WHEN A COMPLICATION IS NOT JUSTIFIED

Abstract

The positions of the article by O.G. Melnyk “A two-level model of financing of the development of high technologies in Ukraine” are analyzed. His insufficient knowledge of the rules of application of current account formats and forms of the state statistical reporting, which has led to the mixing of several independent economic classifications, is indicated. The eclectic character of his approach is also revealed in the artificial contraposition of the industrial and innovative models of development, i.e., the industrial development through the introduction of innovations turns out impossible. While considering the innovative and scientific-technical activities, O.G. Melnyk has focused, respectively, on the industry on the whole and on the separate sector of high technologies. But, due to the nonidentity of these objects, their comparison is improper. His thesis as for the identity of the model of the distribution of financing of the innovative activity and R&D works is also questionable: they correspond to quite different systems of records. O.G. Melnyk committed a simplified application of the method of correlative regressive analysis to the determination of key objects of the managerial control. As a result, he made a paradoxical conclusion that it is expedient to exclude the financing of the innovative activity in the industry from the system of financing as an inefficient means for the development of new technologies, i.e., new technologies should be developed in the unknown noninnovative way. The thesis about the functional connection of a level of the innovative activity in the sector of high technologies and the “scientific-technical activity of the sector of education and science” is also disputable. The sector of high technologies is always a part of the system (in the innovative and any other aspects). However, in the article, the volume of financing of the innovative activity in the high-tech sector in 2012–2013 exceeded the total expenditures, i.e., a part turned out to be larger than the whole. O.G. Melnyk made no recalculation of the data into the invariable prices, which made it impossible to reveal the real tendencies in the financing. It is hard to agree also with the categorical assertion that the two-level system is relevant for all systems of financing of the development of new technologies in any innovative systems.