The Ranking of Innovative Regions was developed in 2012 for monitoring and management purposes by the Association of Innovative Regions of Russia (AIRR) in cooperation with the Ministry of Economic Development, representatives of regional authorities, and the countrys leading experts. The analytical system of the Ranking highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each region, demonstrates the dynamics of all the areas reflected by the indicators, and lets regional authorities see what they can improve to ensure further innovative growth.
The ratings are calculated based on a system of 29 indicators grouped into 4 clusters: scientific research and development, introduction of innovations, socio-economic conditions for innovation, and innovation activity. To ensure transparency and validity of the Ranking, the authors provide the algorithm for calculating the ratings. As its final step, all the regions of Russia are divided into 5 groups based on the level of their innovative development. The groups are:
- strong innovators (the index value of the innovation development exceeds 140% of the average country level);
- medium strong innovators (the index value is between 110% and 140% of the average country level);
- medium innovators (the index value is between 90% and 110% of the average country level);
- medium weak innovators (the index value is between 60% and 90% of the average country level);
- weak innovators (the index value is below 60% of the average country level).
The leaders of the ranking remain the same. They are Saint Petersburg (172.9% of the average country level of innovation development), the Republic of Tatarstan (169.6%), and Moscow (166.4%). However, Moscow has slided to the third position, while the Republic of Tatarstan is placed second for the first time. The six weakest innovators still represent the Russian North, Siberia, and North Caucasus.
For regions that are members of the Association, the report provides a separate analysis, using individual indicators to highlight their strengths and weaknesses and explain their rankings. For example, the reasons why the Republic of Tatarstan took the second position in the final ranking were a high relative importance of organizations engaged in introducing technological and non-technological innovations; a high share of innovative goods, works, and services; a high level of innovation activity of regional authorities, etc. At the same time, the region still has a potential for growth as regards publications in peer-reviewed journals indexed by the Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI).