planning, financing, and reporting of R&D. The basis 

 for planning and financing remains primarily the "in- 

 stitutional performer," not the stages of the research- 

 to-production cycle. 5 Again the heavy organizational 

 bias of the system is evident. Planning and the al- 

 location of resources are organized mainly around in- 

 stitutions rather than projects and programs. 



Furthermore, R&D has been perceived and planned in 

 rather narrow terms and time frames. The planning 

 process has usually ended with the creation of exper- 

 imental prototypes or at best with small batch pro- 

 duction of new products. The actual introduction of 

 R&D results has been beyond the boundaries of science 

 planning. The focus has been on building up scien- 

 tific and technological "potential." The Russian 

 word for the latter, zadel , means literally a stock 

 of semi-finished articles waiting to be processed. A 

 short time horizon, usually only a year, has also pre- 

 vailed. Only since the late 1960s has attention been 

 given to developing the concept of scientific and 

 technical progress, to elaborating its meaning and 

 implications for both the research sector and the in- 

 dustrial sphere, and to making it the object of plan- 

 ning. Such an extension of the boundaries of plan- 

 ning complicates the task considerably. V. Yu. Buda- 

 vey and M. I. Panova observe, "The essence of the 

 matter is that the problem involves drawing up not 

 just a separate section of the national economic plan 

 but a second plan." Yet, they add, "Without global 

 evaluations of scientific and technical progress for 

 the long term it is impossible to work out a strate- 

 gic planning policy in this area and to determine 

 correctly the tasks of a uniform technology policy."" 

 No uniform conception of the future shape of science, 

 technology, or of the economy has emerged to guide 

 the planners, however. 



Science policy analysis and planning still suffer 

 from inadequate indicators, norms, and information. 

 By 1974 nearly 300 different indicators were used 

 that directly or indirectly characterized scientific 

 and technical progress. However, they did not form 

 a sufficiently goal-oriented system of indicators to 



89 



