Sustainable Development of the Innovation System in the Context of

the Sixth Technological Paradigm

Yury V. Gusev

, Tatiana A. Polovova

and Alexei I. Pinsky

All-Russian Research Institute "Tsentr", Moscow, Russia

Moscow Municipal University of Management of the Moscow City Government named after Yu. М. Luzhkov, Moscow,

Russia

Keywords: Innovative Development, Digital Economy, Technological Priorities Of The Sixth Technological Paradigm,

Sustainability Of Enterprises, Innovation Infrastructure, Innovation Activity, Innovative Territorial And

Spatial Formations.

Abstract: As a result of the desire to ensure high consumer characteristics of products and reduce individual production

costs below the socially required ones, technological changes occur over time, which are prerequisites for the

transition to a new technological mode. Priority preparation for a new technological mode becomes one of

the important tools of state policy to consistently ensure the economy's sustainability through the innovative

trend of development of the national economy as a whole and of the enterprises that make up its foundation.

However, this can only be realized through a shift in innovation priorities, radical transformation, and

investment in new technologies and areas of activity. The article considers several problematic issues related

to the transition of the economy to the sixth technological paradigm, the presence of which is due to the

peculiarities of territorial and spatial formations, heterogeneity of their resource potential, different innovation

activity of economic systems, as well as the need to identify effective principles and management mechanisms,

the choice of transformation models and formation of innovation infrastructure in conditions of existence of

multimodality of the Russian economy.

1 INTRODUCTION

In modern conditions of transition to technologies of

the sixth technological mode and digitalization of the

economy, it is the level of development of innovation

systems that largely predetermines the horizons of

national economic growth. In developed countries, as

a rule, the fourth and fifth technological modes

prevail. In the domestic economy, in addition to the

fourth and fifth patterns, there is the third one.

With significant improvement of the institutional

and infrastructural innovation environment in the

domestic economy, the methods and tools of

innovative activity of economic entities are

insufficiently implemented, which has a weak impact

on the development of innovation potential.

This leads to a significant lagging of the Russian

economy in the field of high technology. The

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4739-2764

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1412-8924

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7946-3766

countries with the highest volume of high-tech

exports ($ billion) in 2019 were distributed as

follows: China, 715,843; Hong Kong, 322,038;

Germany, 208,677; US, 156,074; South Korea,

153,561; Russia, 10,864. Russia's high-tech exports

account for 1.5% of Chinese exports and 6.9% of US

exports (World Bank Group, 2021).

In this regard, the formation of a truly innovation-

active economy in the near future requires, firstly, a

clearly defined economic strategy in accordance with

the technological priorities of the sixth technological

mode, and secondly, the solution to the problem of

forming a system of innovation activity management

at all levels of the national economy.

Given the technological priorities of the sixth

technological mode, it is necessary to develop a

comprehensive approach to the transformation of

innovation infrastructure capable of ensuring

Gusev, Y., Pinsky, A. and Polovova, T.

Sustainable Development of the Innovation System in the Context of the Sixth Technological Paradigm.

DOI: 10.5220/0010588302070214

In Proceedings of the International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure (ISSDRI 2021), pages 207-214

ISBN: 978-989-758-519-7

207

sustainable economic development and

competitiveness of the national economy in high-tech

markets.

2 RESEARCH METHODS

The study of the above problems is based on

methodological tools, ensuring the

comprehensiveness and objectivity of their study, in

particular, the dialectical methods of knowledge. We

are talking about the application of such general

scientific methods of knowledge, as analysis and

synthesis of theoretical material, generalization,

classification, grouping. This allows us to

substantiate approaches to the formation of the logical

structure of innovation activity management and the

organizational mechanism of functioning of the

system of innovation activity of enterprises and the

region in the context of the new technological mode.

The evidentiary basis of the hypothesis justification is

based on the method of comparative analysis, which

allowed us to compare different approaches to the

transformation of the innovative structure of the

national economy and the construction of

infrastructure adequate to the technological

challenges of the 4th industrial revolution. In order to

substantiate the author's position on the indicated

problems on the basis of general scientific methods of

abstraction and generalization, the theoretical

analysis of different points of view and scientific

views set out in the publications of academic

economists, as well as the synthesis of the materials

obtained. In addition, the experience of the authors of

this article as experts is involved.

As part of the ongoing research to conclude on the

feasibility of joint use in the study of systemic and

synergetic approaches, which allowed a constructive

approach to solving the problematic issues of research

and description of innovative activities and activities

of economic entities of different levels, capable of

self-development and changes in the system

properties that arise during technological leaps. This

is due to the duality of the manifestation of innovation

activity. In one case, the system through innovation

moves to a higher qualitative level, and in the other

case, through perturbing influences leads to a

violation of the stability of the system's functioning.

3 RESULTS OF RESEARCH

As we know, the functioning of economic entities is

based on such basic laws as development, self-

preservation, and synergy. According to the first law,

business entities are motivated to innovate in an

environment with factors of uncertainty and

competition. The development of innovation activity

in the system of economic and scientific and technical

relations of economic entities, as a rule, creates

synergetic effects. From the position of the state's

interests regarding changes in economic and

innovation priorities and values of market relations, it

is fundamental to ensure consistency of actions of all

participants of the innovation system (Shinkevich et

al., 2016), (Gusev et al., 2017), (Rodionova, 2016),

(Rodionova, 2015). The dual nature of innovation

should be taken into account. On the one hand,

innovation is one of the main sources of profit

growth, development of enterprises and territories,

and on the other hand, it is a possible source of risk

and loss of sustainability of enterprises.

As the research shows, the external environment

factors are becoming increasingly dynamic of change,

especially in the context of digitalization of the

economy and the 6th technological mode (Kaminsky

et al.,2019), (Gusev et al.,2016), (Golichenko, 2011),

(Kaminsky et al., 2019), (Sviridova et al., 2019),

(Digital Russia, 2019).

The first group of factors is manifested in relation

to the impact on socio-economic development

(including institutional environment factors). The

second - in connection with the impact on the state of

innovation potential of an economic entity. The third

group of factors directly influences innovation

performance and development (innovation activity,

innovation receptivity, etc.).

Low dynamics of the introduction of innovations

at the enterprises of spatial-territorial formations is

caused by the manifestation of factors of a negative

character. First, the risk of investing in new

innovative projects under conditions of instability of

both national and global economies. Secondly,

limited opportunities for investment in large

innovative projects that have a long payback period.

Thirdly, imperfection of the legal support of

innovation activities.

Low innovation activity is often related to internal

factors. An example could be large enterprises whose

degree of innovation activity is related to their

monopolistic position and to the rare application of

anti-monopoly legislation to them.

Thus, the development of innovation

infrastructure in different territorial-spatial

ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure

208

formations occurs unevenly, affecting, ultimately, the

state of the innovation environment of the national

economy.

Given the technological priorities of the new

technological paradigm, it is necessary to take

adequate measures to transform the national

innovation system (NIS) and adapt the national

economy to the new realities under the control of

government agencies with the ability to optimize the

emerging situation.

Of course, the development trajectory of

economic entities and territorial and spatial

formations should be sustainable. In this regard, two

problems become very urgent for economic entities

and territorial and spatial formations:

- transformation of the national innovation system

and ensuring the management of innovation activity

for its own development in the transition to the 6th

technological mode (Gusev et al.,2017), (Kaminsky

et al.,2019);

- ensuring at the same time the sustainability of

the national economy as a whole and individual

economic entities (Shinkevich et al., 2016), (Gusev et

al., 2016).

At the same time, based on the ideas about the

essence of innovation, it follows that their real

implementation and materialization take place largely

at the level of economic entities (enterprises), which

represent a system that has an integral characteristic

of abilities (competencies) and readiness to

implement innovations to obtain a specific target

result.

In this case, the enterprises - leaders perform the

function of poles of attraction for innovation and

development of production (in accordance with the

model of "growth poles" by F. Perroux). Later on, due

to economic growth, an increase of financial

resources, and infrastructure development there is a

gradual spread of positive trends and an increase of

efficient use of resources of spatial formations to the

whole economy.

At the same time, as research and scientific

publications show, megacities and clusters have a

significant impact on the formation of the innovation

environment in addition to enterprises. This is

ensured by a high degree of concentration of

scientific and technical resources and production

capacity. "Concentrating resources on key areas of

innovation ensures that it is scaled up in current and

strategic ways. This is especially true for

breakthrough technologies, the dependence of which

on the scale of funding is evident" (Gusev et al.,

2017). This conclusion finds support in publications

on this problem, e.g. (Shinkevich et al., 2016).

Currently, the "environment" cluster concept,

which is based on the approach to justify the

interaction between cluster participants (Rudskaia et

al., 2015), as well as the concept of forming network

mechanisms of relations between economic entities,

has been widely spread (Rodionova, 2016),

(Rodionova, 2015), (Vodolazhskaya et al., 2017),

(Petrikov, 2019).

The clusters created in regions and industries are

an example of the development of innovative activity

and the formation of a community of innovation

process participants (Petrikov, 2019).

For example, the share of Moscow in the structure

of gross value added of Russian regions in 2019 was

20.8% (Rudskaia et al., 2014). The clusters located in

the Moscow metropolitan area are focused on such

innovative areas of specialization as microelectronics

and instrumentation; industrial biotechnology;

medical industry; pharmaceuticals; new materials;

nuclear and radiation technologies. Quite large

clusters are developing in the megalopolis of St.

Petersburg and a number of other regions.

In addition to clusters, incubators and business

angels, university complexes and research centers,

venture capital funds, enterprises and organizations -

producers of products (services), as well as

consumers of products (services) are the basic

elements of a complete and functioning

infrastructure. The totality of such actors is the basis

of the architecture of interconnected and

interdependent processes of production, distribution,

exchange and consumption.

Infrastructure has a special place among the

elements of the innovation system, which plays a

crucial role in ensuring the coherence of all actors in

the economic process. The main provisions of

organizing the functioning of innovation

infrastructure are outlined in the works of many

researchers (Vodolazhskaya et al., 2014), (Gusev et

al., 2017).

The vector of infrastructural development of the

national economy during the transition to the 6th

technological mode should become new innovation

and technological trends, which determine the points

of growth, both at the level of enterprises and

territorial-spatial formations (Kalashnikov et

al.,2018), (Mudrak et al,2019), (Sviridova et al.,

2019), (Utepbergenov et al., 2018).

It seems that the priorities of innovation

infrastructure entities should be primarily determined

based not on the development of technologies and

processes of the new technological paradigm that

need to be implemented, but on the orientation

towards markets for products (services) produced on

Sustainable Development of the Innovation System in the Context of the Sixth Technological Paradigm

209

the basis of new paradigm technologies (for example,

intelligent urban mobility and telematic

transportation systems; neuroassistants,

neuroeducation, neuromedtech, and pharma; Big

Data and IIoT robotics; "smart" agriculture, etc.).

This is mainly due to the fact that specific

technologies only contribute to the creation of

market-demanded use value.

The state occupies a special place in the

innovation infrastructure, which performs, in our

opinion, four main forms of interaction with

economic entities and other structures of the national

innovation system.

First, the state structures form the institutional

environment and innovation climate for innovation

activity based on the state strategy with the focus on

the leadership in science and reliance on the scientific

and innovation potential of defense enterprises (the

state as an innovation customer), and act as a

regulator of innovation activity and transformation of

innovation into a market product.

Especially noteworthy in the context of transition

to the 6th technological mode is the importance of

forming an innovation strategy, transition of all

structural elements of the innovation environment to

a different qualitative state through the acquisition of

new properties. In addition, the state is a key enabler

of innovation.

Secondly, state structures carry out the

development of the innovation infrastructure

stimulating innovations.

The state creates special structures (networks of

innovation diffusion centers, advisory centers,

foundations for the financing of fundamental or

applied research; technoparks, incubators, and other

institutions providing services to innovative

companies; institutions promoting cooperation

between science and industry, etc.) that implement

innovation policy, ensure the receptiveness of

business entities to global scientific and technological

advances and coordinate their actions in the

innovation sphere.

Thirdly, state structures control the

implementation of national projects and also create

new competencies (professional retraining systems

and providing opportunities for workers to acquire

new skills that are in demand on the market

throughout their careers).

Fourthly, state structures act as a source of

funding for major projects, investing in selected

priority areas, innovative national projects,

fundamental or applied research.

The outlined functionality of state structures is

represented in Figure 1 in the form of a rhombus.

Figure 1: "State Functional Rhombus" in the national

innovation system.

The complexity and multidimensionality of the

structure and tasks of the national innovation system

make it necessary to form an effective mechanism for

coordination of interaction between the main subjects

of innovation activities and support of innovation

activities adequate to the challenges of the 6th

technological mode.

Figure 2 presents the conceptual scheme of

formation of the organizational mechanism of

functioning of the management system of the national

innovation system.

ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure

210

Figure 2: Formation of the organizational mechanism of the national innovation system management system.

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Both domestic and foreign specialists are engaged in

the research of issues in the field of innovation theory,

innovation management, and innovative development

of organizations.

The points of view of domestic and foreign

scientists on the problems under consideration are

presented in Table 1.

Sustainable Development of the Innovation System in the Context of the Sixth Technological Paradigm

211

Table 1: List of authors on the issues under study.

Issues under investi

ation Domestic and forei

n scientists

Development of theoretical and methodological

approaches to the management of innovation activity and

innovation activity of business entities. Interrelation of

innovation activity and its activity with parameters of

economic growth of economic entities.

Borisova E.Y., Vasilieva Z.A., Golichenko O.G.,

Grechenyuk A.V., Zeldner A.G., Izmalkova S.A.,

Korepanov E.N., Korolev D.V., Krotov M.I., Kurnysheva

I.R., Lavrova N.A., Nizhegorodtsev R.M,

Nikitin S.A., Sadkov V.G., Filimonenko I.V. et al.

Study of theoretical aspects of innovation activities Drucker P, Castells M., Mensch G, Santo B., Twiss B.,

Schumpeter J., Anchishkin A.I., Blyakhman L.S,

Valdaitsev S.N., Kondratyev N.D., Kokurin D.I., et al.

Development of innovation management tools and

mechanisms

Glazyev S.Y., Grinberg R.S., Golichenko O.G., Gokhberg

L.M., Gutman G.V., Zavlin P.N., Kazantsev A.K., Kovalev

G.D., Mindeli L., Fatkhutdinov R.A., Yuryev V.M. et al.

Study of innovation processes in territorial spatial

formations

Asaul A.N., Bakhtizin A.R., Bogdan N.I., Bodrunov S.D.,

Bortnik I.M., Glazyev S.Y., Glisin F.F., Golichenk O.G.,

Gokhberg L.M., Ivanova N.I., Ivanter V.V., Kuznetsov

S.V., Lundvall B., Malinin A. M., Mensch G., Nelson R.,

Perani J., Razumovsky V.M., Santo B., Twiss B., Freeman

K., Schumpeter J.A., Edquist C., et al.

Factors of innovative development of economic systems Goldobina M.V., Esina O.I., Kantserov R.A., Mitrofanov

M.Y., Monastyrsky V.V., Moskvin O.S., Olovyannikov

A.A., Razumovsky V.M., Sukhovey A.F., Freimovich

D.Y., Yur

ev V.N., etc.

Source: compiled by the authors.

The review of the literature shows that the

economic literature presents studies from the position

in sufficient detail:

 adequate response of economic entities and the

economy as a whole to changes in innovation

and technology [Anchishkin A.I., Blyakhman

L.S., Glazyev S.Y., Goldobina M.V., Zeldner

A.G., Mensch T., Schumpeter J, Yuryev V.N.

et al;]

 innovative and investment development,

determined by strategic trends and priorities in

the economy [Valdaitsev S.N. Drukker P.,

Clark K., Kondratiev N.D., Mitrofanov M.Y.,

Nizhegorodtsev R.M., Razumovsky V.M.,

Santo B. et al;]

 management of innovation potential and

innovation activity of enterprises [Glazyev

S.Y., Gokhberg L.M., Zavlin P.N., Kazantsev

A.K., Kovalev G.D., Fatkhutdinov R.A.,

Yuryev V. M. et al];

 The development of innovation activity and

activity of economic entities in the system of

cluster associations, megacities, and other

territorial and spatial formations [Aleshin A.V,

Alieva E.M., Asaul A.N., Gusev Y.V., Ivanter

V.V., Isaeva E.M., Mensch G., Nikulina O.V.,

Nelson R., Perani J., Polovova T.A.,

Rodionova N.D., Skoch A.V., Trofimova

O.M., Chernikov E.A., Chernova O.A.,

Shevchenko I.K. Schumpeter, J.A. et al.].

At the same time, the analysis of publications of

scientists-economists has shown that in the context of

the theory of innovation systems it is necessary to

further study the issues of transformation of the

innovation system and its entire infrastructure in

conditions of a radical change of technological

priorities in connection with the new technological

mode.

It seems that the creation of innovative

infrastructure of the national economy can be

implemented by changing the model of interaction

between the state and economic entities and territorial

spatial formations, including through the

improvement of the investment mechanism as a

national project.

For this purpose, an attempt has been made to

substantiate the main provisions of the conceptual

scheme of formation of the organizational mechanism

of functioning of the management system of the

national innovation system.

5 CONCLUSION

As a result of the study, the features of the current

stage of development of the innovation economy,

which intensify competition in the global market of

high-tech products, were identified:

ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure

212

 The process of acceleration of scientific and

technological development, which is a

prerequisite for the transition of national

economies to the sixth technological mode as a

result of the fourth industrial revolution;

 Artificial intelligence production tools, digital

technologies, nano- and biotechnologies,

nanobiotechnologies, and other

microelectronic components are predicted to

form the technological basis of the new

technological paradigm;

 Government agencies in many countries are

taking a proactive stance with regard to

stimulating R&D in priority areas with

subsequent dissemination of science and

technology achievements at the global market

scale to ensure sustainable development of the

economy.

Meanwhile, the national innovation system is

characterized by dispersion of intellectual resources,

selective financing of innovation projects, poor R&D

and technology transfer results, and weak linkages in

the "science-production-commerce" system.

As a result, the NIS of the domestic economy has

a number of significant inconsistencies in the

construction of the management system. The analysis

of publications on this issue and our own research

allowed us to substantiate and propose a conceptual

scheme of formation of the organizational mechanism

of functioning of the management system of the

national innovation system. This approach can be

used as the basis for the transformation and structural

construction of the management system of NIS

infrastructure of the national economy with new

mechanisms and tools to generate innovation,

technology transfer.

The results of the study of the formation of

innovation environment in the transition period of the

sixth technological mode allow us to further

substantiate a number of provisions concerning the

transformation of the complex of management tasks

to enhance innovative development.

REFERENCES

Digital Russia (2019). RBC.

Forecast of long-term socio-economic development of the

Russian Federation for the period up to 2030:

developed by the Ministry of Economic Development

of the Russian Federation Access from the reference

legal system "ConsultantPlus".

Gusev, Y. V., Polovova, T.A., Natalyina, T.V., Belkov,

A.V. (2016). Formation of logical structure and strategy

of production and economic systems growth. The

International Journal of Applied Business and

Economic Research, 14(10): 311-327.

Gusev, Yu.V., Polovova, T.A. (2017). Megacities and

clusters as reference points for the formation of an

innovative environment. Stage: economic theory,

analysis, practice, 5: 22-35.

Gusev, Yu.V., Polovova, T.A. (2017). Conceptual

foundations for the formation of the framework of the

national economy, Economics: yesterday, today,

tomorrow, 7 (2A): 73 - 84.

Gusev, Y. V., Polovova, T.A., Karnaukh, I. (2016).

Strategic Focus as a Tool Ensure Economic Stability

and of Non-Financial Corporations as Socio-Economic

Systems in Russian Economy Modern. Journal of

Applied Economic Sciences, Vol. XI, 5(43): 968-982.

Golichenko, O. G. (2011). The main factors in the

development of the national innovation system: lessons

for Russia. 634 p.

Kaminsky, S.M., Meshcheryakova, M.A., Kolosov, N.V.

and et al. (2019). Innovative development of

ecosystems, 323 p.

Kalashnikov, I.B., Vavilina, A.V., Yakubova, T.N. (2018).

A new technological structure on the way to the

formation of an innovative economy. Creative

Economy, 12 (9): 1307-1320.

Mudrak, Ya.O., Pobegailo, M.G. (2019). A new

technological structure on the way to the formation of

an innovative economy in the aspect of ensuring

economic security. Bulletin of Youth Science, 2: 23-25.

National report on innovation in Russia (2016). Boston

Consulting Group, BCG.

On the Strategy for the Innovative Development of the

Russian Federation for the Period until 2020: Order of

the Government of the Russian Federation No. 2227-r

dated December 8, 2011 (as amended on October 18,

2018). Access from the reference legal system

"ConsultantPlus".

On the Strategy for Spatial Development until 2025: Order

dated February 13, 2019 No. 207-r. (as revised on

31.08.2019). Access from the reference legal system

"ConsultantPlus".

Petrikov, A.V. (2019). Features of the innovative

development of the regions of the Central Federal

District of the Russian Federation. Economics of

Sustainable Development, 1 (37): 64-67.

Ponkratova, L.A., Grankina, V.L. (2016). Features of

integrative relations between science, state and industry

in Russia and abroad. International Review of

Management and Marketing (IRMM), 6(2):142-148.

Rodionova, N.D. (2016). Spatial-network interaction of the

subjects of the regional innovation system: concept and

development scenarios. Monograph.

Rodionova, N.D. (2015). Trends in the development of

cooperation and technological exchange in the spatial-

network interaction of the subjects of the innovation

system. Bulletin of the Rostov State Economic

University (RINH), 2 (50).

Rudskaia, I.A., Rodionov D.G., Gorovoj A.A.,

Kudryavtseva T.J. (2015). Scheme of Program

Cooperation between Participants of Regional

Sustainable Development of the Innovation System in the Context of the Sixth Technological Paradigm

213

Innovation System. Procedia - Social and Behavioral

Sciences, 207:824–832.

Rudskaia, I.A., Rodionov D.G., Guzikova L.A. (2014).

Innovation potential of regions as a factor of national

economy competitiveness. Actual problems of

economy, 158 (8):215-233.

Sviridova S.V., Shkarupeta, E.V., Archakova, S.Yu.

(2019).The mechanism for managing the innovative

environment of an enterprise in the digital economy.

Production Organizer, 27 (1): 63-71.

Shinkevich, M.V., Shinkevich, A.I., Chudnovskiy, A.D.,

Ishmuradova, I.I., Marfma, L.V., Zhuravleva, T.A.

(2016). Formalization of Sustainable Innovative

Development Process In the Model of Innovations

Diffusion. International 25 Journal of Economics and

Financial Issues (IJEFI), 6(l):179-184.

Shinkevich, A.I., Galimulina, F.F., Moiseyev, V.O.,

Avilova, V.V., Kuramshina, K.S., Ishmuradova, I.I.,

Ponkratova, L.A., Grankina, V.L. (2016). Features of

integrative relations between science, state and industry

in Russia and abroad. International Review of

Management and Marketing (IRMM), 6(2):142-148.

Vodolazhskaya, E. L., Shinkevich, A. I., Ostanina, S. Sh.,

Chikisheva, N. M., Sharafutdinova, M. М. (2017).

Innovative forms of Industrial Enterprises’

Cooperation. International journal of environmental

and science education, 12(1):69-77.

Vodolazhskaya, E. L., Zaraychenko, I. A., Shinkevich, A.

I., Avilova, V. V., Ostanina, S. Sh., Gainullina R. R.

(2018). Strategies for regional innovation networks

development. Revista Espacios, 39 (09):1015-1021.

Vodolazhskaya, E. L., Kudryavtseva, S. S., Shinkevich, A.

I., Ostanina, S. Sh., Chikisheva, N. M., Lushchik, I. V.,

Shirokova, L. V. (2014). The Methods of National

Innovation Systems Assessing. International Review of

Management and Marketing, pp. 225 – 230.

Utepbergenov, I., Bobrov, L., Medyankina, I. (2018).

Principles of creation of information support system for

innovative economy in the Republic Kazakhstan.

Economic and Social Development: materials digest of

the 28th International Scientific Conference on

Economic and Social Development (19-20 April 2018,

Paris, France), pp. 271-276.

World Bank Group (2021). Official site,

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator.

ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure

214