Assessment of Innovative Sustainability of Northern Resource-type
Nikolay E. Egorov
, Grigory S. Kovrov
and Olga A. Guk
Scientific-Research Institute of Regional Economy of the North «M.K. Ammosov North-Eastern Federal University»,
Yakutsk, Russian Federation
V.I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University, Simferopol, Russian Federation
Keywords: Sustainable Development, Northern Resource-Type Regions, Indicator System, Regional Innovation System,
Rating Score, Sustainability Coefficient.
Abstract: The article is devoted to assessing the innovative sustainability of the regional innovation system. The
research is reviewed and the concept of "sustainable development" is studied. It is noted that the country's
sustainable economic development largely depends on the best possible development and effective
functioning of the national innovation system, which is based on regional innovation systems. The
methodological and procedural bases for assessing the innovative sustainability of Russian regions are studied.
The system of main indicators in innovations is determined and the integral ranking of the northern resource-
type regions' innovative development level for the period from 2010 to 2019 is performed. According to the
ranking results, the regions are differentiated into three categories according to the innovative development
level. Based on the method of calculating the variation coefficient for a random variable, which is widely used
in probability and statistics, the authors propose a similar method for determining a region's innovative
sustainability level by the coefficient of innovative sustainability, which is calculated using the composite
index of the region's innovative development for the considered period. It is established that in northern
resource-type regions, there is mainly a sustainable favourable innovative development, except for the
Sakhalin Region, which has low innovative sustainability.
Currently, the term "sustainable development" is
widely used by economic researchers. Sustainability
in a broad sense is understood as the ability of a
system to return to an equilibrium position after it has
been unbalanced under external or internal disturbing
influences (Lukyanov et al., 2013).
The very concept of "sustainable development"
was formulated in 1987 in the report of the UN World
Commission on Environment and Development "Our
Common Future", known as the report by G.
Brundtland (Brundtland, 1987). According to this
report, sustainable development is a development in
which society meets its present needs and doesn't
jeopardize future generations' ability to meet their
needs. Sustainability of development is achieved by
three interrelated core factors being developed:
economic, social and environmental.
In Russia, the regulation "On the Concept of the
Transition of the Russian Federation to Sustainable
Development" (Decree of the President of the
Russian Federation, 1996) determines the main tasks
for a consistent transition to sustainable development,
ensuring the solution of socio-economic tasks and
problems of preserving a favourable environment and
natural resource potential in order to meet current and
future generations' needs.
In general, the concept of "sustainable
development" includes the principles of viability and
balance, while economic growth is associated with
the country's dominant economic goals (including
innovative factors), with its citizens' well-being: with
the social development, with the state of the labour
Egorov, N., Kovrov, G. and Guk, O.
Assessment of Innovative Sustainability of Northern Resource-type Regions.
DOI: 10.5220/0010589903120318
In Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure (ISSDRI 2021), pages 312-318
ISBN: 978-989-758-519-7
2021 by SCITEPRESS Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
market and other factors (Kryukova et al., 2020).
Various interpretations of the concept of "the region's
sustainable development" are reviewed in the works
(Kalinchikov, 2005; Gabidullina, 2020). According
to the authors of the article (Bukreyev, Pshenichnykh,
2018), the region's sustainable socio-economic
development is a development of the territory as a
system of equal elements (man, nature, society),
which, in response to the impact of environmental
factors, contributes to the preservation of the system,
restoring its balance, maintaining the state, type of
functioning, its qualitative improvement at a new
stage of development.
The analysis and assessment of the sustainability
of innovative development of industrial enterprises in
the region are considered in the work by Yashin S.N.
and Korobov Yu.S. (Yashin, Korobov, 2017).
According to the authors, the sustainability of
innovative development of an enterprise is the ability
of its economic system to set and maintain the
necessary rates and parameters of innovative and
general development in a dynamically changing
macro- and micro-environment over a certain period.
The higher the integral innovation index of the
enterprise, the higher the sustainability of innovative
development in the regional industrial sector.
It is well known that the country's sustainable
economic development largely depends on how well
and effectively the national innovation system is
developed and functioning, the basis of which is
regional innovation systems (RIS). RIS is designed to
ensure the implementation of tasks of the national
innovation policy in a particular region. To recognize
regions as subjects of sustainable development
requires activating the formation of RIS as a key
component of sustainable development. The region's
transition to sustainable development is impossible
without the development of appropriate policies of
regional authorities oriented to ensuring an effective
innovation subsystem (Badmayev, 2015).
Innovative sustainability can be considered as one
of the characteristic features of successful innovative
development of the socio-economic system. The
innovative sustainability of the regional socio-
economic system should be understood as the ability
of the system to generate intellectual property objects
over a certain period, followed by their introduction
in producing sector in order to significantly change
the structure of the industry and develop new
technological production. Innovative sustainability
shows the strength and reliability of RIS, its dynamic
balance, as well as its ability to withstand internal and
external negative influences. Assessing regional
innovative sustainability can be performed by the
modified methodology of the Data Envelope
Analysis. Herewith, the result of this approach is the
calculated deviation of the actual value from the
established standard (Charnes at all, 1994; Morgunov
and Morgunova; 2003; Ruiga, 2015; 2017; Ruiga et
al., 2019). This approach is rather labour-intensive
due to the necessity to form a system of threshold
values for indicating innovative development to
determine correctly the quantitative parameters of the
standard. For this reason, ranking based on forming a
composite index of the region's innovative
development can be considered the most simple and
statistically reliable method of assessing the region's
innovative sustainability.
Assessment of the region's innovation potential based
on constant monitoring of changes in its indicators is
necessary for determining the level of regional
innovative development of the economy and making
various organizational and managerial decisions by
local public authorities.
Currently, various methods and models for
assessing the level of the region's innovative
development are proposed in Russia (Barinova &
Zemtsov, 2016; Bortnik et al., 2013; Il'ina et al., 2018;
Lisina, 2012; Makaruk, 2017; Mityakov et al., 2017).
Despite numerous studies in this area, there is no one-
size-fits-all approach to assessing the innovation
index (Mityakov et al., 2017).
There is also the author's method of rapid
assessment of the region's innovative development
based on the Triple Helix model, which allows
performing a comparative econometric assessment of
the region's innovative development level, as well as
the contribution of academic organizations, business
and the state to the overall innovative development of
the economic entity according to their minimum
statistical key figures in scientific and innovative
activity (Egorov, 2017; Egorov at el., 2019).
Methodological issues of forming Russian
regions' innovative development ranking are
discussed in detail in the works (Mikheyeva, 2013;
Yashin end Korobova, 2017). Currently, the
Association of Innovative Russian Regions (AIRR)
(Rating of Innovative Development of Russian
Regions, 2018) and the Higher School of Economics
(HSE) (Russian Regional Innovation Development
Ranking, 2020) are mainly engaged in preparing the
Assessment of Innovative Sustainability of Northern Resource-type Regions
assessment system for a region's innovative
The 2018 AIRR ranking includes 29 indicators.
The developed analytical ranking system allows the
regional authorities to clearly show their strengths
and weaknesses, directions for further development
and improvement of innovation systems, as well as
the dynamics of changes in all areas reflected by the
The HSE ranking system is based on the original
system of quantitative and qualitative indicators of
the region's innovative development, which meets
modern statistical standards applied both in Russian
state statistics and in leading countries and
international organizations. It also integrates
indicators used in similar developments of the
European Commission (Regional Innovation
Scoreboard). The developed ranking is the result of
ranking 85 Russian regional subjects in descending
order by 53 innovation indicators grouped into five
thematic blocks: socio-economic conditions,
scientific and technical potential, innovation activity,
export activity and the quality of regional innovation
policy, each of which has its own sub-ranking.
When selecting indicators, their quantity required
for the assessment is equally important. On the one
hand, they should be enough for the assessment to be
comprehensive and objective, on the other hand, their
number should be limited by importance and
significance for the sustainable development goals of
a particular region (Alferova, 2020).
The main problem in determining the region's
innovative development level is the lack of a
scientifically based, necessary and sufficient number
of indicators to assess the effectiveness of regional
innovation processes. The analysis of management
requirements shows that in order to improve the
efficiency of managerial decisions in innovations, it
is necessary to identify 15-20 indicators, on the basis
of which the region's innovative development is
assessed (Lisina, 2012).
We should also take into account the fact that by
increasing the number of indicators, we are
expanding the boundaries of the review, but at the
same time, we are blurring the benchmarks in
assessing the most significant aspects for achieving
sustainable development (Tanguay and etc., 2010).
Given the above, the authors propose the
following methodological approach (algorithm) for
assessing the sustainability of the region's innovative
development or a regional innovation system (RIS).
Ranking the region's innovative development
level is based on three aggregative blocks of key
indicators that characterize innovative activity. Each
group of indicators includes several quantitative
indicators, data on which are available on the official
Internet resources of Rosstat, Rospatent and the
Federal Treasury:
1. The activity of organizations and citizens in
share of organizations, that implemented
technological innovations, in the total number of
organizations surveyed, %;
number of employees engaged in research and
development, people;
internal costs for research and development,
million rubles;
innovation activity costs, million rubles.
2. The effectiveness of innovative activities.
number of patents granted for inventions, utility
models and industrial designs per 10,000 employees,
advanced manufacturing technologies used by
the subjects of the Russian Federation, units;
volume of innovative goods, works, and
services, million rubles;
volume of innovative goods, works and services
in the total volume of goods shipped, works
performed, and services provided, %.
3. The national policy of the region in the
development of RIS.
share of public funds in internal research and
development expenditures, %;
expenses of the consolidated budget of the
subject of the Russian Federation for scientific
research, million rubles.
The subjects of the northern resource-type regions
are ranked in descending order by an integral ranking
score from 0 to 1 using the methodology of limitation
of the annual indicators of the region's innovative
development (Rating of the socio-economic situation
of the subjects of the Russian Federation, 2019)
In this paper, the assessment of the region's
innovative development was performed for the
northern resource-type regions (NRTR) over 2010-
2019. The general review shows that resource-type
regions are regions characterized not only by high
resourcing but also a certain degree of resource
dependence. The authors assigned the subjects to
northern resource-type regions by estimating the Far
North regions' resource dependence by share of
statistical indicators for Foreign Economic Activities
of Mining and Quarrying (FEA MQ) in the Gross
Regional Product (GRP) structure of the subject, they
determine the following criteria for assigning a
subject to the resource-type regions (Egorov, Kovrov,
ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientific and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure
Highly dependent more than 50% of FEA MQ
in the GRP structure of the subject.
Moderately dependent – from 21.4% to 50%;
Independent – under 21.4%.
After the obtained results of the regions' resource
dependence analyzed and in accordance with the
criteria proposed by the authors for classifying a
subject as a resource-type region, the following 8
subjects of the Far North are proposed to be
considered northern resource-type regions: the
Republic of Komi; the Nenets Autonomous Okrug
(NAO); the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug–
Yugra (KhMAO); the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous
Okrug (YaNAO); the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia);
the Magadan Region; the Sakhalin Region and the
Chukotka Autonomous Okrug (CHAO).
At the second stage, to assess the region's
innovative sustainability basing on the combined
integral index values, the authors calculated the
innovative sustainability coefficient of (Csust) RIS.
For this purpose, the variation coefficient of a random
variable widely used in statistical theory is taken.
Variation coefficient V is a relative index of
variability and is the ratio of the standard deviation
( 𝛿 ) to the arithmetic mean (𝑥̅ ), expressed as a
percentage (Variation coefficient):
V = 𝛿/𝑥̅ ∗ 100
It should be noted that the variation coefficient
can be used to determine the sustainability of the
forecasting model. V's gradual decreasing on the
totality of forecast values from period to period
indicates the sustainability of the forecasting model
as a system. An increase in this indicator signals a loss
of its sustainability. (Zaporozhets). In this regard, the
authors propose to use the formula (1) to calculate the
innovative sustainability coefficient (Csust) of RIS.
In accordance with the proposed methodology and
with the selected indicators, the calculations of the
innovative development indices by year and region
and the composite index of innovative development
were performed and resulted in an integral ranking of
the northern resource-type regions by the level of
innovative development, they are illustrated in a
normalized form from 0 to 1 (Fig. 1).
Figure 1: Ranking of the northern resource-type regions by
the integral index of innovative development.
The analysis of the figure shows that the Republic
of Sakha (Yakutia) and the Khanty-Mansi
Autonomous Okrug have a high level of the region's
innovative development (Fig. 2).
Figure 2: Regions with a high level of innovative
The average level of the region's innovative
development is observed in the Sakhalin Region, the
Komi Republic, the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous
Okrug and the Magadan Region (Fig. 3). This group
of regions is characterized by large variations in the
dynamics of the integral index development and
comparable levels with the average value for the
Figure 3: Regions with an average level of innovative
Assessment of Innovative Sustainability of Northern Resource-type Regions
The Chukotka and Nenets Autonomous Okrugs
are ranked last, with a low level of innovative
development (Fig. 4).
Figure 4: Regions with a low level of innovative
The innovative sustainability coefficient (C
) of
the northern resource-type regions for the period of
2010-2019 is calculated by the formula (1) and
presented in Table 1.
Table 1: Innovative sustainability coefficient (C
), %.
Northern resource-type regions Csust, %
Republic of Komi 17.20
Nenets Autonomous Okrug 12.43
-Mansi Autonomous Okru
Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okru
ublic of Sakha
Magadan Region 16.16
Sakhalin Region 20.26
Chukotka Autonomous Okrug 15.01
Source: compiled by the authors.
The obtained values of the C
determine criteria for assessing the level of innovative
sustainability of RIS in the northern resource-type
regions (Table 2). The C
criteria correspond to the
variation coefficient accepted in statistics, the value
of which determines the corresponding sustainability
criteria: high, average and low.
Table 2: Criteria for assessing the level of innovative
sustainability of the northern resource-type regions.
, %
<10 no
Yakutia, Yamalo-
Nenets Autonomous
Okrug, Nenets
Autonomous Okrug,
Autonomous Okrug,
Autonomous Okrug,
Republic of Komi,
adan Re
>20 Sakhalin Region
Source: compiled by the authors.
The analysis of this table shows that no region has
a high level of RIS sustainability (less than 10%). All
the subjects of northern resource-type regions, except
Sakhalin, belong to the group with an average level
of innovative sustainability (C
= 10% - 20%).
The research results obtained in this article are quite
reliable since it uses statistical data from official
sources intended for open publication. Quantitative
assessment is carried out on a system of indicators in
innovations, the system can be adjusted depending on
the purposes and tasks of the research.
The methodological approach proposed by the
authors is based on using the variation coefficient
well-known in probability and statistics. The use of
formula (1) for calculating the variation coefficient
shows an adequate assessment for determining the
sustainability of the regions' innovative development.
Therefore, according to the authors, using the
variation coefficient as a coefficient of the region's
innovative sustainability is quite reasonable and can
be used to assess the innovative sustainability not
only of regions but also for other economic sectors
and social spheres with corresponding changes in the
system of indicators reflecting their production and
economic activities.
The main advantages of this method include the
simplicity of numerical calculations based on the
standard Microsoft Excel platform, the use of official
statistical data which exclude subjectivity that occurs
when different weighing coefficients are used.
ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientific and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure
The innovative development of the northern resource-
type regions for the period from 2010 to 2019 was
ranked by using the selected key indicators. The
authors propose a method for determining the level of
the region's innovative sustainability by the value of
the innovative sustainability coefficient, which is
calculated according to the data of the composite
index of the region's innovative development.
According to the research results, it can be
concluded that the ranking system based on the
formation of a composite index of innovative
development can be used to assess the level of
innovative sustainability of RIS. At the same time, the
variation coefficient in the dynamics of the
development of the consolidated level of the region's
innovative development can be taken as the
coefficient of innovative sustainability of RIS.
Besides the regional authorities, various
economic and social entities can use the research
results to monitor and forecast the innovative
development of their sector, as well as to adjust the
existing legal documents relating to innovation
The article was prepared as part of the performance
of the state task of the Russian Ministry of Education
and Science under Project FSRG-2020-0010
"Patterns of Spatial Organization and Spatial
Development of Socio-Economic Systems of the
Northern Resource-Type Regions".
Alferova, T. (2020). Ustoychivoye razvitiye regiona:
podkhody k otboru pokazateley otsenki. Vestnik
Permskogo universiteta. Ekonomika, 15(4): 494–511.
DOI: 10.17072/1994-9960-2020-4-494-511.
Badmayev, Z. (2015). K voprosu obespecheniya
ustoychivogo razvitiya regiona na osnove aktivizatsii
innovatsionnoy sostavlyayushchey. Vestnik VSGTU,
5(56): 70-73.
Barinova, V.A., Zemtsov, S.P. (2016). Reytingi
innovatsionnogo razvitiya regionov: zachem nuzhna
novaya metodika v Rossii? Vestnik Povolzhskogo
instituta upravleniya, 6(57): 110–116.
Bortnik, I.M., Zinov, V.G., Kotsyubinskiy, V.A., Sorokina,
A.V. (2013). Indikatory innovatsionnogo razvitiya
regionov Rossii dlya tseley monitoringa i upravleniya.
Innovatsii, 11: 2-13.
Brundtland, G., 1987. Report of the World Commission on
Environment and Development: Our Common Future.
Bukreyev, A., Pshenichnykh, A., (2018). Soderzhaniye
ponyatiya «ustoychivoye razvitiye regiona» kak
predmeta nauchnogo issledovaniya. Region:
gosudarstvennoye i munitsipal'noye upravleniye, 2(14).
Charnes, A., at all (1994). Data Envelopment Analysis:
Theory, Methodology, and Application. Boston:
Kluwer Academic Publishers, 513 p.
Egorov, N., Pospelova, T., Yarygina, A. and Klochkova, E.
(2019). The Assessment of Innovation Development in
the Arctic Regions of Russia Based on the Triple Helix
Model. Resources, 8(2), p. 72. DOI:
Egorov, N.E. (2017). Method of Express Assessment of
Innovative Development of Region Based on Triple
Helix Model. AEBMR-Advances in Economics
Business and Management Research, 38: 139–143.
DOI: 10.2991/ttiess-17.2017.24.
Gabidullina, CH. (2020). Ustoychivoye razvitiye regiona:
ponyatiyno-kategorial'nyy apparat. Ekonomika:
vchera, segodnya, zavtra, 10(4A): 413-424. DOI: 10.
Il'ina, I.Ye., Zharova, Ye.N., Agamirova Ye.V.,
Kamenskiy, A.S. (2018). Innovatsionnoye razvitiye
regionov Rossii. Regionologiya, 26(2): 230–255.DOI:
Kalinchikov, M., (2005). Teoretiko-metodicheskiye
osnovy kontseptsii ustoychivogo razvitiya regiona.
Regional'naya ekonomika: teoriya i praktika, 9(24): 14-
Koeffitsiyent variatsii. https://
Kryukova, Ye., Matsuy, Ye., end Teplinskikh, Ye. (2020).
Vliyaniye innovatsionnykh protsessov na ustoychivoye
razvitiye regiona. Yevraziyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal,
9(148): 447-451.
Lisina, A.N. (2012). Metodika otsenki urovnya
innovatsionnogo razvitiya regiona. Vestnik NGU.
Seriya: Sotsial'no-ekonomicheskiye nauki, 12(1): 115–
Lukyanov, V., Mukhor'yanova, O. end Nedvizhai, S.
(2013). Theoretical aspects of sustainable economic
development of the region. Stavropol: AGRUS, 115 p.
Makaruk, O.Ye. (2017). Kompleksnyy indeks
innovatsionnogo razvitiya regionov. Nauka i innovatsii,
Mikheyeva, N.N. (2013). K voprosu ob innovatsionnykh
reytingakh rossiyskikh regionov. Sovremennyye
proizvoditel'nyye sily, 2: 54-67.
Mityakov, S.N., Mityakova, O.I., Murashova, N.A. (2017).
Innovatsionnoye razvitiye regionov Rossii: metodika
reytingovaniya. Innovatsii, 9: 97–104.
Morgunov, Ye. And Morgunova, O. (2003). Kratkoye
opisaniye metoda Data Envelopment Analysis.
Assessment of Innovative Sustainability of Northern Resource-type Regions
Regional Innovation Scoreboard, 2019. European
Commission. URL: https: // growth/sites/
growth/ files/ris2019.pdf.
Reyting innovatsionnogo razvitiya regionov Rossii, 2018.
Assotsiatsiya innovatsionnykh regionov Rossii. URL:
Reyting innovatsionnogo razvitiya sub"yektov Rossiyskoy
Federatsii. M.: NIU VSHE, 2020. 264 p.
Reyting sotsial'no-ekonomicheskogo polozheniya
sub"yektov RF. Itogi 2019 goda. Reytingovoye
agentstvo «RIA Reyting». URL:
Ruiga, I. at all, 2019. Practical implementation of Data
Envelopment Analysis technology to assess the
innovative sustainability of resource type regions.
Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1399 03311. DOI: 10.1088/1742-
Ruyga, I. (2017). Metody otsenki innovatsionnoy
ustoychivosti regiona. Kreativnaya ekonomika, 11(10):
1025-1038. DOI: 10.18334/ce.11.10.38411.
Ruyga, I., (2015). Formirovaniye sistemy kriteriyev i
pokazateley otsenki innovatsionnoy ustoychivosti na
regional'nom urovne. Innovatsionnoye razvitiye
ekonomiki, 6(42):156-163.
Tanguay, G., Rajaonson, J., Lefebvre, J. end Lanoie, P.
(2010). Measuring the sustainability of cities: An
analysis of the use of local indicators. Ecological
Indicators, 10: 407-418. 2009.07.013.
Yashin, S.N. end Korobova Y.S. (2017). A method for
calculus of integral index of the region's innovative
development. Financial Analytics: Science and
Experience, 10(4): 360-374.
Yashin, S.N., Korobova, YU.S. (2017). Otsenka stepeni
ustoychivosti innovatsionnogo razvitiya
promyshlennykh predpriyatiy regiona na primere
Nizhegorodskoy oblasti. Nauchno-tekhnicheskiye
vedomosti SPbGPU. Ekonomicheskiye nauki, 10(3):
112-123. DOI: 10.18721/JE.10310.
Yegorov, N.Ye. and Kovrov, G.S. (2020). Sravnitel'naya
otsenka innovatsionnogo razvitiya regionov Kraynego
Severa. Arktika i Sever., 41: 62-74. DOI:
Zaporozhets, A.V. Ispol'zovaniye koeffitsiyenta variatsii
dlya opredeleniya ustoychivosti modeli
prognozirovaniya. URL:
O kontseptsii perekhoda Rossiyskoy Federatsii k
ustoychivomu razvitiyu. Ukaz Prezidenta Rossiyskoy
Federatsii ot 01.04.1996 g. № 440.
ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientific and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure