Developing a Typology of Regions Based on Their Predisposition to Scientific and Technological Development

Aim. The presented study aims to describe the proposed typology of regions based on their  predisposition to scientific and technological development in the context of hereditary industrial, social, and institutional determinants of economic territorial development.  

Tasks. The authors develop a methodological approach to forming a basic criterion for the classification of regions; develop a methodology for the classification of regions based on their  predisposition to scientific and technological development with allowance for the economic  impact of their hereditary core; test the authors’ developments on the regions of the Russian  Federation.  

Methods. This study uses tools for modeling the hereditary socio-economic core of regions based  on the calculation of Frobenius norms to identify the prevailing dynamic trends in territorial  development, and a matrix method for developing a regional typology. The methodology applied  by the authors focuses on identifying territories that are more susceptible to technological  transformations, including those that ensure the significant impact of these transformations  on the national economy.  

Results. The study tests the authors’ developments on Russian regions and provides two  typologies. The first typology groups regions according to criteria such as stable positive  predisposition, permissible positive predisposition, negative predisposition, and stable negative predisposition to scientific and technological development. The second typology identifies regions with hereditary capital, regions with useful heredity, regions with defective  useful heredity, regions with the effect of a large hereditary base, regions with defective  heredity, and regions with significant defective heredity. The developed typologies make it  possible to identify regions that serve as the opposite poles of scientific and technological  transformations as well as high-risk regions with unjustified investment in innovative economic activities.  

Conclusions. Industrially developed regions are more predisposed to scientifific and technological  development, and expansion of innovations will be implemented faster in these regions compared  with others. The Sverdlovsk and Tyumen regions have an elastic industrial heritage, which is  manifested in the successful implementation of a wide range of innovative tasks. Comparative  analysis also shows that the Ural Federal District has the most favorable industrial, social, and  institutional hereditary determinants responsible for the susceptibility of the territory to technological transformations compared with other regions, which makes it a potential center for  the scientific and technological development of the national economy.  

1. Lukyanchenko N.D., Ibragimkhalilova T.V. Typology as a method of researching the social and economic development of territories: Marketing aspect. Vestnik Instituta ekonomicheskikh issledovanii = Vestnik of Institute of Economic Research. 2018;(2):48-55. (In Russ.).

2. Animitsa E.G., Glumov A.A. Middle region: Theory, methodology, analysis. Yekaterinburg: Ural State Economic University; 2007. 296 p. (In Russ.).

3. Animitsa P.E., Novikova N.V., Khodus V.V. Typology as a method for studying the socioeconomic development of regions. Izvestiya Ural’skogo gosudarstvennogo ekonomicheskogo universiteta = Journal of the Ural State University of Economics. 2009;(1):52-59. (In Russ.).

4. Logacheva N.M. Positioning and typology of Russian regions in terms of infrastructure development in the field of healthcare and education. Vestnik Ural’skogo instituta ekonomiki, upravleniya i prava. 2012;(1):52-58. (In Russ.).

5. Reshiev S.S. The role of the typological approach when choosing a strategy for the development of a macroregion (on the example of the Southern Federal District). Regional’naya ekonomika: teoriya i praktika = Regional Economics: Theory and Practice. 2010;(4):15-27. (In Russ.).

6. Grinchel B.M., Nazarova E.A. Typology of regions by level and dynamics of the quality of life. Ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye peremeny: fakty, tendentsii, prognoz = Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast. 2015;(3):111-125. DOI: 10.15838/esc/2015.3.39.9

7. Asaul A.N., Balakina G.F., Soyan M.K. Contemporary paradigms of the regional economy. Problemy sovremennoi ekonomiki = Problems of Modern Economics. 2013;(4):257-260. (In Russ.).

8. Rusinova O.S., Rusinov A.G. Theoretical and methodological approaches to the typology of regions. Vestnik Instituta druzhby narodov Kavkaza (Teoriya ekonomiki i upravleniya narodnym khozyaistvom). Ekonomicheskie nauki = Bulletin of Peoples’ Friendship Institute of the Caucasus. The Economy Theory and National Economy Management. Economic Sciences. 2016;(4):95-104. (In Russ.).

9. Gritsai O.V., Ioffe G.A., Treivish A.I. Center and periphery in regional development. Moscow: Nauka; 1991. 168 p. (In Russ.).

10. Krehl A., Siedentop S. Towards a typology of urban centers and subcenters – evidence from German city regions. Urban Geography. 2019;40(1):58-82. DOI: 10.1080/02723638.2018.1500245

11. Baum S. A typology of socio-economic advantage and disadvantage in Australia’s large nonmetropolitan cities, towns and regions. Australian Geographer. 2006;37(2):233-258. DOI: 10.1080/00049180600672367

12. Animitsa P.E., Novikova N.V., Khodus V.V. Typology as a method for studying the socioeconomic development of regions. Izvestiya Ural’skogo gosudarstvennogo ekonomicheskogo universiteta = Journal of the Ural State University of Economics. 2009;(1):52-59. (In Russ.).

13. Kozlovskaya O.V. Typology of regions for the purposes of strategic development. Rossiiskii ekonomicheskii internet-zhurnal = Russian Economic Online Journal. 2006;(6):125. URL: https://readera.org/tipologija-regionov-dlja-celej-strategicheskogo-razvitija-142109059 (accessed on 14.09.2021). (In Russ.).

14. Sepik D. Competitiveness of regions: Some aspects. Moscow: Russian-European Center for Economic Policy; 2005. 42 p. (In Russ.).

15. Viana A.L.D., Bousquat A., Ferreira M.P., Uchimura L. Typology of health regions: structural determinants of regionalization in Brazil. Saude e Sociedade. 2015;24(2):413-422. DOI: 10.1590/S0104-12902015000200002

16. Fedorov G., Korneevets V. Socioeconomic typology of Russia’s coastal regions. Baltiiskii region = Baltic Region. 2015;(4):121-134. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.5922/2074-9848-2015-4-7

17. Violin S.I. Typology of regions and corresponding implementation of diversified regional policy. Regional’naya ekonomika i upravlenie: elektronnyi nauchnyi zhurnal = Regional Economics and Management: Electronic Scientific Journal. 2018;(2):6. URL: https://eeeregion.ru/article/5406 (accessed on 14.09.2021). (In Russ.).

18. Krivko S.R. Types of problem regions of the Russian Federation and preconditions of their existence. Teoriya i praktika obshchestvennogo razvitiya = Theory and Practice of Social Development. 2012;(11):317-322. (In Russ.).

19. Lukin E.V., Uskova T.V. Interregional economic cooperation: State, problems, prospects. Vologda: Institute of Socio-Economic Development of Territories of RAS; 2016. 148 p. (In Russ.).