Innovation in Latin-America: indicators and surveys

1
Innovation in Latin-America indicators and
surveys
RICYT Red Iberoamericana de Indicadoresde
Ciencia y Tecnología
Diana Suárez
Innovation Indicators for Latin America
Workshop19 March, 2009Paris, France
2
The LA environment

• Innovative features
• Low ST expenditure
• Low endowment of qualified personnel
• High public expenditure participation
• Low patent rate

• Context
• Unstable macroeconomic environment
• M-L L Tech goods
• Low external insertion

?
Developing countries
3
Methodological Approach
Macroeconomy
Trajectories
Incentives
Institutional framework
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Strategy
Innovation
Innovative behaviours
Purpose
Impact
Obstacles
Obstacles
Objectives
Innovation Activities
Results
Funding and information
_ _ _ _ _ Innovation System
4
Innovation in Latin-American firms
What can we test?

• Results of Innovation activities
• Expenditure on Innovation activities
• RD human resources
• Links, cooperation and sources of information
• Obstacles

5
How can we test?
Country Period Sample Statistical Unit
Argentina 2002-2004 1.688 (ISIC rev.3 D) Manufacturer firms with more than 10 employees
Brazil 2003-2005 12.000 (mining and manufacturer industries) Firms with more than 10 employees
Chile 2003-2004 2.877 (ISIC rev.3 A-O) Establishments with more than 10 employees
Colombia 1999-2002 101 Manufacturer Establishments
México 2004-2005 328.718 (census) Establishments with more than 50 employees
Uruguay 2001-2003 814 Manufacturer firms with more than 5 employees
6
1. Results

• High product innovator rate but low rate of
  firms that applied for patents,
• Developing countries more process than product
  innovators.

7
2. Expenditure

• Low innovation expenditure with high deviations

• Concentrated on capital goods (then innovators)

8
3.Human resources in RD

• Even the firms with RD expenditure and
  personnel present low rates of efforts.
• RD expenditure and human resources are not
  enough to understand innovative activities.

9
4. Innovative strategies
  In-house RD Capital Goods Training EID IA
Germany 2,46 1,22 - - 5,1
Argentine 0,2 0,64 0,01 0,08 1,12
Brazil 0,58 1,34 0,05 0,37 2,8
Spain 0,62 0,46 - - 1,5
France 2,46 0,35 - - 3,6
Uruguay 0,3 4,3 0,1 0,5 6,2

• Capital goods and RD are the most important
  activities in terms of expenditure,
• But training and engineering and industrial
  design are also important in terms of impact of
  the capital good acquisition.

10
5.Links and cooperation
Agents Agents Ar Ur Br Ch Me Co Sp Ge Fr
ST institutions Universities 27 15 2 3 5 5 11 11
ST institutions Training institutions 14 14 2 2 26
ST institutions Technological centres 26 18 12
ST institutions Consultants 34 31 2 3 12 5 4 14
Commercial chain Related enterprises 22 15 1 5 4 4 6 16
Commercial chain Headquarters 15 4 3
Commercial chain Clients 39 34 4 4 5 9 21
Commercial chain Suppliers 54 50 4 6 24 9 9 25
Commercial chain Competitors 20 12 1 3 9 2 3 4 14
11
6. Obstacles
  AR UR CH BR ME SP GE FR
Lack of qualified personnel 37 20 40 48 61 18 5 17
Risk of innovation 32 15 19 75 69      
Cost of innovation / return period 51 26 40 80   44 19 30
Financing problems 68 33 35 57 68 30 12 10
Market structure 55     24 59 22 5 18
Cooperation problems whit ST institutions 40 15 39 30   13 3 11
Insufficient information about markets 27   23 31 60 10 3 7
Insufficient information about technologies 22     36 59 1 11 5
12
Summary and conclusions

• Innovative features
• Low, concentrated and heterogeneous innovation
  expenditure
• High rate of innovators but low scope of
  innovations
• Low cooperation rates and contradictory numbers
• Macroeconomic obstacles (uncertainty and funding)

• Implications
• Importance of the subject approach and the
  integrated analysis (IA expenditure vs. RD)
• Simple indicators are not enough (efforts,
  results, scope and impact)
• Deeper analysis of cooperation and links with
  the NIS
• Endogenous vs. exogenous obstacles

13

• www.ricyt.org
• dsuarez_at_ricyt.edu.ar