Russian Federation
The article is devoted to the actual topic of achieving technological sovereignty based on the innovative development of high-tech sectors of the Russian economy.The author's concept of managing the development of a high-tech industrial complex at the mesolevel is presented. The concept of a high-tech industrial complex has been clarified. The concept is formed on the basis of the interconnected development and use of methodological provisions of the theory of economic systems, ecosystem approach, mesoecnomics of network structures, theories of innovative development, the concept of open innovation, the concept of technological modernization, the concept of technological modes, technological trajectories, modes, models of innovative activity of companies based on a systematic approach. The choice of the principles of the new concept is substantiated: a systematic approach to solving problems, the priority of developing meso-level innovation ecosystems, consolidating efforts in critical (priority) and promising areas for achieving technological sovereignty, focusing on innovative activity and entrepreneurship, orienting planning of the future.
high-tech industrial complex; meso-level; concept; innovative ecosystems
1. Nikolaeva T.P. Vysokotehnologichnyy kompleks i ego rol' v innovacionnom processe // Innovacii. 2005. № 9(86). S. 52-57.
2. Maevskiy V., Kuzyk B. Usloviya razvitiya vysokotehnologichnogo kompleksa // Voprosy ekonomiki. 2003. № 2. S. 26-39.
3. Ermolenko A.A., Naumov S.V. Novaya real'nost': preodolenie razryva mezhdu ekonomicheskoy teoriey i praktikoy // Izvestiya Yugo-Zapadnogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Ekonomika. Sociologiya. Menedzhment. 2020. T. 10. № 6. S. 109-123.
4. Ermolenko A.A. Fenomen «globalizirovannogo nacionalizma» v kontekste novoy ekonomicheskoy real'nosti // Izvestiya Yugo-Zapadnogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Ekonomika. Sociologiya. Menedzhment. 2020. Tom 10. № 1. S. 130-141.
5. Burlingham B. Small giants: companies that choose to be great instead of big. New York: Portfolio, 2016. 186 p.
6. Jaffe A., Trajtenberg M., Henderson R. Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations // The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1993, 108(3): 577-598. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2307/2118401
7. Crescenzi R., Jaax A. Innovation in Russia: the territorial dimension // Economic Geography. 2017, 93(1): 66-88. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2016.1208532
8. Brilliantova V.V., Vlasova V.V., Fursov K.S. Tehnologicheskoe raznoobrazie i samoobespechennost' proizvodstva peredovymi proizvodstvennymi tehnologiyami v rossiyskih regionah // Ekonomika regiona. 2020. Tom 16. № 4. S. 1224-1238. DOI:https://doi.org/10.17059/ekon.reg.2020-4-15
9. Rumyancev A.A. Postindustrial'nye tehnologii v ekonomike Severo-Zapada Rossii // Ekonomika regiona. 2021. T. 17. № 1. S. 103-113. DOI:https://doi.org/10.17059/ekon.reg.2021-1-8
10. Mezoekonomika razvitiya / Pod red. G.B. Kleynera. M.: Nauka, 2011. 804 s.
11. Kosenko A.A., Hrustalev O.E., Babkin G.V. Finansovo-ekonomicheskaya i institucional'naya konsolidaciya naukoemkih i vysokotehnologichnyh proizvodstv // Finansovaya analitika: problemy i resheniya. 2013. № 22(160). S. 12-22.
12. Vlasova V., Rud' V. Kooperacionnye strategii predpriyatiy v epohu otkrytyh innovaciy: prostranstvennye i vremennye aspekty // Forsayt. 2020. Tom 14. № 4. S. 80-94. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.17323/2500-2597.2020.4.80.94
13. Kleyner G.B. Sistemnaya sbalansirovannost' ekonomiki / G.B. Kleyner, M.A. Rybachuk. M.: ID «Nauchnayabiblioteka», 2017. 320 s.
14. Iansiti M., Levien R. The Keystone Advantage: What the New Dynamics of Business Ecosystems Mean for Strategy, Innovation, and Sustainability. Harvard Business School, Press: Boston, MA, 2004. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.42-5360
15. Jacobides M., Cennamo C., Gawer A. Industries, Ecosystems, Platforms, and Architectures: Rethinking our Strategy Constructs at the Aggregate Level. LondonBusinessSchool, 2015.
16. Kleyner G.B. Social'no-ekonomicheskie ekosistemy v svete sistemnoy paradigmy. Sistemnyy analiz v ekonomike - 2018: sbornik trudov V Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferencii-biennale, Moskva, 21-23 noyabrya 2018 goda / Pod obsch. red. G.B. Kleynera, S.E. Schepetovoy. M.: OOO «Izdatel'stvo Prometey», 2018. S. 4-14. DOI:https://doi.org/10.33278/SAE-2018.rus.005-014
17. Chorafakis G., Laget P. Mesoeconomic structure, innovation and complexity: the concept of mesoeconomic plexus. In book: Knowledge Matters. Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Innovation Networks and Knowledge Clusters / Ed. by E.G. Carayannis, P. Formica. UnitedKingdom: PalgraveMacMillan, 2008. Page 52-86.
18. Kleyner G.B. Sistemnye problemy otechestvennoy ekonomiki: mezoekonomika, mikroekonomika, ekonomika predpriyatiy // Vestnik CEMI RAN. 2018. № 1. S. 5.
19. Brette O., Mehier C. Building on the micro-meso-macro evolutionary framework: the stakes for the analysis of clusters of innovations. In book: Varieties of Capitalism and New Institutional Deals: Regulation, Welfare and The New Economy / Ed. by W. Elsner, H. Hanappi. Cheltenham: Elgar, 2008. Page 227-250.
20. Markov L.S., Yagol'nicer M.A. Mezoekonomicheskie sistemy: problemy tipologii // Region: ekonomika i sociologiya. 2008. № 1. S. 18-44.
21. Bathelty H., Cohendet P. The creation of knowledge: Local building, global accessing and economic development-toward an agenda // Journal of Economic Geography. 2014, 14(5): 1-14.
22. Da Silva R.H., Kaminski P.C., Marin R.O. Innovation ecosystems in the automotive industry between opportunities and limitations // Foresight and STI Governance. 2021, 15(3): 66-80. DOI:https://doi.org/10.17323/2500-2597.2021.3.66.80
23. Wilhelm M., Dolfsma W. Managing knowledge boundaries for open innovation - Lessons from the automotive industry // International Journal of Operations & Production Management. 2018, 38(1): 230-248.
24. Balackiy E.V., Ekimova N.A. Al'ternativnaya model' upravleniya innovaciyami i vysokotehnologicheskim sektorom ekonomiki Rossii // Upravlenec. 2020. Tom 11. № 5. S. 2-16. DOI:https://doi.org/10.29141/2218-5003-2020-11-5-1
25. Dosi G. Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change // Research policy. 1982, 11: 147-162.
26. Dosi G. Sources, procedures, and microeconomic effects of innovation // Journal of economic literature. 1988, 26: 1120-1171.
27. Gohberg L.M., Kuznecova T.E., Rud' V.A. Analiz innovacionnyh rezhimov v rossiyskoy ekonomike. Metodologicheskie podhody i pervye rezul'taty // Forsayt. 2010. T. 4. № 3. S. 18-30.
28. Pavitt K. Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory // Research Policy. 1984, 13: 343-373.
