Interlinking of science, foresight and policy: the case of neuroscience development in Russia

3. Increasing the number of man-made disasters;

4. The growth of information load;

5. High levels of morbidity including central nervous system disease;

6. Slower growth in labor productivity;

7. The challenges of global demographic transition;

8. Transition to the production of the next generation;

9. Development of extreme climatic zones.

Based on the above mentioned it can be concluded that neurotechnology is one of the few pillars and technological research activities in the 21st century (Kablov, 2010). Moreover, launching the number of global research projects with public financing around the world for the studying brain says about the relevance and need of the clarification of brain functioning and further usage of this knowledge for the entire world civilization.

1.2.1 Global Neuroscience Projects

Undoubtedly neurotechnology is a global trend around the world nowadays. Every developed country understands the importance of neuroscience development in their country. Already in the near future economic growth of countries will be caused by advances in neurotechnology domain. "Knowledge economy" and high-tech industries sector is becoming the foundation of countries' economy. There will be the essential increase of labor productivity and energy efficiency, improving the quality of human capital, the growth of sectors which are responsible for human development (health and education), increase the country's defense thanks to obtained new technologies. Those countries that do not develop neuroscience could not be competitive on the world stage anymore.

Thus, recent years many developed countries had launched specialized neuroscience projects which are the infrastructure for policy strategy implementation for effective development of neurotechnology domain. Breakthroughs in neurotechnology are created mainly at the intersection of different disciplines with the joint participation of private and public institutions with financial and organizational support from the state. Thanks to overall support the actual erasure of time line between basic and applied research in neurotechnology domain became a trend which has emerged in recent decades.

The activity of all global projects which were launched in order to study the brain focused on developing breakthroughs aimed at:

1. structural and functional brain mapping,

2. mathematical modeling of the brain and the development of a new generation of supercomputers,

3. the creation of advanced interfaces "brain-computer" and "eye-brain computer",

4. early diagnosis and preventive treatment of acute, chronic and congenital diseases of the brain.

Key elements of fundamental science which should promote the overall development of neuroscience are divided into four areas: accuracy of measurement and data collect1ion; advanced computer shortchanging data, modeling and simulation; a thorough understanding of neural structures, networks and functions; understanding of cognition and the architecture of complex systems. Each of these areas plays an important role in the development neurotechnology. They must develop simultaneously, not in isolation from each other.

In order to show graphically the scale of the domain support the case study results of the 14 biggest neurotechnology projects around the world are presented in Table 1. As resource of information publicly available reports and surveys of global projects were used. Description of each project was conducted according to next set of parameters: year of launch, country, volume of budget, source of budget, aims, infrastructure, and current state.

Table 1. Overview of global neurotechnology projects.

1.3 Literature review conclusion

Summing up the analysis of literature, it was repeatedly noted that different in topic scientific and technological domains demand very similar recommendations for their implementation (for example, Summary report “FET Flagships Recommendations for Implementation document”, 2010). Moreover, effective development of any domain cannot exist without a common strong system for science, technology and innovation realization.

Thus, that means that not only local policy for definite domain should be studied, it is very essential to consider a general level of country innovativeness and Science, Foresight and Policy interlinking in country as basis for rapid and proper development of any scientific domain.

2. Methodology

In the third chapter the methodology approach of the present study is described. The general idea of research concept in academic studies is designated. Principles of case study in the domain of neuroscience are shown. The procedure of interview is described. The framework of benchmarking method is given. All stages of competitive benchmarking for the neurotechnology domain are presented in details.

2.1 Research overview

The present study was conducted according to approach which is illustrated on Figure 3.

Figure 3. Methodological approach to research

First, the literature review of scientific resources on the topic was conducted. The research concept of study was developed with attention on the significance of Science, Foresight and Policy interlinking for launch and development of promising science directions and new technologies. Then area of Neurotechnology was considered as a case. Existing global neurotechnology projects around the world were studied during the case study. A series of interviews was conducted as essential study for detecting weaknesses in Russian neuroscience domain. The most relevant neurotechnology cases were compared during benchmarking. Reinforcing and counselling information for current policy regulation of Russian neurotechnology case was obtained. At the last, the possible scenarios of new neurotechnology implementation into everyday life from the point of policy preparedness degree for that were considered critically.

Further each step of methodology approach in present study is considered in details.

2.1.1 Research concept of Science, Foresight and Policy interlinking

Generally, a research concept is understood as a combination of fundamental ideas, principles, rules, revealing the essence and the relationship of phenomenon or system that are under investigation and allows identifying the system of indicators, factors and conditions that contribute to solving the problem or the formation of a strategy.

Research concept involves an overall design of research, system of fundamental views, ideas and principles that means a set of methodological guidelines which are defining the approach to research and the organization of its implementation (Cronholma, 2011). Concept determines the components and parts of the test mechanism which should help resolving problems. In the structure concept includes the set of topics such as the characteristics of a concept object, purpose and objectives, the basic principles of the concept, the main directions of activity, the mechanism of realization of the concept.

The research concept of present study was developed and described in literature review. The concept was visualized for clarity in the Figure 1. Description of concept meaning was presented firstly generally and then with detailed specification of each interaction in interlinkages of Science, Foresight and Policy.

2.1.2 Case study in neuroscience domain

Current understanding of neurotechnology domain around the world was presented firstly in order to show the extreme topicality and potential of new neurotechnologies. Critical importance of the domain development for countries' economies and defense were emphasized.

As a preparatory phase for competitive benchmarking case study of existing projects in the neurotechnology domain around the world was conducted. Case study is empirical study that examines the modern phenomenon in its truly existing context where the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not obvious and a lot of diverse information sources are used (Soy, 1997). Case study is a complicated research method because generally multiple sources of data are involved and large amounts of data are produced for analysis. Researchers from different scientific directions use the method in order to describe an object or phenomenon, to explain the situation, to produce a new theory, challenge or dispute the theory or provide solutions for situations. The method advantages are its applicability to real life, everyday situations, and its accessibility to the public by means of written reports. Case study results enhance an understanding of real life situations.

Study of each project was conducted briefly emphasizing the next set of parameters: year of project launch, country-founder, volume of project budget, source of funding, main project goals, project infrastructure and management type, current state and achievements of projects. Publicly available reports of global projects were used as source of information for case study.

2.1.3 Interviews

Interview is a basic tool for studies designed for formal consultation and the accumulation of knowledge possessed by the interviewees. Interviews are called structured conversations that remain within the given topics and allow extracting the "implied" knowledge, not clothed earlier in verbal form, or documented, which are nevertheless easier to get into a conversation with experts or politicians than literary analysis (Gubrium, 2002). The possibility of using this method in a wide range of research purposes allows talking about its universality and diversity of collected evidence indicates a significant potential oral questioning.

In the research the informal individual interview was used. This method contributes to the intuitive understanding of the issue or issues as well as the detection of unexpected areas of relevance to the study. Moreover, such method has the ability to quickly change the set of relevant questions in the formation of a conceptual image of the problem and the kind of interviews can be used at all stages of the study. In present study members of the Russian neurotechnology project were interviewed in order to understand the current state of project, detect the points for improvements and changes and distinguish possible objects for competitive benchmarking. Eight representatives participated in individual interview: three of them are managers of high position in the projects, which are related to Foresight side of project, another four persons are representatives of scientific and business community, whose private projects involved in global one as part, and last person is representative of policy apparatus. Generally, the next set of questions was asked personally or during phone call:

1. What weaknesses does Russian project have?

2. Is it possible to gain the main aim of project?

3. Which project can be taken as example for Russian project? What exactly? Why?

4. How can you estimate Russian position in neurotechnology domain?

During the series of interviews representatives of project were asked by additional questions in order to clarify and better understand the spokesmen points of view. Every interview takes from 15 to 40 minutes.

2.1.4 Competitive benchmarking

Benchmarking is the process of identifying, understanding and adapting existing examples of effective functioning of the projects in order to improve own work, based on comparative analysis using set of indicators. It equally involves two processes: evaluation and comparison. Benchmarking is used in all areas of activity of the projects and one of the effective tools of organizational change (Krylov, 2015). Using benchmarking gives the opportunity to gain experience of the organizational changes and thus created the basis for further improvement of the organization and management relying on its own strengths.

The founders of benchmarking are the Japanese, who have learned to perfectly copy other people's achievements. They carefully examined the European and American goods and services, identified their strengths and weaknesses and then produced something similar at a lower price. Moreover, the Japanese had successfully transferred technology and know-how from one business area to another. In the West benchmarking has been actively used in the late 1970s. At that time Japanese companies already greatly vexed the US companies, and their managers began to look for the causes of the dramatic loss of its share.

In Japan, the USA and other countries benchmarking program developed with government support. There are "industrial dating agencies" which are specifically designed to search for benchmarking partners (globalbenchmarking.com, benchnet.com et al.). It is believed that through such experience exchange the whole economy of country gets benefits (Fukolova et al., 2002).

Currently there are four main approaches to benchmarking: competitive, functional, general and internal. In present research competitive benchmarking is used. Competitive benchmarking is measuring enterprise performance, the study of specific products, features or administrative process methods and comparing them with the best competitors. The main stages of competitive benchmarking which have been passed during research are next:

1. Definition of an object for comparison using set of evaluation criteria;

2. Determination of object's needs for improvements and changes;

3. Competitive selection of relevant cases to compare;

4. Collection of information about chosen cases;

5. Analysis of align advantages and determination of the applicability of the data;

6. Adaptation and application of best practices and use of the gained experience.

At the first step of benchmarking innovation development of Russia was investigated. Russian neurotechnology case was studied according to the point of general study research concept which emphasizes on importance of Science, Foresight and Policy interlinking in the development of any technology domain. Russian neurotechnology project Neuronet was considered. Thus, Russian case was scrutinized in respect to the next set of criteria which was divided in two parts: country criteria and project criteria.

Country criteria:

1. Innovation climate in the country;

2. Policy for neuroscience domain in the country;

3. Foresight activities for Science/Technology development in neuroscience domain in the country;

4. Degree of science and technology development of neuroscience domain in the country.

Project criteria:

1. Goals, infrastructure, managerial board, main actors of the project, amount of budget.

Requirements for improvements and changes of Russian neurotechnology case were established thanks to the study of domestic case and the results of interview set with representatives of Russian neurotechnology project. The main factors affecting the efficiency of its operations, particularly important for the realization of competitive advantages were studied.

Owing to preparatory phase for competitive benchmarking which is case study of existing projects in the neurotechnology domain the most relevant and developing foreign cases in neuroscience domain were chosen. These cases also were considered from the point of the study research concept and innovativeness of country using described above set of country criteria. The investigation of neuroscience projects representing each country was conducted in accordance to mentioned above project criteria. Analysis of detected strengths in chosen cases and examination of their applicability for Russian case were conducted. Obtained knowledge from comparison of cases and advantage analysis was adapted for Russia case. The reinforcing and counselling recommendations for current policy regulation of Russian neurotechnology case were received.

2.1.5 Analysis of new neurotechnology implementation

The implementation of new technologies is not less important process than their creation. It is known many examples when policy and society are not ready to using breakthrough technologies due to different reasons. Thus, it is relevant to consider issue of new technologies integration in everyday life.

The analysis on the topic of new neurotechnology implantation in everyday life was conducted from the point of extrapolation the degree of policy preparedness for their implementation. Rapid and slow technological development was taken as the one criterion. High and low preparedness of policy for the introduction of new neurotechnologies in everyday life are taken as the another criterion. Four different scenarios as possible pictures of the future world were discussed critically: the most positive scenario, the positive scenario 1, the positive scenario 2 and the negative scenario.

At the end of the study general conclusion was done. Concept of Science, Foresight and Policy interlinking was debated as effective instrument in terms of designing new promising directionalities for science development and creating any new technology markets and as driver of countries' innovation development.

1. 3. Description of study

In the fourth chapter, the Russian neurotechnology case is described in details. Results of interview series with representatives from Russian project are presented. Successful foreign neurotechnology cases are detected and described in details. Results of strengths' analysis of successful cases and their adaptation for Russian case are shown.

3.1 Russian neurotechnology case

In recent years Russia has made great efforts to resolve the problems accumulated in the sphere of research and development in the 1990s (during the period of crisis development) in the development and implementation of the country's intellectual potential (Ivanova, 2013). According to the economic reform program the main objective of the government is to ensure that Russian supremacy in the field of science and technology will become a resource for economic growth. Nowadays the development of innovative neurotechnology becomes the one of key priorities of policy activity (Report "Neurotechnologies, 2014). Creating an enabling environment for innovation in the field of neurotechnology will allow modernizing the technological base of the Russian economy and dramatically increase the competitiveness of domestic products and developments in this area.

Current priorities in science and technology development were approved by the Government order of the Russian Federation dated by December 20, 2012 №2433-p "On the approval of the State programme “Development of science and technology” in the Russian Federation for 2013 - 2020 years.” As preparation step, in 2008 year “The concept of long-term Russian socio-economic development until 2020 year” was accepted. That is a fundamental document defining the strategy for the country's development including science and technology development and innovation design in scientific and technological sphere. In 2009 year “Technology platforms” were announced as the establishment of the innovation management tools in collaboration of government, business and science in Russia. The first list of 27 technology platforms was approved by the decision of the Government Commission on High Technology and Innovation in April, 2011. “Medicine of the Future”, which involves the neurotechnology domain, was included in the number of platforms. In 2011 the Russian Government on December 8 “The innovative development strategy for the period until 2020” № 2227-p had adopted, in which the restoration of the leading position of the Russian fundamental science on the world stage as well as the formation of a balanced and stable research and development sector are indicated. "Fundamentals of Russian policy in the field of science and technology for the period up to 2020 and beyond" have been approved by the President of the Russian Federation on January 11, 2012 № Pr-83, in which the strategic goal of state policy in the sphere of science and technology was called a software of world-class research and development and global competitiveness of the Russian Federation till 2020 year in the areas identified by national scientific and technological priorities. In the above-mentioned documents the foundation of the current national innovation system in Russia is laid, the system of measures for the development of research and development sector, innovation infrastructure, education environment, technological modernization of the Russian economy based on technological innovation are formulated.

In January, 2014 the forecast prepared by the Russian Ministry of scientific and technological development for the period up to 2030 was approved. Among the promising areas of research in the field of medicine and health the forecast includes the contact devices for the interaction of cells with artificial systems, integrated electronic control device for monitoring the current state of the organism, internal structure of the imaging system with ultra-high resolution. The list of 16 priority research tasks was formulated one month later, in which the task of "Brain: cognitive functions, mechanisms of neurodegeneration, molecular targets for early diagnosis and treatment." is included. The creation of brain-computer interfaces, robot-techniques and computer-mediated neurorehabilitation with targeted brain stimulation, development of the exoskeleton are among the expected results of the task (ASI Analytical report, 2015).

Despite of all above-mentioned Russia still is lacking in drivers for innovation, mechanisms for innovation and the framework conditions that stimulate innovation (Gupta et al., 2013). The reason of this is that corruption and lack of transparency destroy the intents of government making it difficult to reach the impact of policies. As attempt to over it government have created a business-friendly environment by launching special economic zones, technoparks and business incubators, but the use of knowledge for creating new product and processes and their commercialization is still one of the weakest aspects of Russia's innovation system. Moreover, without links to the industrial economy and better strengthening IPR the impact of such policy on the economy growth may be minimal. An underdeveloped financial sector and limited access to capital hamper the industrial innovation also, but improving regulations and the presence of foreign companies have affected positively on the growth of the banking industry. Moreover, excellent in the past Russian education lost its positions on global level in recent years.

It is worth mentioning that at the same time such promising areas as nanotechnology or biotechnology, where the Russian government had made large investments, do not have such problems as well as knowledge-intensive and nonproduction-driven sector like information technology (IT) had grown rapidly with increasing share in the global market in spite of the unpaved reasons that depress other economy areas (Gupta et al., 2013). Summing up, it is relevant to add that according to results of Global Innovation Index 2015 Russia took the 46th rank from 141 countries passing ahead all countries, which has activities in neurotechnology domain (Dutta et al., 2016).

Due to the unsatisfied intermediate progress of country's innovation development Russian government had taken measures in order to strengthen the NIS. The programme National Technology Initiative (NTI) was being prepared during several years and on December 4, 2014 the President of the Russian Federation V. Putin announced NTI in his Address to the Federal Assembly. NTI is a set of projects and programmes of the public-private partnership in launch and development of promising new markets based on high-tech solutions that will determine development of the Russian and global economy in the next 15-20 years. NTI has a focus on the markets emerging on the basis of a new technological mode, transition to which the developed countries are planning to implement in the next 10-20 years. NTI is anticipated to outcome in emergence of Russian companies leading global future markets by 2030-2035 (OJSC “RVC”, Press-release, 2015).

NTI has been formed as a broad alliance of project groups from technology entrepreneurs, representatives of the leading universities and research centers, major business associations of the country, development institutions, expert and professional communities as well as representatives from specialized government departments. Such groups are focusing on the markets formed on the basis of the new technological lifestyle, a transition to which is part of the developed countries' plans for the next 10-20 years [http://asi.ru/eng/nti/]. Project groups actively participate in the Foresight activities on the forming a development strategy for every market that will help to policy formulation.

Foresight study in order to design sectoral and territorial development, develop strategic vision competencies in the business environment, form a personnel reserve for state administration and the real economy was initiated in May, 2012 by Russian Governance (OJSC “RVC”, Press-release, 2014). During, several years the most promising direction of science and technology for Russian development were being studied. Finally, nine markets and three ancillary infrastructural and technological areas were chosen for government support in the frame of NTI. Next stage of Foresight study, namely the development of roadmaps for each market and area, was launched by government with a reason to build a view of future markets, which allows for policy-makers to formulate innovative strategy for effective development of markets.

Currently four promising markets and three ancillary infrastructural and technological areas are being developed actively in the frame of NTI (OJSC “RVC”, Press-release, 2015). One of them is `NeuroNet - the market of man-machine communications based on advanced developments in neurotechnology, increase efficiency of human-machine systems and performance of mental and cognitive processes'. The main aim of the project is creation of next generation of internet - 4.0 Internet. The foci of the project are on the study of the brain resources, identification and elimination of deficiencies, optimize resources' use and their increase due to the usage of the latest (neuro-, pharma-, psychological, robotic) technologies. Project has 6 segments: Neuromedical equipment, Neuropharmaceutics, Neuroassistants, Neurocommunication, Neuroeduction, Neuro entertainment and sport. Obtaining knowledge from each segment will be used for realization of the main project aim, yet each segment has its own independent goals also.

For financing the market 8 487.5 mln rubbles (115 mln Euros) has been allocated. Internal distribution of funding for Neuronet is still in process nowadays. Decree of Russian governance №317 was announced just on April 18, 2016 that clarifying all ussies about funding and its control. The project will function as set of different unions, which will combine laboratories, training centers, business accelerators around the country for each segment. One mutual info-analytical platform will be open for all participants of the project.

The brief view of technology roadmap for neurotechnology case in Russia with strategy of development for every segment and the assumed technological barriers are presented at Table 2.

Table 2. Roadmap for Russian neurotechnology case.

The aim of roadmap is to launch the innovative scenario of development and creation of neurotechnology market to 2035 year, thereby to provide the competitiveness of the Russian segment at the global neurotechnology market, which should take no less than 2.5% (40 billion Euros) from the global neurotechnology market. To achieve the goals of the Neuronet project the following tasks should be staged:

- 2016-2018 years - the formation of a specialized scientific-innovative infrastructure (co-called “CoBrain project”) in order to consolidate the existing scientific resources to overcome technological barriers and to ensure the flow of new patentable developments;

- 2019-2025 years - the creation of the hundreds of start-ups and specialized venture capital funds on the basis of technological reserve of the first stage, the formation of "proto-NeuroNet" market;

- 2025-2035 years - the emergence of globally competitive national companies, the formation of full-fledged market NeuroNet.

Nowadays Russia has considerable scientific and human potential in the field of technical, physical and mathematical sciences. Unique achievements of Russian mathematical and neurophysiological schools, the use of potentialities in the field of the brain mapping and forming the model of emotional and meaning attitudes allow obtaining all needed data for neurotechnology development very rapidly. Moreover, in Russia there are a broad circle of talented mathematicians and IT specialists thanks for whom unique algorithms for deеp learning, modeling of neurons' interconnection structure, solving tasks of recognition and classification will be done rapidly and properly. Successful experience in the commercialization of IT technologies and algorithms, existence of Russian competitive IT companies on global stage (Abbyy, Yandex, Kaspersky, Parallels, Acronics and etc.) allow talking that based on such platforms it is possible to create and develop products and services in the field of «deep learning» and other neuromorphic computing. Russian developments in the sphere of memristic technologies, achievements in the neuromorphic elementary basic and mathematical modeling (neuronetwork computing) do it possible to create in Russia own neuromorphic digital computers.

However, even at last year neurotechnologies were under development by individual scientists and research groups, but due to the absence of a common regulation the results are scattered and do not appear on the background of significant overseas discoveries. Publication and patent activity of Russia on the neuroscience topic is far away from leader at the domain. Moreover, human resources have reduced as a result of the massive emigration of scientists at previous years (Ivanova, 2013).

3.2 Results of interview series

In order to clarify the true needs for improvement and elaboration in Russian case series of interviews with representatives from Russian project Neuronet was conducted. It was especially that spokesmen from different departments were asked in order to get completely covered information about project. Thus, eight representatives were interviewed by list of the same questions which is presented in the chapter of methodology. From eight persons there are three representatives of managerial board of project who are close with Foresight procedure, four are scientists and developers who have their own projects in NeuroNet or participating in some of them. One person is spokesman from policy board.

According to the answers during the series of interview next results were received. Spokesmen from scientific and business side detected that there is "long lasting process of development of finance mechanism" for local projects from which consist segments of project, still "absent primary funding allocation" and "mechanisms of transparent funding control", just marked total amount of funding for entire project (it should be noted that Decree of Russian governance №317 was announced on April 18, 2016 that clarifying all ussies about funding and its control). Moreover, scientists noted "the lack of support and its transparency” from managerial point of view and "the absent of confidence to all project participants” from government side. Policy representative in his turn said about “the absent of understanding from scientists and businessmen the aim of project”, because "they (scientists and developers) want to get financing for their local project only not caring about the main mutual goal". Managerial board noted that "there is absent of one responsible policy maker or group of them who do true valuable decisions for project already now” due to the constant changes in policy maker board. Moreover, "policy makers are not close to the specific neuro technological topic", because of that “they do not want to take a responsibility for outcome of their decision-making”.

Further according to answers of interviewees it was detected that the “aims of project and ways for achieving them is not so clear still in existing scale and time”. This demands clarifying all steps of project realization with proper understanding of answers on questions: who, how, what and when. Moreover, it was noted that “project perspectives in reaching the main goal should be justified more properly from the scientific point of view”. There is one more weakness that interviewees noted that Russia in general is needed in "enhance of innovation climate in country” and “changes in the system of scientific knowledge realization at the market" very keenly. It seems that all above-mentioned answers show a broad set of weaknesses in the Russian neurotechnology case.

Notwithstanding on mentioned needs for improvement, all interviewees noted that Russia has all opportunities to become the most successful country in neurotechnologies domain in the world. Also during the series of interviews it was established that all interviewed suppose that the main goal of project - to create new generation of Internet - is real reached and it would better "to focus exactly on main aim and strategy of its achievement not spending time on sub-goals, which are not linked with IT field". By representatives from managerial board it was noticed that “in former time nobody could image that people fly to cosmos, but we (USSR) had done it". Moreover, it was repeated couple of times: "We cannot linger in our work in order to be first."

3.3 Selection of relevant cases

As preparing process for selection of the most relevant projects, case study in neurotechnology domain around the world was conducted. 14 projects were shown as the promising biggest neurotechnology projects around the world. Apart from Russian project there are five American projects, three Asian projects, two European projects, one Japanese project, one project of EU and USA collaboration and one of China and Australia collaboration. All of them were studied according next set of criteria: year of launch, country, volume of budget, source of budget, aims, infrastructure and current state. Results of case study are presented at the chapter of literature review, sub-chapter Global Neuroscience Projects.

During the session of interviews interviewees also were asked the question: "Which project can be taken as example for Russian project? What exactly? Why?" in order to figure out the opinion of experts in the field. Thus, some of interviewees had difficulties with answer on this question due to the novelty of the neurotechnology domain at general. They said that "almost all big projects were launched in two-three last years, they have not gone far away from us." One of managerial board representatives noticed that "Neuronet is the biggest project from all existing and it is not possible to compare it with any other project". However, at the same time the project of MIT Media Laboratory "Enigma" (USA) was emphasized by another spokesman as relevant project for Russian one from point of the main aim and as “very productive” nowadays. “Failed” European Human brain project was noticed with paying attention on firstly good idea for collaboration and funding, however, it was noted also that "it is a good example how we have not to realize good ideas in Russia". Another interviewee detected as the most successful example for Neuronet "Manhattan project" on the creation of atomic bombs in 1940-s as relevant from point of view that the high technological aim was reached successfully. The reappeared Chinese project China Brain was marked as “the main competitor for Russian Neuronet” in the aim. Also Human Genome project was noted as valuable example in science.

The process of final neurotechnology projects selection for competitive benchmarking was conducted with attention that any scientific or technological direction or project demands very similar measures from policy to its implementation. That means that it is very relevant to study properly the general policy regulation of science, technology and innovation development in different countries during benchmarking procedure. Moreover, a thorough study of projects does not possible, because of recent appearance the most of them. Furthermore, it is more appropriate to consider all set of projects in every country for better understanding of the entire status of the neuroscience domain in each country. Already in the near future the successfulness of realization of these projects will show the degree of Science, Foresight and Policy interlinking in countries as driver of science, technology and innovation development.

Thus, nowadays Russia aims on transformation of economy on social oriented one. It was very relevant to consider case of some European country which has social oriented economics during long time so far. Switzerland was chosen for benchmarking procedure as active developer of neuroscience in Europe and as one of the main launchers of the Blue Brain project and the Human Brain Project. Additional condition for its selection was that Switzerland already many years takes top-places in the list of the most innovative countries in the world. Further, it was logical to consider for benchmarking the case of the most productive in science in general and in neuroscience domain in particular country in the world - USA. The US has five individual large scale projects in neurotechnology domain: the Brain Initiative project, the Synapse project, the Human Connectome project, the Enigma project and the Allen Brain project. For the last, China case was appropriate to consider in the benchmarking procedure because of its rapid country economics development based on science achievements. China has three individual global projects in neuroscience domain: the Brainnetome project, the China Brain project and the China Brain project (Baidu).

Summing up, as the relevant cases for benchmarking study with the Russian neurotechnology case three cases in the neurotechnology domain: the Swiss case, the US case and the Chinese case; were selected. Further detailed description of each case is presented.

3.4 Description of chosen cases

Detailed description of Swiss, American and Chinese cases is presented in this sub-chapter according to the set of country and project criteria which were mentioned in the chapter of methodology.

3.4.1 Swiss case

According to the classification of World Economic Forum, Switzerland is part of a group of countries, which major factor of economic development is innovation. With almost no mineral and fuel resources the country is ranked the 1st in the world index of global competitiveness of the economy. In addition, Switzerland for a number of years is a world leader in the development of innovative sphere that allows Swiss science and business hold leading positions in various sectors of the global markets (The Global Competitiveness Report, 2011).

Issues of innovation development in Switzerland traditionally belong to the highest priorities of government. In the last decade the government allocated annually around 3% of GDP on the research programmes that describes Switzerland as a European country with high scientific potential. At the same time two-thirds of all research and development is funded by the private sector and only 20% from the expense of the federal and cantonal budgets (Belov, 2014).

In the Swiss Confederation the fundamental legal document governing the planning and implementation of activities to support research and innovation is a federal law "On the support for research and innovation" from 1983 year with additions amended at 2009 year as well as corresponding to the Law Decrees (“Bundesgesetz ueber die Foerderung der Forschung und der Innovation”, 2012). According to the Law, its objectives are to promote research and innovation and to support the evaluation and implementation of research results in practice; control and regulation of cooperation between the competent authorities in the field of research; effective use of federal funds allocated to support research and innovation. The Law defines the institutional bodies to support research and innovation as well as their competence and basic tasks and the highest advisory body to the Federal Council of Switzerland - The Council for Science and Technology, whose sphere of competence includes the preparation and analysis of the existing framework for the national policy in the field of science, research and technology as well as the representation of the general development of concepts and proposals on measures for its implementation for Swiss Government.

In Switzerland the organization of the educational process at all levels related to the main priorities of the state (Belov, 2014). It is worth noting the applied nature of the educational process in this country: the majority of teachers and students involved in research work. The state allocates for science about 2.6% of GDP. The state successfully encourages participation of the private sector in the development of science. The State Commission for Technology and Innovation has successfully put into practice the slogan: "Science to Market".

The main infrastructure elements of the innovation sphere in practice are: Technology and Innovation Commission (TIC); technology transfer centers at universities; industrial parks and "start-up" centers. The TIC, which is structurally part of the Federal Department of the economy, education and research in Switzerland, in essence acts as an agent of the Federal Government for the implementation of the state innovation policy of the implementation of the results of applied research and development in industry [https://www.kti.admin.ch/kti/de/home.html]. TIC objectives are strengthening of innovation processes in the economy; training of research personnel, focused on practical results; better cooperation between research institutes and industry. The main goals are to promote exchange of knowledge and technology between businesses and universities as well as supporting the creation of new enterprises. Thus, since 2003 successful exchange of scientific and technological information between national research institutions and the private sector exist. Special Technology transfer centers for the commercialization of scientific and technological activities operate next to Swiss universities. Dense network of industrial parks and start-up centers, which facilitate the creation and development of innovative young companies, complements the system of supporting innovation.

European development of the neurotechnology domain was a response to the NBIC initiative of American governance (ASI Analytical report, 2015). At the same time Europe is interested in the prospects of gerontology studies of the brain, because it is expected that in 2050 28% of the population in Europe will be aged of 65 years and older. Thus, first in Europe in 2005 year the Blue Brain Project was launched in Switzerland as joint project of Swiss Federal Technical Institute of Lausanne and IBM-corporation and devoted to computer modeling of the human neocortex. IBM and the Institute are working together during 10 years already on the project with a budget in 100 million Euros. The project uses the Blue Gene supercomputer for modeling columns. In 2006, a column of the young rat neocortex was simulated. One computer Blue Gene was used and 8192 processors for the simulation of 10,000 neurons were involved. That is almost one processor modeled one neuron. Around 3·10⁷ synapses of neuron connection were modeled (Hines, 2008). Currently the team is working on a "real time", in which the 1 second of real time of brain work is modeled by processors for 1 second.