УДК 33.336

ЦИФРОВАЯ ЭКОНОМИКА РОССИИ В КОНТЕКСТЕ НОВОЙ ТЕХНОНАУЧНОЙ ПАРАДИГМЫ

Буряк Виктор Владимирович
Крымский федеральный университет имени В. И. Вернадского
кандидат философских наук, доцент кафедры ФЕНП философского факультета

Аннотация
В статье рассматривается проблематика, непосредственно относящаяся к такой актуальной теме, как успешная реализация комплексной программы по ускорению развития российской экономики. В контексте формирования новой технонаучной парадигмы как непременного условия осуществления стратегий шестого технонаучного уклада рефлексия относительно эффективного использования наличных институциональных и организационных ресурсов России является стратегически важным делом. Интегрированная совокупность высоких технологий (NBIC) во многом будет определять темпы, продуктивность, экономические, коммуникативные и иные параметры деятельности трудящихся в турбулентных условиях информационного общества. Наряду с эффективными управленческими решениями, высокотехнологичные драйвера (NBIC, эмерджентные технологии), с высокой степенью вероятности, послужат основанием для осуществления важнейших социально-экономических проектов. Широкое внедрение новейших технологий неизбежно обострит комплексные социально-экономические противоречия. Для того чтобы минимизировать возможность социальных конфликтов, необходимо эту проблематику разместить в фокусе междисциплинарных исследований.

Ключевые слова: информационное общество, искусственный интеллект (ИИ), междисциплинарные исследования, перспективы цифровой экономики в России, технонаучная парадигма, цифровая экономика, шестой технологический уклад


DIGITAL ECONOMY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE TECHNO-SCIENTIFIC PARADIGM OF RUSSIA

Buryak Viktor Vladimirovich
V.I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University
Simferopol, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Natural Science Philosophy, Faculty of Philosophy, Taurida Academy

Abstract
The paper reviews the problems directly related to such an urgent topic as the effective implementation of a complex program aimed at accelerating the development of the Russian economy. The reflection on the effective use of available institutional and organizational resources in Russia becomes a strategically important matter in the context of developing a novel techno-scientific approach as an indispensable condition for the implementation of strategies belonging to the sixth technological paradigm. The integrated complex of high technologies (NBIC, sixth technological paradigm) will largely determine the pace, productivity, economic, communicative and other parameters of workers' activity in the turbulent conditions of the information society. Together with effective management solutions, the high-tech drivers (NBIC, emergent technologies) are very likely to serve as the basis for the implementation of critical socio-economic projects. Broad introduction of novel technologies is going to inevitably exacerbate the multi-level socio-economic contradictions. In order to minimize chances for social conflicts, it seems necessary to place the subject within the focus of interdisciplinary research.

Keywords: digital economy, information society, interdisciplinary research, NBIC, technological paradigm


Рубрика: Экономика

Библиографическая ссылка на статью:
Буряк В.В. Digital Economy in the Context of the Techno-Scientific Paradigm of Russia // Гуманитарные научные исследования. 2018. № 10 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://human.snauka.ru/2018/10/25264 (дата обращения: 18.11.2018).

Introduction

The exponential growth of the world and Russian economy largely depends on the characteristics of scientific and technological progress on a global scale. Prospective short-term, medium-term and especially long-term socio-economic prognoses must be substantiated in the form of realistic plans. The agenda adopted by the Russian president for the accelerated development of the domestic economy largely depends on the successful and timely formation of a new technological paradigm. Our state’s economy itself, and even more so regional socio-economic problems cannot be seen as exclusive and autonomous by their nature. They should be considered and addressed in the context of the new political, economic, technological, social and organizational challenges. In other words, the new entrepreneurial ideology must contain a clear techno-scientific articulation. Any modern ideology is closely linked to the notion of the real importance attributed to the “novel technological paradigm”. Hence, what is a “paradigm”, and even more so the “novel technological paradigm”? The term “paradigm”, widely used today, derives from the Greek word παράδειγμα, that is, “model, pattern”. The development of the Russian economy is largely dependent on the successful and timely formation of a new technoscientific paradigm. The economy of the modern state, according to the terminology by the historian of science Thomas Kuhn used as a methodological tool, fits well into the paradigm of a globalized post-capitalist development. The iconic book by the American scientist “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” was first published in 1962 [18].Any paradigm is seen as a set of cognitive procedures recognized by the academic community[17]. This includes scientific advances and technological innovations that, over a historically defined time period, provide scientists with a set of sustainable, logically based procedures used in efficient constituting of relevant problems. Specific interdisciplinary interest can be manifested in such an expression as a “new technological paradigm”, since the former has outlived itself as a result of the radical intensification of international competition (economic, technological and political). In our opinion, the “new technological paradigm” can be defined as a complex of relevant institutional, organizational, communicational fixed tools used for the effective production of scientific and technological knowledge. Goods and services produced in an innovative economy are much more likely to be promoted and sold on world markets.

Prospects for the digital economy in Russia

Successful transition to the economic format of the “digital economy” depends not only on purely technological factors, but also on the availability of a relevant legislative framework, highly effective management institutions, and a rationally organized development strategy. In the modern information society, the impact of information technologies on the economic activity of the population is getting constantly increased. This also applies to productive business activities in our country [2]. Russia as a whole and its separate regions must develop based on their economic potential. For example, V.I. Suprun proposed the concept of development of Siberia as a unique mega-region. Such an understanding of the socio-economic development plays an important role especially in geopolitics, though one must also take into consideration the resource, industrial, scientific and educational levels [12]. In attempts to clarify the complex problematics of formation of a stable trend in the digital economy, some Russian scientists (for example, S. Yu. Glazyev) rely on the hypothesis of the so-called “sixth technological paradigm” [4]; [1]. In our opinion, the historical process is however not determined, and it is necessary to consider other, alternative scenarios for the development of technogenic civilization [16; 22; 19;20]. In the information society should be allocated socio-cultural, economic, technological, educational, medical and biological, and other segments. As a definitely dynamic, complex phenomenon, the digital economy can become the most significant driver of transformation for a globalized society[25].

An undisputable fact is that financial transactions, investments, production processes in the sphere of modern economy are determined by the degree of development of advanced technologies, the digital ones in particular. A successfully developing modern economy should be viewed as a complex ensemble of business projects, each of which, and all of them together, are getting integrated on the basis of digital and high-performance management platforms [24]. In the digital era, economic activity objectively takes place within a turbulent historical interval, which can be defined as a unique transition period which is called “the sixth technological order”, or “the fourth industrial revolution” [23]. The fourth industrial revolution (according to V.I. Suprun’s terminology – “the new industrial revolution”) is a phenomenon occurring in recent decades that has drawn the focus of attention of such analysts as P. Marsh, J. Rifkin, K. Anderson, K. Schwab and others [13]. The authors sharing this conceptual stance do not represent some specialized academic discipline (e.g. economics, sociology, or engineering), but rather continue the tradition of an integrated approach to understanding the dynamics of society of the ’60s of the 20th century (D. Bell, A. Toffler and others). This approach can be called complex, or interdisciplinary, when facts from different areas of human activity are analyzed [3].

The sixth technological paradigm: a scientific hypothesis, or a political resource-based project?

The implementation of the large-scale “digital economy” project in Russia largely depends on the effective solution of multitasking problems associated with the speed of development of information technologies and the subsequent construction of an appropriate legislative field. Given that the legislative activity belongs to the legal sphere of the state, it should be noted that information technologies are themselves complementary and interdependent in their relationship with other technologies. All these and other advanced technologies are often seen as belonging to the “emergent technologies”, being also abbreviated as NBIC (an acronym for Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information technology and Cognitive science). In Russian science, on the initiative of S.Yu. Glazyev, an interdisciplinary reflection on the role of advanced technologies in a progressive economic growth is considered within the context of “the sixth technological paradigm” hypothesis. In our opinion, the concept of digital economy in Russia does not yet have a clear conceptual justification. The sixth technological paradigm, emergent technologies (Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information technology и Cognitive science) and their convergence seem to be a purely terminological instrumental part of the complex economic plan. By itself, the “technological breakthrough” cannot be implemented as a stand-alone development option in Russia, but rather as a strategically important factor of epochal transformation. To further clarify the topic, it is necessary to minimize and, in its essence, redefine the parameters of the terminological discussion as to what “in fact” is a powerful technological driver of the modern economy. Is it about development of emergent technologies, nominated with an established abbreviation NBIC, or rather a procedural-operational option of the sixth technological paradigm? Naturally, any extreme terminological certainty is fraught with the establishment of a universal unified technological vector. In our opinion, information technology should be seen as a connecting link for the processes of integration of high technologies.

If we minimize the narrowness of purely technocratic thinking, it turns out that the modern digital era is a complex phenomenon that includes such aspects as legal activity, public administration, management, economic and technological development, education system, transport, medicine, etc. Hence, it is fair to say that the digital economy program finds itself in a unique historical period of bifurcation. This is a strategically important stage, which can also be referred to as a transition to the sixth technological paradigm. It is this historical interval that will largely determine the realization of socio-economic megatrends on a global scale. The concept of the “sixth technological order” was first introduced by the Russian economist Nikolay Kondratyev. He described the organization logic of the historically deterministic process of cyclical economic activity [10]. This methodological approach was further elaborated in the theoretical works by D.S. Lvov [11], V.M. Averbukh [1] and S. Yu. Glazyev [4; 5; 7; 8]. The notion of the “sixth technological paradigm” reflects theoretical concepts of the key mechanisms of providing the successful development of a single country / economy under conditions of dynamic trends of development of the modern world economy [6]. The phrase “technological paradigm” also refers to the total set of advanced technologies, taking place within a historically determined time period and significantly increasing productivity. Permanent technical, scientific and technological progress objectively contributes to the transformation of society and the revolutionary transition from one production relationship to another, being more productive [1]. At present, according to S.Yu. Glazyev, the world economy grows mainly under the influence factor of the sixth technological paradigm [9]. In his opinion, the economy of modern Russia can be characterized as being in a specific economic state that meets to the qualitative parameters of the third, fourth and fifth technological paradigms. In opinion of V.M. Averbukh, heavy engineering, electrical engineering and chemical industry had developed on the basis of the third technological order. Within the same time period there had been invented the telegraph, telephone and radio. Somewhat later, there emerged such an economic phenomenon as the concentration of capital, and took place the “organizational revolution” (there appeared cartels, syndicates, trusts, corporations, etc.). The dominance of the economic and political spheres first manifested at the local, and later on at the global level [1]. To accelerate financial and economic transactions on the global scale, there is implemented the digitalization of relevant information. Nowadays, based on the information technologies, there develop not only the effective communicative and economic activities, but also the system of higher education and scientific research.

The phenomenon of digital economy in the focus of academic discussions

Not only domestic historians and economists attempt to interpret the historical logic of development of the capitalist and, in particular, post-capitalist civilization. The theorists of the digital economy phenomenon writing for the English-speaking segment of the modern science recruit specific terms to describe the high-tech processes occurring in the global economy. To provide effective academic communication on the “digital economy” subject, it is necessary to minimize an often occurring epistemological impediment which, in the terminology of Francis Bacon, is expressed by the metaphor “idols of the market”. In the theory of knowledge, researchers have long noted the counterproductive “dispute about words”, which is often hidden behind the procedure named the “clarification of concepts.” Sometimes when translating from one language to another, the meaning of certain terms can be occasionally distorted, which may in turn generate lengthy pseudoscientific discussions. The mentioned earlier terminological phrase used by some Russian economists and translated here as “the sixth technological paradigm” can also be translated into English in several ways: the sixth technological setup, structure, order, or the sixth techno scientific way of life, other options are also possible. To avoid a purely scholastic discussion about “right” terms, it seems appropriate to first determine the semantic content of the English-language alternative variants. It seems very unrealistic to expect in the nearest future (and, in particular, today, in the age of super-speeds), that English-speaking researchers might on their own reach the point of adopting our domestic terminology and start using such a term as “the sixth technological paradigm”. As a terminological equivalent for the “sixth technological paradigm” one can use such a term as “the fourth industrial revolution” pertaining not exclusively to technical and production activities, but rather to the epochal, paradigmatic shift in living of the modern mankind. This type of “integral approach” to understanding the epochal shift is presented in the works by Jens Christensen. Considerable increase in the internet related options aimed at a user, emergence of social media, high-speed mobile communications, cloud services for storing large amounts of information, technologies of rapid retrieval of strategically important information (big data), Internet of things (IoT) and other information resources provide a favorable background for the start of the fourth industrial revolution. The most novel technologies such as 3D printing, sharing economy, gamification of economic activity and other innovations greatly accelerate the high-performance economic activities [14]. According to Christensen, the modern economy can be generally described as a set of business structures interconnected on the basis of specialized programs, including information systems. He argues that the business activities in the era of dominance of digital technologies is a complex globalized process. A clear understanding of trend dynamics, including economic ones, is facilitated by effective business analytics. J. Christensen demonstrates that already in the early 2020s high technologies and new trends in management (first of all, highly efficient logistics) are going to form to a great extent separate branches of industrial production, transport, communications and services. For this reason, it can be stated that the fourth industrial revolution has already begun. At the same time, he believes that these trends are not autonomous, but rather interdependent and mutually complementary, and therefore they must be viewed as a complex phenomenon on a planetary scale [14]. Global leadership (technological, socio-economic and political) in the digital age can be provided not only by political will and the ideology of progressive development, but also high (emergent) technologies and original organizational solutions. Along with other promising technologies, the importance of information technology (IT) is constantly growing. Besides, information technology allows more efficient use of existing business resources (investments and professional staff). According to Dylhe Dyche, the successful implementation of a new business model within the framework of activities conducted by competitive corporations in compliance with the digital economy requirements is impossible without the use of the newest IT [15]. This is clearly understood by politicians, economists, experts and scientists. Depending on the level of development of the productive forces and production relations inherent in one country or another, it is obvious that even the “most fitting” theory must be backed up bycertain practical actions. In his book “Digital Strategy: A Guide to Transforming the Digital Business” (2016), Alexander Rauser provides the analysis of a set of practical solutions for those businessmen who strive to achieve high results in today’s high-tech business environment [21]. He believes that entrepreneurs who want to be successful in the digital age must accelerate the introduction of technological and organizational innovations. When implementing their business acitvities, they by default are always prepared to the phenomenon of digital disruption. Nowadays, the widespread term disruption should be understood as a “break in the pattern”, “a cognitive break with previous stereotypes.” Those who aspire to succeed in the modern globalized business will inevitably use high-performance digital technologies. In addition to applied digital technologies, it is also critical to have a promising “digital strategy”. Otherwise, the entrepreneur multiplies risks, and may then turn to appear (in the short, medium, and even more so in the long term) much less efficient than his competitors. In today’s business, there are widely used the logistics tools based on analytical technology called big data (a set of methods for accelerated processing of giant volumes of unstructured or structured information of specific nature). According to A. Rauser, the lack of rational understanding of digital strategy creates true risks of non-targeted spending of various strategic resources (time, investment and human resources). Consistent policy of planning, creation, introduction, and implementation of digital strategy (in corporations, globally-oriented high-tech companies) ensures the effective implementation of needed innovations and a successful risk management. Without such the steps, the implementation of digital strategy is not impossible at all [21]. The notion of ​​ digital economy in Russia so far is in the space of political rhetoric and lacks conceptual clarity. The sixth technological / economic paradigm (emergent technologies and their convergence) appears to be only an instrumental option of a cumulative social and economic success. “Technological breakthrough” cannot be in itself an autonomous factor of the complex transformation of Russia, but rather a strategically important vector of epochal changes. Developers of the program of the digital economy in Russia, apparently, are hoping for the integration of available resources on the principle of “first you need to get involved in the fight, but there it will be seen.” For the time being this is an ambitious project, rather than a “project”. Without having an integral, realistic picture of current trends in the dynamics of planetary economic processes, it is unlikely that large-scale projects in the digital economy segment of Russia will be implemented on time. The designers of the digital economy program in Russia are apparently hoping for the integration of available resources on the following principle: “simply get involved in the fight and watch the consequences”. For the time being this is an ambitious idealistic scheme, rather than a realistic project. Without having a coherent realistic picture that reflects the current trends in the dynamics of today’s planetary economic processes, it seems very unlikely to succeed in carrying out the large-scale projects within the segment of state development called “the digital economy of Russia.”

Conclusion. In clarifying the conceptual framework of the new technological paradigm currently defining the digital economic space, it is necessary to analytically elaborate the potential of appropriate technological and organizational innovations. However, the prospects for digital economy imply substantial investments as well into the legal framework, the areas of education and mass communications. The term “new techno scientific paradigm” might serve as one of the most relevant terminological expressions in the context of disputes about the conditions of implementation and the prospects for the digital economy. The program of the digital economy in Russia has already been manifested and relies on a distinct political background. However there is absent an appropriate strategy of the so called “digital economy”. To ensure the proper implementation of a relevant strategically important state program, it is necessary to integrate available high-tech resources on the basis of a new techno-scientific paradigm.

Поделиться в соц. сетях

0

References
  1. Авербух В. М. Шестой технологический уклад и перспективы России (краткий обзор) // Вестник Ставропольского государственного университета. Социологическиенауки, (2010). 71; С. 159-171. [Averbukh V.M. (2010) The sixth technological paradigm and perspectives of Russia (brief overview) // Vestnik Stavropolskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Sociological sciences, 71. - (2010). - P. 159-171]
  2. Буряк В.В. Цифровая экономика и новая технологическая парадигма / В сборнике: Цифровая экономика в профессиональном образовании // Материалы Международной научно-практической конференции. Под редакцией Н. В. Молотковой. 2017. С. 61-66. [Buryak V.V. (2017) Digital economy and new technological paradigm / In: The digital economy in vocational training // Materials of the International scientific-practical conference. Ed. byN. V. Molotkova. 2017. P. 61-66]
  3. Буряк В.В., Шостка В.И., Шостка Н.В. Тенденции развития современной науки. История и методология. Симферополь: Изд. ДИАЙПИ, 2016. [BuryakV.V. &ShostkaV.I. & ShostkaN.V. (2016) Developmenttrendsinthemodernscience. History and methodology. Simferopol: DIAIPI, 2016]
  4. Глазьев С. Ю. Выбор будущего. – М.: Алго- ритм, 2005. – 352 c. [Glazyev S.Yu. (2005) Choice of the future. – M.: Algo-ritm, 2005. – 352 p.]
  5. Глазьев С. Ю. Мировой экономический кризис как процесс смены технологических укладов / Вопросы экономики. 2009. № 3. с. 26-38. [Glazyev S.Yu. (2009) World economic crisis as a process of changing technological structures / / Voprosy ekonomiki. 2009. № 3. - pp. 26-38]
  6. Глазьев С. Ю. Новый технологический уклад в современной мировой экономике / Международная экономика. 2010. № 5. с. 5-27. [Glazyev S.Yu. (2010) New technological paradigm in the modern world economy // Mezhdunarodnaya ekonomika. 2010. № 5. pp. 5-27]
  7. Глазьев С. Ю. Стратегия опережающего развития и интеграции на основе шестого технологического уклада / Партнерство цивилизаций. 2013. № 1-2. с. 195. [Glazyev S.Yu. (2013) Strategy of advanced development and integration on the basis of the sixth technological paradigm // Partnerstvo tsivilizatsyi. 2013. № 1-2. p. 195]
  8. Глазьев С. Ю. Формирование новой институциональной системы в условиях смены доминирующих технологических укладов / Научные труды вольного экономического общества россии. 2015. т. 190. № 1. с. 37-45. [Glazyev S.Yu. (2015) Formation of a new institutional system under conditions of changing dominant technological structures // Nauchnye trudy volnogo ekonomicheskogo obschestva. 2015. V. 190. № 1. pp. 37-45]
  9. Глазьев С. Ю. Мирохозяйственные уклады в глобальном экономическом развитии / Экономика и математические методы. 2016. т. 52. № 2. с. 3-29. [Glazyev S.Yu. (2016) World economic structure in the global economic development // Ekonomika I matematicheskie metody. 2016. V. 52. № 2. pp. 3-29]
  10. Кондратьев Н. Д. Большие циклы конъюнктуры и теория предвидения / Сост. Ю. В. Яковец. – М.: Экономика, 2002. – 768 с. [KondratyevN.D. (2002) Bigcyclesofconjunctureandthetheoryofforesight / Comp. V.V. Yakovets. - Moscow: Ekonomika, 2002. - 768 p.]
  11. Львов Д. С. Эффективность управления техническим развитием. - М.: Экономика, 1990.- 255 с. [Lvov D.S. (1990) The efficacy of management in technical development. - Moscow: Ekonomika, 1990. - 255 p.]
  12. Супрун В.И. Мегарегион Сибирь в контексте новой индустриализации / Идеи и идеалы. 2017. Т. 1. № 1 (31). С. 107-117. [Suprun V.I. (2017a) Megaregion Siberia in the context of new industrialization // Idei i idealy. 2017. V. 1. № 1 (31). P. 107-117]
  13. Супрун В.И. Феномен новой индустриальной революции как объект междисциплинарных исследований / В сборнике: Социально-экономические проблемы современности: поиски междисциплинарных решений сборник научных трудов участников Международной конференции “XXIV Кондратьевские чтения”. Под редакцией В.М. Бондаренко. 2017. С. 333-335. [Suprun V.I. (2017b) The phenomenon of the new industrial revolution as an object of interdisciplinary research / Socio-economic problems of our time: the search for interdisciplinary solutions. Proceedings of the International Conference "XXIV Kondratiev Readings" / Edited by V.М. Bondarenko. 2017. P. 333-335]
  14. Christensen, Jens (2015) Digital Business. – Stoughton, WI: Books On Demand; 398 p.
  15. Dyche, Jill (2015) The New IT: How Technology Leaders are Enabling Business Strategy in the Digital Age (Business Books). – N. Y. C.: McGraw-Hill Education; 288 p.
  16. Frase, Peter (2016) Four Futures: Life After Capitalism. N.Y.: Verso; 160 p.
  17. Koch, Henrik H. (2018) A Short Introduction and Discussion – Thomas S. Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science, Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Progress and Anomaly. N.Y.: Koch Publishing; 50 p.
  18. Kuhn, Thomas S. (2012) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: 50th Anniversary Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 264 p.
  19. Kelly, Kevin (2017) The Inevitable: Understanding the 12 Technological Forces That Will Shape Our Future. – New York: Penguin Books; 336 p.
  20. Mason, Paul (2017) Postcapitalism: A Guide to Our Future. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 368 p.
  21. Rauser, Alexander (2016) Digital Strategy: A Guide to Digital Business Transformation. – Carouge, Switzerland: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform; 174 p.
  22. Schwab, Klaus (2015) The Fourth Industrial Revolution. New York: World Economic Forum; 185 p.
  23. Schwab, Klaus & Davis, Nicholas(2018) . Shaping the Fourth Industrial Revolution. New York: World Economic Forum; 287 p.
  24. Srnicek, Nick‎ & Williams, Alex (2016) Platform Capitalism (Theory Redux).United Kingdom, Cambridge: Polity; 120 p.
  25. Webster, Frank (Ed.) (2003). The Information Society Reader. United Kingdom, Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge; ‎464 p.


Количество просмотров публикации: Please wait

Все статьи автора «Буряк Виктор Владимирович»


© Если вы обнаружили нарушение авторских или смежных прав, пожалуйста, незамедлительно сообщите нам об этом по электронной почте или через форму обратной связи.

Связь с автором (комментарии/рецензии к статье)

Оставить комментарий

Вы должны авторизоваться, чтобы оставить комментарий.

Если Вы еще не зарегистрированы на сайте, то Вам необходимо зарегистрироваться:
  • Регистрация