Evolution of Views on the Socio-Economic Role of Information Technology – the Example of the 60-Year History of Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences

The history of the information technology (IT) development at CEMI RAS and the rethinking of the IT role and associated expectations that has occurred over 60 years in this organization can be an illustration of the evolution of views in the scientific community regarding the socio-economic potential of IT. Over the years of its research work, CEMI RAS worked out the most effective way to use almost all major modifications of computers in scientific research, and also carried out the work related to the development of information and communication technologies, including the Internet. Gradually, views on the IT role as a tool for scientific research evolved into an understanding of the complex impact of IT on socio-economic processes, which has the form of widespread digitalization of socio-economic activities. Under these conditions, one of the key IT-related areas of research and development is the creation of a concept for digitalization of coordination mechanisms, the improvement of which affects the entire socio-economic system. The proposed study briefly presents the main milestones in the use and development of IT over the 60 years of CEMI existence and substantiates a qualitatively new task of using and developing IT to improve methods for coordinating scientific research. The rationale for this task is presented using the example of research activities, but the overall long-term goal of these studies is to develop the concept of digital infrastructure and corresponding institutional structures that will ensure better coordination and act as catalyst for the country's development in all major areas of economic 
activity.

1. Akinshin A. A., Ilmensky M. D., Lyapicheva N. G., Polyak Yu.E. (2022a). CEMI's contribution to the development of RUNET. Infrastructure projects. Bulletin of CEMI RAS, vol. 5, iss. 1 (in Russian). DOI: 10.33276/S265838870019842-9-1

2. Akinshin A. A., Ilmensky M. D., Lyapicheva N. G. (2022b). Problems of increasing information security using the example of CEMI RAS. Bulletin of CEMI RAS, vol. 5, iss. 3 (in Russian). DOI: 10.33276/S265838870021954-2

3. Ilmensky M. D. (2020). Problems of choosing technical means for carrying out research work in organizations. Bulletin of CEMI RAS, no. 2 (in Russian). DOI: 10.33276/S265838870012128-3

4. Vlasova N. Yu., Molokova E. L. (2019). Mechanisms for coordinating stakeholders in the higher education market: theoretical approaches to identification. The Manager, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 21–30 (in Russian). DOI: 10.29141/2218-5003-2019-10-2-3

5. Dementyev V. E., Evsyukov S. G., Ustyuzhanina E. V. (2017). Hybrid forms of business organization: on the issue of analyzing intercompany interactions. Russian Journal of Management, no. 15(1) (in Russian).

6. Grigoriev P. V. (2019). Features of the functioning of the scientific situation center. Artificial Societies, no. 14(4) (in Russian). DOI: 10.18254/S207751800007917-7

7. Lyapicheva N. G. (2021a). Features of mail traffic during the transition to remote work in 2020–2021. Bulletin of CEMI RAS, vol. 4, iss. 2 (in Russian). DOI: 10.33276/S265838870017058-6

8. Lyapicheva N. G. (2021b). The role of email in remote work. 81st International Scientific Conference of the Eurasian Scientific Association (November 2021). Scientific discussions in the era of globalization and digitalization. «Eurasian Scientific Association». Moscow. November, no. 11 (81), pp. 200–202 (in Russian). DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5796979

9. Parinov S. I. (2015). The concept of the virtual scientific environment «Open Science». Scientific service on the Internet: proceedings of the XVII All-Russian scientific conference. Moscow: Keldysh Applied Mathematics Institute (IPM) (in Russian).

10. Parinov S. (2022a). Coordination behavior of human agents: clarification of the content and the structure of coordination processes in an economy. Digital Economy, no. 2 (18) (in Russian). DOI: 10.34706/DE‑2022-02-01

11. Parinov S. (2022). New Approaches to the Improvement of Coordination Mechanisms. Foresight and STI Governance, no. 16 (4), pp. 82–89 (in Russian). DOI: 10.17323/2500-2597.2022.4.82.89

12. Parinov S. I. (2023). Micro level of economic coordination processes. Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 2, pp. 127–144 (in Russian). DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2023-2-127-144

13. Parinov S. I. Towards economic coordination mechanisms design. Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 9, pp. 121–137 (in Russian). DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2023-9-121-137

14. Polterovich V. M. (2018). Towards a general theory of socio-economic development. Part 1. Geography, institutions or culture? Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 11, pp. 5–26 (in Russian).

15. Khodakov V. E., Sokolova N. A., Kiriychuk D. L. (2014). On the development of the foundations of the theory of coordination of complex systems. Problems of Information Technologies, no. 2, pp. 12–21 (in Russian). URL: http://epr.kntu.net.ua/136/1/02.pdf

16. Ustyuzhanina E. V. (2022). Issues of constructing a theory of coordination of economic interaction. Journal of Institutional Studies, no. 14 (1), pp. 25–35 (in Russian). DOI: 10.17835/2076-6297.2022.14.1.025-035

17. Adler P. S. (2001). Market, hierarchy, and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism. Organization Science, no. 12 (2), pp. 215–234.

18. Elliott M. (2016) Stigmergic Collaboration: A Framework for Understanding and Designing Mass Collaboration. In: Cress U., Moskaliuk J., Jeong H. (eds). Mass Collaboration and Education. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series, vol. 16. Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-13536-6_4

19. Elliot M. (2006). Stigmergic collaboration: The evolution of group work. M/C Journal, vol. 9, 2. http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0605/03-elliott.php

20. Malone T. W., Crowston K. (1994). The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), no. 26 (1), pp. 87–119.

21. Heylighen F. (2016). Stigmergy as a universal coordination mechanism I: Definition and components. Cognitive Systems Research, no. 38, pp. 4–13.

22. Parinov S., Antonova V. (2016). End of Publication? Open access and a new scholarly communication technology. / arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.05505.

23. Parinov S., Antonova V. (2020). Citation content/context data as a source for research cooperation analysis. International Journal of Metadata, Semantics and Ontologies, no. 14 (2), pp. 149–157.

24. Powell W. W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 12, pp. 295–336.

25. Provan K. G., Kenis P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, no. 18 (2), pp. 229–252.

26. Weigand H., van der Poll F., de Moor A. (2003). Coordination through communication. Proceedings of the 8th International Working Conference on the Language-Action Perspective on Communication Modelling. Tilburg, The Netherlands.