This is an article on the issues with implementing state innovational policy within the context of conflict between the main players in the sphere of innovation, represented by the fields of business, education and science. Special attention is paid to the conflict of interest occurring throughout the process of developing, producing and commercializing technological innovations. As for the theoretical-methodological basis for this study, it consists of clauses which consider innovational activity to be a complex phenomenon, it including relations and interests of various nature, as well as strategies for their implementation. Highlighted is the presence of hidden conservative strategies caused by inequality and instability in terms of how interest groups stand in relation to the government and government institutions. The empirical basis consists of results from 90 interviews with Russian experts (conducted in 2016-2018): this fact defines the relevance, novelty and experimental nature of the study. It is revealed that those parties which partake in innovational activity are inclined more towards collaborating with government institutions than with one another, which explains the dominant role of the state in growing and developing the innovational environment. The government’s main partners at this particular stage of implementing innovation policy are corporations: it is considered that they are the ones able to increase the economy’s and society’s receptiveness of innovations, to overcome the innovation sphere’s open state via combining scattered resources and incorporating more science into the production process. The results of specific innovation projects primarily depend on the degree of government involvement in the innovation process at any given stage, from financing a project to government contracts. It is revealed that lobbying technological innovations has a certain peculiarity to it, as in high levels of risk when it comes to development, transfer and commercial implementation. Therefore, value is gained by such aspects of lobbying activity as prediction, analysis and expert evaluation. Indicated is the fact that, in most cases, “shadow lobbying” compensates the poor quality of government management, by basically funding risks associated with executive decisions, not those associated with developing and producing technological innovations. Innovation activity also promotes the institutionalization of techno-lobbying, actualizing its expert-analytical and predictive functions.

innovation policy, innovative technologies, state, business, science, education, interest groups, technology.

Alexandrova E. A., Kuznetsova T. E., Rud' V. A. Osobennost' gosudarstvennoy podderzhki innovaciy [Feature of state support of innovation]. Innovacionnaya aktivnost' sub"ektov innovacionnogo processa: Bulletin, 2015, no 4, pp. 1–7 (in Russ.).

Alexandrova E. A., Kuznetsova T. E., Rud' V. A. Kooperaciya rossiyskih predpriyatiy i nauchnykh organizaciy [Cooperation of Russian enterprises and scientific organizations]. Innovacionnaya aktivnost' sub"ektov innovacionnogo processa: Bulletin, 2014, no 2, pp. 1–4 (in Russ.).

Biznes i vlast' v sovremennoy Rossii: teoriya i praktika vzaimodejstviy [Business and power in modern Russia: theory and practice of interaction]. Ed. by P. A. Tolstykh. Moscow, RAPA publ., 2010. 286 p. (in Russ.).

Dezhina I., Ponomariov A. Perspektivnye proizvodstvennye tekhnologii: novye akcenty v razvitii promyshlennosti [Perspective production technologies: new accents in the development of industry]. Forsite, 2014, no 8 (2), pp. 16–29 (in Russ.).

Dynkin A. A., Sokolov A. A. Integrirovannye biznes-gruppy v Rossiyskoy economike [Integrated business groups in the Russian economy]. Voprosy economiki, 2002, no 4, pp. 78–95 (in Russ.).

Edelman L. B. Overlapping fields and Constructed Legalities: The Endogeneity of Law. Private Equity, Corporate Governance and the Dynamics of Capital Market Regulation. London, Imperial College Press, 2007, pp. 55–90.

Edquist C. Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations. London, Routledge, 1993. 408 p.

Indikatory innovacionnoy deyatel'nosti [Indicators of innovation]. Ed. by N. V. Gorodnikova, L. M. Gohberg et al. Moscow, NRU HSE publ., 2016. 320 p. (in Russ.).

Indikatory innovacionnoy deyatel'nosti [Indicators of innovation]. Ed. by N. V. Gorodnikova, L. M. Gohberg et al. Moscow, NRU HSE publ., 2018. 344 p. (in Russ.).

Juma C. Innovation and Its Enemies: Why People Resist New Technologies. Oxford, Oxford University press, 2016. 432 p.

Kak probudit' spiashchikh gigantov [How to awaken the sleeping giants]. The Official website of Russian Ministry of economic development. URL: http://economy.gov.ru/minec/about/structure/depino/2017130114 [date of visit: 20.05.2018] (in Russ.).

Kliuchariov G. A., Didenko D. V., Latova N. V., Latov Y. V., Sheregi F. Obrazovanie, nauka i biznes v sozdanii naukoyomkih sred [Education, science and business in the creation of science-intensive environments]. Saint-Petersburg, Nestor-Istoriya, 2016. 288 p. (in Russ.).

Kliuchariov G. A., Popov M. S., Savinkov V. I. 2017. Obrazovanie, nauka i biznes: novye grani vzaimodejstviya [Education, science and business: new facets of interaction]. Moscow, Institute of Sociology RAS publ. 488 p. (in Russ.).

Lapin N. I. Sociokul'turnye faktory rossijskoy stagnacii i modernizacii [Sociocultural factors of the Russian stagnation and modernization]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2011, no 9, pp. 3–18 (in Russ.).

Men'shenina N. N., Panteleeva M. V. Lobbizm [Lobbyism]. Ekaterinburg, Ural university publ., 2016. 136 p. (in Russ.).

Nacional'ny doklad ob innovaciyah v Rossii [National report on innovations in Russia]. Moscow, Russian Ministry of Economic Development, Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, RBC, 2016. 104 p. (in Russ.).

Pavroz A. V. Soiskanie renty kak kategoriya politicheskogo analiza [Rent seeking as a category of political analysis]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta, Seriya 12 Politicheskie nauki, 2009, no 2, pp. 84–94 (in Russ.).

Peregudov S. P. Krupnaya rossiyskaya korporaciya kak social'no-politicheskiy institut (opyt konceptual'no-prikladnogo issledovaniya) [Large Russian corporation as a socio-political institution]. Moscow, IWEIR RAS publ., 2000. 139 p. (in Russ.).

Podcerob M. Pochemu rossiyskie vuzy ne podnimayutsya vysoko v mezhdunarodnykh reytingah [Why are Russian universities not raised high in international rankings]. Vedomosti Official website, release 17.10.17. URL: https://www.vedomosti.ru/management/articles/2017/10/17/738144-vuzi-ne-podnimayutsya [date of visit: 25.05.2018] (in Russ.).

Prognoz nauchno-tekhnologicheskogo razvitiya: 2030. [Forecast of scientific and technological development: 2030]. Ed. by L. M. Gohberg. Moscow, NRU HSE publ., 2014. 244 p. (in Russ.).

Regiony Rossii. Social'no-economicheskie pokazateli [Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators]. Moscow, Rosstat, 2017. 1402 p. (in Russ.).

Rynok lobbistskih uslug v Rossii: rezul'taty issledovaniya vzaimodejstviya GR–kompaniy s organami gosudarstvennoy vlasti (na primere Moskvy) [The market of lobbying services in Russia: the results of a study of the interaction of GR companies with state authorities (on the example of Moscow)]. Fond sodeystviya izucheniyu praktiki priniatiya pravovykh i upravlencheskih resheniy. URL: http://lobbyinst.org/images/moscowmarket%20lobbying%20services.pdf [date of visit: 20.05.2018] (in Russ.).

Selezniova I. E., Klochkov V. V. Institucional'nye problemy organizacii prikladnyh issledovaniy i razrabotki vysokotekhnologichnoy produkcii [Institutional problems of organization of applied research and development of high-tech products]. Problemy upravleniya nauchnymi issledovaniyami i razrabotkami – 2017. Moscow, IPU RAN, Zhukovsky Institute, 2017, pp. 151–157 (in Russ.).

Semchenkov A. S. Vzaimootnosheniya s gosudarstvennymi strukturami i tekhnologii lobbirovaniya [Relations with state structures and technology of lobbying]. Moscow, MAKS Press, 2017. 128 p. (in Russ.).

Shatilov A., Selezniov P. Innovation policy in contemporary Russia and the struggle for influence between the leading groups within the establishment. Review of business and economic studies, 2015, no 3 (4), pp. 5–12 (in Russ.).

Strategiya nauchno-tekhnologicheskogo razvitiya Rossiyskoy Federacii 2016 [The strategy of scientific and technological development of the Russian Federation 2016]. The Russian President Official website. URL: http://kremlin.ru/acts/bank/41449 [date of visit: 20.05.2018] (in Russ.).

Strategiya social'no-economicheskogo razvitiya Tomskoy oblasti do 2030 goda, utverzhdennaya Postanovleniem Zakonodatel'noy Dumy Tomskoy oblasti ot 26.03.2015 no 2580 [The strategy of socio-economic development of the Tomsk region until 2030]. Tomsk region parliament Official website. URL: http://old.duma.tomsk.ru/page/29000 [date of visit: 20.05.2018] (in Russ.).

Suharev O. S. Evoliucionnaya ehkonomicheskaya teoriya institutov i tekhnologij (problemy modelirovaniya) [Evolutionary economic theory of institutions and technologies]. Moscow, Lenand, 2017. 144 p. (in Russ.).

Turanov S. Luchshie lobbisty Rossii – chetvertyj kvartal i itogi 2017 goda [The best lobbyists of Russia – the fourth quarter and the results of 2017]. Nezavisimaya gazeta, release 30.01.2018. URL: http://www.ng.ru/economics/2018-01-30/5_7161_lobby.html [date of visit: 30.05.2018] (in Russ.).

Vorobiov A. A. Razvitie integratsionnogo vzaimodeystviya sub"ektov regional'noy innovacionnoy deyatel'nosti [Development of integration interaction of actors of regional innovation activity]. Voronezh, Nauchnaya kniga, 2016. 164 p. (in Russ.).

Werle R. Institutional Analysis of Technical Innovation. A Review. Stuttgart, University of Stuttgart, 2011. 32 p.