Paradoxes of Foreign Financing of Science and Technology Activities in Ukraine. Part IІ

Abstract

Part II of the article contains results of a retrospective analysis of trends in the total number of organizations that were recipients of foreign funds for science and technology activities (covering R&D and science & technology services) in 2006—2015; foreign financing of science & technology activities, including funds per recipient organization, by disciplinary group; and trends in foreign financing of science & technology activities in Ukraine by administrative departments that were recipients of foreign funds in 2006—2016, in constant prices of 2015.

These results are used to define the science & technology works performed in Ukraine, which can be assumed as priority ones for foreign customers, in disciplinary and administrative dimensions. In disciplinary dimension, only chemistry can be assumed as priority one in the group of natural sciences: foreign funds were growing in chemistry along the decreasing numbers of recipients of foreign funds in a way that the remaining organizations could receive thrice higher amount of foreign funds, giving evidence of the clearer focusing of demand from foreign customers. Foreign financing in the other disciplines featured the overall downward trend in the period of the study, with exception of agriculture, which trend, although positive, cannot allow for the assumption of its priority due to the too low absolute figure of foreign funding in the initial year of the study. In the group of technical sciences, power engineering and instrument making can be assumed as the priority, and aircraft and rocket & space technology — as the potential priority. Although and aircraft and rocket & space technology remained in focus of foreign customers, accumulating a lion share of the funds coming to technical sciences and maintaining the leadership by amount of foreign funds per organization, the overall amount of foreign funds in this discipline fell by nearly half over the period under study. In administrative dimension, the leadership is with the State Space Agency of Ukraine, the concern “Ukroboronprom” (the Ukrainian military industry), the State Inspection of Nuclear Regulation of Ukraine, the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of Ukraine (MEDT). The reasons behind the priority positions of the above administrative departments (especially MEDT) in terms of foreign funding are highlighted, confirming that the administrative affiliation is still a better guarantor of the stability of foreign financing in Ukraine than the disciplinary one.