Search

Revolutionary technological change in the publishing business and the expansion of information technology have given an impetus for scientific journals institution to evolve with the development of bibliographic databases that create new information products, indicators, and indices. The Russian scientific journals institution, which plays a significant role in the Russian innovation system, is developing in line with this trend. The article analyses the Russian innovation system actors’ narratives regarding the role of journals in the functioning of the system. The methodological basis of the study includes theories and approaches of narrative economics and original institutionalism that allow focusing on the use of qualitative research methods. Narratives reflect actors’ ideas of publication activity indicators getting increasingly used in management practices in the field of education and science. These indicators have received special significance within the framework of the managerialism doctrine, or new public management, in which publication activity indicators were associated with the effectiveness of scientific research. The role of journals and indices is considered from two points of view: at the individual level actors talk about personal success in publishing articles in top-rated journals; however, at the level of science and education the role of publication activity indicators is described using negative connotations; actors refer to the situations as problematic. Further development of the Russian scientific journals institution should contribute to the formation of new foundations and organizational structures which allow taking into account and intensifying the grassroots initiatives of scientists and innovators.

Effective public administration of the innovation system is a complex task that can be resolved through qualitative analysis of institutional arrangement, institutional environment and infrastructure. The article aims to identify relevant judgments about the rules, routines and institutions that are of key importance for the innovative development. The authors rely on the narrative analysis when dealing with the discourses of the innovation system’s actors (entrepreneurs, scholars, and public authorities). Methodologically, the study rests on original institutional economics and narrative economics. The targeted sample includes the narratives of actors from 43 ranking sources of mass media, magazines, and online resources provided by the Integrum electronic database. The ranking sources were selected using the Medialogia analytical system. The research timeframe covers the period from January 1, 2010 to July 1, 2021. We identified five “failures” of public administration, which had a negative impact on the functioning of the Russian innovation system: 1) path dependence in determining the priority areas of research and technological development; 2) the rise of “artificial competition” for administrative monopolies (financial and managerial resources); 3) overregulation of the market for innovations and excessive bureaucracy; 4) inconsistent and dispersed management model; 5) low speed of implementation of innovative projects. The research findings prove the necessity for alternative directions for the development of research and technologies in the context of the global innovation market.

The article studies the phenomenon of institutional traps resulting from modern reforms in public sector and higher education in Russia in the context of New Public Management. The research methodology embraces theoretical patterns and approaches of institutional economics. The research methods include interpretative, narrative and content analysis of opinions and expressions of actors retrieved from various mass media. The ideology of New Public Management is viewed as a result of neoliberal discourse which has become increasingly popular in the past few decades all over the world. Neoliberal reforms were first initiated in the United Kingdom and a number of other developed countries in the 1980s – 1990s in many sectors, including the public one. These institutional traps are sustainable forms of the lock-in effect in the context of path dependence theory. The authors focus on primarily two types of them – the metrics trap and the bureaucracy (administrative) trap – and analyse them theoretically and empirically. Within the framework of theoretical analysis, the traps’ relevance is due to social laws such as Campbell’s law and Graeber’s “iron law of liberalism”. These laws illustrate some negative fallout in social and economic activities focused on specific indicators in the public sector. Empirically, we explore these institutional traps using narrative analysis of mass-media reports, interviews and online discussions and citations. It characterizes the way in which the reforms implemented in higher education are perceived. The authors conclude that there is the interrelation between the problems in reforming higher education and the ideology of New Public Management, which causes the need for rethinking the strategy and ideology of modern reforms in higher education.