Международное научное сотрудничество России

The article analyzes the role of China in the most important areas of international scientific cooperation in the Arctic, in which non-Arctic players are involved along with the Arctic countries. The legal basis for scientific cooperation in the Arctic is the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the other is the Arctic Council. In 2013, China became the official observer state of the Arctic Council, thus taking an important step towards participating in Arctic international cooperation. Despite the fact that China is a non-Arctic country, factors such as climate change in the Arctic, the prospects for the development of the region’s resources and the Arctic Channel contribute to China’s interest in the Arctic and its policy towards the region. Taking into account the interests of China in the Arctic, as well as the legal framework and responsibility in the Arctic, under the existing mechanisms of international cooperation in the Arctic, China is involved in a number of Arctic international scientific research, mainly in the field of natural sciences. At the same time, China introduced its new platform for international cooperation in the Arctic – the Polar Silk Road, which is making some progress in international scientific cooperation.

This seventh Synthesis with the Science Diplomacy Action serial emerged from the panel session on Arctic Science and Technology Advice with Ministries, which was convened during the Arctic Circle Japan Forum in Tokyo on 5 March 2023. This session built on transdisciplinary dialogues with the February-March 2022 webinar series on Enhancing International Scientific Cooperation: Arctic Science and Technology Advice with Ministries, which was funded by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan with coordination and logistics provided by the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR), as represented in Synthesis 6. Dialogues in both venues were strongly influence by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the ongoing war with consequences for international Arctic scientific cooperation, as reflected by the 3 March 2022 “pausing” of the Arctic Council. With this background, the Arctic Circle Japan Forum session addressed three questions: 1. How can nations maintain as well as enhance international Arctic scientific cooperation, especially in the context of Open Science? 2. How can individual scientists work with ministries to build Open Science inclusively during times of geopolitical strain? 3. How can ministries facilitate continuity with the Arctic Council inclusively beyond the Arctic Council chairship rotation from Russia to Norway in May 2023? The panel involved leaders from the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, International Arctic Science Committee (IASC), Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC), National Institute for Polar Research (NIPR), Sasakawa Peace Foundation, Science Diplomacy Center™ and the University of the Arctic (UArctic). Panelists’ international perspectives from Finland, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom and the United States are represented in the transcript of their panel dialogue, which is reproduced herein to provide insights about continuity with international scientific cooperation and Open Science inclusively to achieve progress with Pan-Arctic sustainable development.

The purpose of the article is to comprehensively investigate the forms and directions of international activity of Ukrainian historians of interwar Poland based on the analysis of various historiographical literature. The research methodology relies on the use of an interdisciplinary approach. Based on the principles of objectivity and historicism, the research has d the structural-functional systematic analysis of historiographical facts and the comparative-historical method. The article has used the heuristic possibilities of periodisation, classification and typology methods. The scientific novelty of the article consists in an attempt to comprehensively reconstruct the participation of Ukrainian historians of interwar Poland in international scientific cooperation. Conclusions. Despite the generally repressive cultural policies of the Polish government, Ukrainian historians in the Second Polish Republic generally adapted well to the difficult political and financial circumstances. Giving a proper response to numerous socio-political and cultural challenges, they managed to preserve the traditions formed at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. Mainly traditions of international scientific cooperation and, despite constant financial problems, Ukrainian free socio-humanitarianism in foreign forums. In terms of institutions, international scientific cooperation was most actively established by the members of the Shevchenko Scientific Society and the Ukrainian Scientific Institute in Warsaw. This cultural activity gained special national importance in the 1930s of the 20th century, when Ukrainian socio-humanitarianism was subjected to devastating repression under the Soviet occupation. In general, in the conditions of stateless existence at the time, the international scientific cooperation developed by Ukrainian historians in the Second Polish Republic was a kind of cultural diplomacy, realizing the important task of establishing the political subjectivity of Ukrainians.

The purpose of the article is to comprehensively investigate the forms and directions of international activity of Ukrainian historians of interwar Poland based on the analysis of various historiographical literature. The research methodology relies on the use of an interdisciplinary approach. Based on the principles of objectivity and historicism, the research has d the structural-functional systematic analysis of historiographical facts and the comparative-historical method. The article has used the heuristic possibilities of periodisation, classification and typology methods. The scientific novelty of the article consists in an attempt to comprehensively reconstruct the participation of Ukrainian historians of interwar Poland in international scientific cooperation. Conclusions. Despite the generally repressive cultural policies of the Polish government, Ukrainian historians in the Second Polish Republic generally adapted well to the difficult political and financial circumstances. Giving a proper response to numerous socio-political and cultural challenges, they managed to preserve the traditions formed at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. Mainly traditions of international scientific cooperation and, despite constant financial problems, Ukrainian free socio-humanitarianism in foreign forums. In terms of institutions, international scientific cooperation was most actively established by the members of the Shevchenko Scientific Society and the Ukrainian Scientific Institute in Warsaw. This cultural activity gained special national importance in the 1930s of the 20th century, when Ukrainian socio-humanitarianism was subjected to devastating repression under the Soviet occupation. In general, in the conditions of stateless existence at the time, the international scientific cooperation developed by Ukrainian historians in the Second Polish Republic was a kind of cultural diplomacy, realizing the important task of establishing the political subjectivity of Ukrainians.

The importance of cooperation between Ukraine and the European Union is described in the article. The priority directions of research and innovation activity of the EU countries in the field of energy are considered. The key strategic directions of the state energy policy of Ukraine are described, taking into account the country’s European integration course. The state and main problems of the development of the energy sector are analyzed. The trends of energy generation from renewable sources and possibilities of development of this sphere in Ukraine are determined. The necessity of the country’s participation in international scientific and technical cooperation in the energy sector, primarily with the EU are substantiated. Ukraine's declared pro-European orientation requires an appropriate activity strategy, which involves taking into account European standards of production and economic development. Thus, the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU opens up significant prospects for international scientific and technical cooperation of Ukrainian industrial enterprises, in particular energy enterprises, which are determined by greater involvement in innovative and technological projects of the EU, expanding access to capacious European sales markets, using Ukraine's opportunities for attraction of foreign investments and technology transfer, as well as participation in various EU development programs. At the same time, this requires not only the establishment of new priorities for the development of the energy sector, but also their achievement in the medium and long term. The process of international scientific and technical cooperation in the European Union plays a key role in the development of the economy, since the further strengthening of the EU's position on the world stage depends on the effectiveness of the involvement in the process of solving the problems of scientific and technical development of the potentials not only of the Commonwealth of Nations, but also of the entire European region. For this purpose, the European Commission has developed a plan for the creation of the "European Scientific Space", a special place in which cooperation with developing countries and countries with transition economies is given.

This article is devoted to the study of theoretical and legal ideas about scientific sanctions and their political and legal nature, as well as an analysis of their impact on the publication activity of Russian scientists in foreign publications. In modern conditions of geopolitical and geo-economic turbulence, sanctions policy has a restraining effect on the development of scientific and technological potential. In this connection, the purpose of the study is to conceptually generalize the legal nature of scientific sanctions, identify existing barriers to international scientific and technical cooperation and find ways to overcome them. Sanctions policy is represented by various forms of generating difficulties in the sphere of participation of certain states in international network collaborations and established forms of cooperation. The legal basis of sanctions policy is the unilateral termination of contractual relations, which causes damage not only to the state against which sanctions are imposed, but also to the state that imposes sanctions. As a way to respond to sanctions challenges in the field of scientific and technological development, the dynamic development and implementation of innovative measures to support the national scientific and scientific-technical sector is proposed. As measures to increase the publication activity of Russian scientists in foreign publications, it is seen, first of all, the need to form and implement a special state policy as an integral part of the state scientific and technical policy in the field of international cooperation, since its development in these conditions cannot be limited only to the initiatives of scientific subjects and scientific and technical activities. In particular, it seems possible to change the geographical directions of international scientific and technical cooperation. This also involves encouraging friendly countries to harmonize foreign and domestic policies in the field of science, technology and innovation, as well as to harmonize national legislation and improve the functioning of organizational and legal mechanisms of cooperation.

The purpose of the article is to highlight the prospects for strengthening the positions of European companies in the deep tech market in the context of the modernization of the EU innovation landscape by using the potential of regulatory policy and competition policy. The article is based on a research hypothesis, which stems from the fact that at the present stage there is a rethinking of the role of innovations as a source of socio-economic development of global economic entities. It has been established that even at the supranational level, powers in the field of implementing EU innovation policy are distributed between several departments and directorates; such distribution of powers has determined the specificity and diversity of budget mechanisms for financing innovations, which leads to subadditivity of innovation management. The role of innovation for European society is to transform research results into new, higher-quality goods and services in order to maintain and improve their competitiveness in the global market, as well as to improve the well-being of the population. The EU innovation policy is aimed at creating conditions recognized to facilitate the introduction of innovative ideas to the market, and is also a link between the policy of research and development in the field of technology and innovation and the industrial policy of states. Within the framework of the concept of open innovation, the following forms of international innovation cooperation can be distinguished: obtaining knowledge from the external environment (licensing, obtaining firms-sources of knowledge); knowledge transfer (for example, from a management company to foreign subsidiaries); partnership (equal cooperation between two companies, one of which is a non-resident of the other country); venture investments (infusion of foreign capital into innovative projects, start-ups). International innovation cooperation today is expressed mainly in the commercial activities of states: purchase and sale (export and import) of technologies in materialized form; provision of technological know-how (transfer of experience) on a contractual basis, as well as technical support within the framework of cooperation; sale of patents and licenses; personnel training (advanced training, retraining); creation of joint ventures. Coordination is the development by two states or a group of states of a common policy in the field of innovation and technology development. The methods for implementing this form of international innovation cooperation may be the implementation of various interstate programs in the field of joint scientific and technical activities. DeepTech ("deep" technologies) are fundamentally new technological solutions of innovative companies, including start-ups, developed with the aim of finding answers to global challenges and requiring long-term scientific research and significant investment. The areas of deep-tech most often include: new materials, advanced manufacturing technologies, biotechnology, blockchain, robotics, photonics, microelectronics and quantum computing, life sciences, chemistry, space, green energy and agriculture. "Deep" technologies will be in demand beyond the EU and will generally increase the inflow of investment into the innovation sector of Europe. An even more significant budget (EUR 372 billion for 2021-2027) has been allocated through the InvestEU program. It plans to support successful projects of SMEs entering IPO and implement venture fund programs focused on the late stages of the innovation cycle (scale-up venture capital) and formed from the funds of pension funds and insurance companies. Another program, "European Scale-up Action for Risk Capital" (ESCALAR), with a budget of EUR 1.2 billion until 2027, also includes tools to support innovative businesses. The general logic of the modernization of the EU innovation development program assumes a certain "smoothing" of the pan-European innovation landscape by supporting existing and launching new interregional initiatives. This will help to balance the innovative development of regions and EU countries, including those with low indicators in this area. One of the features of venture capital is its high-risk nature, i.e. the possibility of not receiving the expected profit, or losses as a result of the inefficiency of the financed project. This risk must be justified by the high profitability of commercial activity. But venture capital does not simply strive for risky entrepreneurial projects, it kind of frees the innovative entrepreneur from risk, shifting it to itself through venture funds, where this risk is shared between its numerous partners in proportion to the contribution of each. For this reason, venture capital controls the activities of the innovative entrepreneur, creating all the conditions for him to enter the market.

This is a curious book—part oral history of scientists engaged in international scientific cooperation, part commentary on the differences between Soviet-style science and U.S. scientific research, part history and analysis of U.S./USSR scientific cooperation, and part observation of the impact of scientific cooperation on foreign affairs after the fall of the Soviet Union. Sher, who was engaged for many years in the management of exchange programs between the United States and the Soviet Union and later Russia, speaks with knowledge and experience of the many programs begun in the dying days of the Soviet Union and continued thereafter. In particular, he chronicles the efforts to save what was left of the Russian scientific establishment after 1991 and restore it to some semblance of its previous status.Sher is a good writer; many of his examples and vignettes are engaging and informative. But he is neither a historian nor a scientist, though he is knowledgeable about the methods of both history and science. Much of the book is devoted to a history, as he experienced it, of the science agreements between the United States and the Soviet Union shortly before 1991, and then a detailed history of the relations after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Because of his focus on the fall of the Soviet Union and its aftermath, he has little to say about the years immediately after World War II, a period with its own revealing lessons of scientific cooperation with the Soviet Union. The centerpiece of the book, however, is an annotated history of experience in the programs of cooperation with the “new” Russia, presented in the words of the participants along with commentary interpolated by Sher. Problems, successes, scientific accomplishments, foreign-policy effects, human impacts, and bureaucratic difficulties are described, usually in the words of those engaged in the programs, occasionally by foreign-policy officials.The book does not fit into any specific realm of analysis—neither the history of science, international affairs, nor bureaucratic politics. Rather, it is a personal memoir analyzing Sher’s experiences in a little-studied area of international scientific cooperation. There have been other more typical disciplinary analyses of international scientific cooperation from the perspective of international affairs, as well as of the Russian state's influence on international policy after the Soviet Union's demise, the relevance of scientific cooperation to strategic issues, or even the relationship of research to scientific advance. Sher offers suggestions about how international cooperation affects these areas and makes several points about their relevance to foreign policy, though they tend to be anecdotal and sometimes based on personal reflections about prominent officials (Henry Kissinger takes his lumps) or about the Department of State in general. The occasional digressions of that kind, even when deserved, do not point to an underlying disciplinary analysis.Notwithstanding the personal nature of the history presented, the material does make contributions to specific disciplinary areas. Many of the comments about the differences between the structure and assumptions of the Russian/Soviet style of scientific research and that of the West, particularly the United States, are instructive and useful inputs to the history of science. The interesting and intriguing views that Sher is able to obtain from significant actors in cooperative programs often help to illustrate many of the problems and successes encountered in the cooperative research programs. They provide useful cautions about issues that can arise in cooperative efforts across nations and cultures. This book is largely a personal memoir, interesting but not a discipline-based or interdisciplinary analysis.

The purpose of our research was to study the transformation of international Eurasian scientific and technical interaction within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (hereinafter—SCO). The methodological basis of the study is formed by comparative legal and formal-legal methods. The method of comparative legal analysis is aimed at comparing the legal regulation of scientific and technical cooperation in the SCO member states. The method of formal and legal analysis was used to interpret legal acts of the SCO member-states aimed at developing legal and institutional basis for mutually beneficial cooperation in science and technology. The relevance of the study is predetermined by the growing influence of the development of science and technology within the framework of interstate organizations. The novelty of the work is due to the small degree of study of the problem of international Eurasian scientific and technical cooperation. The study analyzed ways to intensify international scientific and technical cooperation within the SCO, including the establishment of commissions or councils on scientific and technical cooperation, development of model legal acts aimed at creating a legal framework for the development of international relations in the field of science, the formation of special funds to finance research, as well as the adoption of a new agreement on scientific and technical cooperation between the SCO member-states. As a result of the research, the authors conclude that in order to develop international Eurasian scientific and technical cooperation, a number of legal, institutional and organizational and financial measures are required.

By far the most important way that the international community has sought to govern the global environment is through cooperation among nation states and the creation of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), or regimes. There are currently more than 140 MEAs in existence, most of which have come into being since 1972. Studying international environmental cooperation provides insights into exactly how states succeed or fail to work together to address complex transboundary and global problems. International environmental negotiations have been fraught with difficulties, and conflicts of national interests, values, and priorities. These clashes have often led to compromises that have disappointed many. These negotiations are also often remarkable for examples of political entrepreneurship, creative compromises, and last-minute solutions. They have attracted attention and participation from a wide range of actors, not only states and their representatives, but also scientists, activists, and business leaders. International relations theories of bargaining and “cooperation under anarchy” have provided important insights into the complex factors that shape negotiation outcomes and regime formation. At the same time, the study of international environmental cooperation has brought to the fore important dimensions of these processes that had hitherto been less visible in this field of study, but have gained in importance across most, if not all, types of global governance regime in recent years. In later sections of this chapter, we examine the growing influence of the South in global governance, the role of scientific and technological expertise, and increasing demands for participation by non-state actors, notably civil society and corporate sector actors.

International activities of public laboratories in Canada

Objective. This note aimed to summarize the main achievements and to determine emerging political-legal challenges of Antarctic governance in the light of the 60th anniversary of the Antarctic Treaty. Methods. A Comparative Analysis of academic papers on this matter, and interpretation of the legal provisions of declarations and statements adopted during the past decade by the Antarctic Treaty Parties’ official delegations and authorized representatives. Results. The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) is widely considered as one of the most successful and robust international legal regimes. It is the first welldeveloped institution to govern all kinds of human activities on the continent-wide large scale in the area covering nearly 10% of Earth’s surface. Peaceful use, international scientific cooperation, and the protection of the Antarctic environment, including the rational use of marine leaving resource in the Southern Ocean, comprise the three basic elements that are and continue to be cornerstones of the ATS. While the Antarctic Treaty Parties have been mostly focusing on two arising issues (climate change and tourism), the ATS is now facing a number of other political and legal challenges, such as heterogeneity amongst memberstates, pressure to internationalize Antarctic governance, unresolved issues of jurisdiction and territorial sovereignty claims, including the delimitation of continental shelf in the Southern Ocean, as well as the growth and diversification of Antarctic resources commercial activities – illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and bioprospecting etc. Conclusions. The current 60th anniversary of the ATS is laid at the most stabile stage of its development in the first part of twenty-first century, just in the middle of another almost 60-year period between 1991 and 2048 milestones that referring to the banning of mining in Antarctica and possible mechanism of its review respectively. Therefore, now it is the appropriate time to reinforce international efforts through relevant and proactive interaction between government and legislative bodies, to address the most important issues putting the Antarctic Treaty System under pressure and giving rise to new challenges. It is also the appropriate time to update national Antarctic strategic interests and priorities, in particular to define clear vision for Ukraine’s political role in Antarctica.

The article is devoted to the development of bilateral and multilateral relations between Russia and the European Union (EU). Such relations are based on the principle of cooperation among States, which, in accordance with international law, establishes the duty of cooperation regardless of differences between States on an equal basis and in a variety of fields. Since the scope of modern international law has expanded significantly, many areas of cooperation have been developing rapidly. These include such areas as science, innovation, education. In the context of internationalization of science, the development of mutually beneficial international cooperation for the formation of a model of international scientific cooperation and international integration aimed at protecting public interests and improving the efficiency of Russian science requires the analysis of the best forms of cooperation, information exchange, resolving legal issues of participation in various scientific projects. Fields of science, innovation and education are among the unifying areas in which the development of international cooperation continues despite the adverse international situation. The article deals with conventional, non-conventional and institutional forms of between Russia and the EU.

Since its establishment in 2008, the Center for Science Diplomacy of American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has advocated global scientific cooperation, stressed the importance of international scientific cooperation for improving international relations, actively promoted cross-regional international participation and regional cooperation, encouraged scientists to actively participate in policy formulation, and helped scientists play a better role in international cooperation. Based on the AAAS Annual Report from 2018 to 2022, important activities of the AAAS Center for Science Diplomacy in these years are reviewed. China's science and technology society should learn from the experience, promote global science and technology development, strengthen non-governmental science and technology exchanges, facilitate the practice of science diplomacy, spread the concept of China's science diplomacy, to make greater contribution to building a community with a shared future for humanity.

The issues of ensuring sustainable development of the fuel and energy complex are a major task, including within the framework of international cooperation. One of the main problems that must be solved is environmental problems, environmental protection, and protection of natural biodiversity from the functioning of the fuel and energy complex. The solution to these problems is possible through the creation of international scientific and technical cooperation between states. The work analyzed a unified scientific, technical and innovation policy and monitoring its implementation, as well as proposed mechanisms to improve the effectiveness of this policy.