Suchergebnisse

Метою цієї публікації є висвітлення історії Миколаївського морськоготоргового порту від зародження торгового мореплавання в регіонісучасного міста Миколаєва до початку ХХ ст. у контексті історичногорозвитку Миколаєва як промислово-комерційного центру Півдня України.У ХІХ – на початку ХХ ст. порт мав найменування Миколаївськийміжнародний комерційний (або торговий) порт. Автор спиралася напринципи історизму, об'єктивності, всебічності й комплексності, атакож на соціальні та матеріалістичні підходи до розуміння історії, заяких економічні аспекти першочергово беруться до уваги під часдослідження. Вагоме значення мали принципи й методи, напрацьованіісториками науки і техніки. Використано також методи джерелознавчого аналізу, оскільки дослідження ґрунтується переважно наархівних джерелах.Засади торгового мореплавання в Чорноморському басейні булозакладено ще у IX–XIII ст. У 1788 р. на лівому березі річки Інгул заснованоВільну Гавань, яка вважається прародителькою морського торговогопорту в Миколаєві. Оскільки уряд Російської імперії переслідував метустворення в Миколаєві центру Чорноморського військово-морськогофлоту й через це запроваджував різного роду обмеження, міжнароднаторгівля припинилася.Миколаївське купецтво в основному займалося забезпеченням Адміралтейства, підприємств морського відомства й флоту потрібними їмматеріалами й товарами. Після Кримської війни (1853–1856 рр.) тазапровадження обмежувальних статей Паризького мирного договору(1856 р.) суднобудування в Миколаєві припинилося, Головне управлінняЧорноморського флоту та портів було ліквідоване. Миколаїв поринув углибоку економічну кризу. Миколаївський військовий губернатор М. Аркасстав ініціатором заснування Російського товариства пароплавства таторгівлі, однак діяльність товариства не мала значного впливу наекономіку Миколаєва. У 1860 р. Миколаївський військовий губернаторБ. Глазенап запропонував відкрити порт у Миколаєві для заходуіноземних суден і експортно-імпортних операцій. Порт відкрито з1 червня 1862 р Географічно до Миколаєва тяжів регіон, у якому вирощувалися зернові,тому порт відразу став центром експорту пшениці, жита, вівса, атакож заліза. Уже в перші роки його існування вартість експортуперевищила вартість імпорту. Подальшому розвиткові хлібної торгівлісприяли повернення єврейського населення до Миколаєва, відкриттямитниці 1-го класу, банківських установ, Хлібної біржі, Біржовогокомітету й аналітичної камери при ньому, прокладання залізниці. Усе цезагалом сприяло розвиткові фабрично-заводської промисловості в місті,зростанню кількості населення й перетворенню Миколаєва напромисловий центр Півдня України.Однак із часом з'ясувалося, що порт не задовольняє вимогам часу.Постало питання його реконструкції, проєкт якої було затверджено у1885 р. Портове управління почало діяти з 1894 р. Його очолювавкапітан над портом, який водночас був головою Присутствія ізпортових справ – дорадчого органу, до повноважень якого належаловирішення портових проблем. Порт поділявся на два відділи: закордоннийі каботажний. Під час реконструкції було визначено кордони порту,збудовано нові набережні, елеватор, склади, порт забезпечено новітнімина той час вантажувально-розвантажувальними засобами, транспортерами зерна й руди, у зимовий період судна до порту почали проводити задопомогою криголамів. Разом із цим, було вирішено проблемупоглиблення каналу в Дніпро-Бузькому лимані, оскільки судна з великоюосадкою не могли повністю навантажуватися в Миколаєві й вимушені булидозавантажуватися в порту «Очаків», а транспортування вантажів доОчакова вимагало значних фінансових витрат. Також були встановленімаяки й застережливі знаки.Це дало можливість значно збільшити вантажообіг порту, який у1910 р. досяг рекордної цифри – понад 151 млн пудів, у т. ч. понад115 млн пудів зернових (це складало 14 % експорту зернових усієїРосійської імперії). У цей рік Миколаїв прийняв 527 іноземних суден.Наприкінці ХІХ – на початку ХХ ст. порт працював на засадах державноприватного партнерства (за сучасним визначенням), у його розвитоквкладали кошти держава, місто та іноземні інвестори. Таким чином,історія порту періоду до 1917 р. надає приклад для його розвитку вХХІ ст., коли фактично порт працює в тих самих зовнішніх і внутрішніхумовах, як і у вище досліджуваний період. ; The purpose of this research was to investigate the history of the Mykolaiv Sea Port from the beginning of marine trade in the region of modern Mykolaiv-city to the beginning of the XX cent. in the context of the historical development of Mykolaiv as an industrial and commercial center of the South of Ukraine. In the second part of the XIX cent. and early XX cent. the name of the Port was the Mykolaiv International Commercial (or Trade) Port. The research has based on the principles of historicism, objectivity, comprehensiveness, as well as social and materialistic approaches to understanding history, in which economic aspects has primarily significance. The principles and methods developed by historians of science and technology was importance as well. Methods of source analysis were also useful, since the research was based mainly on archival sources. The principles of commercial navigation in the Black Sea basin were laid in the IX–XIII centuries. In 1788, on the left bank of the Ingul River, the Free Harbor, which is considered the antecedent of the Sea Port in Mykolaiv, was founded. Since the Government of the Russian Empire pursued the aim of creating the Black Sea Navy Center in Mykolaiv and, because of this, imposed various restrictions, the international trade in Mykolaiv was ceased. The Mykolaiv merchants were mainly engaged in providing the Admiralty, the enterprises of the Sea Department and the Black Sea Fleet with the necessary materials and goods. After the Crimean War (1853–1856) and the implementing of restrictive articles of the Paris Treaty (1856) shipbuilding in Mykolaiv was ceased, the Main Administration of the Black Sea Fleet and the Military Port were abolished. The deep economic crisis started in the city. The Mykolaiv military governor M. Arkas initiated founding of the Russian Society of Shipping and Trade, but the activity of this company did not have a significant impact on the economy of Mykolaiv. In 1860, the Mykolaiv military governor B. Glazenap proposed to open the Port in Mykolaiv for foreign vessels and export-import operations. The Port was opened on June 1, 1862. The region in which crops were grown geographically tended to Mykolaiv, so the Port immediately became the center of export of wheat, rye, oats, and also iron. Already in the first years of the Port operation the value of exports exceeded the value of imports. Further development of the grain trade was promoted the return of the Jews to Mykolaiv, the opening of the Customs Office and banks, the Crops Exchange, the Exchange Committee, the analytical chamber at it, the railway building. All this generally contributed to the development of the industry in the city, population growth and the transformation of Mykolaiv to the industrial center of the South of Ukraine. However, over time it was found that the Port did not meet the time demands. The question of its reconstruction was raised in the 1870s, and the project of the reconstruction was approved in 1885. The Port Administration began to operate in 1894. It was headed by 'the Captain over the Port', who was at the same time the Head of the Port Affairs Bureau – an advisory council whose authority was to solve port problems. The Port was divided into two divisions: foreign and cabotage. During the reconstruction the boundaries of the Port were identified, new embankments, elevators, warehouses were built. The Port was equipped with the latest loading and unloading facilities, grain and ore transporters. Two icebreakers helped the vessels to achieve to the Port in the winter time. Simultaneously, the problem of deepening of the canal in the Dnieper-Bug estuary was solved. It was importance because the vessels with large sediment could not be fully loaded in Mykolaiv and were forced to dock at the port of Ochakov, and transportation of cargo to Ochakov required considerable expenditure. Beacons and warning signs were also installed. All this made it possible to significantly increase the cargo turnover of the Port, which in 1910 reached a record level – more than 151 million poods, including more than 115 million poods of grain (this constituted 14 % of grain exports throughout the Russian Empire). That year Mykolaiv accepted 527 foreign vessels. At the end of the XIX – at the beginning of XX cent. the Port had been functioning on the basis of public-private partnership (by modern definition). The state, city and foreign investors put money into its development. Thus, the history of the Port until 1917 is the example of the Road Map for further development of the Port in the XXI cent., when in fact the Port operates in the same external and internal conditions as in the period studied above.

The purpose of this research was to investigate the history of the Mykolaiv Sea Port from the beginning of marine trade in the region of modern Mykolaiv-city to the beginning of the XX cent. in the context of the historical development of Mykolaiv as an industrial and commercial center of the South of Ukraine. In the second part of the XIX cent. andearly XX cent. the name of the Port was the Mykolayiv International Commercial (or Trade) Port. The research has based on the principles of historicism, objectivity, comprehensiveness, as well as social and materialistic approaches to understanding history, in which economic aspects has primarily significance. The principles and methods developed by historians of science and technology was importance as well. Methods of source analysis were also useful, since the research was based mainly on archival sources. The principles of commercial navigation in the Black Sea basin were laid in the IX–XIII centuries. In 1788, on the left bank of the Ingul River, the Free Harbor, which is considered the antecedent of the Sea Port in Mykolaiv, was founded. Since the Government of the Russian Empire pursued the aim of creating the Black Sea Navy Center in Mykolaiv and, because of this, imposed various restrictions, the international trade in Mykolaiv was ceased. The Mykolaiv merchants were mainly engaged in providing the Admiralty, the enterprises of the Sea Department and the Black Sea Fleet with the necessary materials and goods. After the Crimean War (1853–1856) and the implementing of restrictive articles of the Paris Treaty (1856) shipbuilding in Mykolaiv was ceased, the Main Administration of the Black Sea Fleet and the Military Port were abolished. The deep economic crisis started in the city. The Mykolaiv military governor M. Arkas initiated founding of the Russian Society of Shipping and Trade, but the activity of this company did not have a significant impact on the economy of Mykolaiv. In 1860, the Mykolaiv military governor B. Glazenap proposed to open the Port in Mykolaiv for foreign vessels and export-import operations. The Port was opened on June 1, 1862. The region in which crops were grown geographically tended to Mykolaiv, so the Port immediately became the center of export of wheat, rye, oats, and also iron. Already in the first years of the Port operation the value of exports exceeded the value of imports. Further development of the grain trade was promoted the return of the Jews to Mykolaiv, the opening of the Customs Office and banks, the Crops Exchange, the Exchange Committee, the analytical chamber at it, the railway building. All this generally contributed to the development of the industry in the city, population growth and the transformation of Mykolaiv to the industrial center of the South of Ukraine. However, over time it was found that the Port did not meet the time demands. The question of its reconstruction was raised in the 1870s, and the project of the reconstruction was approved in 1885. The Port Administration began to operate in 1894. It was headed by 'the Captain over the Port', who was at the same time the Head of the Port Affairs Bureau – an advisory council whose authority was to solve port problems. The Port was divided into two divisions: foreign and cabotage. During the reconstruction the boundaries of the Port were identified, new embankments, elevators, warehouses were built. The Port was equipped with the latest loading and unloading facilities, grain and ore transporters. Two icebreakers helped the vessels to achieve to the Port in the winter time. Simultaneously, the problem of deepening of the canal in the Dnieper – Bug estuary was solved. It was importance because the vessels with large sediment could not be fully loaded in Mykolayiv and were forced to dock at the port of Ochakov, and transportation of cargo to Ochakov required considerable expenditure. Beacons and warning signs were also installed. All this made it possible to significantly increase the cargo turnover of the Port, which in 1910 reached a record level – more than 151 million poods, including more than 115 million poods of grain (this constituted 14 % of grain exports throughout the Russian Empire). That year Mykolaiv accepted 527 foreign vessels. At the end of the XIX – at the beginning of XX cent. the Port had been functioning on the basis of public-private partnership (by modern definition). The state, city and foreign investors put money into its development. Thus, the history of the Port until 1917 is the example of the Road Map for further development of the Port in the XXI cent., when in fact the Port operates in the same external and internal conditions as in the period studied above. ; Частина 2 (початок статті в № 20 «Історичного архіву» 2019 р.)

Метою цієї публікації є висвітлення історії Миколаївського морськоготоргового порту від зародження торгового мореплавання в регіонісучасного міста Миколаєва до початку ХХ ст. у контексті історичногорозвитку Миколаєва як промислово-комерційного центру Півдня України.У ХІХ – на початку ХХ ст. порт мав найменування Миколаївськийміжнародний комерційний (або торговий) порт. Автор спиралася напринципи історизму, об'єктивності, всебічності й комплексності, атакож на соціальні та матеріалістичні підходи до розуміння історії, заяких економічні аспекти першочергово беруться до уваги під часдослідження. Вагоме значення мали принципи й методи, напрацьованіісториками науки і техніки. Використано також методи джерелознавчого аналізу, оскільки дослідження ґрунтується переважно наархівних джерелах.Засади торгового мореплавання в Чорноморському басейні булозакладено ще у IX–XIII ст. У 1788 р. на лівому березі річки Інгул заснованоВільну Гавань, яка вважається прародителькою морського торговогопорту в Миколаєві. Оскільки уряд Російської імперії переслідував метустворення в Миколаєві центру Чорноморського військово-морськогофлоту й через це запроваджував різного роду обмеження, міжнароднаторгівля припинилася.Миколаївське купецтво в основному займалося забезпеченням Адміралтейства, підприємств морського відомства й флоту потрібними їмматеріалами й товарами. Після Кримської війни (1853–1856 рр.) тазапровадження обмежувальних статей Паризького мирного договору(1856 р.) суднобудування в Миколаєві припинилося, Головне управлінняЧорноморського флоту та портів було ліквідоване. Миколаїв поринув углибоку економічну кризу. Миколаївський військовий губернатор М. Аркасстав ініціатором заснування Російського товариства пароплавства таторгівлі, однак діяльність товариства не мала значного впливу наекономіку Миколаєва. У 1860 р. Миколаївський військовий губернаторБ. Глазенап запропонував відкрити порт у Миколаєві для заходуіноземних суден і експортно-імпортних операцій. Порт відкрито з1 червня 1862 р Географічно до Миколаєва тяжів регіон, у якому вирощувалися зернові,тому порт відразу став центром експорту пшениці, жита, вівса, атакож заліза. Уже в перші роки його існування вартість експортуперевищила вартість імпорту. Подальшому розвиткові хлібної торгівлісприяли повернення єврейського населення до Миколаєва, відкриттямитниці 1-го класу, банківських установ, Хлібної біржі, Біржовогокомітету й аналітичної камери при ньому, прокладання залізниці. Усе цезагалом сприяло розвиткові фабрично-заводської промисловості в місті,зростанню кількості населення й перетворенню Миколаєва напромисловий центр Півдня України.Однак із часом з'ясувалося, що порт не задовольняє вимогам часу.Постало питання його реконструкції, проєкт якої було затверджено у1885 р. Портове управління почало діяти з 1894 р. Його очолювавкапітан над портом, який водночас був головою Присутствія ізпортових справ – дорадчого органу, до повноважень якого належаловирішення портових проблем. Порт поділявся на два відділи: закордоннийі каботажний. Під час реконструкції було визначено кордони порту,збудовано нові набережні, елеватор, склади, порт забезпечено новітнімина той час вантажувально-розвантажувальними засобами, транспортерами зерна й руди, у зимовий період судна до порту почали проводити задопомогою криголамів. Разом із цим, було вирішено проблемупоглиблення каналу в Дніпро-Бузькому лимані, оскільки судна з великоюосадкою не могли повністю навантажуватися в Миколаєві й вимушені булидозавантажуватися в порту «Очаків», а транспортування вантажів доОчакова вимагало значних фінансових витрат. Також були встановленімаяки й застережливі знаки.Це дало можливість значно збільшити вантажообіг порту, який у1910 р. досяг рекордної цифри – понад 151 млн пудів, у т. ч. понад115 млн пудів зернових (це складало 14 % експорту зернових усієїРосійської імперії). У цей рік Миколаїв прийняв 527 іноземних суден.Наприкінці ХІХ – на початку ХХ ст. порт працював на засадах державноприватного партнерства (за сучасним визначенням), у його розвитоквкладали кошти держава, місто та іноземні інвестори. Таким чином,історія порту періоду до 1917 р. надає приклад для його розвитку вХХІ ст., коли фактично порт працює в тих самих зовнішніх і внутрішніхумовах, як і у вище досліджуваний період. ; The purpose of this research was to investigate the history of the Mykolaiv Sea Port from the beginning of marine trade in the region of modern Mykolaiv-city to the beginning of the XX cent. in the context of the historical development of Mykolaiv as an industrial and commercial center of the South of Ukraine. In the second part of the XIX cent. and early XX cent. the name of the Port was the Mykolaiv International Commercial (or Trade) Port. The research has based on the principles of historicism, objectivity, comprehensiveness, as well as social and materialistic approaches to understanding history, in which economic aspects has primarily significance. The principles and methods developed by historians of science and technology was importance as well. Methods of source analysis were also useful, since the research was based mainly on archival sources. The principles of commercial navigation in the Black Sea basin were laid in the IX–XIII centuries. In 1788, on the left bank of the Ingul River, the Free Harbor, which is considered the antecedent of the Sea Port in Mykolaiv, was founded. Since the Government of the Russian Empire pursued the aim of creating the Black Sea Navy Center in Mykolaiv and, because of this, imposed various restrictions, the international trade in Mykolaiv was ceased. The Mykolaiv merchants were mainly engaged in providing the Admiralty, the enterprises of the Sea Department and the Black Sea Fleet with the necessary materials and goods. After the Crimean War (1853–1856) and the implementing of restrictive articles of the Paris Treaty (1856) shipbuilding in Mykolaiv was ceased, the Main Administration of the Black Sea Fleet and the Military Port were abolished. The deep economic crisis started in the city. The Mykolaiv military governor M. Arkas initiated founding of the Russian Society of Shipping and Trade, but the activity of this company did not have a significant impact on the economy of Mykolaiv. In 1860, the Mykolaiv military governor B. Glazenap proposed to open the Port in Mykolaiv for foreign vessels and export-import operations. The Port was opened on June 1, 1862. The region in which crops were grown geographically tended to Mykolaiv, so the Port immediately became the center of export of wheat, rye, oats, and also iron. Already in the first years of the Port operation the value of exports exceeded the value of imports. Further development of the grain trade was promoted the return of the Jews to Mykolaiv, the opening of the Customs Office and banks, the Crops Exchange, the Exchange Committee, the analytical chamber at it, the railway building. All this generally contributed to the development of the industry in the city, population growth and the transformation of Mykolaiv to the industrial center of the South of Ukraine. However, over time it was found that the Port did not meet the time demands. The question of its reconstruction was raised in the 1870s, and the project of the reconstruction was approved in 1885. The Port Administration began to operate in 1894. It was headed by 'the Captain over the Port', who was at the same time the Head of the Port Affairs Bureau – an advisory council whose authority was to solve port problems. The Port was divided into two divisions: foreign and cabotage. During the reconstruction the boundaries of the Port were identified, new embankments, elevators, warehouses were built. The Port was equipped with the latest loading and unloading facilities, grain and ore transporters. Two icebreakers helped the vessels to achieve to the Port in the winter time. Simultaneously, the problem of deepening of the canal in the Dnieper-Bug estuary was solved. It was importance because the vessels with large sediment could not be fully loaded in Mykolaiv and were forced to dock at the port of Ochakov, and transportation of cargo to Ochakov required considerable expenditure. Beacons and warning signs were also installed. All this made it possible to significantly increase the cargo turnover of the Port, which in 1910 reached a record level – more than 151 million poods, including more than 115 million poods of grain (this constituted 14 % of grain exports throughout the Russian Empire). That year Mykolaiv accepted 527 foreign vessels. At the end of the XIX – at the beginning of XX cent. the Port had been functioning on the basis of public-private partnership (by modern definition). The state, city and foreign investors put money into its development. Thus, the history of the Port until 1917 is the example of the Road Map for further development of the Port in the XXI cent., when in fact the Port operates in the same external and internal conditions as in the period studied above.

The purpose of this research was to investigate the history of the Mykolaiv Sea Port from the beginning of marine trade in the region of modern Mykolaiv-city to the beginning of the XX cent. in the context of the historical development of Mykolaiv as an industrial and commercial center of the South of Ukraine. In the second part of the XIX cent. andearly XX cent. the name of the Port was the Mykolayiv International Commercial (or Trade) Port. The research has based on the principles of historicism, objectivity, comprehensiveness, as well as social and materialistic approaches to understanding history, in which economic aspects has primarily significance. The principles and methods developed by historians of science and technology was importance as well. Methods of source analysis were also useful, since the research was based mainly on archival sources. The principles of commercial navigation in the Black Sea basin were laid in the IX–XIII centuries. In 1788, on the left bank of the Ingul River, the Free Harbor, which is considered the antecedent of the Sea Port in Mykolaiv, was founded. Since the Government of the Russian Empire pursued the aim of creating the Black Sea Navy Center in Mykolaiv and, because of this, imposed various restrictions, the international trade in Mykolaiv was ceased. The Mykolaiv merchants were mainly engaged in providing the Admiralty, the enterprises of the Sea Department and the Black Sea Fleet with the necessary materials and goods. After the Crimean War (1853–1856) and the implementing of restrictive articles of the Paris Treaty (1856) shipbuilding in Mykolaiv was ceased, the Main Administration of the Black Sea Fleet and the Military Port were abolished. The deep economic crisis started in the city. The Mykolaiv military governor M. Arkas initiated founding of the Russian Society of Shipping and Trade, but the activity of this company did not have a significant impact on the economy of Mykolaiv. In 1860, the Mykolaiv military governor B. Glazenap proposed to open the Port in Mykolaiv for foreign vessels and export-import operations. The Port was opened on June 1, 1862. The region in which crops were grown geographically tended to Mykolaiv, so the Port immediately became the center of export of wheat, rye, oats, and also iron. Already in the first years of the Port operation the value of exports exceeded the value of imports. Further development of the grain trade was promoted the return of the Jews to Mykolaiv, the opening of the Customs Office and banks, the Crops Exchange, the Exchange Committee, the analytical chamber at it, the railway building. All this generally contributed to the development of the industry in the city, population growth and the transformation of Mykolaiv to the industrial center of the South of Ukraine. However, over time it was found that the Port did not meet the time demands. The question of its reconstruction was raised in the 1870s, and the project of the reconstruction was approved in 1885. The Port Administration began to operate in 1894. It was headed by 'the Captain over the Port', who was at the same time the Head of the Port Affairs Bureau – an advisory council whose authority was to solve port problems. The Port was divided into two divisions: foreign and cabotage. During the reconstruction the boundaries of the Port were identified, new embankments, elevators, warehouses were built. The Port was equipped with the latest loading and unloading facilities, grain and ore transporters. Two icebreakers helped the vessels to achieve to the Port in the winter time. Simultaneously, the problem of deepening of the canal in the Dnieper – Bug estuary was solved. It was importance because the vessels with large sediment could not be fully loaded in Mykolayiv and were forced to dock at the port of Ochakov, and transportation of cargo to Ochakov required considerable expenditure. Beacons and warning signs were also installed. All this made it possible to significantly increase the cargo turnover of the Port, which in 1910 reached a record level – more than 151 million poods, including more than 115 million poods of grain (this constituted 14 % of grain exports throughout the Russian Empire). That year Mykolaiv accepted 527 foreign vessels. At the end of the XIX – at the beginning of XX cent. the Port had been functioning on the basis of public-private partnership (by modern definition). The state, city and foreign investors put money into its development. Thus, the history of the Port until 1917 is the example of the Road Map for further development of the Port in the XXI cent., when in fact the Port operates in the same external and internal conditions as in the period studied above. ; Частина 2 (початок статті в № 20 «Історичного архіву» 2019 р.)

Сфера высшего образования находится в состоянии постоянных изменений. Вузы вынуждены постоянно искать средства финансирования. Одним из главных аспектов функционирования вузов и иных организаций научно-инновационной сферы становится оборот интеллектуального капитала, который вуз может использовать для коммерциализации и тем самым получать большую прибыль от своей деятельности. Оборот интеллектуального капитала обладает определенными особенностями и находится под влиянием различных факторов, воздействуя на которые возможно ускорять и замедлять скорость оборота интеллектуального капитала. Таким образом, необходима разработка интегрированной методологии управления этими процессами. Указанная методология должна строиться на последовательном описании всех этапов коммерческого использования составляющих интеллектуального капитала. Также авторы полагают, что двойственный характер капитала интеллектуального происхождения подразумевает формирование таких организационных структур, которые дадут возможность извлечь из создаваемого интеллектуального продукта не только общественную, но и экономическую выгоду. Наиболее перспективным направлением развития инновационной системы является объединение плановых и рыночных механизмов в определенных организационных структурах, так как гарантом раскрытия потенциала общественного блага в инновациях выступает государство, а получению максимальной экономической выгоды от интеллектуального капитала помогает гибкая и мобильная предпринимательская среда. Именно по такому пути идут государства, наиболее успешные в инновационной деятельности, национальные инновационные системы которых развиваются при активном участии бизнеса и государства. Таким образом, для управления коммерциализацией интеллектуального капитала необходимо использовать различные управленческие методы и инструменты, специфичные для сфер внешнего и внутреннего применения. ; The higher education is constantly changing. The universities have to constantly look for financing. One of the main aspects of the functioning of universities and other organizations in the sphere of scientific-innovative is intellectual capital turnover that university may use for commercialization, and thereby obtain greater profits from their activities. The turnover of intellectual capital has certain peculiarities and is influenced by various factors that can speed up and slow down the speed of turnover of intellectual capital. That is, it is necessary to develop integrated methodologies for managing these processes. This methodology should be based on a sequential description of all phases of commercial use of intellectual capital. Also the authors believe that the dual nature of intellectual capital implies the creation of organizational structures that will provide an opportunity to draw from the intellectual product not only social, but also economic benefits. The most promising direction of development of innovation system is the integration of planned and market mechanisms in certain organizational structures. The state is the guarantor of the potential public goods for innovation, and flexible and mobile business environment helps to obtain maximum economic benefits from intellectual capital. This was the way of the countries that are most successful in innovation, the national innovation system of which is developed with the active participation of business and government. That is, to manage the commercialization of intellectual capital it is necessary to use various management methods and tools, which are specific to the areas of external and internal use.

This article deals with personal theoretical and practical contribution of American historians and archivists, John Franklin Jameson, Waldo Gifford Leland and Robert Digges Wimberly Connor, to development of archives in the United States and foundation of the U.S. National Archives. Author pays attention to the straggle of American archivists for implementation of provenance and 'respect des fonds' principles in American archival practice, development, by the American colleagues, archivist's plan of action in emergency situations, efforts of American archivists aimed on acquisition of archives by the First World War period documents. Author paid special attention to the question of how the American colleagues tried to avoid political influence on archives and archivists, and perform only their professional duties. ; В статье освещен персональный теоретический и практический вклад американских ученых историков и архивистов Джона Франклина Джеймсона, Валдо Гиффорда Лиланда и Роберта Диггса Вимберли Коннора в развитие архивного дела в США и основание Национального архива США. Автор обратил внимание на борьбу американских архивистов за внедрение принципов «происхождения» и «уважения к фонду» в американскую архивную практику, разработку американскими коллегами плана действий архивистов в чрезвычайных ситуациях, усилия американских архивистов, направленные на комплектование архивов документами периода Первой мировой войны. Отдельное внимание автор уделил тому, как американские коллеги пытались избежать политического влияния на архив и архивистов и выполнять только свои профессиональные обязанности. ; У статті висвітлено персональний теоретичний і практичний внесок американських учених істориків і архівістів Джона Франкліна Джеймсона, Уолдо Гіффорда Ліланда та Роберта Діггса Вімберлі Коннора до розвиток архівної справи у США та заснування Національного архіву США. Автор звернув увагу на боротьбу американських архівістів за впровадження принципів «походження» та «поваги до фонду» у американську архівну практику, розробку американськими колегами плану дій архівістів у надзвичайних ситуаціях, зусилля американських архівістів, направлені на комплектування американських архівів документами часів Першої Світової війни. Окрему увагу автор приділив намаганням американських колег уникнути політичної заангажованості архівістів і виконувати лише свої професійні обов'язки

Soviet and post-Soviet historians have not paid enough attention to the US National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) – the U.S. principal archive that preserves historical documentary sources of national importance. In the United States the history of the National Archives is presented in the works of Wayne C. Grover, Donald R. McCoy, H.G. Jones, Herman J. Viola, Anna Bruner Eales and other authors. The 1940-1950's in NARA's history is one of the most important periods, the time of "maturing and gaining self-awareness", which the author intends to explore in this article. NARA, established in 1934, tried to represent itself as a very important state agency. During World War II, NARA received a significant number of historical documents of the federal executive departments for storage, executed thousands of requests from civilian and military government agencies, popularized historical documents in order to reinforce a sense of patriotism, created thousands of security copies, let their premises to important military defense offices, made important steps to save documents of the occupied countries. Due to the services, rendered by archivists to the U.S. Army and Navy, NARA got the title of "National Defense Agency." Immediately after the war, the Second Archivist of the USA Solon J. Buck suggested creating the International Council on Archives and the UNO Archives. Prominent American archivists Waldo Gifford Leland, one of the founders of (NARA) the National Archives, Chairman of the Committee on Conservation of Cultural Resources, Collas G. Harris, the head of an Archives committee on protection against the hazards of war, Vernon D. Tate, the head of NARA photo archives department, Philip M. Hamer, the Records Control Officer NARA contributed to the development of the records' saving methods during the war. Ernst Posner, a scholar and lecturer at the American University, headed of the project on compilation of guides of archives in Germany, Italy and many occupied countries. The guides were created in order to save the repositories and documentary treasures they contained. Under the leadership of Philip M. Hamer the staff of the National Archives prepared "Guides to Records of World War II" for print. Consequently, archivists believed they were able to prove the value of archives as a strategic state informational resource that preserves nation's historical documents and provides government institutions with important retrospective information. However, in the postwar years, the government made decisions unfavorable for further development of the National Archives. Before and during the war an extraordinary number of documents in need of appraisal and disposal were accumulated in federal departments. In 1943 Congress issued the «Records Disposal Act» which demanded institutions to submit schedules of records, allocated for destruction to the U.S. Archivist. However, the devising of schedules progressed slowly. In 1945 amendments to the Act were adopted, which authorized the Archivist of the United States to compile mandatory General schedules. In 1946 President Harry S. Truman signed EO 9784 "Providing for the More Efficient Use and for the Transfer and Other Disposition of Government Records". This order required the departments of the executive branch to implement records management programs, and made NARA responsible for control and coordination in the area of the records management. It seemed that the measures taken to resolve the problem of appraisal and records management were sufficient. In 1947 the Commission on the Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government was established in the U.S. government, headed by the former U.S. President Herbert Hoover. Although Hoover declared that the reorganization was necessary for management simplification, clarity of the executive branch of power's policies, according to the Constitution of the United States, the real purpose of reorganization was the executive branch's attempt to take over all possible functions of governance, strengthening the status of major federal departments and cost savings. A special group was created as a part of the Commission. Its task was to survey the records management in federal agencies and provide recommendations for its improvement. Emmett J. Leahy led the group. He suggested the creation of a Federal Records Administration, incorporating it as a component of the National Archives and all the repositories, that stored non-current federal government documents, and passing a law to coordinate formation, storage, management and destruction of records procedures, appointing a person responsible for records management in each department, developing and implementing the relevant standards and regulations. However, the only Leahy's proposal the members of the Hoover Commission realized concerned NARA association with the General Services Administration (GSA), the office, responsible for ensuring the operation of public institutions and their buildings, transport and so on. The Third Archivist of the USA Wayne C. Grover (1948-1965) directed his own suggestions to the Hoover Commission, in which he appealed against the decision to establish a new Administration and insisted that NARA was able to successfully perform the functions of records management on its own. Opponents criticized Leahy for the narrowness of the aim he pursued: the problem of reducing the quantity of records and saving space for their storage. They made hints that he was more concerned with how to "sell" his idea to the Commission, than the communal benefit. They also pointed out the lack of alternatives and the uncertain status of the National Archives. Their fears were justified. On June 30, 1949 «Federal Property and Administrative Services Act» (PL 152) concerning federal property and administrative services was adopted, according to which all government records were declared federal property, centralized management was entrusted to GSA, which the National Archives and Records Service (NARS) was subjected to. With a few exceptions, the law passed in 1949 ensured that all the U.S. Archivist's responsibilities were passed to the head of GSA. Archives lost its authority as an independent government agency, and even changed its name from NARA to NARS. This resulted in the inability of the National Archives to conduct independent policy in the field of archival affairs and to control human resources and finances, which adversely affected the further development of the Archives. In 1953 U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953-1961) intended to politicize the post of the Archivist, to remove W.C. Grover from the office and appoint a politician. In 1965 Grover resigned because of a conflict with GSA regarding Archives funding cuts. Before that he had written a letter to President Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-1969) with a request to reestablish the National Archives into an independent agency. For 25 years the conflict between the GSA and NARS had been developing into a state of "war" in which, fortunately for American Archivists, they achieved a victory, returning not only the name but also the independence and rights to the Archives in 1985. Changes in the archives legislation concerning U.S. Archives in the 1940s – 1950s improved the records management in federal agencies: General and specific schedules were introduced, the activities of institutions in the field of records management were regulated, the rules for records disposition were established, retention periods were determined, destruction procedures were standardized, federal records centers were founded. Institutions were freed from aggravating work with noncurrent records, receiving an opportunity to transfer them to temporary repositories, appraisal and subsequent disposal in records centers. Activities of federal agencies in the area of records were subjected to centralized management, coordination and control by NARS. In fact, NARS powers were increased with the right to the records management programs control of the life cycle of documents from the formation in an institution until the final disposition. This was a significant step forward in comparison with the situation in the first half of the XX century. It ensured systematic acquisition of records of historical value by NARS and prevented the loss of valuable documents. Assessment of the guidelines given to the government by Hoover Commission is not high. The National Archives as an independent agency of the executive branch could have implemented its tasks in the field of records management on its own without unnecessary complications. Instead, it was held "captive" for 25 years (in the words of American Archivists) by the GSA and worked under pressure of an unresolved conflict which was time and energy consuming for the archivists. The examined period in the history of the National Archives of the United States (1940-1950's) was important both in terms of archives' achievements in practicing their trade and in terms of understanding their role as archivists. American archivists managed to prove to their federal departments the importance of transferring documents to be stored in the Archives and showed department heads that the Archives are a federal agency, which guarantees and reliably ensures the safety of government records and information as well as institutions' services. Later on, the heads of federal agencies had no doubts about the wisdom of submitting records to the NARA. Archives' informational activities didn't focus solely on executing state civilian and military agencies' requests, but on actively popularizing historical documents among officials, military men and citizens too. Actions, intended to popularize historical documents, helped to form a positive image of archives in the community. For the United States it was of great importance as American citizens as taxpayers assess the necessity of an institution's existence in terms of its cost justification. Activities of American archivists had a positive impact on the safety of occupied countries' documents. Contribution to the salvage of documents of other countries positively influenced the perception of the United States as one of the founders of the International Council on Archives by the international archival community. Decisions taken by the U.S. government in the postwar years were positive as a whole. Firstly, a strict records management system was implemented in federal agencies. The problem of appraisal and temporary storage of records was solved. Second, the loss of National Archives status as an independent public entity, which negatively reflected on all of the Archives' activities until 1985, taught archivists a lesson. Archivists realized that their mission was not to be clerks, who perform routine paperwork, but as guardians of history. W.C. Grover commented on this in his farewell letter to the staff of the Archives: «These missions, as I have repeated many times, are important. They are at the center of man's effort to preserve and carry forward civilization itself. "The written word endures" - at least such portions of the word as we archivists decide are worth preserving! It is a worrisome and responsible task, but I can't think of a nobler one in this rather uncivilized era we find ourselves». It took years for archivists to overcome the resistance of politicians and government officials, return an independent status to the Archives, eliminate the threat of politicization and turn archival branch into a separate independent public system. This does not mean that the U.S. archival branch and National Archives today operate without problems, but they experienced a period of "maturing and gaining self-awareness", which allowed archivists to move on to a new level of perception and representation of themselves and their role in State and society. ; Освещена история Национального архива США в период Второй мировой войны и первые послевоенные годы, усилия архивистов, направленные на организацию экспертизы ценности и обеспечение сохранности документов департаментов федерального правительства, популяризацию исторических источников; деятельность первой и второй Гуверовских комиссий, изменения законодательства в отраслях архивного дела и управления документацией в США в 1940-1950-х гг. Особенное внимание уделено статусу Национального архива США как самостоятельного органа исполнительной ветви власти и стратегического информационного ресурса государства ; Висвітлено історію Національного архіву США у період Другої світової війни та перші повоєнні роки, зусилля архівістів з організації експертизи цінності та забезпечення збереженості документів департаментів федерального уряду, популяризації історичних джерел; діяльність першої та другої Гуверівських комісій, зміни законодавства у галузі архівної справи та у сфері управління документацією у США у 1940-1950-х рр. Особливу увагу приділено статусу Національного архіву США як самостійного органу виконавчої гілки влади та стратегічного інформаційного ресурсу держави