Articles

Strategic priorities of regional development and technological sovereignty: points of convergence

Received: 15.07.2025 Published: 15.07.2025

UDC: 338.2 EDN: BZRUMN

Full text

Abstract

Introduction. In contemporary conditions, researchers are increasingly focusing on, on the one hand, the global technological agenda and methods for defining corresponding national priorities, and on the other hand, approaches and mechanisms for forming strategic regional development priorities. However, research on these two fronts is predominantly conducted in isolation, which limits the practical implementation of the resulting solutions. Furthermore, recent global shocks have demonstrated the high vulnerability of overly centralized production systems; achieving technological sovereignty requires a balanced and sustainable aggregate of regional economic systems. The purpose of this study is to examine the points of convergence between global technological trends, the correct consideration of which is required for achieving technological sovereignty, and regional strategic development priorities within the Russian economy. Materials and methods. The research was conducted using methods of scientometric analysis and content analysis. The Lens.org platform served as the primary source for forming the corpus of articles. Scientometric analysis was performed using VOSviewer software (version 1.6.20). Content analysis of the most relevant articles was carried out to identify the intersection points of the considered thematic blocks, taking into account the concepts that formed the core clusters in the constructed network maps. Results. Based on the construction of term network maps that account for the time factor, the study reveals disconnects in research on strategic regional economic development priorities and technological sovereignty. Research on technological trends shows a shift in focus from technological development to technological progress. Regarding regional development, a wide diversity of concepts was identified (innovation, strategic planning, cooperation, integration, employment, center-periphery relations, the search for competitive advantages and ways to respond to challenges by balancing strategies at different levels and the interests of various actors), alongside the absence of a clear trend in the evolution of publication content. Conclusions. The study identifies areas of intersection between the considered thematic blocks: the infrastructure-technology domain, the human capital development domain, the creation of an innovation ecosystem, and industrial cooperation. Based on the analysis results, it is concluded that forming a new framework for economic policy is advisable-one that integrates regional, scientific-technical, and innovation policy not only through the inclusion of the same issues but also via new regulatory instruments.

Keywords

How to cite

Для цитирования:

Никитаева А. Стратегические приоритеты регионального развития и технологический суверенитет: точки сопряжения // Государственное и муниципальное управление. Учёные записки. 2025. № 4. С. 39–45.

For citation:

Nikitaeva A.Y. Strategic priorities of regional development and technological sovereignty: points of convergence // State and Municipal Management. Scholar Notes. 2025. no. 4. P. 39–45.

How to Cite

Nikitaeva A.Y. Strategic priorities of regional development and technological sovereignty: points of convergence // State and Municipal Management. Scholar Notes. 2025. no. 4. P. 39–45.

References

  1. Caravella S., Crespi F., Cucignatto G., Guarascio D. Technological sovereignty and strategic dependencies: The case of the photovoltaic supply chain// Journal of Cleaner Production. 2024. Volume 434. 140222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140222.
  2. Crespi F., Caravella S., Menghini M., Salvatori C. European technological sovereignty: An Emerging Framework for Policy Strategy// Intereconomics. 2021. 56. 348–354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-021-1013-6
  3. Edler J., Blind K., Kroll H., Schubert T. Technology sovereignty as an emerging frame for innovation policy. Defining rationales, ends and means// Research Policy. 2023. 52 (6). 104765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104765
  4. Гареев Т.Р. Технологический суверенитет: от концептуальных противоречий к практической реализации // Terra Economicus. 2023. 21(4). C. 38–54. https://doi.org/10.18522/2073-6606-2023-21-4-38-54
  5. Edler J., Blind K., Frietsch R., Kimpeler S., Kroll H., Lerch C., Reiss T., Roth F., Schubert T., Schuler J., Walz R. Technology Sovereignty: From Demand to Concept// Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research Policy Brief No. 02/2020. Available online: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/233462/1/policy-brief02-2020.pdf (accessed on 15 September 2025)
  6. Blind K. Standardization and Standards: Safeguards of Technological Sovereignty? // Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2025. Volume 210. 123873. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123873.
  7. March C., Schieferdecker I. Technological sovereignty as ability, not autarky// Int. Stud. Rev. 2023. 25 (2) DOI: 10.1093/isr/viad012
  8. Martynova E., Shcherbovich A. Digital transformation in Russia: Turning from a service model to ensuring technological sovereignty// Computer Law & Security Review. 2024. Volume 55. 106075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106075
  9. Pandey P. Digital Sovereignty and AI: Developing India’s National AI Stack for Strategic Autonomy// Procedia Computer Science. 2025. Volume 254. 250-259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2025.02.084.
  10. Katsikas S.K. Towards a cybersecurity-oriented research agenda for digital sovereignty// Procedia Computer Science. 2025. Volume 254. 279-288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2025.02.087.
  11. Никитаева А.Ю. Институциональная структура региона в контексте инновационного развития промышленности // Журнал институциональных исследований. 2017. Т. 9. № 1. 134-149. https://doi.org/10.17835/2076-6297.2017.9.1.134-149.
  12. Вольчик В.В., Маслюкова Е.В., Барунова А.А., Демахина О.В. Дифференциация регионов России в процессе реиндустриализации // Экономика региона. 2025. Т. 21. № 1. 1-16. https://doi.org/10.17059/ekon.reg.2025-1-1
  13. Kosolapova, N.A., Nikitaeva, A.Y., Dolgova, O.I., Gridnev, D.S., Fedorova, A.A. Clustering of Russian Regions: Transformation Factors and Economic Behavior Patterns. In: Kuzmin, E., Hodgson, G.M., Bravi, L., Lavrikova, Y. (eds) Searching for Developmental Alternatives in Economic Theory. EASET 2024// Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Springer, Cham. 2025. 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-91159-0_10.
  14. Бредихин С. В., Сварчевская М. В. Тренды мировой научно-технической политики в II квартале 2025 года. М.: ИСИЭЗ НИУ ВШЭ. 2025. Режим доступа: https://issek.hse.ru/news/1091824521.html
  15. Gholizadeh A., Wang Y., Saneinia S. The political economy of regional development initiatives: A multiple-case analysis of economic impact and strategic objectives// Journal of Environmental Management. 2025. Volume 394. 127356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.127356.
  16. Schütz M., Kriesch L., Losacker S. Mapping local government priorities: a web-mining approach for regional research// Regional Science Policy & Practice. 2025. Volume 17. Issue 12. 100240. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rspp.2025.100240.
  17. Победин А. А. Инновационная трансформация регионов на основе умной специализации: методика анализа стратегий социально-экономического развития // Муниципалитет: экономика и управление. 2025. № 2(51). С. 20–35.