It is the first time for many years that a united team has got power in the country. Therefore, the President, the Verkhovna Rada and the Cabinet of Ministers should have talked in unison. Scandals (if they exist) do not get out of the corporation to the society and do not affect international institutions. I recollect that just one year ago Ukrainian forums were filled with anecdotes about political quarrels between Yuschenko and Tymoshenko. Every Ukrainian citizen has felt what this all leads to.


Educational reform canceled?

Today reality changed. Nobody tries to win more power in the politicum. Still, it is too early to appraise new authorities. They should not only talk in unison but also act this way. The actions should be implemented in laws and be supported by real figures. Ukrainians don’t want to hear about reforms, they want to see their implementation, their influence on the life of every pupil, student, and teacher.

What can be said about science and education sphere? As usual, the problem lies in the lack of money. The road map of state policy in this field is the basic financial document of the country, its budget. But what is this budget like? It is wrong to say that the budget is totally bad. We are aware of the crisis, so the budget should fight it.

Budget’s pros and cons

Let’s return to education. One of the budget’s positive moments is the improvement of funding for selected articles compared to the previous year. For example, I’d like to consider the “School Bus” program. Azarov’s Cabinet of Ministers resumes this program’s funding. Resultantly, in 2010 45 mln. UAH will be allocated in order to buy 139 buses. What are 139 buses for thousands of pupils who need to walk several kilometers to reach school every day?... It is a drop in the ocean. But this year we’ll have 139 more buses and next year this figure will also increase, I hope.
Speaking of the budget’s 2010 advantages one can’t help mentioning the purchases of computer equipment for schools. Compared to the 2009 budget the funding of this program has increased by 10 mln. UAH. This money will give the ministry opportunity to equip about 100 educational institutions. It is important that most part of the money was received by countryside schools as long as without the computer skills their graduates won’t be able to compete with their counterparts from the city.

 There is money provided for completion of several university buildings, complete overhaul of a number of hostels. 190 mln. UAH allocated for these purposes will considerably lower the workload on the Ministry’s of Education housing fund.

Sufficient augmentation (almost 3 times) of general remuneration of labor fund can be considered only conditionally positive. Actually, this money will be spent for decumulation and won’t pay dividends to overall development of science and education.

Innovations can’t be provided by filling in holes

Meanwhile, this year’s budget contains many “buts.” Let me remind you that during his annual address to the nation the President concentrated on the field of the Humanities. Yanukovych decided to announce the year 2011 to be the year of education and informational society. But it seems that the Cabinet of Ministers didn’t pay appropriate attention to this. Real expenditures for science and education of the basic financial document of the country do not correlate with the goals set by the head of the state. In this budget the initiatives concerning educational reform, modernization of professional technical colleges, professional personnel retraining are not taken into account.

Today the Cabinet of Ministers doesn’t invest money in further development of the field but is focused on filling in the holes left after the previous government. But effective education is the foundation of sustained development of the state. So what will the country get in 10-15 years?

During ten years of independence we have lost 10 thousand kindergartens. Resultantly, more than half of the children don’t receive a full-fledged preschool education. Afterwards they find themselves at school with the lack of textbooks, workbooks, qualified teachers. That is why if we talk about educational reform, we should start not with rewriting of certain chapters of the textbooks, as our core minister proposes, but from the acceptable conditions for education of our children!

If we proceed with filling in the holes we should forget about Ukrainian education of high quality. Petty economy today tomorrow may lead to much bigger expenditures.

In general, it can be summed up that the budget 2010 repeats the mistakes of past budgets oriented on populism and not on sustained development. No qualitative reforms are possible with such a budget.

Way out for science

I’d like to say more about science. According to the law of Ukraine “About Scientific and Scientific-Technical Activity,” 1.7 of Ukrainian GDP should be spent for scientific activity funding. The Cabinet of Ministers predicted that in 2010 Ukraine’s GDP would reach 1000 bn. UAH. Consequently, 17 bn. UAH should have been allocated for science development this year. On the contrary, only 4.7 bn. UAH are provided for this in the budget 2010. Shameful to recognize this, but it is one of the lowest indices for the last ten years. So how can we talk about “intellectual product” development?

Nobody is paying attention to the quality of our education presently. Resultantly, university graduates often can’t find work according to their specialization. Our education gives very good theoretical knowledge but it is hard to be adapted to practice.

Today the state doesn’t moderate the country’s development. Ukraine is in need of integral state programs in order to involve inner and external investments into the sphere of science and education. But the state does too little to achieve this. Money likes order, and we don’t have order in our laws.

Unfortunately, our education, as one of the types of economic activity, isn’t very attractive to international investors. Direct investments in this field reached its maximum in 2007 and were 36.7 mln. US. In 2008 already they have fallen to 18.1 mln. US (0.006% of all the investments in Ukraine).

Industrial parks as national investment

One of the ways to attract investments into this sphere is the creation of industrial parks (organizations into which research institutes are united). Industrial parks are created to concentrate all the conditions for super productive activity. This allows adopting scientific innovations into the sphere of production as fast as possible.

Unfortunately, to achieve this, strategic thinking is needed as long as state support of industrial parks is always investment into the future. Industrial parks always pay for themselves but not by the means of money earned directly. Their incomes are indirect. They are earned by expansion of existing production, competitiveness increase, and new products promotion at new markets.

    For example, in the neighboring Poland industrial parks are under the authority of local governments. They are directly interested in their regions’ development. Resultantly, local authorities assist industrial parks’ development too. There are almost 90 members in Polish association of industrial parks and incubators. Out of them 40 are business incubators (organizations that provide full specter of services for small and medium-sized businesses). At the beginning of the XXI century there were 1118 industrial parks and incubators in Poland.

    If we take world practice into account we’ll see that industrial parks receive different amounts of state funding in different countries. For one, in China they receive 90% of funding needed and in Finland this amount is only 30%. The experience of industrial parks’ development shows us that full state sponsorship for these organizations turns out to be too expensive and not effective. This is confirmed by Ukrainian experience in this sphere. State innovation fund was created in 1992. According to the law, all the Ukrainian companies had to submit 1% of their income to it. During 8 years of its existence the fund proved state investments to be ineffective: 93% of its programs were disrupted.
From the USSR we have inherited quite good manufacturing capabilities and education. Though they are out of date, it is possible to use them as a basis for further development as long as the most successful are the industrial parks created near big technical universities. If we combine new approaches with scientific basis, it is possible to achieve high results.

Instead of an epilogue

State budget is an instrument of strategic planning. And I want to stress its strategic planning function. Former government also lived only here and now. It’ll be a pity if this government does the same. I’ll quote Polish poet Kazimierz Tetmajer: “What you wanted to do tomorrow, do today; and what you wanted to say today delay for tomorrow.”

  David Zhvaniya is the head of the Intellectual Property and Innovation Activity Subcommittee under Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, Committee on Science and Education.