The article is devoted to the analysis of indicators characterizing the dynamics of scientific and technological development in 2019–2023, which acts as a characteristic of the ability of the Russian Federation to respond to great challenges. The share of domestic expenditures on research and development in GDP fluctuates slightly, remaining within 1%, which is significantly lower than the same indicator in economically and technologically developed countries of the world. There has been a steady increase in spending on civil science from the federal budget in absolute terms; the increase in funding for applied research exceeds the increase in funding for basic research. The number of researchers in the Russian Federation decreased in 2023 compared to 2019 (while there is an increase in the number of researchers in the natural sciences and humanities); in the technical, medical and social sciences, the number of researchers decreased. The indicator “number of highly cited publications by Russian authors” grew. The share of highly cited publications by Russian authors in the global number of such publications increased in 2020–2022, but in 2023 there was a decrease in the indicator, which means problems with the integration of Russian science into the global scientific community; the decline in the visibility of Russian science. The prospects for scientific and technological development of the Russian Federation in the context of great challenges are determined by the following factors: the availability of natural resources, historically strong scientific schools in mathematics, physics and other natural sciences; the development of certain priority areas of science and technology; and the implementation of innovation support programs. In this regard, it is proposed to focus efforts in the following areas: increasing funding for scientific research, creating favorable conditions for the work of scientists, improving innovation infrastructure, stimulating cooperation between science and production, and concentrating resources on the development of priority areas.
S. Sidorenko (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: