SIXTH TECHNOLOGICAL ORDER: LAST KONDRATIEV CYCLE.

Lyudmila Vzdorova

applicant of the Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics South Federal University,

Russia, Rostov-on-Don

ANNOTATION

The origin, emergence and development of the next technological structure causes quite a lot of controversy among both theorists and practitioners of economic research.

A new technological structure almost always brings with it the unknown and vagueness of the next economic stratum, but in our case the special position of the whole situation is complicated by the fact that the next technological structure should occur, according to most experts, in an era of a different economic reality, which consists in the transparency of the denominator of the technological revolution based on the openness of all processes.

In the article, the author refers to the research, judgments and hypotheses of the famous Soviet economist N.D. Kondratiev, and adherents of his economic theories, from which it follows that the sixth technological structure will mark the completion of a galaxy of economic cycles.

ABSTRACT

The birth, the emergence and development of the next technological order is a sufficiently large number of disputes, like the theorists and practitioners of Economic Research.

New technological way almost always carries with it uncertainty and nebula following the economic strata, but in this case the special situation of the whole situation is complicated by the fact that the next technological structure must occur for the majority of the experts, in the era of an economic reality, consisting in Transparent denominator technological revolution based on transparency of all processes.

The author refers to the research, hypotheses and propositions known Soviet economist N.D. Kondratyev and adherents of his economic theories, from which it follows that the sixth technological order will be held the end of a galaxy of economic cycles.

Keywords: sixth technological structure, Kondratiev cycles, third world war.

Keywords: sixth technological order, Kondratieff cycles, a third world war.

According to the statements of most scientists, the next economic cycle and technological structure, when formed, usually begins with new discoveries and technologies, which are then accompanied by major social upheavals, wars and revolutions, which simultaneously includes a social and scientific shake-up of the world order. Of course, these prototypes of the theory of technological structures represent an assessment template containing a set of ideal conditions, and each scientific revolution has its own face.

The sixth technological structure, as noted above, already in its initial formation contains quite a lot of elements of an open society, which most likely will determine one of the main trends of all technological innovations and discoveries, but the author is not interested in this fact, but in the fact that The second empirical pattern in the development of any way of life is war, revolution and a radical (social) revolution in the life of society, and can the latter be a self-sufficient condition for the beginning of a new way of life or is war necessary for the onset of Kondratiev’s upward phase?

Nowadays, there is a trend among states all over the world - the militarization of the system, be it democracy or authoritarianism, a republic or a monarchy, federalism or a unitary state - all resources, including scientific ones, are aimed at strengthening weapons and defending the right to their own sovereignty not only among states , but also peoples, nations.

Stimulating militarization in the sense of scientific research (especially those not used in people’s lives) also has a positive side - the growth of scientific research and potential, because there are many examples in history when discoveries serving military purposes are subsequently applied in peaceful life, creating a new world scientific and technical potential (during World War II - a vaccine against tularemia and tuberculosis, carbine glue, etc.).

Can militarization, as the main goal of technological progress, act as a sufficiently significant engine as a social shake-up, and in combination with the openness of processes consisting in the development of individual communication technologies, lead to the beginning process singularities, And the end of the era of Kondratieff cycles?

After all, such rather incompatible phenomena come into play, such as initially containing mental contradictions, with the main features inherent in militarism - the closedness of the process and the transparency of the economy - openness, which will have to develop in unison in the sixth technological order.

Of these two trends, two pressing questions emerge: “Can it be sufficient if one of the conditions for the development of a new structure and cycle is not war and revolution, but militarization of the economies of various countries, as an impetus for the development of the technological process, or the need for more serious shock?", and "Is it possible to build an open society on the dualism of struggle contradictions between openness and closedness?».

Extrapolation of the moment of singularity due to militarization as the root cause of the emergence and formation of the sixth technological order, containing openness, a phenomenon that society has yet to experience, may be a self-sufficient motive for the growth of scientific creativity in all areas, albeit starting with research issues related to the military potential.

Self-sufficient to the extent that no need for traditional wars and military conflicts, since discoveries will revolutionize the life of society a priori, and temporary militarization and redistribution of spheres of influence by the world (hybrid conflict or hybrid war, for example, Crimea) will only serve as an impetus for a surge in research in various fields of science. After all, there were historical precedents of countries that were leaders of economic strata and technological structures, when the states themselves did not enter into world wars, taking advantage of their authority as guarantors of economic stability in the world and advanced innovations. Such countries include Switzerland, Belgium and the Netherlands (except during the Dutch period of world capitalist development from 1756 to 1816), which almost always stood at the head of the management of economic and technological innovation, and at the same time never experienced serious social upheavals and destructive wars.

Does the empirical scenario and the root cause pushing people for discoveries depend on choice or is it a question of the endless chaos of the development of development scenarios, and in light of this we need to understand: is there such a thing as controlled chaos, or is it impossible to control the unorganized elements: does the human will play any role? role in the formula for the development of the universe, or everything is a manifestation of endless scenarios of development to the Nth degree of the collective unconscious; is it possible to make a choice between what lies ahead or does everything seem like an endless chain of random queues; whether the will acts as a choice of the next order, and whether the will of one can give rise to a series of random patterns that influence everyone. The question of will in chaos theory is not as simple at first glance as it seems, because if you prove that there is something like that, then the course of history directly depends on the variable category will, but how to establish the pattern of its appearance and influence on the sequence of events.

Is it possible to volitionally stage the situational process of some serious social upheaval, which would be sufficient in strength as a revolution or war, while in essence it was not. Can the will of one, several, groups of people, etc. influence this development of events, or is their course predetermined by a chain of random events? Is it possible to create such a paradigm when it is possible to control chaos: simultaneously perform an action at a specified time and achieve the required result . For example, the theory that “the fifth cycle was supposed to end in 2001,” “ and was only artificially delayed due to the organization of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but we are seeing its end today» .

And so, the basis of any technological structure is, first of all, technologies that, in the broad sense of the word, change the world, and the latter can be changed in different ways: it could be a new method of production, or new materials that have an impact on society, up to the introduction in everyday life - in a word, what changes the consciousness of an individual in society, acquiring the scale of the latter. And for this, war or military conflict is not at all necessary; the important thing is that this very world ceases to be the same once and for all.

To do this, let’s try to consider whether wars, military conflicts, revolutions influence the existing postulates in conditions of chaos, and determine whether in all 5 long waves (cycles) “increasing phases (Kondratieff long waves) are richer in social upheavals (revolutions, wars) , than downward ones,” which are compressed and modified, and whether in conditions of chaos, “the famous winner in the war” always makes a breakthrough in the economy, scientific and technical revolution, etc.

Let us carry out the analysis by speculatively superimposing the number of wars, military operations, conflicts, social revolutions on technological structures:

• The first technological structure 1770–1830 – 60 years (89 wars and military conflicts), of which, when the number of wars is superimposed on the time of the first technological structure, the following picture emerges: at the beginning of the spread the first technological structure of 1770–1790, which lasts 20 years - there are only 18 wars.
• Second technological order 1830–1880 – 50 years, 90 wars and military conflicts. Start of distribution the second technological structure 1830–1847, and it takes 3 years less compared to the first and amounts to seventeen years and they account for 45 wars and military conflicts.
• Third technological order 1880–1930 – 50 years, 109 wars and military conflicts. The beginning of the spread of the third way of life from 1880–1897. is 17 years old, and coincides with the second, but here, in contrast, there is a decrease in the indicator of wars and military conflicts to 34.
• The fourth technological order 1930–1970 – 40 years, 102 wars and military conflicts. Its peculiarity, compared to the previous first, second and third modes, is the compression of deadlines, with an increase in wars and military conflicts. At the beginning of distribution the fourth way is 13 years from 1930–1943 and accounts for about 37 wars.
• Fifth technological structure lasts 40 years 1970–2010, 107 wars and military conflicts. This way of life coincides in amount of time with the fourth way. Beginning of the fifth technological order 1970–1983 13 years – 45 wars.

From the above research it can be concluded that the beginning of the technological order, accounts for on average 1/3 of all wars from the total number of wars that take place in one way or another (P.S. Research on the number of wars in a given technological structure was carried out by the author based on materials from more than a hundred scientific articles and several dozen monographs).

The second aspect is to consider long waves using the same method, by speculatively superimposing the number of wars, military operations, conflicts, social revolutions, only this time on Kondratiev cycles:

• The first long wave (cycle) of Kondratiev 1780–1844. – lasts more than 60 years, 137 wars. Begins with an upward wave from 1780 to 1814. for a period of 34 years, during which 55 wars occur.
• Second long wave (cycle) of Kondratiev 1844–1990–1996, – more than 50 years, 81 wars. This cycle is shorter in time (almost 10 years), but its structure is similar to the first wave: the increasing stage takes longer than the decreasing stage, but has temporal differences. The peculiarity of the second wave compared to the first is that it is five years shorter in the upward stage, therefore it lasts 29 years instead of 34 in the first, but there is an increase in the number of wars from 55 to 56 wars.
• Third long wave (cycle) 1890–1896 to 1929–1933, – more than 42 years, 94 wars. The increase stage is close in time to the second 24 years versus 29 years, but 10 years less than the first; In terms of the number of wars, its indicators in the increasing stage are close to the first wave of 53 wars.
• The fourth long wave (cycle) from 1933 to 1984. – more than 51 years, 120 wars. More than the third wave, by 9 years, less than the first wave by 9 years, and equal in time to the second wave. If we compare with the second and third waves in the increasing stage, then in the fourth we can see an increase to 69 wars against 40 and 41.
• Fifth long wave (cycle) from 1984 to 2015. – 31 years old, demonstrates a record time compression compared to previous waves, this is its fundamental difference from other long waves from the first (29 years), second (29 years), third (11 years), fourth (9 years) . The number of wars in the fourth long wave in the increasing stage, which is twice as long as the decreasing stage (in this indicator coincides with the third long wave), 55 wars occur.

In the second study on the ratio of the number of wars, revolutions and social upheavals to economic cycles, one can observe a picture that the number of the above ranges on average from 1/3 to ½ for a particular economic wave (P.S. Research on the number of wars in a given economic cycle was carried out by the author based on materials from more than a hundred scientific articles and several dozen monographs).

Comparing the number of wars at the beginning of technological structures and the upward stage of long waves (cycles) of Kondratieff, we can say that it is not always at the initial stage of these two processes that half of the total number of wars involved in a given structure occur. These data give serious reason to think about what can serve as self-sufficient conditions for the start of a new technological order.

Any technological revolution begins with a dramatic transformation of the life of nations, nationalities, entire countries and states in the economic, political and social sense, the redistribution of spheres of influence and world capital in a short period by historical standards of time.

If we talk about the upcoming sixth technological order, it can be noted that society has already begun its primary transformation, not at all thanks to militarization, but to technologies focused on openness, as a result of which people have become his cognitive functions change (memorizing, drawing, etc.), perhaps this is what self-sufficient social upheaval, and this fact is already difficult to change or refute.

Technologies of openness are a new type of resource, and when the latter appears, another redistribution of those who will manage it follows, regardless of whether the resource is the bowels of the earth, or the resource is the formation of a new method of production.

In our case, the stakes are even higher, since with the beginning of the sixth technological order a new type of resource (openness) appears, by acquiring and managing it, you can control people in the broad sense of the word (informationally, culturally, morally, ethically, economically, politically and etc., so, for example, you can virtually rewrite the whole history), from here it follows quite logically that the artificial militarization of states currently being carried out: society gives a message for openness, and states for militarization and closedness (with an inherent desire and desire to take possession of this type of resource alone).

The struggle between openness and closedness, militarization and transparency - this is exactly what one of the turns of the singularity of the beginning of the economy of the sixth technological order looks like, and the question of the redistribution of a new type of resource is only technical, consisting in the possibility of a peaceful settlement, possession of a new resource peacefully or with the use of force (wars) and military conflicts), but is far from necessary for the growth of scientific potential and technology in society.

Clist of literature:

1. Akaev A.A. and others Kondratiev waves: Aspects and prospects / Volgograd: Teacher, 2012. – 383 p. – ISBN 978-5-7057-3310-1.
2. Baklitskaya O. War, synchrophasatron and astronomy – [Electronic resource] - Access mode. - URL: http://chrdk.ru/weekend/2015/05/05/WWII/ (Date accessed 02/15/2015).
3. Grinin L.E., Korotaev N.D. Kondratieff waves: Long and medium-term cycles / Rep. ed. L.E. Grinin, A.V. Korotaev. – Volgograd: Teacher, 2014. – 360 p.
4. Glazyev S.Yu., Kharitonov V.V. Nanotechnology as a key factor in the new technological structure in the economy - M.: Trovant, 2009. - 304 p. – 200 copies.
5. Kablov E. The sixth technological structure // Science and life: magazine. – M., 2010. – No. 4.
6. Kondratyev N.D. Large cycles of economic conditions: Report // Problems of economic dynamics. – M.: Economics, 1989. – P. 172–226. – 523 p. – (Economic heritage).
7. Myamlin K. Nikolai Kondratyev. Economic cycles that become historical. – [Electronic resource] – Access mode. – URL: http://communitarian.ru/publikacii/mirovaya_ekonomika/nikolay_kondratev_ekonomicheskie_tsikly_kotorye_stanovyatsya_istoricheskimi/ (Accessed November 25, 2015).
8. Rogozin D.O. The robot will stand under the gun // Rossiyskaya Gazeta: newspaper. – M., 2013. – No. 264 (6240).
9. Sadovnichiy V.A., Akaev A.A., Korotaev A.V., Malkov S.Yu. Modeling and forecasting of global dynamics. – M.: ISPI RAS, 2012. – 359 p. – (Economics and sociology of knowledge). – 1,000 copies. – ISBN 978-5-7556-0456-7.
10. Kondratiev cycles – [Electronic resource] – Access mode. – URL: http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/ruwiki/699477 (Date of access: 01/10/2016).

There is nothing more constant than change.

Karl Ludwig Börne

Innovations today come in a continuous, increasing stream; their emergence is not a one-time exceptional event, but an entire industry that is becoming the main source of government revenue. The place of the state on the world stage in our time has become determined not by the size of the army or even its technical equipment, but by the success and speed of the mass introduction of technical innovations. The share of new knowledge embodied in technology, equipment, personnel education, and production organization in developed countries accounts for 70 to 85% of the growth in gross domestic product (GDP).

At the same time, the share of government spending on science and education is constantly growing, reaching an average of 3% of GDP in developed countries, and the share of private investment in innovation can be many times greater than government funding. And all this must be done not only in order to improve the lives of the population, but also to win the technological race, the prize in which, no less, is the preservation of statehood and national independence.

At one time, Sergei Yuryevich Glazyev developed a theory of long-term technical and economic development. The basis of this theory is the idea of ​​a consistent change in technological structures.

Technological structure (TS) is a set of technologies characteristic of a certain level of production development.

Within the framework of technical specifications, a closed cycle is carried out, including the extraction and receipt of primary resources, all stages of their processing and the release of a set of final products that satisfy the corresponding type of public consumption.

For example, a peasant grows flax, it is processed in a factory, it is woven into fabric, a curtain is sewn, and it is used in the theater. If the flax had not been grown, the nail had not been forged, the electricity had not been generated, then the theater would have been different, if it existed at all.

In connection with scientific, technical and technological progress, there is a transition from lower structures to higher, progressive ones.

Table 1

Technological structures

№ THAT	Years	Core	Key Factor	Technology leaders
		Textile industry, textile engineering, iron smelting, iron processing, canal construction, water engine	Textile machines	Great Britain, France, Belgium
		Steam engine, railway construction, transport, machine, steamship, coal, machine tool industry, ferrous metallurgy	Steam engine,	Great Britain, France, Belgium, Germany,
		Electrical engineering, heavy engineering, steel production and rolling, power lines, inorganic chemistry	Electric motor,	UK, France, Belgium, Germany,
		Automobile and tractor manufacturing, non-ferrous metallurgy, durable goods production, synthetic materials, organic chemistry, oil production and refining	Internal combustion engine, petrochemicals	Western Europe, USSR,
		Electronics industry, computing, fiber optic technology, software, telecommunications, robotics, gas production and processing, information services.	Micro-electronic components
		Cell technologies and genetic engineering methods; alternative energy	Nanotechnology

TU manifests itself in all spheres of human life, from the extraction of natural resources and professional training to non-productive consumption. For example, the invention of the steam engine led to an increase in coal production, rapid urban growth, increased labor productivity, the emergence of a skilled working class, and changes in the leisure activities of large masses of the population. Therefore, although it may seem strange at first glance, it is quite possible to build a cause-and-effect chain from the steam engine to the emergence of cinema, photography, radio, theater, wars, revolutions, etc.

In accordance with the theory proposed by S. Yu. Glazyev, the change of world leaders can be explained: the state that is the first to enter a new technological structure gains an advantage and quickly becomes the main player on the world stage. Table 1 indicates the periods of the main technological structures, the key factors determining them, the technological core and those countries that were the first to enter the new structure.

1 technological structure. 1770 - 1830. The key factor determining the new technological structure is the invention and introduction of textile machines. Naturally, this entailed the development of the textile industry and textile engineering, which, in turn, required more cast iron and iron for the manufacture of machine tools. To set machines in motion, a source of energy is required. This led to the construction of canals to power water engines and transport goods. The leaders were, first of all, Great Britain, then France and Belgium.

Plants and factories quickly began to appear with a highly specialized division of labor between its workers. The subject labor system, in which the artisan made the product from start to finish, gave way to the operating system. Now the worker performed only individual operations to produce the final product - quickly, efficiently, cheaply. Pragmatic capitalism reigned, dramatically changing the way of life, social structure and worldview of society. Instead of artisan shops selling only what they themselves made, prototypes of modern stores began to appear, offering a variety of industrially produced goods.

2 technological structure. 1830 - 1880. The catalyst for the transition to a new technological structure was the steam engine. Its appearance made it possible to make production energy independent of rivers. Now it is possible to locate factories and factories in large cities where there is a workforce and the necessary infrastructure. For the first time, a person had his own man-made source of energy, so powerful and compact that it could be placed on a ship or even on a self-propelled carriage. The symbol of change was the railway. Although at first many enlightened people of that time predicted failure for this wonder. For example, the Prussian king believed that “no one will pay decent money to get from Berlin to Potsdam in an hour, while you can spend a day on the same trip on your horse and not pay anything.” When the first railway was launched in Russia, soldiers were put on the first train, as experts were afraid that at such a huge speed of 60 km/h, a person might go crazy from the rapid change of landscapes. But no one went crazy, and where the railway line was laid, life changed dramatically.

Machinery and steamship building developed rapidly. This led to the development of the machine tool industry and ferrous metallurgy. Coal became the main source of energy, leading to a golden age for the coal industry.

Germany and the USA are added to the group of world leaders. The concentration of production increases, and cities become even larger.

Russian endeavors in the field of construction and use of steam engines remained the lot of isolated individuals, such as the father and son Cherepanovs. This led to a slowdown in the pace of development of the Russian Empire, a lag behind advanced countries, an aggravation of its internal contradictions, a revolution and its collapse in 1917.

3 technological structure. 1880-1930. The catalyst for the new technological structure was again the engine - this time an electric one. Heavy engineering, steel production and rolling are developing, power lines are being built, and inorganic chemistry is rapidly developing.

Leader group: Germany, USA, UK, France, Belgium, Switzerland, Netherlands. This specification is characterized by increased production flexibility based on the use of an electric motor and standardization of production. The successes of the United States of America are impressive. But even greater successes were achieved in the Soviet Union: illiteracy of the population is being eliminated, the country is being electrified with incredible efforts, metallurgical and engineering giants are being built, and the USSR is entering the next round of the technological race together with the leaders.

4 technological structure. 1930-1970. According to tradition, the “culprit” of the transition to a new technological structure was the engine - this is an internal combustion engine. Widespread construction of highways begins. The horse finally gave way to the tractor. To feed the iron horse, it is no longer coal that is required, but gasoline. The combat effectiveness of the army began to be determined by the number of engines installed on cars, tanks, planes and ships. Mass and serial production is being established in industry. Thousands of tanks and cars emerge from the workshops. Naturally, to obtain gasoline from oil requires the development of petrochemistry and all organic chemistry in general.

The USA and the countries of Western Europe received a powerful competitor - the USSR, which after the war had an armada of tanks, aircraft and a developed industrial base, capable of very quickly increasing this armada even more. The time has come for a bipolar world, an arms race between two superpowers. The consequence of this race was the rapid exploration of space and penetration into the secrets of the use of nuclear energy.

All recent history is in one way or another connected with the struggle of states for sources and markets for hydrocarbons - the main modern energy carriers. The Battle of Stalingrad, which decided the outcome of World War II, was perhaps the most fierce battle in the entire known history of civilization. Such intensity of the battle in the deserted and poor steppes of the Volga region is not at all explained by the fact that the city was named after Stalin. The one who owned Stalingrad and the Volga owned the routes for delivering Baku oil, which was extremely necessary for the planes and tanks of the warring powers.

Many countries in the post-Soviet space are a zone of strategic interests of the United States, Russia and the European Union, mainly because they are transit countries for gas transportation to Europe.

Taking into account the fact that there is no worthy replacement for hydrocarbons in the near future, the struggle for oil and gas on the Arctic Ocean shelf is already beginning. But I would like to hope that Humanity is mature enough to solve emerging problems peacefully, and that a new source of energy will be found, marking the transition to a new energy era that is not associated with the irreversible and merciless exploitation of the irreplaceable resources of the earth's interior.

5 technological structure. 1970-2010. Being carried away by the number of tractors and tons of steel produced per capita, the Soviet Union somehow missed the appearance of a mere trifle - a semiconductor diode and transistor. It was these “trifles” that broke the already established tradition associated with the fact that the new technological structure begins with the engine. The advent of semiconductors led to the birth of a new industry – electronics. This caused an avalanche-like development of computing, fiber optic technology, software, telecommunications, robotics, and information services.

The United States further strengthened its position, and the Soviet Union, which did not begin the transition to a new technological structure in time, lost and collapsed. A new leader has emerged on the scene: China.

But global competition today is conducted not so much between countries as between transnational reproductive systems. Several such systems, closely related to each other, determine global economic development. They form the core of the world economic system, concentrating intellectual, scientific, technical and financial potential in developed countries.

Such systems are called transnational corporations (TNCs). These corporations, associated with the core of the world economic system, today control more than half of the turnover of world trade and finance, the most profitable sectors of the economy of different countries, including the mining and knowledge-intensive industries, telecommunications, and industrial infrastructure.

Many TNCs surpass large countries in their economic turnover, subordinate governments to their influence, and have a decisive influence on the formation of international law and the work of international institutions. The leading 500 transnational corporations cover over a third of manufacturing exports, 3/4 of world trade in commodities, 4/5 of trade in new technologies, and provide employment to tens of millions of people in almost every country in the world.

Among the five hundred largest and most successful companies operating on the world market: more than two hundred are American, about a hundred are Japanese, a little more than fifty are European.

Unfortunately, not a single Russian company is one of them. This indicates that Russia did not fit into the current technological structure and dropped out of the ranks of world leaders. But all is not lost; a new technological era is approaching, the consequences of which will be no less exciting than the results of the previous ones.

6 technological structure. Since 2010. Nanotechnology is becoming a new catalyst for technological progress. They determine the emergence of genetic engineering, the development of alternative energy, new construction materials, medicines, etc.

Russia has all the necessary prerequisites to restore its status as a technological power. First of all, this is the presence of a developed system of education, science and industry. This should allow us to finally learn how to wisely and carefully spend enormous natural resources, the presence of which should become our advantage, and not a disadvantage that slows down the introduction of modern technologies into production.

Topics for reports and abstracts

The significance of the invention of the steam engine for the economic development of England.

Ways to change the technological structure in modern Russia.

Skolkovo is a pilot project for the innovative development path of Russia.

History of the development of individual transnational corporations.

The influence of various technological structures on the strategy and tactics of military operations.

The influence of genetic engineering on the development of agriculture.

Discussions

What needs to be done for Russia to become a leader in the new technological order?

Literature

Danilov, N.I. Use of resources and energy: textbook for the elective course “Energy Saving” in high school / N.I. Danilov, Yu.N. Timofeeva, A.P. Usoltsev, Ya.M. Shchelokov, V.Yu. Baldin. – Ekaterinburg, 2010.

From the history of science / V.A. Tikhomirova, A.I. Chernoushan. – M.: Bureau Quantum, 1996.

Kudryavtsev, P.S. Course on the history of physics: Proc. manual for pedagogical students. Institute of Physics specialist. -2nd ed., rev. and additional / P.S. Kudryavtsev. – M.: Education, 1982.

Lev, V.G. What is everything from: Scientific and fiction literature / V.G. A lion. – M.: Det. lit. 1983.

Nadezhdin N.Ya. History of science and technology / N.Ya Nadezhdin. - Rostov n/d: Phoenix, 2006.

Official website of the journal “Science and Life”. – www.nkj.ru.

Website of S.P. Kurdyumov "Synergetics". - spkurdyumov.narod.ru.

Technological structure– these are groups of technological aggregates connected to each other by similar technological chains and forming reproducing wholes.

The technical structure is characterized by:

key factor

organizational and economic regulatory mechanism.

The concept of way of life means arrangement, an established order of organizing something.

In the modern concept, the life cycle of a technological structure has 3 phases of development and is determined by a time period of approximately 100 years. The first phase corresponds to its origin and the formation of the previous technological structure in the economy. The second phase is associated with the structural restructuring of the economy on the basis of new production technology and corresponds to the period of dominance of the new technological structure for approximately 50 years. The third phase occurs when the obsolete way of life is dying out and the next one is emerging.

S.Yu. Glazyev developed the theory of N. Kondratiev and identified five technological structures. However, unlike Kondratiev, Glazyev believes that the life cycle of a technological structure has not two parts (upward and downward waves), but three phases and is determined by a period of 100 years.

Between phases I and II there is a period of monopoly. Individual organizations achieve an effective monopoly, develop, and receive high profits, because are protected by intellectual and industrial property laws.

Product innovations themselves are considered primary. They appear in the depths of the economy of the previous technological structure. The very appearance of extraordinary innovations—products—signifies the emergence of a new technological order. However, its slow development over a certain period of time is explained by the monopoly position of individual companies that were the first to apply product innovations. They are successfully developing, achieving high profits, as they are protected by intellectual property laws.

Russian scientists have described the fourth and fifth technological ways (see table).

Table - Chronology and characteristics of technological structures

	technological structure number
Period of dominance	1770-1830	1830-1880	1880-1930	1930-1980	From 1980 to 1990 for 2030-2040 (?)
Technology leaders	UK, France, Belgium	UK, France, Belgium, Germany, USA	Germany, USA, UK, France, Belgium, Switzerland, Netherlands	USA, Western European countries, USSR, Canada, Australia, Japan, Sweden, Switzerland	Japan, USA, European Union
The developed countries	German states, Netherlands	Italy, Netherlands, Switzerland, Austria-Hungary, Russia	Russia, Italy, Denmark, Austria-Hungary, Canada, Japan, Spain, Sweden	Brazil, Mexico, China, Taiwan, India	Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Venezuela, China, India, Indonesia, Turkey, Eastern Europe, Canada, Australia, Taiwan, Korea, Russia and the CIS-?
The core of the technological structure	Textile industry, textile engineering, iron smelting, iron processing, canal construction, water engine	Steam engine, railway construction, transport, machine, steamship, coal, machine tool industry, ferrous metallurgy	Electrical engineering, heavy engineering, steel production and rolling, power lines, inorganic chemistry	Automobile and tractor construction, non-ferrous metallurgy, durable goods production, synthetic materials, organic chemistry, oil production and refining	Electronics industry, computing, fiber optic technology, software, telecommunications, robotics, gas production and processing, information services
Key factor	Textile machines	Steam engine, machine tools	Electric motor, steel	Internal combustion engine, petrochemicals	Microelectronic components
The emerging core of a new way of life	Steam engines, mechanical engineering	Steel, electrical power, heavy engineering, inorganic chemistry	Automotive industry, organic chemistry, oil production and refining, non-ferrous metallurgy, road construction	Radars, pipeline construction, aviation industry, gas production and processing	Biotechnology, space technology, fine chemistry
Advantages of the technological structure compared to the previous one	Mechanization and concentration of production in factories	Increase in scale and concentration of production based on the use of the steam engine	Increasing production flexibility based on the use of an electric motor, standardization of production, urbanization	Mass and batch production	Individualization of production and consumption, increasing production flexibility, overcoming environmental restrictions on energy and material consumption based on automated control systems, de-urbanization based on telecommunication technologies

Technologically developed countries have moved from the fourth to the fifth technological order, embarking on the path of deindustrialization of production. At the same time, modifications of manufactured models are being carried out for products of the fourth technological order, which is sufficient to ensure effective demand in their countries to maintain market niches abroad.

The fourth technological structure(the fourth wave) was formed on the basis of the development of energy using oil, gas, communications, and new synthetic materials. This is the era of mass production of cars, tractors and agricultural machinery, aircraft, and various types of weapons. At this time, the computer appeared and software products for them began to be created. Atomic energy has been used for peaceful and military purposes. Mass production was organized based on conveyor technology.

Fifth wave relies on achievements in the field of microeconomics, computer science, satellite communications, and genetic engineering. There is a globalization of the economy, facilitated by the worldwide information network.

The core of a new sixth technological order, including biotechnology, space technology, fine chemistry, artificial intelligence systems, global information networks, the formation of network business communities, etc. The origin of the 6th way of life dates back to the early 90s of the twentieth century within the framework of the 5th technological way of life.

In the domestic economy, for a number of objective reasons, the potential of the third and fourth technological structures has not yet been fully used. At the same time, high-tech industries of the fifth technological order were created.

The dominance of a technological structure over a long period of time is influenced by government support for new technologies in combination with the innovative activities of organizations. Process innovations improve product quality, help reduce production costs and ensure stable consumer demand in the product market.

Thus, the main conclusion that follows from studying the influence of innovation on the level of economic development is the conclusion about uneven wave-like innovative development. This conclusion is taken into account when developing and selecting innovation strategies. Previously, forecasts used a trend approach based on extrapolation, which assumed the inertia of economic systems. Recognition of the cyclical nature of innovative development made it possible to explain its spasmodic nature.

In the modern concept of the theory of innovation, it is customary to distinguish such concepts as product life cycle And life cycle of production technology.

The product life cycle consists of four phases.

1. In the first phase, research and development is carried out to create an innovation product. The phase ends with the transfer of processed technical documentation to the production departments of industrial organizations.

2. In the second phase, technological development of large-scale production of a new product occurs, accompanied by a reduction in costs and an increase in profits.

Both the first and especially the second phase are associated with significant risky investments, which are allocated on a repayable basis. The subsequent increase in production scale is accompanied by a decrease in costs and an increase in profits. This makes it possible to recoup investments in the first and second phases of the product life cycle.

3. A feature of the third phase is the stabilization of production volumes.

4. In the fourth phase, there is a gradual decrease in production and sales volumes.

The life cycle of a production technology also consists of 4 phases:

1. The emergence of innovation processes through a wide range of technological R&D.

2. Mastering innovations and processes at the facility.

3. Distribution and replication of new technology with multiple repetition at other facilities.

4. Implementation of innovation processes in stable, constantly functioning elements of objects (routinization).

Technological structure is one of the terms of the theory of scientific and technological progress. It means a set of related industries that have a single technical level and develop synchronously. The change in the dominant technological structures in the economy predetermines the uneven progress of scientific and technological progress. Leading researchers on this topic are Sergei Glazyev and Carlota Perez.

Some Kondratieff long wave researchers have paid a lot of attention to studying the innovation process. Joseph Schumpeter already noted that the development of innovation is discrete in time. Schumpeter called the periods of time during which a surge of innovation occurs “clusters” (bundles), but the term “waves of innovation” has become more established. The discrete nature of scientific and technological revolutions was also recognized by Simon Kuznets (in a 1940 review of Schumpeter’s book.

In 1975, West German scientist Gerhard Mensch (German) Russian. coined the term “technical method of production”. Mensch interpreted the Kondratieff cycle as the life cycle of a technical mode of production, described by a logistic curve. In a 1978 paper, Mensch's ideas were repeated by the East German economist Thomas Kuczynski. In the 1970s and 1980s, an adherent of the idea of ​​diffusion of innovations, the Englishman Christopher Freeman formulated the concept of a “techno-economic paradigm,” which was subsequently developed by his student Carlota Perez.

The term “technological structure” is used in domestic economic science as an analogue of the concepts of “waves of innovation”, “technical and economic paradigm” and “technical mode of production”. It was first proposed in 1986 by Soviet economists D.S. Lvov and S.Yu. Glazyev in the article “Theoretical and applied aspects of scientific and technological progress management.

According to the definition of S. Yu. Glazyev, a technological structure is a holistic and sustainable formation, within which a closed cycle is carried out, starting with the extraction and receipt of primary resources and ending with the release of a set of final products corresponding to the type of public consumption. The complex of basic sets of technologically related industries forms the core of the technological structure. Technological innovations that determine the formation of the core of the technological structure are called the key factor. Industries that intensively use the key factor and play a leading role in the spread of the new technological order are carrier industries.

A simpler definition was given by Yu. V. Yakovets: a technological structure is several interconnected and successively successive generations of technology, evolutionarily implementing a general technological principle. For K. Perez, the techno-economic paradigm is the sphere of production and economic relations with all its inherent phenomena (income distribution, technology, organizational and management methods). At the same time, by key factors, Peres understands the same thing as Glazyev.

In its development, earthly civilization has gone through a number of pre-industrial and at least 6 industrial technological structures, and now developed countries are in the 5th technological structure and are intensively preparing for the transition to the 6th technological structure, which will provide them with a way out of the economic crisis. Those countries that are late in the transition to the 6th technological structure will get stuck in economic crisis and stagnation. The situation in Russia is very difficult, since we have not moved from the 4th technological structure to the 5th, due to the deindustrialization of the industrial potential of the USSR, i.e. have not moved to the 5th post-industrial structure and are forced, if we succeed, to jump directly to the 6th technological structure. The task is extremely difficult, if not almost impossible, especially in the absence of an industrial policy among the country's leadership. The well-known thesis of K. Marx, on which more than one generation of Soviet people was brought up, that productive forces and production relations determine the socio-economic system, can be significantly corrected in the light of the theory of N.D. Kondratiev.

Pre-industrial ways were based on the muscular, manual, and horse energy of humans and animals. All inventions of that time, which have survived to this day, related to strengthening the muscular strength of humans and animals (screw, lever, wheel, gearbox, potter's wheel, bellows in a forge, mechanical spinning wheel, hand loom).

The beginning of industrial periods of technological structures occurs at the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th centuries.

First technological The way of life is characterized by the use of water energy in the textile industry, water mills, and drives of various mechanisms.

Second technological order. The beginning of the 19th - the end of the 19th century - using the energy of steam and coal: steam engine, steam engine, steam locomotive, steamships, steam drives of spinning and weaving machines, steam mills, steam hammer. There is a gradual liberation of a person from heavy manual labor. A person has more free time.

The third technological structure. The end of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th century. Use of electrical energy, heavy engineering, electrical and radio engineering industry, radio communications, telegraph, household appliances. Improving quality of life.

The fourth technological order. Beginning of the 20th - end of the 20th century. Use of hydrocarbon energy. Widespread use of internal combustion engines, electric motors, cars, tractors, airplanes, synthetic polymer materials, the beginning of nuclear energy.

Fifth technological structure. The end of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st century. Electronics and microelectronics, nuclear energy, information technology, genetic engineering, the beginning of nano- and biotechnologies, space exploration, satellite communications, video and audio equipment, the Internet, cell phones. Globalization with the rapid movement of products, services, people, capital, ideas.

Sixth technological structure. Beginning of the XXI - mid-XXI century. There is an overlap with the 5th technological structure, it is called post-industrial. Nano- and biotechnologies, nanoenergy, molecular, cellular and nuclear technologies, nanobiotechnologies, biomimetics, nanobionics, nanotronics and other nanoscale production; new medicine, household appliances, types of transport and communications, the use of stem cells, engineering of living tissues and organs, reconstructive surgery and medicine, a significant increase in life expectancy for humans and animals.

Table. Technological structures

Technological structures (TU)		Key Factors	Technological core
		Textile machines	Textiles, iron smelting; iron processing, water engine, rope
		Steam engine	Railways, steamships; coal and machine tool industry, ferrous metallurgy
		Electric motor, steel industry	Electrical engineering, heavy engineering, steel industry, inorganic chemistry, power lines
		Internal combustion engine, petrochemicals	Automotive, aircraft, rocketry, non-ferrous metallurgy, synthetic materials, organic chemistry, oil production and refining
		Microelectronics, gasification	Electronics industry, computers, optical industry, aerospace, telecommunications, robotics, gas industry, software, information services
		Quantum vacuum technologies	Nano-, bio-, information technologies. Goal: medicine, ecology, improving quality of life

In my essay, I touched on the third technological structure (1880-1930), which was called the “Age of Steel” (Second Industrial Revolution), and I will consider in it the history of the creation of the escalator.

technological structure escalator performance

E. Kablov, acad. Photo by Alexander Krivushin. The conversation is conducted by B. Rudenko

The task set by the President of Russia - to create a “smart” economy - determines the need for the rapid development of science and the dynamic implementation of its achievements. Since this task covers many aspects of our lives, a special integrating indicator is required to assess the success of its implementation. Today, the concept of “technological structure” is increasingly claiming its role. The correspondent of the Science and Life magazine Boris Rudenko talked about this with the General Director of the Institute of Aviation Materials (FSUE VIAM, State Scientific Center of the Russian Federation), Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Evgeniy KABLOV.

Academician E. N. Kablov.

Installation for the production of unique heat-resistant alloys (the final product is shown in the photo on the right) for fifth-generation aircraft engines.

It is up to those who, from yesterday's young specialists, who will form the elite of Russian science tomorrow, to ensure entry into the sixth technological order.

Science and life // Illustrations

Testing of new generation materials should be carried out only on the most modern equipment. In the photo: laboratory tests using a tensile testing machine.

The state is turning its face to science, says Academician E. N. Kablov. This attention must continue in the future.

The world economy has not yet fully recovered from the consequences of the crisis. Why did the topic of “technological structure” arise right now?

The world owes the appearance of this concept to our compatriot, scientist-economist Nikolai Dmitrievich Kondratiev. He held a responsible post in the Provisional Government of Kerensky, and then headed the famous Moscow Institute of Market Studies. Studying the history of capitalism, Kondratiev came to the idea of ​​the existence of large - 50-55 years long - economic cycles, which are characterized by a certain level of development of the productive forces (“technological structure”). As a rule, such cycles end with crises similar to today's, followed by a stage of transition of productive forces to a higher level of development.

Today the world is on the threshold of the sixth technological order. Its contours are just beginning to take shape in the developed countries of the world, primarily in the USA, Japan and China, and are characterized by a focus on the development and application of knowledge-intensive, or, as they now say, “high technologies”. Everyone is now hearing about bio- and nanotechnologies, genetic engineering, membrane and quantum technologies, photonics, micromechanics, thermonuclear energy - the synthesis of achievements in these areas should lead to the creation, for example, of a quantum computer, artificial intelligence and ultimately provide access to fundamentally a new level in management systems of the state, society, and economy.

Forecast experts believe that if the current pace of technical and economic development is maintained, the sixth technological structure will begin to take shape in 2010-2020, and will enter the maturity phase in the 2040s. At the same time, in 2020-2025 there will be a new scientific, technical and technological revolution, the basis of which will be developments that synthesize the achievements of the above basic directions. There are reasons for such predictions. In the USA, for example, the share of productive forces of the fifth technological order is 60%, of the fourth - 20%. And about 5% already fall on the sixth technological structure.

- How are things going in Russia?

It’s too early for us to talk about the sixth technological structure. The share of fifth-stage technologies in our country is still approximately 10%, and even then only in the most developed industries: in the military-industrial complex and in the aerospace industry. More than 50% of technologies belong to the fourth level, and almost a third are even to the third. This explains the complexity of the task facing domestic science and technology: in order for our country to be able to become one of the states with the sixth technological structure over the next 10 years, it needs, figuratively speaking, to jump over the stage - through the fifth way.

- How practically is this possible?

With the existing forms and methods of management, organization and financing of work, such a breakthrough will not be possible. Fundamental changes are needed in these areas. And they are possible only if science has the status of an independent branch of the economy with all the ensuing consequences. The leading countries of the world have already come to this. Most of them have a powerful scientific foundation and an active innovation system that allows them to create and constantly maintain this foundation at a high level, quickly turning it into practical results.

Our capabilities in this matter do not look so optimistic. As practice has shown, ministries and departments, primarily the Ministry of Education and Science, the Ministry of Economic Development and the Ministry of Industry and Trade, are not able to provide the country with dynamic innovative development. Even worse, some of their employees continue to push questionable decisions on us.

- Can you give examples of such decisions?

Referring to foreign experience, the opinion is persistently propagated that the “center of gravity” of the development of science should move within the walls of universities. Is it possible? Not to mention the fact that the main task of universities is to train specialists, it is difficult to imagine an educational institution capable of maintaining and effectively operating powerful experimental research stands and technological complexes.

It is equally erroneous to believe that innovative development can only be ensured by scientific organizations that are owned or financed by private corporations, the main interests and goals of which, as is known, in many cases do not coincide with the goals and interests of the state.

Large non-state corporations are certainly involved in the creation of new knowledge. But this process is strictly limited by their desire to ensure the competitiveness of their products. Moreover, corporations are very reluctant to take risks when funding scientific research. And if there is a monopoly position in the market, sometimes they even freeze the process of acquiring new knowledge.

- What could be the way out of this situation?

I believe that in our situation, the innovation process must be made mandatory for everyone, and especially for large corporations. To do this, in particular, it is worth returning to the practice of deducting 2% of profits to the Technological Development Fund. In this way, it is possible to create the conditions for the transition of the economy to the sixth technological structure. But we must not lose sight of the fact that there are a number of important tasks in the field of science and technology, the solution of which is the direct responsibility of the state. Simply by definition it falls within the scope of his responsibility. This means that the state must have its own scientific institutions capable of providing solutions to these main national tasks of innovative development. And, of course, the public sector of science should be the “main driving force” in the implementation of the innovation strategy.

Many circumstances speak in favor of this proposal. And first of all, more than 70% of the country’s scientific and technical potential is state-owned. Accordingly, the public sector of science is the main source of domestic innovation. Finally, only the public sector can act as a guarantor of the interests of the state aimed at ensuring security and solving the most important socio-economic problems.

Over the past twenty years, we have heard many times statements about the low efficiency of the public sector of the economy in comparison with the private sector. Frankly, it is quite difficult to dispute these statements. Won't the same shortcomings appear when the state organizes the scientific process?

The effectiveness of the public sector of science primarily depends on the presence of a systematic regulatory and legal framework. Unfortunately, in our country such a base is practically absent. Even the very concept of “public sector of science” is not clearly formulated, which does not allow fully revealing its functional purpose as a system that ensures the fulfillment of government tasks.

Gaps in the regulatory framework interfere with the normal interaction of academic, industry and university science. Problems are laid, as they say, already at the start. I have spoken about this more than once, including on the pages of your magazine. In 2005, the section “Basic research and promotion of scientific and technological progress” was eliminated in the structure of the federal budget. As a result, fundamental research today is financed under the “National Issues” section. And applied ones - under the section “National Economy”. Thus, there is a situation where the connection between fundamental and applied research is broken already at the stage of creating financial plans.

To this it must be added that the Ministry of Education and Science, together with the Russian Academy of Sciences, is developing proposals only regarding the budget for fundamental research. The program part of investments in science (concerning applied research under state programs) is formed by the Ministry of Economic Development, the non-program part by the Ministry of Finance, which in turn destroys the principle of a single technological chain.

It probably makes sense to return to the previous practice. And indicate in the budget expenditures on science in a single line “Science and Innovation” with subsections “Basic Research” and “Applied Research and Innovation”. And of course, you need to be very careful in selecting those who are assigned to do the work.

Look, over the past decades we have turned into a “state of intermediaries.” Numerous firms and firms, by hook or by crook, get into the chain on the way from producer to consumer with the sole purpose of taking a bite of their piece of the financial pie. The mold of mediation has even penetrated science. Organizations have appeared in it that, without having either personnel or the necessary equipment, manage to receive orders (and money!) to conduct research and development. And only part of this money is spent on attracting scientists and specialists from real research institutes, the results of whose work the intermediary company passes off as its own.

This became possible, in particular, due to the abolition of state accreditation of scientific organizations. And, consequently, the criteria for classifying organizations as scientific. Moreover, the very concept of “scientific organization” has lost its legal content, and executive authorities that carry out state regulation in the scientific and innovation sphere are an effective tool for monitoring them.

All these and similar numerous examples speak of the need for a structural restructuring of our innovation sphere, a radical modernization of its management, financing, and organization of work. A fundamental step on this path, in my opinion, could be the creation of a science and technology department under the President of the Russian Federation.

- And what tasks will this organization have to solve?

The main task should be the management of scientific and technological policy to ensure Russia's entry into the sixth technological order. To do this, management should be given the appropriate powers to formulate the basic principles of scientific and technological policy of the Russian Federation; development of a unified program of fundamental and fundamentally oriented applied research and development aimed at solving the problems of modernization of the Russian economy, linked to personnel training; coordination and control over the implementation of the program and the distribution of financial resources based on the assessment of research and scientific work of organizations. The department should also issue recommendations on the acquisition of unique technologies and equipment abroad.

Understand, we can’t catch up. We need to make a sharp breakthrough and, taking advantage of our own developments and the achievements of our Western and Eastern colleagues, reach a new level. Information has now become very accessible, and this makes it possible to make such a leap.

Within the framework of the Department of Science and Technology, it is also advisable to create a working group to prepare proposals for the legal regulation of the public sector of science, the legislative definition of its composition, structure, forms and mechanisms of state support, and the creation of a state register of scientific organizations.

From this list it is clear how important the personal composition of the proposed management and the mechanism for making decisions are. Without going into details, I will refer to foreign experience.

Speaking at the National Academy of Sciences, US President Barack Obama put forward a number of theses designed to ensure US leadership. In his opinion, the key to successful development is freedom and independence, including scientific research. Obama expressed confidence in the need to provide the scientific community with the opportunity to "directly intervene in public policy." And this thesis was confirmed in practice: the Advisory Council on Science and Technology under the President was expanded this year. By the way, it was not an “effective manager” who was appointed Secretary of Energy in the Obama administration, but a scientist, 1997 Nobel Prize winner in physics Steven Chu.

In the United States, the role of the innovation center is played by the National Science Foundation, which is under the authority of the Office of Science and Technology under the President of the United States, in France - the National Center for Scientific Research of the Interministerial Committee for Scientific and Technological Research under the President of the French Republic.

An important link in the proposed new innovation system in Russia, in my opinion, should be research and technological development centers created on the basis of the Russian Academy of Sciences and state scientific centers (SSC) with the involvement of leading universities capable of providing scientific, methodological and educational activities.

These research and technological development centers should be organized not only in the five priority areas of technological breakthrough identified by the president, but also in such an important area as materials science and materials production. After all, it is materials that are the base, the foundation on which all scientific and technical achievements are built.

The innovation process is a kind of continuous conveyor belt for generating new knowledge and using it for the production of high-tech products, including fundamental, exploratory and applied research, technology development, creation and industrial production of high-tech products. Including with the involvement of venture capital and on the basis of public-private partnership.

Modern science is a single organism with a well-established mechanism of connections both between scientific organizations and between scientific schools and individual scientists. The time has passed not only for individual scientists, but also for individual scientific institutions isolated from the world scientific process. What can be said about Russian science in this context?

Unfortunately, over the past twenty years, for well-known reasons, connections between government scientific organizations of different sectors (academic, university, industry) have weakened greatly. The same can be said about the links between research and production structures. This not only “impoverishes” each of the parties, but also significantly impedes the implementation of innovative developments. Meanwhile, in domestic practice, including in recent years, there are examples of effective cooperation between academic, industry and university organizations, which has led to the creation, in particular, of new materials and technologies. This form of cooperation must grow and deepen. The joint participation of representatives of different scientific organizations in common projects for a specific target task is also promising. It is only important to correctly determine the parent organization of the project.

For the Academy of Sciences, the importance of interaction with industry institutes is that they are involved in solving problems with a pronounced innovative focus, with good engineering work provided by industry experts. Industry organizations have access to deep fundamental research from academic institutions.

Interaction can be implemented on a long-term basis within structures that unite representatives of academic, industry, industrial organizations, and businesses operating in certain segments of production and the market. Within the proposed research and technological development centers, SSCs are expected to play an extremely important role.

The role of the State Research Center is extremely important for the success of research and technological development. Created with the goal of preserving world-class leading scientific schools, developing the country's scientific potential in the field of fundamental and applied research and training highly qualified scientific personnel, they remain one of the most important components of the public science sector.

State Scientific Centers have a unique research, production and testing base, and we can safely say that now they best meet the requirements of innovative development. In collaboration with organizations of the Russian Academy of Sciences and other state academies, leading universities and major industry scientific organizations, the State Scientific Center creates and implements a serious scientific and technological foundation in priority areas of development of science, technology and engineering. This is achieved on the basis of a clear and understandable planning system and mutual coordination of a complex of fundamental, exploratory and applied research and development.

The most important feature of the State Research Center is the interdepartmental nature of the research and development they conduct, which meets the needs of many sectors of the military-industrial complex and the civilian sector of the economy.

Success on the innovation path depends not only on the organization and financing of research, but also on who conducts this research. Over the past twenty years, the most qualified scientists have been leaving Russia en masse, and the level of training of new scientific personnel has been steadily declining.

Of course, even the most generous funding and favorable working conditions will not bring the desired results if there are no people capable of putting forward “crazy” ideas, defending them against all authorities, and sitting all night long in laboratories and on test benches. Therefore, the issue of training and retraining of personnel is among the most important. Without its solution, it is pointless to talk about innovative development.

By the way, the experience of the past Winter Olympics showed that it is not only money that decides the success of a business. The people who are involved in this matter are much more important. They need to create conditions for work and creativity. You can’t do this without money, but without cultivating interest, passion, and curiosity, ultimately, nothing at all will come of it. And no amount of money will help!

In the United States, the current presidential administration, taking measures to improve the level of secondary education, gives priority to mathematics and natural sciences. An additional $5 billion is being allocated this year to improve education programs in these subjects and encourage better teacher training. In Russian schools, as a result of the reform of secondary education, the number of hours of teaching natural sciences in high school has been reduced in favor of the humanities, which has already affected the training of students.

Moreover, the word “engineer” is being deliberately washed out of our vocabulary, and technical universities are training specialists, not engineers. This has also already been said and written many times.

Of course, the method of work of technical universities in engineering education that was established in previous years should be restored. A two-tier system may be appropriate for humanities majors. Perhaps a bachelor's degree can make a good economist or lawyer. But an engineer, researcher, scientist cannot be made from a student who does not have practical skills. And this is a great danger for the country.

Of course, many of the current personnel problems will disappear on their own when society develops a respectful attitude towards the work of a scientist, engineer, and specialist. However, for now it is necessary to keep under constant control the issues of training scientific and technical personnel, to create conditions for the emergence of internationally renowned scientists who have achieved serious scientific results.

Foreign analysts - students and followers of N.D. Kondratiev - agree that the world economy today is experiencing the completion of another “Kondratiev” cycle. It will be remembered as a time not only of great economic upheaval, but also of dramatic social and political change. Moreover, it gave rise to a redistribution of power and influence between regions, groups of countries and individual states.

Taking these circumstances into account, Russia’s entry into the sixth technological structure is not an end in itself, but a matter of survival, economic development, ensuring the security and international status of the country, and achieving a high level of well-being for our people. This, in fact, is what the transformations proposed above are aimed at. If we do not take into account the desire of some officials to maintain the appearance of their importance, there are no real obstacles to their implementation. All that is needed is political will and, of course, time.

CYCLES AND KONDRATIEV WAVES

According to Kondratiev's theory, the scientific and technological revolution develops in waves, with cycles lasting approximately 50 years. To date, five technological structures (waves) are known.

First wave (1785-1835) formed a technological structure based on new technologies in the textile industry and the use of water energy.

Second wave (1830-1890)- accelerated development of railway and water transport based on steam engines, widespread introduction of steam engines into industrial production.

Third wave (1880-1940)- use of electrical energy in industrial production, development of heavy mechanical engineering and electrical industry based on the use of rolled steel, new discoveries in the field of chemistry. The spread of radio communications, telegraph, the development of the automobile industry. Formation of large firms, cartels, syndicates and trusts. The dominance of monopolies in markets. The beginning of the concentration of banking and financial capital.

Fourth wave (1930-1990)- the formation of a world order based on the further development of energy using oil and petroleum products, gas, communications, and new synthetic materials. The period of mass production of cars, tractors, airplanes, various types of weapons, and consumer goods. Widespread distribution of computers and software products. Use of atomic energy for military and peaceful purposes. Conveyor technologies are becoming the basis for mass production. The formation of transnational and multinational companies that make direct investments in the markets of various countries.

Fifth wave (1985-2035) relies on achievements in the field of microelectronics, computer science, biotechnology, genetic engineering, the use of new types of energy, materials, space exploration, satellite communications, etc. There is a transition from disparate firms to a single network of large and small companies, connected by an electronic network based on the Internet, carrying out close interaction in the field of technology, product quality control, and innovation planning.

It is assumed that with the acceleration of scientific and technological progress, the period between changes in technological structures will be reduced.