SOUTH AFRICAN INNOVATION MODEL: ALTHOUGH SIMILAR TO RUSSIA, BUT STILL NOT RUSSIA

Keywords: innovation, innovation policy, innovation model, South Africa, BRICS, Russia

In 2010, the Institute of Asian and African Studies (ISAA) of the Lomonosov Moscow State University established an extra-structural experimental creative laboratory to study the processes of modernization and innovative development in Afro-Asian societies.

The laboratory consists of young researchers - undergraduates and postgraduates of Moscow State University and institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

It is led by L. L. Fituni, Deputy Director of the Institute of Africa of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Economics, Professor of ISAA and member of the editorial Board of our journal.

The activity of the laboratory has become an example of practical interaction between fundamental and university science. The first major joint research project of ISAA MSU and the Institute of Africa of the Russian Academy of Sciences, currently implemented by the laboratory , is a comparative analysis of innovation policy in the BRICS countries and the possibility of using the experience studied in the interests of Russia's innovative breakthrough. The journal plans to regularly acquaint readers with the main research results.

This article is devoted to the realities of innovation policy of the Republic of South Africa, a state that joined the BRICS group in the spring of this year. Like our country, South Africa has largely inherited a strong scientific potential from its own "pre-reform times". Just like in our country, its economy depends on world prices for raw materials. There are many other parallels that make the experience of South Africa very interesting for our country. The BRICS countries demonstrate a very wide range of approaches to innovation. Innovation strategies differ in starting positions, the amount of resources allocated, the choice of priorities, the timing of expected results, the degree of government support and intervention, and the external background that supports or hinders innovation.

BRICS INNOVATION LANDSCAPE

There are also similarities in subjective conditions. In all countries of the group, innovation and development are hindered by corruption and bureaucracy. There are also significant differences. In Russia, for example, a lack of trust is added to the objective problems, and the attitude to creating favorable conditions for innovation is a bureaucratic task. India and China benefit from an open door policy, while Brazil benefits from the systematic development of several industries over decades.

China, alone among the major emerging markets, is registering international patent applications on a large and growing scale. That is, strictly speaking, China, and not Brazil, India or Russia, is in fact systematically moving from imitation (reproduction of other people's innovations) to innovation. We emphasize that the word "systemically" is the key word here. Spot and even multiple innovations are being implemented in all BRICS countries, but a qualitative transition is still visible only in China. It is still a very fragile reality, which can easily be destroyed by external influences, the global situation, or as a result of incorrect economic decisions within the country. However, qualitative changes are evident.

According to The Economist in London, "In 2000, Americans registered six times as many patent applications as Chinese residents. However, by 2009, China had surpassed the US total"¹. From 1999 to 2010, the share of R & D spending in Chinese GDP doubled (to $100 billion)*. Although the most populous BRICS country still lags behind the richest country in the world and Japan in this indicator. Given the increase in China's GDP growth over the years, the growth in absolute spending on science and innovation in the country is impressive. An innovative strategy adapted to the conditions of the global crisis is being implemented rigidly and steadily. The Chinese do not just declare, but purposefully act for the future, buying assets abroad.

* For more information, see the article by Yu. V. Chudodeev in this issue.

Russian businessmen are also rapidly exporting capital abroad. But the Russian business paradigm is different: to extract non-renewable raw materials at home, save on taxes, sell them at exorbitant prices on world markets, and hide the excess income abroad, usually spreading funds through offshore companies and trust schemes for portfolio investments of a cumulative or speculative nature. Investments in innovation at home are scanty, and if we are honest about the broad macroeconomic picture-almost zero.

Among the BRICS countries, Russia does not occupy the best positions on the innovation front. In the innovation sphere, it is not yet possible to bridge the clear gap between the resources invested by the state and the returns, while the private sector is not interested in interacting with the scientific community either in the public sector or in its own projects. Current problems are compounded by negative demographic dynamics, which leads to the" aging " of research and development personnel. This is a serious problem, because, as world experience shows, breakthrough technological innovations (in contrast to fundamental sciences, where the age gap is almost twice as wide) are the lot of a relatively young segment of the labor force.

From the point of view of development and use of innovations, the BRICS countries represent a special category of states in the global economy. These are fast-growing and fairly diversified national farms with a large population and, as a result, with capacious domestic markets. Their position in the global economy is steadily strengthening, and they are increasingly integrated into the most advanced segments of the world economy. All of them have rather strong national scientific and engineering-technological bases, which are often more diversified and advanced than in individual countries traditionally referred to as the"first world".

There is a clear trend when the world's leading TNCs set up (less often move there) their research centers in large developing countries, usually in the most dynamic three BRICS countries-China, India, and Brazil. This process is a practical reflection of the profound changes in the global economy. After all, by the end of the first third of this century, the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America will surpass the "golden billion"in total purchasing power. For the first time in modern and contemporary history, the world's largest economies will not simultaneously be the richest (in terms of per capita indicators). Two key imperatives of time arise from this. Global businesses will have to do much to change the prevailing business strategies and adapt to the needs of less affluent but more numerous consumers.

Global business leaders anticipate and prepare for this, and they are the main buyers of innovative ideas and products. By creating their own innovation and research centers in the BRICS countries, they not only gain access to cheap labor for local engineers and developers, but also establish the production of innovative products that in the conditions of developed countries simply would not find wide demand. For example, General Electric has opened its corporate R & D centers in India and China. At the same time, taking into account the surplus of workers (in this case, it is scarce in the West, but middle and junior medical personnel are numerous in China), the company, after analyzing local conditions, entered the market with a fundamentally new magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) unit for rural hospitals-and less automated. The new product, significantly cheaper than its Western counterparts, immediately found markets in developing countries. According to the management of General Electric, before the appearance of the R & D center in China, employees of the main division in the United States simply did not think that they should work on such a device and its production would be economically justified.²

Similar centers of this and other corporations are also available in India, Brazil, and South Africa. This symbiosis of investment, engineering, and management activities between TNCs and BRICS countries is beneficial for both sides.

What is very important for developing countries, it ultimately turns the latter into important suppliers of the latest technological equipment and other products with high added value. This will diversify the economies and export structure of the BRICS countries and help them move away from agricultural and raw material dependence.

SIMILARITY OF THE FATE OF SCIENCE AND NOT ONLY

The Republic of South Africa has a special place among the BRICS countries. It's not just that South Africa is the smallest by area and population, and also the youngest member of the group.

As we see it, its experience is also of interest to our country. Of course, there are many differences between us, but at the same time, there were many similarities in the socio-economic development of the two countries, in the attitudes and outlook on the world of a significant part of the population that did not belong to a traditional society. Both countries are richly endowed with rich lands, rich mineral resources, and wide expanses. There was another common feature that was extremely significant in terms of the development prospects of both states and their ability to move in step with the progress of humanity. We are talking about a highly developed science inherited from the previous regime. Of course, the total scientific potential of the USSR was many times greater than that of South Africa. But taking into account the real economic and political "weight" of each of the countries in the world, they were qualitatively comparable.

The collapse of the ruling ideologies in the USSR and South Africa was a severe blow to the established scientific complexes of these countries. The most important economic consequence of democratization was the loss of each of them from the cage of the "developed world" states. The democratic transformations of the second half of the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s and the resulting destruction of the previous economic regimes led to the loss of South Africa and our country from the cohort of leaders and to the destruction of the existing systems of functioning of science. After two decades of planning-

there was a tendency to partially replace some of the lost positions.

Today, both Russia and South Africa are members of the BRICS group of countries - countries whose economies are developing particularly dynamically and which are able to take key positions in the world economy of the XXI century. But, despite their formal membership in this group, the countries we are considering occupy a special position in it. BRICS is heterogeneous, and not only because the spread of indicators of the territory, population and GDP of its members differ significantly. They also differ in the content of the main criterion - growth and development vector. For China, India, and Brazil, which have become the" cover face " of the group, it is moving forward and up, moving to hitherto unknown heights of affluent life and global influence. For Russia and part of South Africa, this is, at least for now, reclaiming what has been lost and making up for what has been lost - an attempt to climb up the steep and slippery welfare ladder that they recently plummeted down as a result of their careless actions and clumsy steps.

Although entire areas of Russian science have been lost, the residual (since Soviet times) scientific potential of Russia is so great that to this day our country is a major world scientific power. In South Africa, the outflow of world-class specialists abroad and the policy of strengthening the position of the black population in science and education, which caused a change in leadership and certain structural distortions in many laboratories and universities, had a very negative impact on the fate of science, which is more compact and not as diversified as in Russia.

But what's interesting. The innovation impact of South African science, which is experiencing difficulties and has a smaller base, is relatively higher than in Russia. The share of discoveries, inventions, and patents of local researchers that are implemented in the practical economic life of the country is an order of magnitude higher than in the Russian Federation.

Let's try to answer the question of what, in our opinion, is the reason for this discrepancy.

MACROECONOMIC BACKGROUND OF INNOVATION

One of the main reasons for the greater focus of South African science in general and innovative developments on practical implementation lies in the initial market orientation and even market roots of South African educational and research life.

Unlike in our country, during the post-reform period, the market in South Africa was not introduced by presidential decrees and electric shocks from the IMF. Despite all the injustice of the previous racist order of things, the economic transformation was measured and smooth - the property remained with most of the previous owners, the main production facilities were not torn apart and did not die. Research institutes and laboratories were not closed. Despite all the difficulties, R & D funding was carried out at approximately the same level (the decline occurred in some years, but it was not radical, and on the eve of the last global crisis, it increased for a number of years).

What is the macroeconomic background for innovation in South Africa now? The Republic of South Africa is the most economically developed country in Africa. It has a unique set of socio-economic characteristics that are common to both developed countries and the developing world. The presence of a developed economic infrastructure, a broad technological base, as well as an extensive market for fairly cheap skilled and unskilled labor has made South Africa quite an attractive country for foreign investors and entrepreneurs.

South Africa belongs to the category of countries called "emerging markets", but in this category it occupies a special position associated with both its past (not so long ago it, along with Portugal, Greece, Ireland, etc., was referred to as "countries of medium-developed capitalism") and the present. Over the past decades, there has been a steady positive trend in its socio-economic indicators, which allowed it to enter the BRICS group of ³ countries.

According to the latest published data from the World Bank (2010), South Africa ranks 28th in terms of GDP and 31st in terms of GNI in the world ranking of countries (calculated at the current exchange rate-$364 billion and $304 billion). accordingly). In 2009, South Africa surpassed some developed countries in terms of GDP, such as Portugal, Israel, and New Zealand. Among the BRICS member countries, South Africa ranks last in terms of GDP-China is in the first place ($5878 billion), followed by Brazil, India and Russia. Among the countries of Africa, on the contrary, South Africa occupies a leading position in terms of GDP. It is followed by Egypt, ranked 40th in the world, and Nigeria, ranked 45th. In terms of GDP per capita (purchasing power parity, PPP), stable annual growth was observed between 1999 and 2006. During this period, the indicator increased from $6,900 to $12,100. It reached its highest level in 2007 ($13,300), but declined sharply during the crisis (2008-2009 - $10,700, 2010 - $10,400). The national income of South Africa, calculated per capita at the current exchange rate, was $6,100 in 2010 (83rd place in the world), and at PPP - $10,492 (70th place in the world) ⁴.

QUALITY OF LIFE AS AN ENGINE OF DEVELOPMENT

Indicators of GDP and per capita income remain the main and most widely used criteria for classifying countries as developed or, as they have recently begun to say, advanced economies. However, in recent decades, indicators that take into account the living conditions of their populations have been increasingly used to better reflect the realities. It is believed that not only the level of development determines the quality of life in a country, but also vice versa - a high quality of life creates conditions for accelerated and high-quality growth of human capital.

The key indicator for characterizing a country in terms of the living conditions of its population is, of course, the average life expectancy.

In 2010, in South Africa, it was approximately 55 years for women and 53.3 years for men. For users-

Figure 1. Life expectancy at birth, 1997

Источник: U.S. Bureau of the Census, International Programs Center, International Database - http://www.census.gov/population/international/data/idb/country/RSA.php

For example, this indicator for men in 2008 was 52, in 1990 - 61, and in 1970 - 53 years.⁵ It is worth noting that life expectancy varies significantly not only depending on gender, but also on belonging to a particular ethnic group. Since the fall of apartheid, statistical information broken down by racial group has become increasingly rare, so we will use the latest available official data. They date back to 1997 and show a wide variation in life expectancy at birth (HRE) for groups of white and black populations. The former is fully consistent with the average for affluent Western European countries, while the latter is slightly better than the average for Tropical Africa (see chart 1).

Speaking about the parallels among the BRICS countries, one cannot help noticing the complete coincidence of the terms of OPWR for the colored population of South Africa at the end of the apartheid period and for Russians after a quarter of a century of democratic and market reforms in our country. However, both in South Africa and in Russia in the last few years, there have been trends to improve the situation. Prior to this, life expectancy declined in both countries in the first 10 years of post - reform development: in Russia, by an average of 9 years, and in South Africa, by 4 ^years6.

For South Africa, this is largely due to real achievements in the field of mass medicine. Since the middle of the last century, the country has been among the leading countries in the field of complex medical (mainly operating) practice, pharmacology and medical innovations. Suffice it to recall that the world's first successful human-to-human heart transplant was performed in 1967 by South African surgeon Christian Barnard at the University of Cape Town Hospital. He is also, by the way, the "father" of a number of innovative methods for replacing affected heart valves with artificial ones at that time. However, in his time, the main part of the black population was not provided with high-quality medical care.

Since the fall of apartheid, access to health care has increased across the country. Healthcare accounts for about 11% of state budget expenditures annually. Medical care is free for children, pensioners and the unemployed. Given that almost half of the country's population lives below the poverty line and a fifth is HIV-positive, public health services are the backbone of the country's health system. At the same time, in personal conversations with representatives of the white population, it is not uncommon to hear about the decline in its quality.

However, about 80% of the population receives some form of public health care, while the remaining 20% use private clinics. In the total amount of annual expenditures on health care, more than 40% falls on the state. At the same time, only 17% of the population is provided with health insurance (78% of the white population, 28% of Asians, 26% of people of color and only 4% of the black population).⁷. However, the availability of health insurance is not the same as the concept of access to medical care. It is difficult to expect that the illiterate and poor population will actively use insurance financial products.

South Africa, by African standards, has a generally fairly literate and educated population. According to the latest data, about 89% of the adult population can read and write. In fiscal year 2010/11, education accounted for the largest share of government budget expenditures (21%), or RAND 165 billion ($24.5 billion)^.8

South Africa belongs to the group of countries with an average human development index (HDI) and ranks 110th in the world out of 169 countries surveyed.⁹

DEMAND FOR INNOVATION-FUNDAMENTALS

After the fall of apartheid, the South African Department of Finance developed and adopted an economic recovery strategy in 1996. The objectives of the GEAR (Growth, Employment and Redistribution) program were: bringing the economy to the level of GDP growth of 6% by 2000, reducing inflation, a balance of payments deficit of 2-3% of GDP, and increasing employment of the economically active population. To achieve this, a series of economic reforms were implemented, and although GEAR failed to meet its key objectives, the result was macroeconomic stabilization in the country and GDP growth of ⁴% in 2000.10 In fact, the goal was to return to the economic growth rate of the first years of the apartheid regime: it was in the 60s that the GDP growth rate in South Africa reached a record high of 8.9% with a low level of inflation. However, further down the pace

Figure 2. Changes in South Africa's GDP growth rate in 1960-2009

Calculated on the basis of World Bank Data for South Africa, acc. годы - http://unstats.un.org/unsd/snaama/resQuery.asp

GDP growth declined steadily until it reached a low point of 2.1% in the 1990s, as illustrated in Figure 2.

From an agricultural-based economy, South Africa has evolved into a diversified industrial-based economy. Now the course is set to "transform" South Africa into a country whose economy will be based on high-tech industries. However, the traditional sectors have not disappeared, although their importance is steadily decreasing.

South Africa has a diversified and competitive manufacturing base. The manufacturing industry remains the most dynamically developing sector of the economy and provides the country's economic growth and a significant number of jobs. The dominant industries are agricultural processing, automobile manufacturing, chemical industry, information and telecommunications technologies, electronics, and light industry (footwear and clothing production). The key sectors of the economy are wholesale and retail trade, financial sector and tourism. The agro-industrial sector is represented by such industries as animal husbandry, production of cereals, vegetables and fruits, a significant part of which is exported, winemaking, confectionery production, as well as the production of fibers from cotton and sisal.

The automotive industry accounts for up to 10% of South Africa's exports, which makes it a key part of the country's economy. ¹¹ The industry has shown significant growth since 1994, when the government adopted the Motor Industry Development Program (MIDP). The automotive industry is very attractive for foreign investors.

South Africa also has a well-developed chemical industry, which accounts for up to 5% of the country's GDP.¹² Priority areas include the production of explosives, fertilizers, synthetic materials, and liquid fuels. South Africa is a world leader in the field of coal synthesis and production of fuel from hard coal using Sasol technology.

So far, South Africa maintains a fairly strong position in the world markets for manufacturing products, but the competitiveness of some of the goods supplied from South Africa is gradually decreasing. There are several reasons for this: the emergence of new competitors on the world stage, the strong outflow of qualified specialists from South Africa (mainly white population), and the decline in the level of technological efficiency of production, since the fall of the apartheid system slowed down the introduction of innovations in production. However, with the change in the political system in the country, the markets of African countries that previously boycotted products supplied from racist South Africa opened up for South Africa.

The crisis has seriously affected the South African economy. As the continent's most involved country in the global economy, unlike most African countries, it was among those that experienced a real decline in GDP in 2009. The situation was not much better compared to other BRICS countries. Of the" Brics five", three countries survived the crisis more easily. Only in Russia were things worse. However, if we take the dynamics of GDP growth during the entire first decade of the XXI century, the indicators of South Africa were the most modest in the BRICS (see Table 1).

INNOVATION AND HIGH-QUALITY ECONOMIC GROWTH

South Africa ranks 39th out of 162 countries in terms of technological efficiency and innovation in the economy. ¹³ The Government of South Africa clearly understands the importance of supporting entrepreneurship, innovation and economic growth through knowledge-based production.

Table 1

South Africa's GDP growth rate compared to the rest of the BRICS countries, %

Source: World Bank Data on: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/snaama/resQuery.asp; 2010 data for: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2003rank.html

In 2002, the State R & D strategy was approved and several structures were created for its implementation: the National Innovation System, the National Advisory Council of Innovation, the International Association of Science Parks, and the Center for Science Technology and Innovation Indicators. Innovation Indicators), the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (Council for Scientific and Industrial Research), as well as research bases at universities.

Despite the active position of the state in 2004-2005, most of the research was conducted at the expense of foreign investors. However, by 2008,

The main source of R & D funding was local business (51.3%), while state funding accounted for 33.9% ¹⁴.

In 2008, together with the 10-year development plan, the Department of Science and Innovation adopted a new 10-year innovation strategy. Its target settings are shown in table 2.

As for South African patented technologies registered in the United States, there were only 100 registered in 2002, 96 registered in 2004, and 112 registered in 2005, while in India, for example, the number of patents increased from 10 to 341 in one fiscal year 2004/05. The Department of Science and Innovation approved a registration support fund at the opening of which it was noted that the reason for the decline in South Africa's competitiveness on the world stage is partly due to the relatively small number of patents.

The Government of South Africa plans to increase R & D spending to 2% of GDP by 2018. Observing a steady trend in public spending on R & D, it can be assumed that the goal will be achieved. This will require R & D spending to reach 1.5% of GDP by 2014 (compared to 2008). they were less than 1%), and by 2014-2%. Thus, by 2018, the government will need to spend about R50 billion on R & D. instead of the R20 billion it spent before 2008,15 (hereafter, R stands for South African Rand; as of June 1, 2011, Rand 1 was US $ 0.144134, or approximately 7 rand per dollar; the average exchange rate in 2008 for rand ¹ was US $ 0.131167).

Table 2

South Africa's 10-year Innovation Strategy targets

Источник: DST, Innovation towards a knowledge-based economy. Ten-Year Plan for South Africa (2008 - 2018). The baseline is adjusted according to UN and UNCTAD statistics.

Chart 3. South African manufacturing exports.

Source: OECD, STAN Bilateral Trade Database, June 2010.

Changing the structure of South African exports in favor of high-tech products is also a priority. However, the possibility of its implementation in such a short time is questioned by many experts. South Africa's exports of high-tech products remain at a constant level, but exports of medium-level equipment of complexity and novelty prevail.

However, innovation and research do not depend solely on funding: internal political and social processes also play an important role. For example, in the 90s of the last century, along with the decline in the pace of economic development, R & D spending also decreased. Almost all the funds in the country were spent on maintaining the segregation regime, and in 1990, R & D expenditures amounted to 0.61% of the country's GDP, with most of them going to the development of the military sector.

With the fall of the apartheid regime, the situation in the country changed dramatically. Many of those working in the field of scientific research (usually the white population and a small part of Africans who were educated in Europe and the United States) were forced to leave the country. Thus, there are almost no specialists of the proper level left. And the bulk of the Africans living in the territories assigned to them for this purpose, had at best a basic education.

After the adoption of several programs aimed at developing the innovation sector, supporting scientists and researchers, it was possible to reach the level of R & D expenditures of 1% of GDP by 2008. But now another program that has come to the fore has come into force - Blackbased Economic Empowerment. Immediately after the official announcement of the new strategy, irpecce began discussing the future of the country and how the implementation of the program will affect economic growth. Many researchers believe that the VEE will "stifle" the development of new technologies and their introduction into production, agriculture, education, etc. Other researchers believe that the VEE policy will help create the so-called "black elite", and this will have a positive impact on economic growth in the country.

Overall, the situation is still positive, probably because the economy and society have not yet had time to respond to internal changes. If the pace is maintained, supporting research programs, new educational programs, and improving the standard of living of the African population, it is likely that South Africa will achieve its goals.

(The ending follows)

¹ The Economist, April 30 - May 6, 2010. P. 32.

² Ibidem.

³ In the United Nations methodological document (revised April 26, 2011), Composition of macro geographical (continental) regions, geographical sub-regions, and selected economic and other groupings (footnote C). United Nations Statistics Division, revised April 26, 2011, on the grouping and classification of countries of the world, international trade statistics of the Organization considers the South African Customs Union as a "developed region of the world" - http://unstats.un.Org/unsd/methods/m49/m49regin.htm#ftnc

⁴ World Development Indicators database. World Bank, 1 July 2011 - http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GDP.pdf: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATA-STATISTICS/Resources/GNI.pdf; http://chinalist.ru/facts/viewyears.php?p_lang=0&p_country=199&p_param=39; https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook; http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GNIPC.pdf;

⁵ http://www.statssa.gov.za/PublicationsHTML/P03022010/html/P03022010.html; http://www.unicef.org/index.php

⁶ The Real Wealth of Nations: Pathways to Human Development. Human Development Report 2010. NY: The UNDP Human Development Report Office/Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. P. 32.

⁷ http://www.southafrica.info/about/health/health.htm; http://www.springerlink.com/content/q244x4731634qh50/

⁸ http://www.gcis.gov.za/resource_centre/sa_info/pocketguide/2010/018_education.pdf

⁹ Human Development Index (HDI) - an integral indicator calculated annually for cross-country comparison and measurement of the standard of living, literacy, education and longevity as the main characteristics of the human potential of the study area. It is a standard tool for general comparison of the standard of living of different countries and regions. The index has been published by the United Nations since 1990 in the Annual Human Development Report - http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/

¹⁰ http://www.cosatu.org.za/index.php

¹¹ National labour and economic development institute - http://www.naledi.org.za/

¹² University of Pretoria - http://www.web.up.ac.za

¹³ http://www.theinnovationhub.com/newsbits/vo14no10/news02.cfm

¹⁴ http://www.southafrica.info/about/science/rnd-180908.htin

¹⁵ Ibidem.

Permanent link to this publication: