Economic analysis of material and technical support of scientific potential of researchers at Kazakhstani universities

Economic Annals-XXI: Volume 203, Issue (5-6), Pages: 48-58

Citation information:
Aryngazin Anuar, Aryngazin Ansar, Aryngazin Askar, & Tynybayeva Madina (2023). Economic analysis of material and technical support of scientific potential of researchers at Kazakhstani universities. Economic Annals-XXI, 203(5-6), 48-58. doi:

Anuar Aryngazin
MSc (Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering),
Nazarbayev University
53 Kabanbay Batyr Ave., Astana, 010000, Republic of Kazakhstan

Ansar Aryngazin
MSc (Physics),
Nazarbayev University
53 Kabanbay Batyr Ave., Astana, 010000, Republic of Kazakhstan

Askar Aryngazin
D.Sc. (Physics and Mathematics),
Sustainable Innovation and Technology Foundation;
Leading Researcher,
Altynsarin National Academy of Education
8/2 Mangilik El Ave., Astana, 100000, Republic of Kazakhstan

Madina Tynybayeva
PhD (Education),
Chief Scientific Officer, President,
Altynsarin National Academy of Education
8/2 Mangilik El Ave., Astana, 100000, Republic of Kazakhstan

Economic analysis of material and technical support of scientific potential of researchers at Kazakhstani universities

Abstract. One of the pressing challenges confronting higher education institutions in Kazakhstan is the enhancement of the quality of academic and research training for students, particularly at the postgraduate level (PhD). This quality is significantly influenced by the research capabilities of academic faculties. The assessment of academic training involves various factors, including the proficiency level in scientific methodologies exhibited by academic staff and postgraduate students. Economics of material-technical infrastructure plays a pivotal, often decisive role in this training, especially in the realm of natural and technical sciences.

The primary goal of our study is to gauge the proficiency levels in scientific methodologies among academic faculty, scrutinize economics of material-technical provisioning of higher education institutions, and to formulate pedagogical and administrative recommendations targeted at the academic staff and management of these institutions.

In the presented country case study (Kazakhstan), a comprehensive survey and data collection were carried out, involving 23 higher education institutions, 22 research institutes (spanning the years 2019-2021), and about 800 surveyed academic and research representatives in the fields of humanities, natural-technical sciences, and mathematical disciplines.

A pronounced deficiency (82%) was identified in the grasp of scientific methodologies within higher education institutions. Marginal variances were observed between universities and research institutes, as well as between natural-technical and social-humanitarian faculties. Alarmingly lower levels of material-technical provisioning per academic faculty member were revealed, ranging from a mere 2% to 75% compared to research institutes.

The presented results introduce new quantitative and qualitative data extracted from primary sources. The analysis uncovers both general and specific per-capita characteristics of the research potential of academic faculty and higher education institutions in Kazakhstan. It reveals significant variances in material-technical provisioning, ranging from a mere 2% to 75% when compared to research institutes.

We provide evaluations and recommendations for universities to substantially augment the per-capita characteristics of material-technical provisioning at the level of individual research potential. In the economical aspect, we advise to improve workplace facilities and equipment.

Keywords: Higher Education Institution; Research Potential; Individual; Personality; Research Methods; Material-Technical Provisioning; Economics; Statistical Analysis; Decision Theory

JEL Classіfіcatіon: I22; I23; I25; O15; O31; O32; O34

Acknowledgements and Funding: This paper has been prepared within the framework of the scientific and technical program «Scientific basis for modernization of the education system and science» (OR11465474), implemented by the Y. Altynsarin National Academy of Education (Kazakhstan).

Contribution: The authors contributed equally to this work.

Data Availability Statement: The dataset is available from the authors upon request.



  1. Schwab, K., & Zahidi, S. (2020). Global Competitiveness Report Special Edition 2020: How are Countries Performing on the Road to Recovery. World Economic Forum.
  2. National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan. (2020). National Report about Science, 2020. ­Nur-Sultan, Almaty.
  3. Ernst & Young Kazakhstan. (2022, November). In the context of the uncertainty of the global economy, which path will Central Asia choose? Investment attractiveness of the countries of Central Asia. Ernst and Yang Kazakhstan. (in Russ.)
  4. Paltashev, T. (2019, August 20). Less pathos, more realism. (in Russ.)
  5. Zhumashev, S. (2022, March 04). Two million people are actually unemployed in Kazakhstan. KPMG. (in Russ.)
  6. Strokova, T. A. (2018). Building research competence of PhD students: an analysis of experience of a PhD school. The Education and Science Journal, 20(10), 9-30. (in Russ.)
  7. Shestak, V. P., & Shestak, N. V. (2011). Formation of research competence and «academic writing». Higher Education in Russia Journal, 12, 115-120 (in Russ.).
  8. Efimova, G. Z., Sorokin, A. N., & Gribovskii, M. V. (2021). The ideal teacher of higher education: personal qualities and socio-professional competencies. The Education and Science Journal, 23(1), 202-230. (in Russ.)
  9. Schneegans, S., Straza, T., & Lewis, J. (2021). UNESCO Science Report: the Race Against Time for Smarter Development. UNESCO Publishing: Paris.
  10. Sokolov, B. S. (2001). About sciences fundamental and applied. Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 71(9), 784-787. (in Russ.)
  11. Aryngazin, K. M. (2005). Introduction to semantic pedagogy. Karaganda: KSU Publishing (in Russ.).
  12. Balzer, H. D. (1989). Soviet Science on the Edge of Reforms. Routledge.
  13. Forbes Kazakhstan. (2020, December 13). «Knowledge Enterprise»: what should be higher education in Kazakhstan. (in Russ.)
  14. Aryngazin, A. K. (2023). Brutto Assessment of the Early Stage of Research Activity. Science Management: Theory and Practice, 5(1), 104-127. (in Russ.)
  15. (2021, May 27). The concept of the development of science until 2025 was developed in Kazakhstan. (in Russ.)
  16. Gusev, A. B., Doronina, E. G., Vershinin, I. V., & Malakhov, V. A. (2018). Monitoring and evaluation of the results of scientific and technical activities: foreign experience and Russian practice. Science Governance and Scientometrics Journal, Russian Research Institute of Economics, Politics and Law in Science and Technology (RIEPL), 13(1), 65-91. (in Russ.)
  17. Zborovskii, G. E., & Ambarova, P. A. (2022). Scientific and pedagogical workers as a social community in the changing conditions of academic development. The Education and Science Journal, 24(5), 147-180. (in Russ.)
  18. Zyateva, O. A., & Pitukhin, E. A. (2022). Prognosticating scientific activity indicators of Russian universities and their rating. Perspektivy nauki i obrazovania (Perspectives of Science and Education), 58(4), 692-705. (in Russ.)
  19. Moiseev, P. S., Sysoev, P. V., Evstigneeva, I. A., & Sorokin, D. O. (2022). A research and publication activity center in the context of university participation in the «Priority 2030» program: main activity vectors and their understanding among faculty. Perspektivy nauki i obrazovania (Perspectives of Science and Education), 60(6), 717-734. (in Russ.)
  20. Kolomiychenko, L. V. (2014). Methodological culture as the most important component of professional competence. Perm Pedagogical Journal, 6, 49-51. (in Russ.)
  21. Lazarev, V. S. (2021). Bibliometrics, scientometrics and informetrics. Part 2. Object. Science Management: Theory and Practice, 3(1), 80-105.
  22. Makotrova, G. V., Moiseenko, O. A., Krolevetskaya, E. N., Polotskaya, N. A., & Efimtseva, D. N. (2022). Simulation the process of scientific potential development of the personality at the university: approaches and ideas. Perspektivy nauki i obrazovania (Perspectives of science and education), 6(60), 29-46. (in Russ.)
  23. Koltun, V., & Hafner, D. (2021). The h-index is no longer an effective correlate of scientific reputation. PLOS One, 16(6), e0253397.
  24. Deloitte. (2013). The Analytics Advantage: We’re just getting started. (in Russ.)
  25. von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  26. Strokova, T. A. (2016). Criteria and diagnostic tools for monitoring quality assessment of pre-service teachers’ training for practice-oriented research activity. The Education and Science Journal, 132(3), 29-43. (In Russ.)

Received 20.01.2023
Received in revised form 11.03.2023
Accepted 12.03.2023
Available online 14.06.2023