University property complexes in the conditions of implementation of the Russian Federation state policy in the sphere of higher education

Introduction. The paper considers the questions of the formation of a new approach to the study of property complexes of universities, which are traditionally dominated by real estate. Their relevance is determined by the state policy of the Russian Federation in the sphere of higher education, the important priorities of which are the improvement of the property complexes management on the digital basis, orientation to the creation of world-class campuses in the future.

Materials and methods. The characteristics of the source materials of the study, compiled on the basis of official statistical data generated by the state authorities of the Russian Federation, are presented. The insufficiency of official reporting data for a full-fledged study of the issues of real estate development within the property complexes of universities is noted, there is only the possibility to determine their main characteristics related to the structure and investments in the context of certain types of property. It is emphasized that during the transition to digitalization in all spheres of the economy, it is important to transform significantly the statistical information related to the property complexes of universities.

Results. Three aspects in the analysis of real estate objects were studied, in the context of which a comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness of state budget investments in the property complexes of Russian universities was carried out. The trends that are significant for assessing the current state and forecasting the situation with the construction and reconstruction of real estate as part of the property complexes of universities were identified. The main tendency, on which the attention of the authors was focused, was noted — the risks of incomplete construction, which should be reduced in order to ensure the effectiveness of the implementation of the Russian Federation state policy in the sphere of higher education.

Conclusions. In this regard, in terms of discussion, a set of measures that can be implemented at the state level in the context of digitalization was proposed, starting with the expansion of the information base on operated, under construction and reconstructed real estate, ending with proposals to include indicators of the state of university property complexes in
the indicators of their ratings, including on the basis of the creation of an information system on the state of real estate objects on a digital platform.

1. Zhang Q., Wang Y., Liang R. Comparison and optimization suggestion for campus system of U.S. and China green building evaluation standards. Journal of Xi’an University of Architecture & Technology. 2017; 49(3):416-421. DOI: 10.15986/j.1006-7930.2017.03.016

2. Farag A.A., Doheim R.M. Rating sustainability at Effat University-Towards a Green Campus. The Second Memareyat International Conference (MIC 2018), Architecture and Urban Resiliency. Jeddah, KSA, 2018.

3. Tan H., Chen S., Shi Q., Wang L. Development of green campus in China. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2014; 64:646-653. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.10.019

4. Eliseev A.M., Podoprigora Yu.V., Zakharova T.V. Campuses of the future in university cities in Russia and France in the context of the digital economy, innovation and a barrier-free environment. Bulletin of Tomsk State University. Economics. 2020; 49:225-235. DOI: 10.17223/19988648/49/16. EDN IFLTZE. (rus.).

5. Puchkov M.V. University campus: Interrelations of educational technologies and models of architectural space formation. University Management: Practice and Analysis. 2021; 25(4):109-119. DOI: 10.15826/umpa.2021.04.039 (rus.).

6. Shirokova O.L., Pavlyuk A.S. Forming the structure of a modern campus. Construction and Architecture. 2022; 10(1):105-109. (rus.).

7. Fedotova M.A., Belyaeva I.Yu., Loseva O.V., Kalachev D.N., Kukhtin P.V., Pukhova M.M. et al. Development of the management system for the property complex of university campuses: the best Russian and foreign practices. Moscow, Rusajns, 2017; 144. EDN ZASETD. (rus.).

8. Ovchinnikova O.P., Ovchinnikova N.E. Financing of higher education in developed countries and Russia: an analysis of current trends. Accounting in Budgetary and non-profit Organizations. 2018; 6:33-42. (rus.).

9. De Martino M., Tkach G.F., Kovalenko S.A. Modern trends in public funding of higher education. Higher Education in Russia. 2020; 29(3):136-152. DOI: 10.31992/0869-3617-2020-29-3-136-152 (rus.).

10. Dmitrienko A.S. Review of higher education financing models: Funding mechanisms and the role of the state. Public Administration Issues. 2023; 2:146-171. DOI: 10.17323/1999-5431-2023-0-2-146-171 (rus.).

11. Bugaian L. Reconsideration of financing Higher Education Institutions at international and national level. Journal of Social Sciences. 2020; 3(4):6-16. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4296200

12. De Boer H., Jongbloed B., Benneworth P., Cremonini L., Kolster R., Kottmann A. et al. Performance-based funding and performance agreements in fourteen higher education systems. University of Twente, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies, 2015.

13. Dougherty K.J., Natow R.S. Performance-based funding for higher education: how well does neoliberal theory capture neoliberal practice? Higher Education. 2020; 80(3):457-478. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-019-00491-4

14. Pankratov O.E., Pankratov E.P. Problems of unfinished construction and ways to reduce it. Construction Economics. 2020; 5(65):3-13. EDN BIVGHP. (rus.).

15. Evteev D.A. The concept and signs of construction in progress. Young Scientist. 2021; 53(395): 61-64. EDN XTOOOG. (rus.).

16. Pankratov E., Grabovy K. Greater role of depreciation in innovative development of construction business production potential. MATEC Web of Conferences. 2017; 106:08070. DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201710608070

17. Shane J.M. Abandoned buildings and lots. Problem-Oriented Guides for Police. Problem-Specific Guides Series. 2012; 64:1-69.

18. Alsuliman J.A. Causes of delay in Saudi public construction projects. Alexandria Engineering Journal. 2019; 58(2):801-808. DOI: 10.1016/j.aej.2019.07.002

19. Hossain M.A., Raiymbekov D., Nadeem A., Kim J.R. Delay causes in Kazakhstan’s construction projects and remedial measures. International Journal of Construction Management. 2022; 22(5):801-819. DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2019.1647635

20. Kog Y.C. Construction Delays in Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction. 2019; 24(3). DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-5576.0000434

21. Orlova S.Yu. Construction in progress and shortcomings of public administration. Expert. 2020; 25(1166). (rus.).

22. Kurochkina V.A. The impact of long-term construction subjects and industrial areas on the geoecology of cities and development of depressed urban spaces. The Eurasian Scientific Journal. 2020; 6. DOI: 10.15862/36NZVN620 (rus.).