study (THEMIS) was a phase 3 randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, done in 1315 sites in 42 countries. Patients were eligible if 50 years or older, with type 2 diabetes, receiving anti-hyperglycaemic drugs for at least 6 months, with stable coronary artery disease, and one of three other mutually non-exclusive criteria: a history of previous PCI or of coronary artery bypass grafting, or documentation of angiographic stenosis of 50% or more in at least one coronary artery. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ticagrelor or placebo, by use of an interactive voice-response or web-response system. The THEMIS-PCI trial comprised a prespecified subgroup of patients with previous PCI. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (measured in the intention-to-treat population). Findings: Between Feb 17, 2014, and May 24, 2016, 11 154 patients (58% of the overall THEMIS trial) with a history of previous PCI were enrolled in the THEMIS-PCI trial. Median follow-up was 3·3 years (IQR 2·8–3·8). In the previous PCI group, fewer patients receiving ticagrelor had a primary efficacy outcome event than in the placebo group (404 [7·3%] of 5558 vs 480 [8·6%] of 5596; HR 0·85 [95% CI 0·74–0·97], p=0·013). The same effect was not observed in patients without PCI (p=0·76, p interaction=0·16). The proportion of patients with cardiovascular death was similar in both treatment groups (174 [3·1%] with ticagrelor vs 183 (3·3%) with placebo; HR 0·96 [95% CI 0·78–1·18], p=0·68), as well as all-cause death (282 [5·1%] vs 323 [5·8%]; 0·88 [0·75–1·03], p=0·11). TIMI major bleeding occurred in 111 (2·0%) of 5536 patients receiving ticagrelor and 62 (1·1%) of 5564 patients receiving placebo (HR 2·03 [95% CI 1·48–2·76], p<0·0001), and fatal bleeding in 6 (0·1%) of 5536 patients with ticagrelor and 6 (0·1%) of 5564 with placebo (1·13 [0·36–3·50], p=0·83). Intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 33 (0·6%) and 31 (0·6%) patients (1·21 [0·74–1·97], p=0·45). Ticagrelor improved net clinical benefit: 519/5558 (9·3%) versus 617/5596 (11·0%), HR=0·85, 95% CI 0·75–0·95, p=0·005, in contrast to patients without PCI where it did not, p interaction=0·012. Benefit was present irrespective of time from most recent PCI. Interpretation: In patients with diabetes, stable coronary artery disease, and previous PCI, ticagrelor added to aspirin reduced cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, although with increased major bleeding. In that large, easily identified population, ticagrelor provided a favourable net clinical benefit (more than in patients without history of PCI). This effect shows that long-term therapy with ticagrelor in addition to aspirin should be considered in patients with diabetes and a history of PCI who have tolerated antiplatelet therapy, have high ischaemic risk, and low bleeding risk