Financing System Development Russian Education Science Programs

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1339 editor@iaeme.com
International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET)
Volume 10, Issue 01, January 2019, pp. 1339–1350, Article ID: IJMET_10_01_136
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=1
ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359
© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FINANCING
SYSTEM OF STATE PROGRAMS IN THE FIELD
OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE
RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Tatiana Viktorovna Krupa
GlobalLab, Ltd
Moscow, Russian Federation
ABSTRACT
The implementation of the Russian Federation state policy covering the national,
regional and local levels, is designed for socio-economic impact through state
programs of the Russian Federation.
The message of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly
of March 1, 2018 states that the development of Russia and long-term growth can
provide priority projects “in spatial development, investments in infrastructure,
education, health care and the environment, new technologies and science, economic
support measures, promotion of talents, youth”, as part of government programs
aimed at financial support of a new quality of life and innovative development,
modernization of the economy.
Achievement of the set strategic targets is possible due to the increase in the
effectiveness of public spending by adopting organizational, financial and methodical
measures to improve the system of financing state programs, including by
encouraging the attraction of private investment in government projects.
Key words: Management, University, Structure, Promotion, Development.
Cite this Article: Tatiana Viktorovna Krupa, The Development of the Financing
System of State Programs in the Field of Education and Science of the Russian
Federation, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 10(1),
2019, pp. 1339–1350.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=1
1. INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the Procedure for Applying the Budget Classification of the Russian
Federation 19, the expenditure part of the budget is managed by standard-cost, program-
targeted, project-based methods in accordance with the target budget allocations, which
reflect program items and budget expenditures [1].

The type of budget expenditures discloses financial instruments, with the help of which
financial support is provided to state programs: scholarships, grants, work subsidies, budget
investments, intergovernmental transfers, government procurement, etc.
1.1. The organizational approach to the concept of financing the state programs
of the Russian Federation
The organizational approach to the concept of financing the state programs of the Russian
Federation as a focused activity on the development and execution of the program budget of
the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, which consists of:
 the formation of goals and objectives for the state programs of development of education and
science in accordance with which the selection of tools that reflect the results is carried out -
target indicators (indicators);
 development of mechanisms for action to achieve the goals and the selection of the optimal
ones for implementation;
 calculation of forecast values in the formation of the program budget;
 ensuring the execution of the program budget; monitoring and control of the execution of the
program budget.
1.2. The legal approach to the concept of financing the state programs of the
Russian Federation
The legal approach to the concept of financing the state programs of the Russian Federation
reveals the functional component of the support of financial processes in accordance with the
fundamental legal acts in force in the country.
1.3. The information approach to the concept of financing the state programs of
the Russian Federation
The information approach to the concept of financing the state programs of the Russian
Federation discloses its interconnection and interdependence with the state integrated
information system for managing public finances ―Electronic budget‖ (hereinafter referred to
as the ―Electronic budget‖ IIS) during financial operations.
1.4. The characteristic functional features of the financing system of state
programs in the field of education and science of the Russian Federation
During the theoretical analysis of the approaches to the formation of a system of financing
state programs in the field of education and science of the Russian Federation, as well as
taking into account the study of the financial mechanism for supporting activities in the field
of education and science, the main features of the system of financing state programs in the
field of education and science of the Russian Federation were identified:
 the formation of financial and institutional relations about the efficient use of budget funds (in
the context of state programs in the field of education and science of the Russian Federation)
in the unity of all its fundamental participants and actions;
 management of organizational support of the processes of program execution of the budget of
the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia on expenditures;
 information and analytical support of the process that ensures the cash execution of state
programs in the field of education and science of the Russian Federation;

The Development of the Financing System of State Programs in the Field of Education and
Science of the Russian Federation
 to monitor the financial support of state programs in the field of education and science and to
analyze the results of the implementation of state programs in the field of education and
science.
 the primacy of the whole lies in the interaction of subjects and objects through common
financial methods and tools;
 hierarchy manifests itself in functional structuring, where each component of the system is
considered as a subsystem of budget spending between the Ministry of Education and Science
and financial management bodies, co-executives, participants of state programs for financial
support of state programs, contractors (services), recipients of subsidies to meet their financial
obligations;
 the relationship with the external environment consists in the exchange of financial
information with the GIS ―Electronic Budget‖ and its functional blocks (registry of
agreements, registry of contracts and contracts concluded by customers, reporting on the
implementation directions of state programs of the Russian Federation, etc.);
 focus on the program budget execution and the achievement of increasing the effectiveness of
its functioning;
 the continuity of operation and development consists in the application of various instruments
and methods of financing, as well as the possibility of their improvement;
 alternative directions of operation are to develop algorithms for the adaptation of financial
instruments to the field of education and science to achieve the results enshrined in the
passports of these state programs.
It is important to note that the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian
Federation, like the GRBS, is a participant in the budget process and performs the functions
of planning and executing the budget, monitoring the execution of the budget, and also carries
out budget accounting and reporting. Consequently, the criteria for assessing the effectiveness
of financial support for state programs implemented by the Ministry of Education and Science
of Russia should include all the above-mentioned functional characteristics of the activities of
this department [2]. Taking into account the fact that the Ministry of Education and Science of
the Russian Federation is the responsible executor of the GPRO and GPRNT, the indicators
for assessing the effectiveness of financial support for state programs implemented by them
characterize the latter‘s maintenance of both financial and management accounting.
Thus, the system of financing state programs in the field of education and science of the
Russian Federation can be defined as a set of subjects and objects interacting during the
program execution of the budget by means of uniform for education and science methods and
tools for managing budget expenditures, allowing for the systemic allocation of education and
science finances, promoting integration and management indicators in assessing the impact of
financial support for state programs.
Financing of public programs can be carried out by applying treasury, banking or mixed
models of public financial management, the features of which are explored in the following
article [3].
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1. Materials
The results of fundamental and applied research, contained in scientific works of domestic
and foreign scientists-economists, devoted to public finances in the field of education and
science, in particular, the specifics of financing state programs.

2.2. The methodological base
The methodological base of the research is formed on the basis of the use of a systemic,
evolutionary, historical, program-targeted and project-based approach to monitoring and
evaluating the effectiveness of government programs. In the course of the work, the following
methods were used: systematization, logical structural, comparative and cause and effect
analysis of scientific sources, classification, groupings, formalization of criteria, expert
assessments, modeling, functional and factor analysis of public expenditures during the
implementation of state programs.
3. RESULT AND DISCUSSIONS
3.1. Models of treasury budget execution by key features of management can be
divided into [4]:
 hyperactive (the treasury in accordance with the established criteria decides to carry out these
or other expenditure operations);
 active (the treasury, in addition to the allocation of resources, sets limits on liabilities and on
payment of expenses);
 passive (the treasury allocates resources to budget institutions, according to the approved
budgets).
In our opinion, the role of the Federal Treasury of Russia is active and consists in
financial and informational support of the activities of state structures with accounting and
control functions. Since 2016, its role in Russia has increased in connection with the
empowerment of the control and supervisory activities of the financial and budgetary sphere,
as well as with the introduction of new managerial functions consisting in the implementation
of treasury approval of operations accompanied by government contracts agreements.
It is important to note that since 2016 the practice of treasury contract support and
agreements has been recognized as successful and received its continuation in 2017-2018.
3.2. The positive results of work on treasury support of government contracts
(contracts, agreements) determined by the Federal Treasury:
 the flow of funds to the subjects of the real sector of the economy from the budget;
 implementation of target indicators (indicators) of government contracts, contracts and
agreements established in the conditions of their provision;
 increasing requirements for government contracts, providing for advance payments, etc.
 In 2017, the scope of treasury support expanded:
 application of the treasury mechanism for securing obligations in the process of banking
support of state contracts;
 the use of treasury escort using a treasury letter of credit (in the Ministry of Education and
Science of the Russian Federation in the direction of the implementation of the federal target
program "Research and development in priority areas of development of the scientific and
technological complex of Russia for 2014-2020" (hereinafter - FTPIR)).
3.3. The main instruments of treasury budget execution in different countries are:
 limits of budgetary obligations (Great Britain, France, Australia, Canada, Italy, Germany);
 budget and financial limits (Brazil);
 budget allocations (USA);

 budget and cash limits (Japan).
3.4. The main instruments of treasury budget execution in Russia
In Russia, budget allocations and budget commitment limits are the main instruments for
budget execution. In addition, in order to strengthen control over their use, in 2016, marginal
amounts of payment of monetary obligations were introduced, which are established for the
main managers of budget funds monthly or quarterly in general, without detailing the budget
classification codes.
3.5. The results of a comparative analysis of 4.5 and 4.4.
According to the results of a comparative analysis, it can be stated that there is no single
model for managing public finances and an organizational structure, each of the above
financing systems is unique and applicable to a particular state.
Studying the experience of some of the functional capabilities of the treasury systems of
developed countries is necessary, in our opinion, to identify positive trends used in individual
countries to improve the quality of budget execution, to expand the capabilities of budget
management systems in Russia. An example of successful borrowing of Canadian experience
in providing a certain set of government services to citizens in electronic form is the practical
use of documents-bases (contracts, agreements, government contracts, etc.) in scanned form
(pdf format) by the Treasury of Russia for budget execution [5].
In addition, the GIS ―Electronic Budget‖ in Russia was developed and implemented by
analogy with public financial management systems in Brazil and South Korea.
In general, in the context of market relations, the identification of features of foreign
public finance management systems in terms of the formation and development of financing
systems is necessary to determine the viability and soundness of the development of the
Russian financing system, the ability to adapt existing foreign practices to the Russian reality.
3.6. Features of the current stage of treasury budget execution in Russia:
 First, the strengthening of control and supervisory functions through the introduction of
mechanisms for authorizing budget expenditures.
 Secondly, permanent modernization of the regulatory framework in the public sector.
 Thirdly, the introduction of new instruments into the treasury budget execution system
(treasury and bank execution of government contracts).
 Fourth, ensuring openness and transparency of funds.
Proceeding from this, it can be stated that modern public finance management follows the
development of the treasury budget execution system, which contributes to the
implementation of the basic principles of the budget system: improving the efficiency of
budget expenditures (target orientation, timeliness), increasing the accuracy of forecasts
through operational accounting and control, orderliness and control of the movement of
budgetary funds, etc. [6]. All these arguments indicate the need for timely adaptation and
ensuring the flexibility of the system of financing state programs in the field of education and
science to the new conditions of functioning [7].
In general, budgeting is a tool to achieve the goals of the organization (department). In
practice, basically there are two concepts of budgeting - costly and efficient. Effective -
program-target, management by the centers of responsibility, and cost-based includes model
estimates, incremental and program [8].

3.7. The stages of reforming the budgetary system of the Russian Federation
regarding the development of education and science.
The main processes associated with stages of reforming the budgetary system are considered
in the thesis regarding the development of education and science, systematized and broken
down into the following periods.
3.7.1. Stage I. Cost Management Period (1991-2002)
 the use of budget funds in accordance with the plan,
 the distribution of financial assistance;
 the emergence of programs of socio-economic development and sectorial development
strategies aimed at achieving balance and sustainability of the budget system of the Russian
Federation;
 the modernization of the system of public finance and inter-budgetary relations;
 the creation of the Stabilization Fund of the Russian Federation,
 the development of federal treasury bodies, etc.
Budget execution was carried out within the framework of educational activities for the
project approved by the Government of the Russian Federation (1994-1999) in accordance
with the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, laws on the budget for the next financial
year, "On Education", "On Science and State Scientific and Technical Policy ".
Federal targeted programs were introduced.:
 1997–2000 (extended to 2001) — on state support for the integration of higher education and
basic science;
 2000–2005 — execution of the federal program for the development of education (hereinafter
- FTs11RO);
 2002–2006 integration of science and higher education in Russia, research and development in
priority areas of science and technology.
3.7.2. Stage II. Transition from cost management to results management (2002-2008)
 2004 — the beginning of the Concept of reforming the budget process, which provides for the
reform of budget accounting and classification: maintaining a separate accounting for the
"existing" and "accepted" obligations; transition to medium-term financial planning with a
focus on results; expansion of the scope of application of program-targeted funds; the
emergence of departmental targeted programs; improvement of budget execution procedures
(Federal Law ―On placing orders for the supply of goods, performance of works, and
provision of services for state and municipal needs‖).
 2006 — the introduction of large-scale measures to reform the Russian education, called the
priority national project "Education":
 2006–2007 — the introduction and development of innovative methods in secondary schools,
higher educational institutions, including work on the Internalization of training and updating
of educational equipment, the purchase of buses for rural schools;
 2008–2009 — active support of primary secondary and secondary vocational education,
modernization of regional education systems.
 During this phase, a network of federal universities and leading world-class business schools
was created from the federal budget. Additional measures are being taken to train the
organization of military contract training and provide them with benefits.

 As part of incentive measures, incentive payments are made to class teachers, prizes to the
best teachers, grants to support talented young people, etc. Many of the listed activities have
their continuation in the framework of existing activities of the GPRO.
 Introduced a long-term FTPIR (2007–2013).
3.7.3. Stage III. Implementation of results-based management principles (2008):
 The process of reorganization of budgetary institutions,
 the separation of levels of the budget system,
 budgeting in accordance with the goals and designed to obtain a specific result,
 the process of bringing accounting and reporting to international standards is underway.
 In 2008, a two-year analytical targeted departmental program is launched, designed to ensure
accessibility and improve the quality of services for additional education of children.
 In 2009, there is a need to increase the number and development of scientific and pedagogical
personnel in innovative Russia; a federal targeted program (hereinafter-FTP) is being
developed and introduced, which operates from 2009 to 2013.
 A decision was taken on the next continuation of the Federal Targeted Program for Proposal
Development in 2011–2015.
 The departmental program of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation
on the patriotic education of citizens (2011–2015) starts its development.
 In 2010, the reforming of the public finance management system begins (the transition from
cost estimates to the state task for indicators of the activities of institutions providing public
services) aimed at improving the efficiency of budget expenditures. In the same period, there
is an active introduction of program-targeted budgeting, designed for planning in accordance
with the strategic goals of the state.
 Since 2012, it was launched of the implementation of GPRO and GPRNT for 2013–2020. etc.
FTSPIR is introduced in 2014–2020.
 Departmental target program for advanced training of engineering and technical personnel,
designed for 2015-2016.
Thus, there was a gradual transition from the costly to an effective budgeting model, i.e. A
goal-oriented process of spending public funds aimed at achieving results and allowing for an
analysis of expenses with the results for each event and their compliance with the priorities of
state policy [9].
In addition, a set of measures is used that are necessary for the executive in charge for
effective management monitoring for compliance and justification of target cost orientation
with a focus on priority areas and monitoring the implementation of measures for the timing
of control events and timely financial support for state programs with the ability to resolve
problem situations and prevent deviations implementation from planned [10].
Advantages in comparison with costly financing
Practical application of program financing allowed distinguishing a number of advantages in
comparison with costly financing [11].
 Financing of activities is carried out taking into account the results and performance of
activities planned in the program (previously carried out according to the established cost
standards).

 The increase in authority and responsibility of the managers of budget funds for subordinate
institutions in the management and to achieve the planned result.
 Simplify the budget structure, increase information transparency and accessibility.
 The establishment of functional links between the budget and the strategic goals of the state.
 Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of sectorial departments.
 Achieving efficient use of budgetary resources.
The dynamism and materiality of changes in the economy determined the need for the use
of modern management tools aimed at ensuring the achievement of goals and the
effectiveness of budget spending in a team manner [12]. Project management based on
characteristic principles for program-targeted management has become such an instrument of
effective management in government bodies, since both of these tools belong to goal-setting
methods [13].
The concept of ―project management‖ has not received legislative recognition, but there is
a mention in one of the regulatory documents, in which project management ―is identically
equal to the balance of project content, cost and time‖ [14].
In the framework of the thesis under the project management we will consider the
management of particularly important activities in the department, presented in the form of a
set of interrelated activities that make up projects aimed at creating a unique result in the time
and resource constraints [15].
Increasing the effectiveness of the organization of activities
The task of project management in executive authorities is to increase the effectiveness of the
organization of activities to achieve their goals at the expense of [16, 17]:
 application of project-oriented management system;
 ensuring the centralization of the process of program-targeted budgeting, leading to the
linking of various programs among themselves;
 ensuring the unity of the system, covering all stages from development, justification to
adoption, implementation of budget decisions;
 organizing the interaction of participants in the project implementation (including
interdepartmental relations), coordination of all necessary conditions;
 training employees to further endow them with special competencies of specialists and
managers of project offices;
 motivation of civil servants to a successful result when performing functional tasks;
 implementation of the technology of the project office;
 implementation of the processes of strategic and tactical management, project management
(process management and operational management);
 improving the efficiency of use of labor, financial and other resources, etc.
Laws and regulations affecting budget implementation
 medium-term planning, calculated for three years (with the exception of 2016), in which
planning is only for the next financial year;
 the procedure and rules for the implementation of procurement activities;
 legal, organizational and economic situation in the field of education;

 legal improvement of regulatory documentation;
 provisions on the support and development of scientific and technical activities;
 information support of public finance management.
3.7.4. Stage IV. The beginning of the project management principles implementation in
terms of the priority tasks realizations (2017)
Project management as a tool for effective priority projects management:
 development of the export potential of the Russian education system;
 universities as centers of innovation creation space [18];
 modern educational environment for schoolchildren;
 workforce for advanced technology;
 modern digital educational environment in the Russian Federation;
 accessible additional education for children.
The goal of the implementation of priority projects is to improve the quality of education
in all the above projects at the same time under team control using digital technologies to
ensure the following results [19]:
 implementation of timely control over the progress of projects, the adjustment of funding
parameters and targets through analytical tools of the information platform;
 operational decision-making in a joint discussion of all departments, organizations, subjects of
the Russian Federation, excluding prior approval;
 horizontal and vertical management of the activities of the federal and regional teams of
project offices;
 improving the quality of decisions by attracting expert groups and public councils to the work
of the design committees;
 improving the efficiency of budget expenditures;
 synchronous increase of the effectiveness of the education system at all levels of education.
The management of priority projects and programs of project activities was considered in
detail by Russian authors who emphasize the need for a special organizational structure, the
availability of specialists with behavioral, contextual and technical competences in the field of
project management, and an effective system of motivation of project activities specialists
[20].
3.7.5. Stage V. Organization of project activities in the implementation of the state program
"Education Development" (since 2018.)
The innovation is the Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation ―On the
approval of the state program of the Russian Federation ―Development of education‖ [21].
Distinctive features of financial support of the newly introduced GPRO:
 ranking of projects and departmental target programs at the stage of development of the state
program by the responsible executor;
 formation of proposals on the structure (change of structure) and financial support for the
implementation of the state program in the next fiscal year and in the planning period, which
are taken into account at the stage of preparing drafts of the maximum amount of allocations
from the federal budget and the budgets of state extra-budgetary funds for the implementation
of the state program;

 the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia will carry out an examination of the
proposals of the responsible executive and prepare relevant conclusions (regarding the
assessment of the required amounts of financial support from the budget allocations of the
federal budget and the budgets of state extra-budgetary funds), as well as the necessary
amounts of financial support from the budget allocations of the federal budget and extra-
budget funds;
 ensuring the consolidation of budget allocations of the federal budget and the budgets of state
extra-budgetary funds of the Russian Federation,
 integration of public financial and regulatory measures.
4. CONCLUSIONS
Thus, the analysis of the theory and practice of the distribution of financial resources in the
field of education and science allowed us to distinguish the stages of evolutionary historical
development of the budget system from the period of cost management to the implementation
of project activities in the implementation of state programs; to identify the main criteria for
evaluating the effectiveness of the state program financing system based on planning
indicators (expenditure planning, etc.), budget execution for expenditures (the number of
discrepancies in the settlement and payment documents with the requirements of budget
legislation, the number of violations in the fiscal sphere, and t . e.), budget execution by
revenues (the number of unpaid invoices of suppliers (contractors), etc.), accounting and
control over the fulfillment of financial obligations under the state programs (quality of
financial and management analysis, etc.).
The study proves that when implementing state programs, the main criteria for assessing
the effectiveness of financial support for state programs are financial and management
indicators, the integration of which allows the complex functional characteristics of the
system of financing state programs of the Russian Federation to be taken into account.
FUNDING STATEMENT
Applied research described in this paper is carried out with financial support of the state
represented by the Russian Federation Ministry for Education and Science under the
Agreement #14.576.21.0100 of 26 September 2017 (unique identifier of applied research -
RFMEFI57617X0100).
REFERENCES
[1] Abramov, R. A., Mukhaev, R. T., and Sokolov, M. S. To a Question about the Criteria and
Parameters of the Effectiveness of the Government in Democratic Countries. Journal of
Advanced Research in Law and Economics, 7(6), 2017, pp. 1248–1262.
[2] Abramov, R., and Sokolov, M. Current Challenges and Competitive Advantages of
National Innovation Systems (NIS) of the Countries-Participants of the Union State up to
2030. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, 8(4(26)), 2017, pp. 1031–
1039.
[3] Borooah, V. K. Modelling institutional behaviour: A microeconomic analysis of
university management. Public Choice, 81(1), 1994, pp. 101–124.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01053268
[4] Biskup, T., Gusev, M., Manceski, G., and Mitrevski, P. A. New Solution for Workflow
and Document Management Used for University Management in WODOMI Project. In:
D. Davcev and J. M. Gómez (Eds.), ICT Innovations 2009 Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer
Berlin Heidelberg, 2010, pp. 451–460.

[5] Vysochin, S. V and Pitelinskii, K. V. The application of a manufacturing execution system
(MES) to computer-aided planning and quality control in college and university
management. Scientific and Technical Information Processing, 36(6), 2009, pp. 323–331.
https://doi.org/10.3103/S0147688209060033
[6] Casteen, J. T. Effective University Management in Difficult Times. In: N. C. Liu, Q.
Wang, and Y. Cheng (Eds.), Paths to a World-Class University: Lessons from Practices
and Experiences Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2011, pp. 139–157.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-355-6_7
[7] de Andrade Roméro, M., Sudan, D. C., de Meira, A. M., da Rocha Brando, F., and
Sorrentino, M. Environmental Education in University Management: Contributions to
Sustainability Construction at The University of São Paulo, Brazil. In: W. Leal Filho, C.
Skanavis, A. do Paço, J. Rogers, O. Kuznetsova, and P. Castro (Eds.), Handbook of
Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development in Higher Education: Volume 2. Cham:
Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 369–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
47889-0_26
[8] Vallé, H. A. C., Peralta, G., Farioli, M. and Giacosa, L. New Paradigms for University
Management. In J. Leitão and H. Alves (Eds.), Entrepreneurial and Innovative Practices in
Public Institutions: A Quality of Life Approach. Cham: Springer International Publishing,
2016, pp. 19–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32091-5_2
[9] Renaudie, M. French university management reforms: critical perspectives from a legal
point of view. French Politics, 16(1), 2018, pp. 96–116. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41253-
017-0049-2
[10] Shattock, M. Research, Administration and University Management: What Can Research
Contribute to Policy? In: R. Begg (Ed.), The Dialogue between Higher Education
Research and Practice Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2003, pp. 55–66.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-48368-4_5
[11] Materka, A. and Strzelecki Michałand Dȩbiec, P. Student‘s Electronic Card: A Secure
Internet Database System for University Management Support. In E. Tkacz and A.
Kapczynski (Eds.), Internet - Technical Development and Applications Berlin,
Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009, pp. 59–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
642-05019-0_8
[12] Pulido, M., Sánchez-Soriano, J. and Lorca, N. Game Theory Techniques for University
Management: An Extended Bankruptcy Model. Annals of Operations Research, 109(1),
2002, pp. 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016395917734
[13] Park, E. From Academic Self-Governance to Executive University Management:
Institutional Governance in the Eyes of Academics in Europe. In U. Teichler and E. A.
Höhle (Eds.), The Work Situation of the Academic Profession in Europe: Findings of a
Survey in Twelve Countries Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2013, pp. 183–203.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5977-0_9
[14] Lancaster University Management School. In: The Grants Register 2018. London:
Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2018, pp. 462–463. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-94186-
5_710
[15] Lahoud, I. and Chamekh, F. Towards an Architecture for Universities Management. In: P.
Ciancarini, F. Poggi, M. Horridge, J. Zhao, T. Groza, M. C. Suarez-Figueroa, V. Presutti
(Eds.), Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. Cham: Springer
International Publishing, 2017, pp. 69–81.
[16] Furnham, A. Odd places: university management. In Management Mumbo-Jumbo: A
Skeptics‘ Dictionary London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2006, pp. 102–104.
https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230626591_39

[17] Galbraith, P. Out of the Frying Pan: Into the Fire of Post-Global Financial Crisis (GFC)
University Management. Higher Education Policy, 26(4), 2013, pp. 523–550.
https://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2013.12
[18] Wroblewski, A. Feminist University Management: Precondition or Indicator for Success?
A Case Study from Austria. In: K. White and P. O‘Connor (Eds.), Gendered Success in
Higher Education: Global Perspectives. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2017, pp. 49–
70. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-56659-1_3
[19] Jonsson, L., Baraldi, E., Larsson, L.-E., Forsberg, P. and Severinsson, K. Targeting
Academic Engagement in Open Innovation: Tools, Effects and Challenges for University
Management. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6(3), 2015, pp. 522–550.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-015-0254-7
[20] Pozdneev, B., Busina, F. and Ivannikov, A. Smart University Management Based on
Process Approach and darts-Standards. In: V. L. Uskov, R. J. Howlett, and L. C. Jain
(Eds.), Smart Education and e-Learning. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016,
pp. 73–82.
[21] Government of the RF. Resolution ―On the approval of the state program of the Russian
Federation ‗Development of education‖from 26. 12. 2017. Retrieved from:
http://pravo.gov.ru/proxy/ips/?docbody=&nd=102456645&rdk=&backlink=1

Financing System Development Russian Education Science Programs

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Financing System Development Russian Education Science Programs

Similar to Financing System Development Russian Education Science Programs (20)

More from IAEME Publication

More from IAEME Publication (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Financing System Development Russian Education Science Programs