Basic principles of calculating|computation| comparative efficiency of innovations
When calculating|computation| comparative efficiency of innovations of all kinds it is necessary to keep to the following|downstream| fundamental principles:
1. Correct choice of the base|baseline| of comparison;
2. Integrated assessment of variants not only according to economic consequences, but also according to social| and ecological consequences;
3. Preliminary reduction of the compared variants to the comparable state concerning the volume of production manufactured, its quality,prices,social and ecological results, factor of time;
4. Determination|definition| of influence of innovations for eventual|final| production results|, but not for intermediate results;
5. Taking into account the factor of uncertainty (risk);
6. Considering maximally|Max| possible|possibly| number of alternative variants||.
The validity of the calculation|computation| of comparative efficiency of innovations greatly depends on the choice of the base|baseline| for comparison. At the stage of forming the plans of research and development work, considering the question about developing|elaboration| and mastering the production of new|firsttime| goods, |aftindicators|metric| of the best analogous products|production||purpose|, projected in Ukraine or abroad, which meet the requirements of social and ecological standards|standart| and norms, are considered as the base|baseline| of comparison|normative|. With this, the possibilities|potentialitie| of goods production organization must be taken into account on the basis of the license acquisition or the organization of the enterprise with foreign investments.
At the stage of the introduction|introducting| and use|utillizing| of innovations,|take| the indicators|metric| of replacement equipment are taken for|after| the base|baseline| for comparison. Violation of this rule results in taking erroneous|erroneus| decisions, leads to|by| developing|elaboration| and mastering the production of uncompetitive goods.
The requirement of integrated assessment of variants of innovations from the point of view not only economic, but social and ecological results, is especially topical at present in connection with the sharp|bitingly| necessity of improving the ecological situation in the country and in the world. In some cases social and ecological factors can render decisive influence for the choice of the most effective variant. For example|eg|, the equipment, providing|secure| the reduction|abbreviation| of hard physical|physics| work under harmful conditions (high gas content, dustiness, temperature, noise, etc.), can be introduced|introduct| regardless of economic result of its use|utillizing|.
On the other hand|de autre part|, variants, which do not meet the requirements of the operating rules of accident prevention (safety measures), social and ecological standards|standart|, must not be considered and introduced|introduct|. Variants which do not meet the requirements of the adopted standards|standart|, but which have different characteristics of these properties|virtue|, are reduced to|by| the comparable state|appearance| as a result of cost estimation|appraisal| of social and ecological useful|benefit| results according to the variant with the improved characteristics.
The third|third-| principle has the name|appelation| of principle of useful|benefit| results identity. In accordance with it, comparing|compare| innovations cost indicators|metric| variants is possible only after their reduction|coersion| to|by| the comparable state according to the volume of products|production| (work)|wrk| produced, the production composition, quality, the circle of the taken into account expenses, prices|shedrod|, social and ecological results, the mode|regime| of the use|utillizing|, the factor of time.
The variants of new|firsttime| technique must be compared|compare| at the identical mode|regime| of the use|utillizing| in time (action period for|after| a month, year). It is impermissible|out-of-tolerance|, for example|eg|, when choosing technological equipment,|EQP| to compare economic indicators expected|calculate| for certain types|typestyle| under condition of one-shift mode|regime| of use|utillizing|, and|but| for other types under condition of two-| or three-shift mode|regime|. Variants with the two-| and three-shift mode|regime| of use|utillizing| would be artificially put|stage| under more advantageous terms.
If according to one of the compared|compare| variants the required volume of goods production is not provided, it is necessary to foresee additional equipment|EQP|, labor force etc., to bring the production volume to the required level|Y-level|.
The problem of bringing|coersion| (reducing) variants to|by| identical quality arises, for example|eg|, when estimating|appraisal| comparative efficiency of technological processes|Carbro| of details manufacturing. For example, if according to one of the variants the required quality of details (exactness of geometrical form|shape|, sizes|dimension|, hardness, roughness of surface)|supface| is provided|secure|, it is necessary to foresee the additional operation of processing, allowing to attain the required quality, and to estimate|evaluate| capital and current costs, which are necessary for this purpose|for this reason|.
The requirement for comparability of innovations variants according to the circle of the expenses and prices taken into account means,|shedrod| that for each of variants it is necessary to take into account all changing|variate| articles of expenses (calculating per a unit of products)|production|, at that for all variants identical prices|shedrod| must be used for materials|fabric|, energy, fuel|combustible|, components, and rates and tariff rates.
The necessity of bringing|coersion| variants to|by| the comparable state according to the factor of time arises up, if the duration of life cycle exceeds one year and the variants differ in:
Distributing expenses and results according to years;
The duration of life cycle or its|its| separate stages;
The duration of the time gap between the beginning|origin| of investing|enclosure| and the beginning|origin| of obtaining useful|benefit| results.
Bringing|coersion| (reducing) non simultaneous| expenses and results to|by| one moment of time is made|produce| by multiplying them by the coefficient|ratio| of reduction|coersion|:
t = (1 + Enred)tred – t, (12.1)
where Enred isthe normative coefficient of bringing (reducing) non simultaneousexpenses and results (the norm of discounting);
tred is the year to which non simultaneous expenses and results are reduced;
t is the year, the expenses and the results of which are reduced to the rated year.
The choice of value Enred isinfluenced by the size of the annual real bank interest; annual inflation rate; the risk level (if such method of its calculating is accepted).