Ulyana Lushchyk, MD 
Prof. Viktor Novytsky, Dr. Sci. (Phys.-Math.) 
Lyudmyla Ryabets
Kyiv Center for Innovative Medical Technologies
   The state policy for development of Ukrainian national innovation system is the most represented in the law of Ukraine on innovation activity and identified as following: ‘Innovations are newly made (used) and (or) improved competitive technologies, products or services and also managerial and engineering industrial, administrative, commercial or other solutions largely improving the structure and quality of production and (or) social sphere’.     
   Today, the Ukrainian comprehension of innovations is controversial: neither an innovator no the government knows what exactly we want to get in the end: the inventor’s fame or capitalization of scientific products and further investments in new scientific projects. Therefore, current mechanisms for integration of scientific inventions into the real economy are limited to the terms ‘implementation’, ‘transfer’, and ‘venture’. Innovation activity and technology transfer as a factor of enterprise’s competitiveness provision doesn’t work because there is no competition itself in our country. Mythology of the innovative process in our country comes to such a postulate as ‘expenses in third parties’ interests’.  
   The country ultimately acts as an ineffective manager because it doesn’t control results and economic effects of investing in scientific projects, even forming new science parks. 
A positive model for today is a venture enterprise in case of presenting pathbreaking projects to the innovation world as an efficient capitalization of scientific products with registration of rights of intellectual property protection as a variant of an effective synergy of science, education and business in the innovation field. A venture entrepreneur develops a business model, mobilizes resources (including intellectual and financial ones), forms a team and prepares a scientific product for selling.
A negative factor is the post-Soviet mentality where a social mind in Ukraine refuses the right for a commercial success of a scientist and a doctor. But medical innovations are highly required because the patient’s health lost today won’t recover tomorrow.    
   As a result, we lose a human life and the country’s potential labour force. There is a vicious circle that must be completely transformed.  
  Schemes of new innovations’ capitalization can be considered in two variants: indirect – through a component of the intellectual property in the price of new medicines, devices, diagnostic equipment and direct one – through paying for the best (and/or exclusive) medical services, i.e. via the own business’ success. 
   The most relevant issues of the current innovation policy are the scientific management and effective risk management. The most riskful macrofactors in the process of developing an innovative product and preparing it for selling include state obstacles on both legislative and executive levels. They are restricted by a number of permitting documents and instability of the state innovation policy reaching in total up to 35 risk factors of innovation commercialization. 
   The working experience of Istyna scientific private center and the experience of an active implementation of scientific developments in the Clinic of Ulyana Lushchyk’s work show that innovative technologies in Ukraine develop through self-investments of private enterprises and are commercialized on the microeconomic business model level. During 2000-2010 we developed several innovative medical technologies for diagnostics of vascular pathologies represented by digital optical capillaroscopy and medical technology ‘Hemodynamic Laboratory’ allowing for the effective influence on the identified pathological changes with the help of medications and rehabilitation measures.  These technologies were based on the author’s methods and 9 Ukrainian patents. 
Hence, innovative technologies in the favorable state microclimate have great chances for commercialization on the macroeconomic model level not only within our country but also on the world market. To do that, one must create state innovative centers and centers for enterprise support that would work on ‘pay-per-performance’ basis, i.e. not for the right to participate in a project but for an ultimate result of the profit gained. Moreover, the public opinion on neglecting the intellectual property right must be conceptually changed. One should form an innovative culture with specialists in the field of innovative technologies, whose training would be provided by the government.    
   Therefore, venture capitalism of scientific projects allows the country to be innovative protecting interests of developers and owners of intellectual technologies. As a result, all the participants gain: a developer is paid for his work and creates his next product; the country, macroeconomically, gets a positive balance and profit for the further development and investments; medical establishments get modern effective technologies that will finally provide the quality and proof of rendering medical services.