by

Emira Becic, Ph.D.Ministry of Science, Education and Sports Republic of Croatia

S &T and Innovation Statistics as tool for measurement progress in

innovation performance

Forum on “Measuring and Fostering the Progress of Societies:A new Approach for CIS and Eastern European Countries”

OECD, ROSSTAT and Russian Academy of Labor and Social Relation, 29- 30 September 2008, Moscow

ContentsContents1.1. Challenges for MeasurementChallenges for Measurement2.2. Innovation statisticsInnovation statistics3.3. PerformancePerformance && Impact AnalysisImpact Analysis4. Some questions ! !

1. 1. Challenges for MeasurementChallenges for Measurement

• GlobalisationsGlobalisations• The The KnowledgeKnowledge-based E-based Economconomy towards a y towards a

Sustainable Knowledge Society: EU innovation Sustainable Knowledge Society: EU innovation gap with Japan and the US; where is Croatia gap with Japan and the US; where is Croatia

• Internationalisation of R&DInternationalisation of R&D• Science policyScience policy: towards improving current : towards improving current

state of artstate of art• Accessing Croatia to EU: Chapter 18 - Accessing Croatia to EU: Chapter 18 -

StatisticsStatistics

GlobalisationGlobalisation• Ageing population Ageing population

– Increasing pressure on public financeIncreasing pressure on public finance -retirement -retirement expenditures expenditures

– Social securitySocial security – unemployment, healthcare and pensions. – unemployment, healthcare and pensions.• Mass immigration and labour markets - impact on growth Mass immigration and labour markets - impact on growth

and productivityand productivity– immigration young human capitalimmigration young human capital– EducationEducation

• Environmental sustainabilityEnvironmental sustainability• Economic environmentEconomic environment

– Incresing global marketsIncresing global markets– Technological changeTechnological change

• Investment in KnowledgeInvestment in Knowledge• Energy and increasing lack of natural sourcesEnergy and increasing lack of natural sources

USERS and their DEMANDSUSERS and their DEMANDS

Type of UsersType of Users

Politicians Politicians GGovernment overnment Parliament Parliament S&T S&T decision decision policypolicy makers makers Local Local authoritiesauthoritiesScientific communityScientific communityBusiness sectorBusiness sectorSocietySocietyInternational organizationsInternational organizationsNGOsNGOs

DemandsDemands

Up-to-date, Up-to-date, key indicatorskey indicators by by policy-relevant categoriespolicy-relevant categories

LongLong time series, time series, detaileddetailed statistics, statistics, comparablecomparable indicators by indicators by research viewsresearch views

General overview, detailed General overview, detailed information on their information on their own own sectorsector and and connecting sectorsconnecting sectors

Mass media, inquiryMass media, inquiryrranking nations by anking nations by

competitiveness, searching competitiveness, searching co-operation partners, co-operation partners, knowledge of global knowledge of global tendenciestendencies

2. Innovation statistics: Relevance, concepts and

difficulties in practice

The relevance • It is generally accepted that in the long-

run innovation drives economic growth and welfare, not cheap/abundant resources

• It is also generally accepted that the market is an insufficient mechanism to optimise investments in innovation, hence policy intervention makes a substantial contribution

Innovation statistics are relevant because:

•They help identify the evolution of deficiencies and shortages in a country over time

•They allow to compare performances between countries: this benchmarking tool increases the potential of learning from peers

But there are problems in capturing innovation

• There are blurring boundaries in the definition and classification of innovations, hence a need for standards

• Over time the nature and landscape of innovation change (hence changing models for understanding innovation leading to different emphasis on capturing its elements)

The Oslo Manual is a dynamic process • Picture and monitor the Knowlege Based

Economy/the Knowledge Based Society• Standards of surveys in countries with different

economic and social backgrounds were adapted to the “Oslo”methodology ask to take into account specific user needs and the characteristics of statistical systems.

• Complementarity and compatibility with other relevant methodology: e.g. R&D (Frascati Manual), human resources in S&T (Canberra Manual), globalisation indicators, patents, the information society, and biotechnology statistics.

Increasing experiences around the world

• The number of countries conducting innovation surveys is growing: EU countries, other OECD countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan, and a large number of non-OECD economies, among them several Latin American countries, Russia and South Africa.

• CBS of Croatia conducting innovation survey within frame of the EU statistics:– CIS 3 - Pilot survey,CIS 3 - Pilot survey,20052005 for the period 2001-2003 for the period 2001-2003– CIS 4, 2008 for the period 2004-2006 within the frame PHARE CIS 4, 2008 for the period 2004-2006 within the frame PHARE

Multicountry Programme (February 2007- February 2008) through Multicountry Programme (February 2007- February 2008) through technical assistance.technical assistance.

Some concrete cases USAUSA Innovation data collected by ad hoc surveys at

high level, with related topics (R&D survey, labour force surveys).

JAPANJAPAN Japanese National Innovation Survey 2003 (J NIS 2003), very similar to the CIS but adapted

KOREAKOREA 2005 Korean Innovation Survey: the Manufacturing Sector, 2003 the Service Sector

IndividualIndividualEU surveyEU survey

Firm level innovation activity:•The IFO Innovation Survey (Germany)•CNR ISTAT Survey (Italy) •SEO Survey (Netherlands) •Nordic Surveys

EU level:EU level:CIS surveyCIS survey

Comunnity Innovation Surveys (CIS1 – CIS 4).Comunnity Innovation Surveys (CIS1 – CIS 4).

CIS 4 TOPICS The statistical indicators presented under CIS 4 domain

cover a range of topics related to:• Product, process, ongoing and abandoned innovation• Innovation activity and expenditure• Intramural research and experimental development (R&D)• Effects of innovation• Public funding of innovation• Innovation co-operation• Sources of information for innovation• Hampered innovation activity• Patents and other protection methods• Other important organisational and marketing innovations

in the enterprise

3. 3. PerformancePerformance && Impact Impact AnalysisAnalysis -Existence of Existence of indicatorsindicators and impact and impact measurementsmeasurements-Global comparisonGlobal comparison

The CIS 4 – PerformancePerformance && Impact AnalysisImpact Analysis• Data Quality Issues

– Response Rates variation variation: Reasons for this are very different willingness to respond (e.g. (e.g.Different data collection procedures; The ”culture”in the business sector to respond; Different industry and size structures;)

PerformancePerformance && Impact AnalysisImpact Analysis - - Existence of Existence of indicatorsindicators and impact measurementsand impact measurements::

• Indicators from The Community Innovation Survey –CIS used within The European Innovation Scoreboard –EIS (set of indicators used to measure innovation performance by countries and country ranking by Summary Innovation Index-SII)

– Lack of more indicators by countries for calculation SII?– Data availability by country– composite indicator scores (relative share)

• Regional Innovation Scoreboard (RIS)

• Impact on other Composite Indexes:– Competitiveness Index as an indicators for measurement progress in

competitiveness by national/regional/global level.

Identifying policy challenges

• Trend Chart Synthesis Report, 2006 (EIS –SII, 2006)– (o/w 8 indicators from 26)(o/w 8 indicators from 26)

• Three EIS indicators seen as main challenges in Three EIS indicators seen as main challenges in 2005:2005:– Rates of business expenditure on R&D (16 EU25 and 3/8 eight Rates of business expenditure on R&D (16 EU25 and 3/8 eight

candidate/associate countries);candidate/associate countries);– Share of science and engineering graduates (13 EU25 and 3/8 Share of science and engineering graduates (13 EU25 and 3/8

eight candidate/associate), andeight candidate/associate), and– Participation in life-long learning activities (14 EU25 & Participation in life-long learning activities (14 EU25 &

1candidate country)1candidate country)

• Five other indicators also cited more often:Five other indicators also cited more often:– Population with tertiary educationPopulation educationPopulation with tertiary educationPopulation education– Broadband penetration rates,Broadband penetration rates,– Business financed university R&D Business financed university R&D – SMEs innovating inSMEs in-house, andSMEs innovating inSMEs in-house, and– Early stage venture capital.Early stage venture capital.

Innovation performanse: EIS-SII Innovation performanse: EIS-SII SII- SII- provide an aggregate national innovation performance

International comparison - Global Innovation International comparison - Global Innovation ScoreboardScoreboardIzvor: http://www.proinnoeurope.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&topicID=84&parentID=51Izvor: http://www.proinnoeurope.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&topicID=84&parentID=51

International comparison - Global International comparison - Global Innovation ScoreboardInnovation Scoreboard• Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan, the US, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan, the US,

Singapore and Israel are the Singapore and Israel are the global innovation global innovation leadersleaders. .

• The group of The group of next-best performersnext-best performers includes Germany, includes Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, Canada, the UK, Republic of Denmark, Netherlands, Canada, the UK, Republic of Korea, France, Iceland, Norway, Belgium, Australia, Korea, France, Iceland, Norway, Belgium, Australia, Austria, Ireland, Luxembourg and New Zealand. Austria, Ireland, Luxembourg and New Zealand.

• The group of The group of follower countriesfollower countries includes the Hong includes the Hong Kong, Russian Federation, Slovenia, Italy, Spain, Kong, Russian Federation, Slovenia, Italy, Spain, Czech Republic, Czech Republic, Croatia,Croatia, Estonia, Hungary and Malta. Estonia, Hungary and Malta.

• The group of The group of lagging countrieslagging countries includes Lithuania, includes Lithuania, Greece, China, Slovakia, South Africa, Portugal, Greece, China, Slovakia, South Africa, Portugal, Bulgaria, Turkey, Brazil, Latvia, Mexico, Poland, Bulgaria, Turkey, Brazil, Latvia, Mexico, Poland, Argentina, India, Cyprus and Romania. Argentina, India, Cyprus and Romania.

SEE: region in transitionSEE: region in transitionSource: Ivo, Šlaus (2007). online:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00163287)Source: Ivo, Šlaus (2007). online:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00163287)

CountryCountryRangeRange

ESI ESI 0 – 1000 – 100

HDIHDI0 - 10 - 1

GCIGCIRankingRanking

GIGIRanking 62 - Ranking 62 -

11

HLSHLS0 - 1000 - 100

SlLOVENIASlLOVENIA 58.858.8 0.8790.879 3131 2525 69.569.5CROATIACROATIA 62.562.5 0.8090.809 5353 2222 66.066.0B & HB & H 51.351.3 …… …… …… 61.561.5S & MNS & MN …… …… …… …… 6161MACEDONIAMACEDONIA 47.247.2 0.7720.772 8181 …… 5656ROMANIAROMANIA …… 0.7750.775 7575 4040 59.559.5GREECEGREECE 50.950.9 0.8850.885 3535 2626 ……ALBANIAALBANIA 59.759.7 0.7330.733 …… …… ……ITALYITALY 47.247.2 0.9130.913 4141 2424 84.584.5AUSTRIAAUSTRIA 64.264.2 0.9260.926 1717 88 81.581.5HUNGARYHUNGARY 62.762.7 0.8350.835 3333 2323 65.065.0CZECH CZECH REPUBLICREPUBLIC

50.250.2 0.8490.849 3939 1515 69.569.5

TURKEYTURKEY 50.850.8 0.7420.742 6565 5353 72.072.0USAUSA 53.253.2 0.9390.939 22 1111 89.589.5IRELANDIRELAND 54.854.8 0.9250.925 3030 11 90.590.5FINLANDFINLAND 73.973.9 0.9300.930 11 1010 91.591.5

4. Instead of conclusion: Some questions ! !• Is it worth launching innovation surveys in

the CIS/SEE countries?• If yes, should that be on an individual

basis, or as a regional exercise?• If the latter is the case is the Oslo Manual,

the Bogota or a new regional manual be the most appropriate tool?

• Would a regional benchmarking exercise (EIS-like) be useful?

CroatiaCroatia

Thanks for your attention!Thanks for your attention!emira.becic@mzos.hremira.becic@mzos.hr