Russian Universities between Internationalization and Technonationalism

Authors

  • Evgeniya Popova Томский государственный университет , Tomsk State University Автор

Keywords:

university, internationalization, national security, export control, technoglobalization, technonationalism, russian politics

Abstract

The paper considers difficulties that face national states trying to find a balance between national security and success in science and technology development. On the one hand, researchers should actively cooperate with representatives of the world's leading universities and educational policy must be guided by the leading world standards. On the other hand, many studies have the potential for the development of national technical and military power and international educational programs might lead to cultural assimilation and potentially threat the nation-state. This contradiction forms the dilemma for the States and result in diversity of national strategies on formulation and execution of scientific policy. In this paper, at first, we formulate the theoretical approaches to the issue of the university participation in global relations. Second, we describe four models of closeness in science and technology policy: the system of classifications (eg. export 175 control of technology and technical expertise); the visa restrictions and limitations of the scientists collaboration for citizens of certain countries, for examples, their work in research groups of national universities; the state management of access to data and resources necessary to carry out research; technonationalism. Third, from point of the above mentioned dilemma and four models of restriction in scientific and technical international activities we consider the Russian state policy towards universities and idea about this policy from the Russian scientists. The methods were an international expert survey on the global governance of science and Russia's participation in it, interviews with representatives of Russian universities, analysis of lists of criminal trials about divulging state secrets against scientists available on the Internet, as well as analysis of the size of government spending on the researches in the Federal targeted programs.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Арефьев А. Л. (2006) Деятельность иностранных фондов и организаций в области образования и науки в России: Социологический анализ. М.: Центр социального прогнозирования

Бычкова О., Попова Е., Черныш А. (2014) Взаимодействие вузов и промышленности в РФ. Отчет по проекту РВК

Мартемьянов М. (2012) Один вышел, двое сели. Эксперт (http://expert.ru/russian_ reporter/2012/25/odin-vyishel-dvoe-seli)

Barry N., Segal A. (2003) China in Search of a Workable Model: Technology Development in the New Millennium. Crisis and Innovation: in Asian Technology. W. William, J. Samuels (eds), Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press: 160-86

Bok S. (1982) Secrecy and Openness in Science: Ethical Considerations. Science, Technology and Human Values, 7:32-41.

Crane D. (1972) Invisible Colleges, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cummings J. N., Kiesler S. (2005). Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries. Social Studies of Science 35: 703-722.

Curry J., Newson J. (eds) (1998) Universities and Globalization. Critical Perspectives, South Oaks: Sage.

Dill David D., Sporn B. (1995) The Implications of a Postindustrial Environment. D. D. Dilland, B. Sporn (eds). Emerging Patterns of Social Demand and University Reform: Through a Glass Darkly, Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Drahos P., Braithwaite J. (2002). Information Feudalism: Who Owns the Knowledge Economy? N. Y.: New Press.

Drori G., Meyer J., Ramirez F., Schofer E. (2003). Science in the Modern World Polity: Institutionalization and Globalization, Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Enders J. (2004) Higher Education, Internationalisation, and the Nation-State: Recent Developments and Challenges to Governance Theory. Higher Education, 47 (3): 361-382.

Farrell M. P. (2001). Collaborative circles: Friendship dynamics and creative work, Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.

Fecher B., Friesike S. (2014) Open science: One term, five schools of thought. S. Bartling, S. Friesike (eds). Opening Science. Springer Open: 17-47.

Feigenbaum A. (2003). China's Techno-warriors: National Security and Strategic Competition from the Nuclear to the Information Age, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Glasner P. (1996). From community to collaboratory? The human genome mapping project and the changing culture of science. Science and Public Policy, 23 (2): 109-116.

Griffith B. C., Mullins N. C. (1972) Coherent Groups in Scientific Change: Invisible Colleges May Be Consistent Throughout Science. Science, 177: 959-64.

Hackett E. J. (2005) Introduction to the Special Guest-Edited Issue on Scientific Collaboration. Social Studies of Science, 35 (5): 667-672.

Jeffrey A. Hart and Sangbae K. (2002) Explaining the Resurgence of U. S. Competitiveness: The Rise of Wintelism. The Information Society, 18: 1-12.

Keller W., Samuels R. J. (2003) Crisis and innovation in Asian technology, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Kwiek M. (2000) The nation-state, globalisation and the modem institution of the univer-sity. Theoria, 96 (December): 74-98.

Mirowski P., Sent E.-M. (eds.) (2002) Science Bought and Sold, Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Pauly W., Reich S. (1997). National Structures and Multinational Corporate Behavior: Enduring Differences in the Age of Globalization. International Organization, 51 (1): 1-30.

Powell W. W., White D. R., Koput K. W., Owen-Smith J. (2005) Network Dynamics and Field Evolution: The Growth of Interorganizational Collaboration in the Life Sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 110 (4): 1132-1205.

Scott P. (ed.) (1998) The Globalization of Higher Education, Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

Teichler U. (1996) Comparative higher education: Potentials and limits. Higher Education 32 (4): 431-465.

Thomas L. (1984) Scientific Frontiers and National Frontiers: A Look Ahead. Foreign Affairs: 966-76 (https: //www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/1984-03-01/scientific-frontiers-and-national-frontiers-look-ahead).

Tidd J., Bessant J. (2009) Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change, John Willey and Sons, Ltd.

Wittrock B. (1993). The Modem University: The Three Transformations. Rothblatt S.,

Wittrock B. (eds). The European and American University since 1800. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press: 298-314.

Downloads

Published

2015-05-15

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Popova E. Russian Universities between Internationalization and Technonationalism // Sociology of Power. 2015. Vol. 27, no. 3. P. 174–196.

Коды статьи

  • EDN UMUMFP
  • Тип статьи (РИНЦ) Научная статья (Научная статья)