Refrences
Bell, M., & Pavitt, K. (1993). Technological Accumulation and Industrial Growth: Contrasts Between Developed and Developing Countries. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2, 157-210.
Castellacci, F. (2023). Innovation and social welfare: A new research agenda. Journal of Economic Surveys, 37(4), 1156-1191. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12537
Chávez, J. C. R., & Chávez, J. C. L. N. (2013). A Science and Technology Policy Model to Support Regional Innovation Systems. In Revista Nicolaita de Estudios Económicos (Vol. 6, Issue 2, pp. 73–86). Instituto de Investigaciones Economicas y Empresariales. https://doi.org/10.33110/rnee.v6i2.137
Cooke, P. (2001). Regional innovation systems, clusters, and the knowledge economy. Industrial and corporate change, 10(4), 945-974.
Duan, Y., Jia, Z., & Wang, M. (2020, November). Minimax-optimal off-policy evaluation with linear function approximation. In International Conference on Machine Learning (pp. 2701-2709). PMLR.
Etzkowitz, H. (2006). The new visible hand: an assisted linear model of science and innovation policy. Science and public policy, 33(5), 310-320.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.  
Godin, B. (2006). The linear model of innovation: The historical construction of an analytical framework. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 31(6), 639-667.
Hautamäki, A., Turkki, T., Brandenburg, C., & Areblad, C. (2010). Creative economy and culture in the innovation policy. Publications of the Ministry of Education, Finland [online], Available from Internet: http://www. minedu. fi/export/sites/default/OPM/Julkaisut/2010/liitteet/OPM13. pdf.
Jordan, G. (2010). A theory-based logic model for innovation policy and evaluation. Research Evaluation, 19(4), 263–273. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820210X12827366906445
Keršuliene, V., Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2010). Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step‐wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA). Journal of business economics and management, 11(2), 243-258. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2010.12
Kim, J., & Yoo, J. (2019). Science and technology policy research in the EU: from framework programme to HORIZON 2020. Social Sciences, 8(5), 153.
Kim, Y. K., Lee, K., Park, W. G., & Choo, K. (2012). Appropriate intellectual property protection and economic growth in countries at different levels of development. Research policy, 41(2), 358-375.
Kwiek, M. (2020). What large-scale publication and citation data tell us about international research collaboration in Europe: changing national patterns in global contexts. Studies in Higher Education, 46(12), 2629–2649. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1749254
Ma, N. (2024). Evaluation of the Implementation of Baotou’s Science and Technology Talent Policies within the Context of Comprehensive Model Autonomous Region Development. Occupation and Professional Education, (1)4, 17-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.62381/O242404
Machado, D., Qu, Y., & Cervantes, M. (2019). Innovation policies for sustainable development: Low-carbon energy and smart-city initiatives. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2019/10/innovation-policies-for-sustainable-development_f616c02b/6287ddb2-en.pdf
Molas-Gallart, J., & Davies, A. (2006). Toward theory-led evaluation: The experience of European science, technology, and innovation policies. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(1), 64-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005281701
Neupane, B. (2015). A more developmental approach to science. Unesco Science Report. Towards, 2030, 6-8. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000235442
Newcomer, K. E., Hatry, H. P., & Wholey, J. S. (Eds.). (2015). Handbook of practical program evaluation (pp. 1-864). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass & Pfeiffer Imprints, Wiley.
OECD (2012). OECD Science, Technology and Industry Outlook 2012, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/sti_outlook-2012-en
OECD. (2019). Science, Technology and Innovation Policies for Inclusive Growth. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Olinto, G. (2009). Human resources in science and technology indicators: longitudinal evidence from Brazil. In Proceedings of ISSI (pp. 359-368).
Oliveira, M. B. D. (2014). Technology and basic science: the linear model of innovation. Scientiae Studia, 12, 129-146.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). Integrating science & technology into development policies: an international perspective. OECD Publishing.
production. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.  United Nations Publications. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/dtltikd2023d2_en.pdf
Reynolds, J. L., Kennedy, E. B., & Symons, J. (2023). If deliberation is the answer, what is the question? Objectives and evaluation of public participation and engagement in science and technology. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 10(1), 2129543.
Rodríguez, J. C., & Navarro-Chávez, C. L. (2015). A system dynamics model of science, technology and innovation policy to sustain regional innovation systems in emerging economies. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 6(1), 7-30.
Sanderson, I. (2000). Evaluation in Complex Policy Systems. Evaluation, 6, 433-454.
Shahabadi, A., & Heidarian, M. (2024). The relationship between human development indicators and technology spillover with environmental quality: Evidence from panel ARDL model for D8 countries. Social Indicators Research, 174(1), 421-444.
Silvestre, B. S., & Ţîrcă, D. M. (2019). Innovations for sustainable development: Moving toward a sustainable future. Journal of cleaner production, 208, 325-332. 
Suparwata, D. O. (2024). The Role of Social and Technological Innovation in Enhancing Economic Well-being and Empowering Rural Communities. Jurnal Terobosan Peduli Masyarakat (TIRAKAT), 1(3), 182-191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61100/j.tirakat.v1i3.219
Takalo, T., Tanayama, T., & Toivanen, O. (2008). Evaluating innovation policy: a structural treatment effect model of R&D subsidies. Bank of Finland Research Discussion Paper, (7).
UNCTAD. (2023). Technology and innovation for cleaner and more productive and competitive. Commission on Science and Technology for Development, Twenty-sixth session, Geneva, 27–31 March 2023. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/ecn162023d2_en.pdf
UNCTAD. (2024). Global cooperation in science, technology and innovation for development. Commission on Science and Technology for Development Twenty-seventh session. Geneva, 15–19 April 2024.  https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/ecn162024d3_en.pdf
Xu, S., Lian, G., Song, M., & Xu, A. (2024). Do global innovation networks influence the status of global value chains? Based on a patent cooperation network perspective. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03413-7
Yong’an, Z., Zhe, G., & Jie, T. (2016). China’s regional science and technology innovation policy: A classification based on data from Zhongguancun science park. International Journal of Innovation Science, 8, 71-88.
Zhamankaraev, Zh. (2021). THE PLACE OF SANCTIONS IN THE MODERNIZATION OF NATIONAL ECONOMIC POLICY. BULLETIN Series of Sociological and Political Sciences, 74(2), 51–55. https://doi.org/10.51889/2021-2.1728-8940.08
БАРКОВ, А. В., & ЗАВЬЯЛОВ, М. М. (2022). THE CONCEPT OF MANAGING STRATEGIC ENTERPRISES   UNDER FOREIGN SANCTIONS   WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF TECHNOLOGICAL SOVEREIGNTY. The Rule-of-Law State: Theory and Practice, 18(3(69)), 34–40. https://doi.org/10.33184/pravgos-2022.3.5