Innovation has existed for many thousands of years. Our ancestors were engaged in epochal, or basic, innovations that changed the face of society and moved it forward. And this was long before science was formed and a small layer of scientists involved in it became isolated. Therefore, it would be reckless to say that science is the only source of innovation. In recent centuries, when the innovative explosion of the industrial era occurred, scientists were not always the initiators of major innovations. The initiators of innovation were entrepreneurs (for example, Ford), politicians and government officials, architects, artists, and musicians.

Although innovative practice has existed for many millennia, innovation became the subject of special scientific study only in the 20th century.

In the formation and development of the theory of innovation, three significant stages emerge:

• - 10-30s - formation of the fundamental foundations of the theory (the period of basic innovations in this area of ​​scientific knowledge);
• - 40-60s - development and detailing of basic innovative ideas of the previous period;
• - since the mid-70s. - a new theoretical breakthrough associated with the development and dissemination of the technological structure, a wave of epoch-making basic innovations during the formation of post-industrial society. This period will probably cover the first decades of the 21st century.

The formation of the foundations of the theory of innovation took place within the framework of the development of a general theory of cycles and crises, primarily in the economic and technological spheres.

N.D. made a great contribution to the foundation of the theory of innovation. Kondratiev. Expounding the doctrine of large cycles of economic conditions lasting approximately half a century, he substantiated the natural connection between the “upward” and “downward” waves of these cycles with the waves of technical inventions and their practical use.

N.D. Kondratiev links technological and economic innovation waves with radical changes in other spheres of social life: “... wars and social upheavals are included in the rhythmic process of development of large cycles and turn out to be not the initial forces of this development, but a form of its manifestation. But once they arise, they, of course, in turn have a powerful, sometimes perturbing influence on the pace and direction of economic dynamics.”

Thus, N.D. Kondratiev laid the foundations of a general theory of innovation, covering not only technology and economics, but also the socio-political sphere, and also revealing the mechanism of interaction of innovations in various spheres of society.

Joseph Schumpeter is considered the founder of the theory of innovation, who picked up and developed the main ideas of N.D. Kondratiev in this area. Schumpeter focused his attention on economic innovation and highly valued the role of the innovative entrepreneur in economic progress.

Schumpeter's main theories of innovation:

• - innovation activity as the most important function of entrepreneurs;
• - distinguishing between product innovations and process innovations, radical (basic) and improving, technological and economic innovations;
• - the place of innovation in the cyclical dynamics of the economy;
• - the inevitability of overcoming the force of inertia and environmental resistance.

Kondratiev's like-minded person, Pitirim Sorokin, laid the foundations for innovation in the sociocultural sphere, understanding it in a broad sense - not only art and culture, social and political relations, but also the dynamics of scientific discoveries and inventions, interstate and civil wars. Published in 1937-1941. in the four-volume “Social and Cultural Dynamics,” he examined, in particular, the trend in the dynamics of technical inventions over more than 5 millennia of the history of society, as well as the largest innovations observed over the millennia in other spheres of the spiritual life of society. Noting the presence of long-term fluctuations in sociocultural dynamics, expressed in a change in the predominance of ideational, sensual and integral sociocultural types, Sorokin denied the existence of a general trend of historical progress and considered these fluctuations aimless, which is difficult to agree with. They gave quantitative estimates of innovation waves in a number of areas of spiritual reproduction.

So, over three decades of the 20th century. the fundamental foundations of the theory of innovation, especially technological and sociocultural, were laid.

Further development of the theory of innovation - from the 40s to the mid-70s. XX century - is not characterized by such fundamental breakthroughs in this area of ​​cognition. This was prevented by the Second World Wave and the post-war arms race, when efforts were aimed at mastering and disseminating the basic innovations of the 4th N.D. cycle. Kondratiev and the technological structure adequate to him; research was more practical, applied in nature. However, the theory of innovation has advanced significantly.

Among the fundamental works of this period, noteworthy is the major monograph of the outstanding English scientist John Bernal, “Science in history,” published in London in 1954 and in the USSR in 1956.

During this period, much attention was paid to the relationship between innovation and economic growth. The Nobel lecture of Simon Kuznets, given by him in December 1917, was devoted to this problem. It formulated a number of new approaches to the theory of innovation, developing the ideas of Schumpeter and Bernal.

• 1. Kuznets introduced the concept of epochal innovations that underlie the transition from one historical era to another.
• 2. The revolutionary acceleration of economic growth in the industrial era was caused, according to Kuznets, by an epoch-making innovation - the accelerated development of science became a new source of growth.
• 3. Discussing the social consequences of innovations, Kuznets notes that they can be both positive and negative. The economic function of the state is to stimulate their growth and structural changes, to analyze, select or discard legal and institutional innovations of new production potential. Without innovation, science languishes; the wave of innovation serves as fertile ground for the flourishing of scientific research.
• 4. Technological innovations are interconnected with innovations in other areas of society.

The current stage in the development of the theory of innovation dates back to the publication of the monograph of the German scientist Gerhard Mensch “Technological stalemate: innovation overcomes depression” and subsequent publications and international conferences devoted to the theory of long-wave oscillations in the economy of Kondratieff and Schumpeter.

Soviet scientists were actively involved in the development of the theory of cycles and innovation. A series of monographs on these problems was published by Yu.V. Yakovets.

A fundamental study of long-term trends in the dynamics of science, technology and economics was carried out by Academician A.I. Anchishkin. He identified three epoch-making revolutions in the history of scientific and technological progress that realized clusters of basic innovations:

• - the first industrial revolution of the late 18th - early 19th centuries;
• - the second industrial revolution of the last third of the 19th - early 20th centuries;
• - the third industrial revolution, which began in the middle of the 20th century. and developed into a scientific and technological revolution.

A review of the theories of long-term trends in the capitalist economy by S.M. was published. Menshikov and L.A. Klimenko on this problem, monograph by L.S. Baryutin on technical innovations in industry, V.I. Kushlin on updating the production apparatus.

The legacy of N.D. was returned to Russian science. Kondratiev, his doctrine of large cycles of market conditions and associated long-term fluctuations in economic dynamics. During this period, a strong innovation school emerged in Russia. A new wave in the development of the theory of innovation is associated with the deep crisis of the world economy in the mid-70s and early 80s. XX century, due to the transition to the 5th Kondratieff cycle. This transition took place against the backdrop of a global energy crisis and a price revolution. history origin innovation

The main achievements in the development of the theory of innovation in the second half of the 20th century:

• 1. The focus of researchers was on long-wave fluctuations in the economy and society and the associated waves of basic innovations. American scientists J. Odelski and W. Thompson date their beginning to 1930.
• 2. Along with long-wave fluctuations in invention, innovation, and economic activity, super-long secular and millennial waves of epochal innovations were put forward and studied, transforming not only technology and the economy, but also the entire structure of society.

Arnold Toynbee studied the cycles in the dynamics of local civilizations, the periodic change of their generations. Fernand Braudel, following R. Cameron, substantiated the presence of not only half-century Kondratieff trends, but also secular trends lasting from 150 to 300 years, believing that longer historical cycles do not exist.

3. Continuing the tradition of N.D. Kondratiev, O. Spengler, J. Schumpeter, P. Sorokin, innovation researchers extended them not only to technology and economics, but also to other spheres of society, including science, political and social life, culture, ethics, religion.

Arthur Schlesinger the Younger, in his book “Cycles of American History,” put forward the idea of ​​political cycles lasting 30 years - the cycles of the active life of one generation. During the first 15 years, each generation is characterized by high innovative activity, and then takes a conservative position. This provision applies not only to politics, but also to other areas of human activity. The law of generational change operates throughout history, largely determining the rhythm of fluctuations in innovative activity.

In the works of Yu. Yakovets in 1984 and 1988, the relationship between the cyclical dynamics of science, inventions, innovations and changes in generations of machines and technological structures, the development of efficiency and prices of technology was studied, and the concepts of environmental, educational, organizational, production, and management cycles were introduced. In the next (1999) work by Yu. Yakovets, “Cycles. Crises. Forecasts,” all types of cycles in the development of society are systematized as manifestations of the general pattern of cyclical genetic dynamics. The cycles identified are ecological, demographic, technological, economic, socio-political, in the spiritual life of society (in science, culture, education, ethics, religion), generalizing historical cycles.

• 4. At the new stage of development of the theory of innovation, much attention is paid to its territorial aspect, fluctuations in the level of innovative activity of different countries and civilizations.
• 5. Particular attention was paid to the economic mechanism for implementing innovation. Most researchers are of the view that it is necessary to combine a market competitive mechanism (especially in relation to improving innovations) with active government support for basic innovations that determine the country's competitiveness. Serious attention was paid to innovation management and practical issues of technology commercialization.
• 6. A new word in the development of the theory of innovation was the substantiation of the concept of technological quasi-rent. In fact, the main result and incentive for innovation is obtaining excess profits during the period of the spread of effective innovations.

These proposals were presented at the round table of the global civil society forum of the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg on September 2, 2002.

Thus, considering the entire path of development of the theory of innovation, one can see that the ideas of cyclical dynamics of Nikolai Kondratiev, Pitirim Sorokin, Joseph Schumpeter, Gerhard Mensch were the basis for the further development of this scientific direction.

Innovative practices have existed for several millennia. However, it is only within the last 100 years that innovation has been the subject of scientific study. In the formation and development of the theory of innovation, three stages can be distinguished:

First stage, called the period of basic innovation in this field of scientific knowledge, from the 1910s to the 1930s. During this period, the fundamental foundations of the theory are formed.

Second phase 1940s -1960s - development and detailing of the basic innovative ideas of the previous period;

Third stage since the mid-1970s - a new theoretical breakthrough associated with the development and dissemination of the fifth technological structure, a wave of epoch-making and basic innovations during the formation of post-industrial society and the emergence of a technological structure. This period covers the first two decades of the 21st century. and could probably extend into the third decade.

Let's consider the main features and achievements of each period. Formation of the foundations of the theory of innovation occurred primarily in the economic and technological spheres within the framework of the development of the general theory of cycles and crises. The prerequisites for understanding the role of innovation in overcoming economic crises follow from the understanding of M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky plays a decisive role in investment fluctuations in changing phases of the industrial cycle, since investments are usually associated with innovation. One of the classics of Keynesianism, E. Hansen, assessing the contribution of M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky, in developing the theory of cycles and crises, wrote: “They dominate the cycle and control it, thus fluctuations in the size of investments; consumption rises and falls as a result of these fluctuations. This was a highly original and essentially new theory for that time, put forward by Tugan-Baranovsky.

The great Russian economist N.D. Kondratiev, expounding the doctrine of large cycles of market conditions lasting approximately half a century, substantiated the natural connection between the “upward” and “downward” waves of these cycles with the waves of technical inventions and their practical use: “Before the start of the upward wave of each large cycle, and sometimes at the very beginning, There are significant changes in the basic conditions of the economic life of society. These changes are usually expressed (in one combination or another) in profound changes in the technology of production and exchange (which in turn are preceded by significant technical inventions and discoveries), in changes in the conditions of monetary circulation, in the strengthening of the role of new countries in world economic life.”

In essence, we are talking about a wave of technological and economic innovation. N.D. Kondratiev links these waves with radical changes in other spheres of society: “Periods of upward waves of large cycles, as a rule, are much richer in major social upheavals and upheavals in the life of society (revolutions, wars) than periods of downward waves.” Thus, we can conclude that N.D. Kondratiev laid the foundations of a general theory of innovation, covering not only technology and economics, but also the socio-political sphere, and also revealing the mechanism of interaction of innovations in various spheres of society. The founder of the theory of innovation is considered Joseph Schumpeter, who developed the main ideas of N.D. Kondratiev in this area. I. Schumpeter, focusing on economic innovation, highly appreciated the role of the entrepreneur - innovator in economic progress. “The function of entrepreneurs is to reform or revolutionize production, using inventions, or more generally, using new technological solutions to produce new goods or produce old goods in new ways, opening new sources of raw materials or new markets, reorganizing industry and etc. The beginning of the construction of railways, the production of electricity before the First World War, steam power, steel, the automobile, colonial enterprises - all these are shining examples of a large family of phenomena that also includes countless more modest representatives - right down to the release of new varieties of sausages and original toothbrushes. It is precisely this kind of activity that is the main reason for the periodic “booms” that revolutionize the economic organism, and the periodic “busts” that arise as a result of imbalances in the production of new goods or the application of new methods. Doing something new is always difficult, and the implementation of an innovation reflects an independent economic function, firstly, since everything new lies outside the boundaries of routine tasks that are understandable to everyone and, secondly, since it is necessary to overcome the resistance of the environment...” This quote summarizes the basics of Innovation Theory II. Schumpeter: innovation as the most important function of entrepreneurs; distinguishing between product innovations and process innovations, radical (basic) and improving, technological and economic innovations; the place of innovation in the cyclical dynamics of the economy; the inevitability of overcoming the force of inertia and environmental resistance. The second period of development of the theory of innovation is not characterized by such fundamental breakthroughs. Theoretical developments were hampered by the Second World War, and in the conditions of the post-war arms race, activity in the innovation sphere was aimed at mastering and disseminating the basic innovations of the IV Kondratieff cycle and the technological structure adequate to it. Such studies were of a more practical, applied nature. Among the fundamental works of this period, it should be noted the monograph of the outstanding English scientist John Bernal “Science in History”, published in London in 1954 and in the USSR in 1956. Although the focus of the researcher is the progress of scientific knowledge throughout historical eras, it reveals the inextricable relationship of this progress with the development of technology, starting with the Paleolithic. J. Bernal notes the succession of periods of ups and downs in the development of science and its technological application: “The progress of science is anything but uniformity in space and time. Periods of rapid pace of its development alternate with longer periods of stagnation and even decline. Over time, the centers of scientific activity moved and usually followed rather than directed the movement of centers of trade and industry. The monograph reveals the connection between scientific, technical and social innovations at all stages of the history of social development. J. Bernal notes that “periods of flourishing science usually coincide with periods of increased economic activity and technological progress.” And although in the early stages science used innovation rather than initiated it, in modern society it is scientific innovation that serves as the starting point for innovation in engineering and technology and in other areas of society. During this period, significant attention was paid to the relationship between innovation and economic growth. In 1917 Simon Kuznets formulated a number of new approaches to the theory of innovation, developing the ideas of J. Schumpeter and J. Bernal. S. Kuznets introduced the concept of epochal innovations that underlie the transition from one historical era to another, as discussed above. S. Kuznets makes 4 main conclusions:

• 1. In the industrial era, the revolutionary acceleration of economic growth was caused by an epoch-making innovation - the accelerated development of science became a new source of growth. “The massive application of technological innovation, which constitutes to a large extent the essence of modern economic growth, is closely related to the further progress of science, which, in turn, forms the basis of further technical progress.
• 2. The use of innovations not only provides additional economic resources for fundamental and applied research with a long development period and significant capital expenditures, but, which should be especially noted, allows the creation of new effective means for research "and provides additional information about changes in natural processes occurring influenced by changes in production."
• 3. The social consequences of innovations can be both positive and negative. The state must take part in preventing and resolving conflicts that arise. The economic function of the state is to stimulate growth and structural changes, to analyze, select or discard legal and institutional innovations proposed as ways and directions for using new production potential. Without innovation, science languishes; the innovation wave serves as fertile ground for scientific research to flourish.
• 4. Technological innovations are interconnected with

innovations in other spheres of society: “The constant emergence of technological innovations, which is characteristic of modern economic growth, and the accompanying social innovations that facilitate the necessary adaptation, are the main factors influencing the structure of the economy and society,” lead to “innovations in the field of law, in institutional structures and even ideology." This applies primarily to developing countries: “Notable progress in economic development

developing countries may require changes in existing production technologies and perhaps even more significant innovations in political and social structures.

During this same period, technological innovation was also explored in terms of innovation management. You can name the book by Brian Twiss “Management of Scientific and Technical Innovations”, the first edition of which was published in 1974. B. Twiss notes the importance of the ideas of N.D. Kondratiev to understand the uneven dynamics of innovation and the decisive role of the latter in ensuring economic growth. “The nature of technological development is changing. In recent years, the work of N. D. Kondratiev, who suggested the existence of long waves of economic development, has received new recognition. G. Mensch, who studied the frequency of scientific and technical innovations, also confirmed the presence of half-century cycles, active innovations in the phase of the deepest depression. In each case, new technologies underlay the formation of new industries that accelerate economic growth. In the light of these ideas, the importance of scientific and technological innovations as sources of economic growth increases.”

The book contains a statement by J. Bright, characterizing the unique role of innovation in the development of society: “The only process of its kind that unites science, technology, economics, entrepreneurship and management is the process of scientific and technological innovation. It embodies the knowledge that a competent leader, an effectively working scientist, an intelligent official and simply an educated member of society should have tomorrow. It is the process of transforming scientific knowledge into physical reality that changes society.”

B. Twiss emphasizes the essence of innovation as a process in which an invention or scientific idea acquires economic content. At the same time, the creative nature of innovation activity reveals the main factors that determine the success of innovations. These include: market orientation, compliance with the goals of the corporation, evaluation methods, effective project management, creativity, innovative environment and the presence of a “project champion”, characterizes the features of innovation at different stages of the industry life cycle, methods for assessing the effectiveness of innovative projects.

Experience in technological innovation generalized by national and international economic organizations, which contributed to increasing the efficiency of innovation activities. However, mainly only at the evolutionary stage of the spread of innovations. The beginning of the third (modern) stage in the development of the theory of innovation is considered to be the publication of the monograph by the German scientist Gerhard Mensch “Technological stalemate: innovation overcomes depression” and the subsequent publications and international conferences devoted to the theory of long-wave oscillations in the economy N.D. Kondratiev and I. Schumpeter. Among these publications, it is worth noting the monographs by J. Van Dyne “Long Waves in Economic Life”, A. Kleinknecht “Innovation in Times of Crisis and Prosperity”, K. Freeman, J. Clark, L. Sute “Unemployment and Technical Innovations. Studying the long waves of economic development”, I. Nikolova “Kondratiev’s Long Waves”. During this period, Soviet and Russian scientists began to pay attention to the development of the theory of cycles and innovation. A fundamental study of long-term trends in the dynamics of science, technology and economics was carried out by Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences A.I. Anchishkin. A.I. Anchishkin identified three epoch-making revolutions in the history of scientific and technological progress that realized clusters of basic innovations: first industrial revolution late XVIII - early XIX centuries; second industrial revolution the last third of the 19th - early 20th centuries; third industrial revolution, which began in the middle of the 20th century. and developed into a scientific and technological revolution. In the penultimate decade of the 20th century, as noted by A.I. Anchishkin, signs of a new, second wave of scientific and technological revolution began to take shape, the main features of which are a radical restructuring of production technology based on electronics, biotechnology, automation of complex technical systems, an information explosion, the absolute dominance of technology on a scientific basis, the transformation of the materialization of scientific knowledge into the main source of expanded reproduction. A series of monographs on the problems of innovation theory was published by Yu.V. Yakovets in 1978-1988

g.g. In these works, innovation was considered as an integral part of scientific, technical and economic cycles (medium-term, long-term, ultra-long-term), the basis for overcoming the crisis, and the relationship between scientific, technical, innovative, economic, educational, organizational and managerial cycles and their innovation phases was studied. By the end of the 80s. In the 20th century, the legacy of N.D. was returned to Russian science. Kondratiev, his doctrine of large cycles of market conditions and associated long-term fluctuations in economic dynamics.

The new stage in the development of the theory of innovation in the 80s of the 20th century is associated with the deep crisis of the world economy in the mid-70s and early 80s, caused by the transition to the fifth Kondratiev cycle. This transition took place against the backdrop of a global energy crisis and a price revolution: the world export price index for 1971-1980. increased by 8.1 times, including for raw materials - 14.1 times, agricultural products - 8 times, finished goods - 6.3 times. A non-standard, from the point of view of crisis theory, phenomenon arose, called stagflation, i.e. galloping inflation in the context of a decline in production. And although over the next 5 years, export prices, especially for fuel and raw materials, decreased, and subsequently there was a moderate increase with unstable dynamics, the situation in the world economy has changed. It became obvious that there was a need to implement a cluster of basic innovations. As a result, only with the help of such innovations was it possible to overcome the global depression of the 80s.

Since the second half of the 80s, relatively high rates of economic growth have been observed (with a hitch at the turn of the 80s and 90s). As a result, the volume of world GDP over 15 years increased by 63%, world production by 60% (including finished products by 65%), exports by 2.83 times (including finished products by 3. 96 times) with an increase in export prices by 3.31 times (including for raw materials - by 1.94 times, for agricultural raw materials - by 2.29 times and finished products - by 4.02 times).

The improvement of world economic indicators in the 90s of the 20th century weakened the attention of scientists to the theory of innovation and brought to the fore the applied problems of the development and dissemination of improving innovations. However, the global economic crisis of 2001-2002, marking the transition to the downward wave of the fifth Kondratieff cycle, and then the global financial crisis of 2008-2010, again poses the problem of mastering clusters of basic innovations that ensure the transition to the sixth technological order, adequate to the post-industrial technological mode of production, which is will cause increased interest in the problems of the theory of innovation, the mechanism of their development and dissemination in the context of economic globalization, revival of interest in the theory of cycles, crises and innovations N.D. Kondratiev, I. Schumpeter, G. Mensch. Now in economic science more attention is paid to the main patterns of development of the modern economy - cyclicality and unevenness, characterized by a change in basic technological processes, as well as the growth and development of the economy based on innovative transformations.

The theory of changing technological structures is based on the concepts of N.D. Kondratiev, I. Schumpeter, G. Mensch, where an attempt was made to connect the change of technological structures with the activity of entrepreneurs in the production and implementation of basic technological innovations. This concept was further supported and developed by Russian scientists Glazyev S., Mayevsky V., Dagaev A., Yakovets Yu. Menshikov S. et al.

There are also opponents to this concept. Russian economist M. L. Khazin criticizes the theory of Kondratiev cycles and, accordingly, technological structures from the position that he considers economic growth to be a function of the degree of economic development of accessible territorial markets (M. Khazin calls them technological zones). According to the economist, market development lies in the maximum possible increase in specialization. Once the maximum possible value has been reached, further growth is impossible despite any technical innovations.

The most significant results of the development of the theory of innovation in the second half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 20th century include:

1. Study of long-wave fluctuations in the economy and the associated waves of basic innovations. The theory of cycles and innovations by N.D. was accepted, statistically confirmed and developed. Kondratiev and J. Schumpeter.

G. Mensch substantiated the provisions on basic innovations, improving innovations and pseudo-innovations; identified the interrelationships of long-term cycles in the field of inventions, innovations and economics.

2. Along with long-wave fluctuations of inventions, innovations, and economic activity, super-long secular and millennial waves of epochal innovations were put forward and studied, transforming not only technology and the economy, but also the entire structure of society. A. Toynbee studied the cycles in the dynamics of local civilizations, the periodic change of their generations. “The growth of civilizations is a progressive movement. Civilizations evolve through an impulse that leads them from challenge through response to further challenge: from differentiation to integration and back to integration again. Progress, which we call growth, is a cumulative forward movement." At the heart of the transformative power of responding to a challenge lies a cluster of epochal and foundational innovations. If a civilization turns out to be incapable of it, it disappears from the historical stage. F. Braudel, following R. Cameron, substantiated the presence of not only half-century Kondratieff, but also secular trends lasting from 150 to 300 years, believing that longer historical cycles do not exist.

E. Toffler, one of the authors of the concept of post-industrial society, has a different opinion. He believes that the result of major innovations is great waves that open up entire eras in human history. First wave began 8-9 thousand years ago with the development of agriculture and cattle breeding, the transition to artificial reproduction, a productive way of life, and then to the formation of construction and crafts. Second wave- the birth of industrial civilization, which began with the industrial revolution. At the end of the 20th century. started third wave, during which humanity moves to a new technological revolution. It brings with it a truly new way of life, based on differentiated, renewable sources of life, on “electronic cottages”, on locally transformed schools and corporations. “The beginning of a new civilization is the single most explosive fact of the time in which we live. Humanity is facing profound changes. It faces the deepest social upheaval and theoretical reorganization of all time. Without yet clearly distinguishing this stunning new civilization, we are participating in its construction from the very beginning.”

• 3. Continuing the tradition of N.D. Kondratiev, O. Spengler, J. Schumpeter, P.A. Sorokin, innovation researchers have extended them not only to technology and economics, but also to other spheres of society, including public administration, science, political and social life, culture, ethics, and religion. They considered innovations in the rhythm of the cyclical dynamics of socio-political life, science, culture, military activity, and historical development in general. (For example, A. Schlesinger’s book “Cycles of American History”). Soviet, Russian researcher V.Yu. Yakovets conducted research on the relationship between the cyclical dynamics of science, inventions, innovations and changes in generations of machines and technological structures, the development of efficiency and prices of technology, introduced the concepts of environmental, educational, organizational, production, management cycles, studied the patterns of the emergence and development of discoveries, inventions and technical innovations.
• 4. At the new stage of development of the theory of innovation, much attention is paid to its territorial aspect, fluctuations in the level of innovative activity of different countries and civilizations. P. Kennedy studied the dynamics of the level of industrialization per capita in different countries and showed that the gap in this indicator increased sharply in the industrial era. For example, a kind of innovative explosion in the first half of the 19th century. observed in Great Britain when it became the center of the industrial revolution: for 1800-1860. the level of industrialization per capita increased 4 times, while over the next 68 years, i.e. by 1928, less than doubled. Over the same period, the opposite trend was observed in the United States, which at the beginning of the 20th century. seized innovation leadership: growth of the indicator under consideration for 1800-1860. was 2.3 times, and for I860-1928. - 6 times .

From the above it follows that each local civilization goes through different stages of its life cycle: in the phases of revival and recovery it is characterized by high innovative activity, in the phases of stagnation and crisis - low. The study of the influence of globalization on the fate of civilizations shows increased territorial differentiation of the innovation process. The group of developed countries with a high level of average per capita income (15% of the world's population) concentrates the bulk of innovation and high-tech production. Poor countries with low per capita income are, as a rule, in a state of technological stagnation and do not have sufficient financial resources and qualified personnel to carry out basic innovations. As a result, the technological and economic gap between countries and civilizations is growing. 5. Much attention was paid to the economic mechanism for implementing innovations and practical issues of commercialization of technologies. Most researchers are of the view that it is necessary to combine the market competitive mechanism (especially in relation to improving innovations) with active government support for basic innovations that determine the country's competitiveness. Discarded as positions of refusal of government support for innovation; hopes for the all-powerful and saving “invisible hand of the market”, as well as the desire to nationalize the entire innovation field, concentrate all innovative resources with the state and implement innovations at bureaucratic discretion.

• Khazin M. L. About Kondratiev cycles. Worldcrisis.ru (April 17, 2012).

As a result of studying this section, the student should:

know

• basic concepts and definitions of innovative economy;
• basic provisions of the theory of innovation;
• basic strategies for innovation;

be able to

• identify key factors that promote or inhibit the development of innovation;
• identify various models and strategies of the innovative economy and determine their features;

own

• terminological and conceptual apparatus of innovative economics and innovation management;
• modern approaches to the formation of models of innovation activity.

FORMATION OF THE THEORY OF INNOVATIVE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIETY

Historical stages of the formation of the theory of innovation

The concept of “innovation” in scientific use appeared relatively recently – at the beginning of the 20th century. and has multidimensional content, as it is used in different fields of knowledge. However, the entire history of the development of civilizations is associated with the search for new ideas (innovations) and their implementation to improve tools and organize economic and social life through the accumulation and systematization of knowledge embodied in technical means, social and economic transformations (innovations).

The term "novation" comes from the Latin word novatio, which meant change, renewal, i.e. the emergence of any innovation that leads to changes in social or economic activity.

The term “innovation” (“innovation”) is associated with the process of implementing new ideas in real human activities as new elements (methods, types, means of labor) that increase the effectiveness of this activity, improve working conditions and change the quality of life. Innovations throughout all historical eras of human development have played a fundamental role in the irreversible change in the method of production and the formation of new content of social systems. Introduction of the conveyor belt, work on organizing the labor process, scientific and technological revolution of the 1960s, computerization and informatization processes of the 1980–1990s. – all this caused changes in the content of national and world economies, the creation of new infrastructure and global changes in public consciousness.

In the modern context, we can say that innovation has been and is a determining factor in social development, contributing to the gradual formation of a certain appearance of historical eras in the process of development of civilizations on Earth. Historical eras, replacing each other, with a certain periodicity change the content of all political, social, economic and technical systems.

For example, in the Neolithic era (VII–IV millennium BC), in contrast to the previous period – the Mesolithic (X–VIII millennium BC), special means of labor (technological innovations) began to be created for social organization cattle breeding, agriculture, various crafts for creating household utensils. This contributed to the formation of new ways of doing business, based on intercommunity relations of exchange of goods and their equivalent (economic innovation); a monogamous family, tribal associations, cities are created; all issues are resolved on the basis of a public meeting (socio-political innovations). In the spiritual sphere, the rudiments of science and writing, ritual arts (dance, music, myths) appear. All these innovations in a certain field of activity determined the historical appearance of the corresponding era. Innovations that determine fundamental changes in a certain area of ​​human activity, i.e. its basis began to be called basic innovations.

In subsequent historical periods of development of social systems, it was basic innovations that determined the historical appearance of eras. These include: the creation of steam engines, mechanisms, the use of electricity, and then the development of electronics, computer technology, information technology and mobile communications. All these are basic technologies that are associated with changes in the technological structure of production and the content of political, social and economic systems.

Consequently, innovation has always existed, even before the formation of scientific knowledge, creating the basic basis of historical eras of human development. Innovation processes accompany all revolutionary transformations in society and contribute to the development of political, economic and technical systems. Each historical era of human civilization moves to a new stage of its development due to the implementation of new knowledge acquired in the process of its implementation. Analyzing the characteristic features of historical eras, we can state that the implementation of innovations in different areas of the economic, social and spiritual life of people leads to a qualitative change in the entire social formation (epoch-making innovations), i.e. the historical appearance of civilization as a whole.

The concept of “epochal innovation” was proposed by an American scientist of Russian origin, Simon Smith Kuznets. Simon Smith Kuznets) – Nobel laureate in economics (1971), who used it to describe the changing cycles of economic eras.

Scientist's opinion

“Major breakthroughs in the development of human knowledge, i.e. those that were the main sources of long-term economic growth and widely spread throughout the world, can be called epochal innovations.”

During the period of transition from industrial to post-industrial society, scientists in various fields of scientific knowledge began to pay close attention to studying the influence of innovative ideas on the development of political, social, economic and technical systems. During this period, a sufficiently voluminous information base of scientific and practical knowledge was formed, which made it possible to substantiate the patterns of development of these systems depending on the intensity of the implementation of innovative processes.

The study of the relationship between the historical appearance of eras and the development of civilization from the point of view of innovation processes allowed scientists to prove that cycles of epochal and basic innovations underlie the formation of the history and appearance of the future society, changes in the content of world civilizations and generations of local civilizations. In his monograph “Epochal Innovations of the XXI Century” (2003), Professor Yu. V. Yakovets proved that the search for the content of modern innovative transformation of society is impossible without knowledge of the historical patterns of basic and epochal innovations. It is not without reason that it is said that our present and future are the sum of the entire past. Any innovation is always associated with the accumulation of knowledge and the ability to apply it to solve constantly emerging pressing problems. Therefore, we can say that innovation contributes to the transition of any organizational system from one qualitative state to another through practical implementation, accumulated subject and interdisciplinary knowledge. The process of accumulation of practical or scientific knowledge has always contributed to the need for their generalization, systematization and the emergence of new knowledge in all areas of human activity.

That is why the history of the formation of the theory of innovation in relation to social and economic systems is connected, first of all, with the names of scientists - educators and economists who realized the fundamental connection between science and production not only in industrial fields of knowledge, but also justified the need for their synthesis at the interdisciplinary level.

For example, the French educator Jean Condore (1743–1794) was the first to substantiate the existence of a connection between science and industry, considering scientific knowledge (innovations) as the main factor in the dynamic development of the economy.

The English economist Adam Smith (1723–1790) initiated the study of innovation processes associated with the division of labor, specialization, invention and mechanization. His model of economic development includes division of labor, productivity, income, mechanization and technological progress.

David Ricardo (1770–1823) was the first to study the influence of new ideas and substantiate the effect of their implementation (innovations) in production as a deepening of the process of division of labor and the opening of new markets.

The period of industrial development of society (the end of the 20th century) and the formation of its post-industrial stage (the beginning of the 21st century), characterized by the rapid development of scientific and technical progress and associated with changes in the technological structure of production, revealed the need to pay special attention to the role of innovation not only in economic, but also in political, social and cultural life.

Technological structure– this is a set of technologies characteristic of a certain level of production development; In connection with scientific, technical and technological progress, there is a transition from lower structures to higher, progressive ones.

The change in technological structures is associated with the activities of innovating entrepreneurs who are constantly searching for new ideas and their implementation (innovation) in new production technologies to increase labor productivity, increase profits and create new markets.

The duration of technological changes can be divided into five stages.

First stage the development of the technological structure (1790–1840) is associated with the creation of new technologies in textile production, the use of coal and steam energy.

Second phase (1840–1890) is characterized by the creation and development of a railway transport network and the mechanization of production.

Third stage (1890–1940) was formed on the basis of electrical energy and discoveries in the field of chemistry (the creation of artificial fibers).

Fourth stage (1940–1990) is determined by the rapid development of electronics, computing, information technology and mass production of goods and services.

Fifth period (from 1990 to present) is associated with the development of communication network technologies, biotechnologies and nanotechnologies.

Practice has shown that a change in the technological structure has a direct impact not only on production processes, but also determines the historical content of socio-economic systems as a whole. The change in technological structures has a systemic and progressive nature, interconnected with the cycles of economic activity and recession (cycles of N. D. Kondratiev), which are characterized by economists as changes in investment behavior, due to the implementation of technological innovations at a certain stage of scientific and technological progress.

Scientific and technical progress is a continuous process of acquiring, accumulating and improving scientific knowledge about the world around us, creating and introducing progressive means and objects of labor, technological processes and forms of organization of production.

A change in the technological structure of production changes not only technology, but also the content of socio-economic systems due to increased competition in the market for goods and services. Therefore, the study of innovation and innovative activity has become, first of all, the subject of economic science, within the framework of which the basic foundations of the theory of innovation and the main provisions of the concept of innovative economics have been formed.

The formation of the fundamental foundations of innovation theory took place within the framework of various theories about the wave, oscillatory and cyclical development of economic, social and technical systems. Any system does not develop progressively, and its state can be characterized by a sinusoid: rise, peak, decline, crisis, rise. Cyclicality is the basis of life activity of any natural and artificial system.

The development of scientific knowledge about innovation, innovation activity and innovation processes has gone through three main historical stages.

The first studies on this issue began at the beginning of the 19th century. Today, there are about 1,500 different types of economic development cycles associated with innovation processes.

Having different forms and natures, such cycles can be divided into three main categories:

• 1) short cycles lasting from one to 4–5 years. Such cycles are also called inventory cycles (Kitchin cycles);
• 2) average cycles lasting from five to 10 years. These are cycles based on human factors and related to the characteristics of production (Kuznets, Drucker cycles, etc.);
• 3) long cycles lasting from 10 to 25 years. These are cycles of construction and overproduction (Juglar cycles).

In the mid-1920s. Russian economist N.D. Kondratiev described the theory of cycles of economic conditions lasting 40–60 years. He examined a number of macroeconomic indicators in Western Europe and the United States from 1790 to 1920, and based on them he constructed graphical dependencies, eliminating short-term fluctuations. As a result, he discovered that in the long run the obtained values ​​change synchronously.

In his theory of economic development cycles, N.D. Kondratiev substantiated the natural relationship between “upward” and “downward” waves of economic development with the cycles of technological inventions and their application in economic activity. In addition, he linked these waves with radical changes in the life of society itself: “Periods of upward waves in large cycles, as a rule, are much richer in major social upheavals and upheavals in the life of society (revolutions, wars) than periods of downward waves.”

Thus, N.D. Kondratiev laid the foundation for the formation of the theoretical foundations of innovation, which relate not only to the economic and technological spheres of activity, but also have a direct impact on the entire socio-political life of people.

Developing the idea of ​​N. D. Kondratiev about the cyclical development of social and political systems and their interrelation, Russian sociologist Pitirim Sorokin laid the foundations for the theory of innovation in the socio-cultural environment. In his work “Social and Cultural Dynamics” (1937–1941), he substantiated the trend of innovation-wave development of the sociocultural sphere and gave a quantitative assessment of innovation waves in some areas of spiritual reproduction. P. Sorokin considered the sociocultural sphere to include: science, art, culture, social, political and interstate relations. In his work “The Main Trends of Our Time” (1964), he expressed the idea that innovations in the sociocultural sphere lead to a tendency towards convergence (bringing together) capitalist and socialist systems, turning them into a mixed sociocultural type. This is explained by the presence of objective systemic patterns of development of systems of any type based on innovations, since the main mechanisms of development are changes, heredity and selection.

Historical excursion

The founder of the theory of innovation is the Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter, who at the beginning of the 20th century. gave an explanation for economic fluctuations in the long term associated with technical innovations and improvements, changes in infrastructure, as well as the involvement of new resources in production and the development of new territories.

Schumpeter outlined his views in the book “The Theory of Economic Development,” published in 1912, in which he first introduced the term “innovation” as a new economic category, as a means of entrepreneurship for making a profit. He substantiated innovation as the main factor of economic progress and the basis for organizing business activities.

The author believed that entrepreneurs, as economic entities, are active functionaries of economic life, creating new combinations of factors and resources, and contributing to the dynamic development of the economy. J. Schumpeter proved that production cannot exist without constant changes in technology and technology, the development of new markets, and the reorganization of market structures. Innovation is a source of profit and creates a new type of competition, more effective than price competition. It is with the names of these outstanding scientists that the formation of the first historical stage (1910–1930) of the theory of innovation is associated, within the framework of which the fundamental role of scientific and technical knowledge in the development of economic and social systems was substantiated.

The second stage (from 1940 to mid-1970) of the development of the theory of innovation is associated with a breakthrough in the field of fundamental science in various fields of knowledge. Much attention has been paid by scientists to the study of the relationship and mutual influence of systems of different natures, i.e. system properties.

In the mid-1940s. A systemic paradigm for the development of the world began to take shape, within the framework of which issues of implementing technical achievements could no longer be resolved only on the basis of economic principles.

The results of economic activity began to have a direct impact on the solution of political, social and environmental problems. The essence of the system paradigm is that the human World is represented as a huge variety of systems of different natures, united into a single whole, and each system is a complement to the whole.

Research by economists was aimed at substantiating the relationship between periods of economic activity of production systems and periods of technological development, the discovery of new resources, which together create favorable conditions for economic growth, and especially investment growth. At this stage, much attention was paid to the relationship between scientific and technological progress (STP) and the economy. For example, the previously mentioned S.S. Kuznets, who first used the concept of “epoch-making innovations,” defined science as a new source of socio-economic growth, promoting deep transformation in society, economics, technology, technology, which leads to the birth of a new sociocultural system, a new world civilization.

The English scientist John Bernal, in his monograph “Science in the History of Society,” published in 1954, noted that innovations in the material world are significantly ahead of innovations in the spiritual, social and cultural spheres. J. Bernal wrote that technical and technological innovations are primarily used to improve the means of labor, and not to improve human living conditions. The scientist, revealing the relationship between scientific, technical and social innovations, proved that they can be positive and negative.

The Austrian economist and sociologist Friedrich Hayek (1899–1992), one of the leading representatives of the new economic school of the 20th century, developed the concept of “dispersed knowledge”, according to which the competitive market is presented as a special “information device” that coordinates and uses the knowledge of millions of independent friends from other people. The originality of his idea lay in the fact that he was the first to view competition as a “discovery procedure”, as a way of searching and developing new products and technologies. The author believed that it is competition that forces an entrepreneur to look for new production technologies to create new products (production combinations according to Schumpeter), to use new markets for raw materials, which allow them to achieve high profits and ensure the dynamic development of the economic system. In his research, F. Hayek attached particular importance to the creative abilities of the economic person himself (intellectual resources) for the development of competition based on the use of the knowledge of all members of society and the dissemination of this knowledge (diffusion), most of which is embodied in prices, being the most important function of the market. For the results of research in the field of money, market fluctuations and analysis of the relationship between economic and infrastructural phenomena, F. Hayek was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1974.

At this stage, the further development of the theory of innovation was greatly influenced by the emergence of a new economic concept of “human capital”, which was first used in 1961 by the American scientist Theodore Schultz as an important factor in economic development. Later, together with a follower of this idea, Gary Becker, they formed the foundations of the theory of human capital, which made it possible to expand the scope of the theory of innovation by including research into the problems of creating innovations, organizing innovation activities and managing innovation processes based on intellectual resources.

The beginning of the third stage of development of the theory of innovation (mid 1970 – 1990) is usually associated with the publication of the work of the German scientist Gerhard Mensch “Technological stalemate: innovation overcomes depression.” In his book, the author outlined the main provisions of the theory of development of economic conditions and innovation. With the concept of “technological stalemate,” G. Mensch defines the period of economic reorientation, during which a stalemate develops between traditional and renewing forces of development. As part of this work, based on an analysis of 112 of the largest inventions and 126 epoch-making innovations for the period from the mid-18th century. and during the 20th century. identified four waves of innovation and business activity in accordance with Kondratieff cycles of economic development. G. Mensch substantiated the objective relationship between the emergence of new theories, major inventions and basic innovations. In his research activities, G. Mensch made a great contribution to the study of innovation, dividing technological innovations according to the level of novelty into basic, improving and pseudo-innovations.

The third stage in the development of the theory of innovation is associated with a technological breakthrough in the field of computer technology and the development of information technology during the formation of a post-industrial society and the development of globalization processes. A new concept of “national innovation system” (NIS) is being introduced, which means that the state considers innovation as a determining factor in the positive dynamics of growth in the field of scientific and technical research and the production sector.

In methodological terms, this means the recognition and practical application of a systematic approach to the formation, organization of innovation processes and their management in the dynamics of their development. During this period, most scientists paid special attention to the study of the relationship between scientific, technical, information, economic, social, educational and organizational and managerial cycles and their innovation phases.

For example, the Soviet scientist Yu. V. Yakovets in his works did not only reveal the patterns of the emergence and development of discoveries and inventions

and innovations, but also determined the main systemic function of innovations as a change in the development cycles of socio-economic, political, demographic systems and the renewal of the spiritual life of society as a whole.

Innovation has come to be seen as an integral part of scientific, technical, social and economic development cycles, as well as the basis for overcoming various crises.

The current stage of development of the theory of innovation begins in 1990 and continues to this day. It is associated with the transformation of world and national economies, global socio-economic crises and their consequences, which affect not only the economy, but also technology, politics, culture, ethics, science, religion, i.e. all public institutions and systems. The processes of interaction between systems of different natures are accelerating not only within one state, but also at the level of interstate relations. Such interaction leads to the emergence of many systemic problems, the solution of which requires the synthesis of knowledge and, on its basis, the expansion and deepening of innovation processes.

It was at this time that a new branch of scientific knowledge was created - innovation, which operates with concepts and provisions from various fields of science and practical knowledge. Innovation is defined by scientists as a science about systemic problems of innovation and the organization of innovative activity. The science of innovation at the present stage has grown into a whole complex of interdisciplinary knowledge, covering a wide range of issues from the creation of new knowledge to its transformation into innovation, as well as its dissemination throughout the entire socio-economic space. The modern theory of innovation is developing on the basis of the provisions of J. Schumpeter’s theory of innovation and at the intersection of modern fundamental and applied sciences: engineering design, entrepreneurship, economics, finance, sociology, production organization, computer science, marketing, logistics, management, pedagogy, etc.

In the 18th century, the French educator Jean Condorcet drew attention to the relationship between science and production. He noted “that the progress of science ensures the progress of industry, which itself then accelerates scientific success, and this mutual influence, the action of which is renewed, should be counted among the most active, most powerful reasons for the improvement of the human race.” He also pointed to the universality of scientific knowledge, noting that “for each generation, the amount of knowledge that can be acquired in the same period of time, with the same price, inevitably increases.

mental strength."

A powerful impetus for the beginning of serious research on innovation and its role in economic development was given by the works of N. Kondratiev. He himself is not

was directly involved in the analysis of innovation issues, but the large cycles of market conditions he examined (long waves)

initiated subsequent research into the causes of these cycles and their duration, with innovation identified as the most important. He revealed the presence of long market waves in the economic development of society and thereby defined economic development as a process

uneven and cyclical. In accordance with the wave theory, any economic system is characterized by alternating periods of rise and fall in its development (the cycle of market waves identified

Kondratiev, lasts about 50 years, these are the so-called “long” waves).

Large market cycles (long market waves) include:

1. seasonal cycles (lasting less than a year);

2. short cycles (lasting three to four years);

3. middle cycles (duration seven to eleven years).

Based on his research, Kondratiev made a number of conclusions. Firstly,

Before the beginning of the upward wave of each major cycle, significant transformations occur in socio-economic processes, which are expressed in the emergence of significant scientific discoveries, technical inventions, changes in the sphere of production and exchange. Secondly, periods of rising cycles of market waves are usually accompanied by major social upheavals (such as revolutions, wars). Thirdly, the downward waves of these cycles are associated with long-term depression in agriculture.

The scientist also suggested that since the upward wave of a large cycle is characterized by radical changes in economic

processes, then its occurrence is due to the accumulation at the stage of depression of sufficient capital to carry out investment activities to renew the basic productive forces of society.

Market cycles, according to Kondratiev, are international in nature and are considered as a consistent violation and restoration of economic equilibrium.

The ideas of N. Kondratiev to a certain extent influenced the Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter. Without exaggeration we can say that I. Schumpeter. in fact, he was the founder of the theory of innovation processes in its modern interpretation. Based on theory

“long” opportunistic waves of business activity, he identified a new opportunity to bring the production system out of the crisis, which is not associated with an increase in the scale of activity, a reduction in costs or an increase in the price of

the same products, but with changes in the economic process due to the creation and implementation of innovations. According to I. Schumpeter, with the help of innovations, an enterprise can use new competitive techniques different from

previous price forms of competition.

The scientist called these competitive methods effective competition, and the exceptional position of the company created thanks to

non-price forms of competition - an effective monopoly. An effective monopoly, in accordance with the concept of I. Schumpeter, is the position

company, in which it can gain additional benefits from implementing innovative changes in its own economic system (release of new products not present on the market; use of new management techniques unknown to competitors; development of new

technological line; use of new materials, etc.).

By innovation I. Schumpeter understood “new combinations,

changes in development." In his seminal work, The Theory of Economic Development (1912), he identifies five cases of innovation (himself

The scientist began to use the term “innovation” only in the 1930s). These include: the introduction of a new product either unknown to consumers, or

a new type of product (consumer novelty); introduction of a new production method; opening a new market to which this industry has not previously been represented; discovery of a new source

raw materials; introduction of a new organizational structure in any industry.

I. Schumpeter also introduced the concept of an innovation cluster -

a set (package) of basic innovations implemented at a single point in time. The scientist noted that innovations do not appear evenly, but in groups (clusters). New scientific discoveries serve as an incentive for the emergence of new innovation clusters. The concept of unevenness of innovation activity forms the basis of modern concepts of scientific and technological development.

In his work “Economic Cycles” published in 1939 and other works, J. Schumpeter explored the basic concepts of the theory of innovation

processes. He viewed innovation as changes in technology and management, as new combinations of resource use. At the same time I.

Schumpeter devoted significant attention to the role of the entrepreneur in the innovation process. According to his views, the entrepreneur is the link between invention and innovation. AND.

Schumpeter showed the role of credit in innovative entrepreneurial activity and carried out the periodization of long waves.

Prominent among economists studying problems

innovations, is occupied by the German scientist G. Mensch. He tried to link the rate of economic growth and cyclicality with the emergence of basic innovations. In his opinion, in a situation where basic innovations exhaust their potential, a situation of “technological stalemate” arises, which determines stagnation in economic development.”

A significant contribution to the development of innovation theory can be

name the development by Russian economists of the concept of technological structures. The concept of a technological structure was introduced into scientific circulation by S. Yu. Glazyev and his colleagues.

TECHNOLOGICAL STRUCTURE – a group of technological units operating on the basis of similar scientific and technical principles.

The technological structure is characterized by a core, a key factor,

organizational and economic regulatory mechanism. Five technological structures are distinguished. In economically developed countries there is intensive

redistribution of resources from the fourth to the fifth technological structure. In Russia, the fifth technological one is less widespread.

The American economist M. Porter made a significant contribution to the formation of competitive strategies. His matrix of firm strategies is widely known, linking together areas of competition and competitive

advantages. M. Porter showed that a company can achieve a competitive advantage by producing at lower costs or based on differentiated product quality. They also deserve

attention to its development on the parameters of the company’s global strategy, the determinant of the competitive advantage of countries, and the stages of development of competition. M. Porter identifies four stages of competitiveness

national economy:

 production,

 investments,

 innovations,

 wealth.

Each of these stages is characterized by a specific mechanism for managing innovation and the economy as a whole. On the stage

factors of production, the advantage of a particular country is expressed through natural resources, climatic conditions, abundant and cheap labor resources. At this stage, simple technologies dominate, and

Advanced technologies, as a rule, are created abroad. The investment stage occurs when national firms become able to invest money in the purchase of technology licenses,

modern efficient equipment. At the same time, the national economy is able to absorb and improve foreign technology. At the next stage, the stage of innovation, national firms are able to improve foreign technology and create a new one. At the same time, domestic demand

quite voluminous and varied. The role of the state and the nature of its policies are changing - indirect methods of regulating the economy are gaining more weight. At the stage of wealth, the incentive for development is to increase

prosperity, capital moves to the financial sector, economic growth rates decrease. The peculiarity of Russia in this respect is that it is located in different competitive

stages at the same time. Basically, of course, this is the stage of factors of production, but at the same time some firms are at the stages of investment and innovation. This implies the need to develop differentiated development strategies for individual sectors of the economy that are at different stages of development.

Modern technogenic civilization has several key features. The main one is that in such a society scientific progress always comes first and

Appearance of the term

The term “technogenic civilization”, or “technocratism”, appeared in 1921. It was first used by a sociologist. In his book “Engineers and the Price System,” the researcher emphasized the importance of uniting the efforts of engineers around the world to improve life on earth.

This concept quickly became popular in the scientific community. Veblen's followers continued the research of their predecessor. Several theories have emerged about what a technogenic civilization is. First of all, it was opposed to traditional society. Such a civilization is characterized by the fact that its members try to preserve their former way of life. They are tradition-oriented and are sensitive to change. This is a society with slow social development. Technogenic civilization is built around opposing principles - individual freedom, progress, innovation in all spheres of life, readiness to adapt to rapid changes.

Fundamentals of technogenic civilization

Technocracy is not only a civilization (that is, a way of society), but also an ideology. Its supporters believe that there is nothing more important than the development of science. At the same time, the development of technology leads to changes in social life. Technological growth is not just a game for scientists. It is also a way to solve many social problems (for example, closing the gap between rich and poor).

Modern civilization (technogenic) changes not only the way of life of people, but also the political system. This ideology implies that the state should be ruled not by a clear institution of power. The mechanisms of governing a country in a technocratic society work without regard to a specific politician. In essence, the personality of the ruler becomes secondary. In the first place is the state machine itself, which, with the help of its social elevators, raises to the top only high-quality managers, and not populists who promise voters in elections. Technogenic civilization is controlled by professionals - people who have long worked to achieve high qualifications in their field.

Prerequisites for the appearance

Today it is difficult to deny that science is the main engine of progress. However, attitudes towards technology development have not always been rosy. Even when humanity left the era of barbarism behind, science for a long time was the lot of the marginalized. The first world civilizations that arose in Antiquity certainly belonged to the group of traditional societies. In all of them, traditions and customs occupied an important place.

The first prerequisites for the emergence of technogenic civilization can be noted in the ancient Greek policies. These were independent cities, in whose life thinkers and scientists played an important role. The policies were governed by the principles of democracy, which replaced the classical tyranny of a single despot. It was in these cities that many significant human inventions emerged.

Fighting traditional society

The difference between traditional society and technogenic civilization is colossal. Therefore, people had to prove their right to progress for many centuries. The noticeable development of technogenic civilization began in the 15th-16th centuries, when Western Europe learned about the existence of the New World. The discovery of lands on distant shores stimulated the curiosity of the inhabitants of the Catholic world. The most enterprising and proactive of them became sailors and explorers. They discovered the world around them and enriched the knowledge of their compatriots. This process could not but affect the general state of mind. Eventually, the quantity of knowledge turned into quality.

One of the main obstacles to the development of early technogenic society was religion. The church in medieval Europe was an important institution, both spiritual and political. Her opponents were declared heretics and burned at the stake. At the beginning of the 16th century, the Reformation movement began in Germany. His inspiration, Martin Luther, advocated church reform. The preacher gained many supporters, including in the princely German dynasties. Armed struggle soon began between Protestants and Catholics. It resulted in the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648), after which the principle of freedom of religion was established in many European countries.

The impact of progress on the economy

In the new society, much more resources were spent on the development of education. Universities opened, people studied and learned about the world around them. Advancements in technology have led to economic growth. Important inventions such as the steam boiler have allowed some countries to increase their own production and improve the well-being of their citizens.

The 19th century made England the main world power with colonies in all parts of the world. Of course, it was already a technogenic civilization. The problems of its development were associated with the fact that people who became masters of the whole world did not immediately learn how to properly use its resources.

The importance of civil liberties

During the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment, there was a synthesis of many ideas from the ancient world and Christian civilization. The new ideology received only the best from these two foundations. In particular, it was love for a person. The ideas of the Enlightenment stated that there is nothing more important in the world than an individual.

These principles today form the basis of the constitutions of most states in the world. People-centeredness was first proclaimed as a key idea after the declaration of American independence. The constitution of this new country enshrined all the basic modern civil liberties. A few years later, France followed a similar path, where a revolution took place that destroyed the old order in the form of a conservative absolute monarchy. Subsequently, over the course of another two centuries, different societies in their own ways achieved civil liberties, without which it is impossible to imagine a technogenic civilization.

The triumph of technogenic civilization

In the 20th century, man and technogenic civilization moved to a new stage of their development. At this time, the pace of social change accelerated dramatically. Today, in the life of one generation, there is so much newness that was not the case several centuries ago. Technogenic civilization is also sometimes called “Western,” emphasizing the place of its origin. Today, the main abodes of such orders are Europe and the USA.

The important thing is that today the crisis of technogenic civilization can no longer occur, because the sources of its development were not new cultural zones as before (colonialism, etc.), but the restructuring of an already existing order. The main success of the transition from a traditional society to technocracy can be considered a change in values. Today, the most important thing for society is any innovation, something new, as a phenomenon.

Traditional and technogenic civilization cannot coexist together. Therefore, modern society is characterized by its dynamic spread to all corners of the planet. Traditional societies themselves become obsolete when they come into contact with the latest technologies. Adherents of traditions and haters of progress have only one way to survive in today's world - to put their society on the path of isolation. This is how North Korea lives, which does not recognize the discoveries of the West and does not even maintain economic relations with it.

Human and nature

One of the most important dominant features in technogenic civilization has always been man’s desire to subjugate nature. Man did not immediately learn to treat the world around him with care. Its active activities associated with the intensive use of natural resources often lead to harmful environmental conditions. In a series of similar examples, one can note the tragedy at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. This is the same case when people took up using new technology too quickly, without having yet learned how to use it. Humanity has only one home. An irrational attitude towards nature is one of the main problems of technocracy.

It is fundamental for a member of such a society to engage in transformative activities. It is with this rule that those values ​​of technogenic civilization are associated, thanks to which it constantly changes its own foundations.

The place of the individual in the new society

The emergence of technogenic civilization has changed the position of man in society. In a traditional society, people are extremely dependent on the supreme authority, traditions and caste system.

In the modern world, the individual is autonomous. Each person can change his environment, contacts, and work circle at will. He is not tied to dogmatic orders. Modern man is free. Independence is necessary for the individual for development and self-realization. A technogenic civilization, which is built on innovation and discovery, encourages and supports the individuality of each individual.