El sistema español de innovación, 1960-2015
Transcription
El sistema español de innovación, 1960-2015
The Spanish Innovation System in the international context, 19602015: Advances and setbacks José M. Ortiz-Villajos Complutense University of Madrid First World Congress of Business History, Bergen, 25-27 August 2016 The unemployment rate in Spain has situated over 20% after 2008 The low level of innovation is one of the explanations Promoting R&D is essential for reindustrialization & job creation But improving the Spanish Innovation System is complex The first step is to have an idea of its historical evolution Outline 1. R&D investment in Spain 2. Who carries out the R&D investment? 3. Results of the innovation system • Scientific publications • Patents • High-tech industry output 4. Conclusions 1. R&D investment in Spain Total R&D has increased 43 times from 1964 to 2013 • Two periods of growth (1964-92; 1995-2008) • Two periods of recession (1993-94; 2009-2014) R&D/GDP increased 10 times: 0.13 % (1964) → 1.3 % (2013) • After 2 years fall (1993-4) the R&D total expenditure recovered the level of 1992 in 1996 (4 years) • But the R&D/GDP (R&D effort) level required 8 years to recover (2000) • A fall of 6 years (2009-14) may have a devastating effect on the Spanish Innovation System Spain has approached the OECD R&D effort average: • But since 2008 this trend has reversed • The fall of the Spanish R&D effort in the crisis is anomalous (in the OECD & EU countries it has increased on average) Spain vs specific countries in 1981-2012 (R&D effort): • Persistent distance in relation to USA, Japan, Germany… • Finland, Korea = from backward to leading positions • Great progress of China • Differences with Italy and Portugal Conclusion (Part 1) • The Spanish R&D system has progressed but insuficiently • There are structural obstacles 2. Who carries out the R&D investment? The three sectors doing R&D in Spain have grown since 1964: • Universities (x 185); Companies (x 89); Government (x 12) Changes in the relative weight: • 1964 = Government (68%); Companies (26%); Universities (6%) • 1974 = Firms’ R&D reached its all-time highest weight (58%) (international level) • 1992 = Universities reach 2nd place (30%) Public vs Private R&D • Entrepreneurial R&D has been historically pro-cyclical in Spain • Public R&D has been anti-cyclical (except in the current crisis) Compared to other countries? Weakness of the entrepreneurial R&D in Spain, 1981-2012: • More pro-cyclical than in other countries • Low weight (50%): other countries (70%) Entrepreneurial R&D is key for a sustained economic growth • The only way rich countries have to be competitive with emerging ones The Achilles heel of the Spanish innovation system: • Firms’ R&D = 0,7%/GDP vs 1,6% OECD • University & Government R&D near the European standards, but quite disconected from the private sector Conclusion (Part 2): • The Spanish entrepreneurs must be convinced about the benefits of R&D • Institutional and educational changes in the country are also needed 3. Results of the innovation system The inputs of the innovation system (R&D) can be invested more or less efficiently: • Thus, it is essential to analyze also its outputs (results) to evaluate its efficiency and specific orientation Three different types of results: • Scientific publications (Universities and Government) • Patents (mainly companies) • High-tec industry output (only companies) Spanish scientific production 1996-2013: • 23.000 → 80.000 publications • 600 → 1.800 x million inhabs. • 2% → 3% of world output Convergence with the developed countries • In publications per capita • In quality (quotes/publication) Conclusion (science): • Spain has achieved an acceptable level in scientific output (although it still lacks first level R&D centers, Nobel Prizes…) • What about industrial results? Patent applications by residents in Spain, 1980-2012: • Six-fold increase in 30 years • “Patent families” (ca. 50% duplicated) • Increasing international projection of the Spanish technological output Ranking of countries in patents per capita • 1st = Japan & Korea • 2nd = Switzerland, Germany, USA, Finland • Spain, Italy… much lower level • China, emerging • But total applications do not discriminate patents by quality Ranking by “triadic” patents per capita: • Japan remains in a prominent position • Korea comes down = below Germany, Finland, USA… • Spain, Italy, China… remain in the lower level Countries in the “lower level” by “triadic” patents per capita • Italy stands out = 4 times more than Spain and 10 times more than Portugal • China’s technological level is still quite low Conclusion (patents): • Spain, more backward in terms of industrial than scientific results • This reflects the weak entrepreneurial R&D investment Spanish companies investing in R&D, 1980-2012: • 5,500 (2002) → 13,000 (2008) → 8,000 (2012) • 5% firms with more 10 workers • Not comparable internationally Production of hightechnology sectors (% GDP) • 1st) Finland, Sweden & UK • 2nd) Germany & France • 3rd) Italy, Portugal, Spain, Poland Low technological level of the Spanish economy • Even lower when looking only at the manufacturing sector 4. Conclusions The Spanish Innovation System has progressed in the last decades: • R&D investment = 0.13% → 1.28%/GDP (1964-2013) • 600 → 1.800 scientific publications/million inhabitants (1996-2013) • 50 → 104 patents originated in Spain/million inhabitants (1980-2013) But the improvement has been insufficient: • The private part of the R&D is the most backward compared to other countries • The production of patents has progressed much less than the scientific output • Few companies doing R&D and low weight of high-tech production These data and the greater impact of the 2008 crisis in Spain show somehow a structural resistance to innovation: • The Spanish economy has opted for depending from the importation of foreign technology rather than producing it • This model has “worked” during the years of prosperity, but has shown its weakness since 2008 (high and sustained unemployment rate) • The new economic circumstances demand to bet on innovation and education