Innovation, EU & Regions: A Way Out of Poverty?

INNOVATION, EU AND REGIONS: A WAY OUT OF

POVERTY? Project 17: Project Leader: Prf. Dr. rer.pol. Bettina Burger-Menzel

Team composition:MARÍA ANDREA VÁSQUEZ CASTILLO CHRISTINE LESSMANN JUSTINA SAKALYTE IEVA NAUJALYTECRISTINA SALA LIDÓN MARC JUANOLA MONÉ

Contents

1. Introduction

2. Why Germany, Lithuania and Spain?

3. Economic Background

4. Study Case

5. Lithuania’s survey

6. Conclusions

1. Introduction

• Germany, Spain and Lithuania as the EU members

• Role of the innovation in the development of the countries.

• Structural and technological changes and their effects into the economies.


• Innovation Leaders: Germany

• Catching-up Countries: Lithuania

• Trailing Countries: Spain


Source: European Innovation Scoreboard 2006

Innovation DimensionsInputs• Innovation drivers: S&T graduates• Knowledge creation: Expenditure on R&D• Innovation & Entrepreneurship: Expenditure on ICT

Outputs• Application: Employ. Med/high-tech manf. , High-Tech

Exports• Intellectual Property: Patent applications


Source: European Innovation Scoreboard 2006

3. Economic BackgroundGermany

INDICATORS NationalPerformance EU 25

2000 2005 2000 2005

GDP per capita in PPS (EU25=100) 112,1 108,2 100 100

Real GDP growth rate (% change previous year) 3,2 0,9 3,9 1,6

Total employment growth (annual % change) 1,9 0,4* 1,5 0,6*

Inflation rate (average annual) 1,4 1,9 2,4 2,2

Unemployment rate (as % of active population) 7,2 9,5 8,6 8,7

Foreign direct investment intensity 6,7 -0,8 2,4 0,9*

Business investment as a percentage of GDP 19,6 16,0* 18,3 17,1*

Source: Eurostat “Structural Indicators and long-term Indicators”

3. Economic BackgroundLithuania

INDICATORS NationalPerformance

EU 25

2000 2005 2000 2005

GDP per capita in PPS (EU25=100) 38.5 48.1 100 100

Real GDP growth rate (% change previous year) 3.9 6.7 3,9 1,6

Total employment growth (annual % change) -3.7 2.4 1,5 0,6*

Inflation rate (average annual) 0.9 1.1 2,4 2,2

Unemployment rate (as % of active population) 1.6 11.0 8,6 8,7

Foreign direct investment intensity 1.7 0.6* 2,4 0,9*

Business investment as a percentage of GDP 16.0 18.0* 18,3 17,1*


3. Economic BackgroundSpain

INDICATORS NationalPerformance

EU 25

2000 2005 2000 2005

GDP per capita in PPS (EU25=100) 91.3 98.3 100 100

Real GDP growth rate (% change previous year) 5 3.4 3,9 1,6

Total employment growth (annual % change) 5.1 2.6 1,5 0,6*

Inflation rate (average annual) 3.5 3.4 2,4 2,2

Unemployment rate (as % of active population) 11.1 9.2 8,6 8,7

Foreign direct investment intensity 8.4 3.2 2,4 0,9*

Business investment as a percentage of GDP 22.8 24.5 18,3 17,1*


4. Study Case

• Definition of NIS (National Innovation System)

”The network of institutions in the public and private sectors whose activities and interactions initiate, import, modify and diffuse new technologies may be described as the “National Systems of Innovation”

Source: Freeman, C. (1987); Technology Policy and Economic Performance – Lessons from Japan; Pinter Publishers, London.

4. Study CaseInnovation Indicators

Innovation System Innovation Actors

1. Education2. R&D3. Implementation4. Financing5. Networking6. Demand7. Regulation and Competition

1. Citizen2. Enterprice3. State

Source: DIW 2006 – Innovationsindikator Deutschland 2006

4. Study Case

• Analysis of inputs and outputs some innovation indicators:

– Education System– Research and development– Implementation

Germany, Lithuania and Spain

4. Study Case

• Education: It is very important for the innovation ability. The society can be innovative only with qualified personnel, intelligent engineers and creative scientists.

Input: Spending on HR - %GDP

0,00

1,00

2,00

3,00

4,00

5,00

6,00

7,00

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Germany

Lithuania

Spain

4. Study CaseOutput: Science and Technology (S&T) graduates per 1000 population between the age of 20 - 29

Output: Employment in high and medium high technology manufacturing sector - % total employment rate

0,00

2,00

4,00

6,00

8,00

10,00

12,00

14,00

16,00

18,00

20,00

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Germany

Lithuania

Spain

0,00

5,00

10,00

15,00

20,00

25,00

30,00

35,00

40,00

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Germany

Lithuania

Spain

4. Study Case

• Research & Development (R&D): It is actually the branch of high technology where the needs for developing creative ideas and their conversion into innovation exist

Input: Gross Domestic Expenditure on R&D (GERD) - %GDP

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Germany

Lithuania

Spain

4. Study Case

Output: Patent Application to the EPO - Applications per million inhabitants in thousands

0,00

50,00

100,00

150,00

200,00

250,00

300,00

350,00

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Germany

Lithuania

Spain

4. Study Case

• Implementation of the innovation in the production: The process of the innovation reaches its target, if the companies make realisation of the products and services or procedures in the market.

Input: ICT expenditure - IT - %GDP

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

2003 2004 2005

Germany

Lithuania

Spain

4. Study Case

Output: High Tech Exports - share of total exports

02468

1012141618

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Germany

Lithuania

Spain

6. Conclusions

6. Conclusions

• GERMANY – leader.• Weakness in HR investment• Strength in use HR in high-tech industry

• SPAIN – trailer.• Weakness in no efficient use of HR in high-tech industry • Strenght in investment in HR intelectual property

• LITHUANIA – catching-up.• Weakness: apparently not efficient use of HR in high-tech

industry BUT the „survey“ reveals that Lithuania uses HR in a different way.

• Strenght: absortive capacity for new ideas and technology innovation in all given industries, including services.

TUSEN TAKK