Государственная политика СССР в сфере внедрения достижений науки и техники в середине 1950-х гг.

Abstract

Based on the study of currently available archival documents from the RGANI funds, the problem of the evolution of state policy in the field of the introduction of science and technology in the USSR in the mid-1950s is investigated. The documents published at that time focused on speeding up the pace of the introduction of new technology, the best use of foreign samples, support for the movement of innovators and inventors, its scaling. A comparative analysis of the indicators of the USSR and the USA demonstrated the continuing technological lag of our country in a number of significant areas. Labor productivity remained relatively low. Arrogance, complacency, fear of taking risks and unwillingness to use the best of world and domestic experience were mentioned as factors determining the failure to achieve the targets. The documents that were not intended for publication contained specific negative examples, there was quite sharp and harsh criticism of the heads of ministries, enterprises and scientists. The conclusion is formulated that the data contained in previously unpublished documents give a more accurate idea of the results of the implementation of the state scientific and technical policy in the period under study and do not allow assessing the measures taken by the authorities in the field of technical re-equipment of production as optimal. Against the background of high rates of economic growth, significant achievements in the field of science and technology, there was a slowdown in modernization processes. Inventors were insufficiently stimulated, the results of research developments were slowly introduced. The approved documents indicate that the authorities tried to cope with the emerging problems with the help of command methods, reorganizations of the management system. But the share of manual labor remained high. This led to the fact that the advantages achieved in any industry by high mechanization of individual processes were largely lost, and the labor intensity of products continued to remain high. As the most important factor of inhibition, the current mobilization model of the economy was determined, focusing primarily on achieving quantitative targets. In addition, the rejection of the development of a unified all-Union plan for the introduction of new technology had a negative impact, there was no single body ensuring the coordination of research and implementation of their results. The country's leadership did not sufficiently assess the importance of the release of computer technology, automation and mechanization of production.