Presentation on theme: "Globelics and the BRICS project Globelics Academy Tampere, Finland – 2008 José Eduardo Cassiolato Economics Institute of Federal University of Rio de Janeiro."— Presentation transcript:
Globelics and the BRICS project Globelics Academy Tampere, Finland – 2008 José Eduardo Cassiolato Economics Institute of Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
Specificities of BRICS Wide variation of production structures –heterogeneity of production systems –heterogeneity of demand Wide regional differences Wide income differences The importance of – history, culture –mode of insertion in globalization Indicators (what ???) In the context of BRICS there is a need to analyze local innovation and production systems (LIPSs) RedeSist ’ s experience in analyzing LIPSs
The Specificities of BRICS Wide variation of productive structures –heterogeneity (in the same sector)of production systems –Heterogeneity of demand Wide regional differences
What is so great about R&D expenditures as an indicator of innovation input ? Innovation capability became now seen less in terms of the ability to discover new technological principles, but more in terms of the ability to exploit systematically the effects produced by new combinations and use of pieces in the existing stock of knowledge (David, P. and D. Foray 1995) “Accessing and Expanding the Science and Technology Knowledge Base”, STI Review, no.16, pp ). Not surprisingly the new model appears closely associated with the emergence of various new sorts of knowledge “service” activities, implying to some extent, and in contrast to the Frascati R&D focus, much more routine use of a technological base allowing for innovation without the need for particular leaps in science and technology, something which has also been referred to as “ innovation without research ” (Freeman and Soete 2007)
BRICS Gross Expenditures on R&D (total and per capita) 2004 Source: Cassiolato and Stalivieri 2008
Studying IS in BRICS The IS framework in –Analytical terms –Normative terms The different dimensions of the IS framework (national, sectoral, etc.) and the narrow and the broad versions The need to establish a bridge between –Macro, meso and micro levels –The territory (in cognitive terms) and the economy Capability and learning are firm-especific but are embodied in human beings (remember the Penrosian firm) History, culture and all types of knowledge (included and most important the “traditional one” The complex problem of analysing IS in countries like BRICS
Brics-countries Extremely uneven regional development income –gap between the most and the least developed regions enormous and still growing. Open and hidden unemployment among unskilled workers is extremely high while there may be shortages of skilled labour. Shortage of capital and knowledge The FDI (scale and type very different). Role of Diasporah as source of both capital and skilled labour. (China and India) and Brain Drain in others
Towards a research design for BRICS –The concepts (NIS, learning, etc): need to be redefined from a “Southern” perspective Power (geo politics, MNCs, etc) Financial globalization Privatization, deregulation, Diversity and institutions The local (regional) dimension Informality and the second economy The role of indigenous knowledge
Annual average growth rates of total real GDP (%) Brazil3,12,91,8 Mexico0,83,11,7 Rep. of Korea8,55,84,6 China10,610,48,8 India5,76,06,1 Russia--4,76,1 South Africa1,42,13,2 Source: UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics, 2005.
BRICS – Income Distribution Statistics Country GINI Index Share of poorest 20% in national income or consumption % of population below the poverty line Brazil China Índia Rússia South Africa Source: United Nations Statistics Division
Industrial performance and growth China: spectacular GDP growth is certainly related to the high competitiveness of its manufacturing system Brazil, Russia, South Africa: manufacturing has lost relative importance and weight; international competitiveness has faltered… India: manufacturing has grown, on average, at the same pace of GDP Question: is an improvement of manufacturing’s competitiveness an important factor for long term growth?
BRICS: manufacturing value added (% GDP), 1993 and Var Brazil Russia India China South Africa Developed Developing Source: UNIDO
Growth and competitiveness East-Asian economies have grabbed an additional 13 percentage points of world trade in the last 25 years China’s performance is, by far, the more dynamic Brazil’s share of world exports has stagnated (with a slight recent improvement) India has also shown some moderate improvement from a low start basis South Africa has lost relative importance in world exports Russia’s recent improvement related to oil and gas price boom Apparently, global competitiveness has been a key factor for fast growth
Evolution of market share of world merchandise exports Developed Countries65,372,064,863,1 Developing Countries29,524,332,133,5. Latin America+ Caribbean5,54,15,05,1. Brazil1,00,91,01,1. Mexico0,91,22,22,1. Developing Asia18,016,924,725,8. West Asia9,93,94,14,4. Russia--1,82,0. South Asia0,70,81,1. India0,40,50,8. East Asia7,112,019,420,1. China0,91,85,86,4. Rep. of Korea0,91,92,62,8. Africa5,93,22,42,5.South Africa1,30,70,5 Developing's excl. first-tier NIEs and China 24,814,816,817,4 Source: UNCTAD Country Value of Exports
BRICS and selected countries: share in world high-tech products exports (%), 1993 and Var BRICS Brazil Russia India China South Africana0.1- Mexico Korea, Rep USA Japan World Source: NEIT-IE-UNICAMP from UNCTAD primary data
Competitiveness in manufacturing high tech products seems to be a relevant driver of fast growth and yet an even more important factor for a strong export record China has almost quadrupled its share of world’s high tech production. It has surpassed Korea and is now equivalent to Japan! India has shown important advance but her share in high tech products is still small Brazil and Russia: have shown a stagnant performance in world’s manufacturing of high tech products South Africa’s presence in high tech is quite small
Towards a research design for BRICS ‘Explain’ in a comparative perspective the specialisation, competitiveness and growth performance, BUT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE LOCAL DIMENSION AND SPECIFICITIES OF THE DUAL ECONOMY –select productive activities that play important roles in the national innovation system and take the regional/local dimension into account. –analyse for each of of local systems what takes place inside firms in terms of innovation, learning and competence building. the interaction among firms including competition, co-operation and networking and how firms interact with knowledge infrastructure. –how specificities in national education, labour markets and different implicit and explicit policies affect firm behaviour and inter-organisational patterns.
Towards a research design for BRICS –The concepts (NIS, learning, etc): need to be redefined from a “Southern” perspective Power (geo politics, MNCs, etc) Financial globalization Privatization, deregulation, Diversity and institutions The local (regional) dimension The second economy
Towards a research design for BRICS - A top-down analysis of the transformation of the national system Mapping the economic structure and the competitiveness of the whole national economy including the changing patterns of production specialization and insertion in world trade. –develop adequate innovation indicators Analyse how BRICS-countries respond to the transformation pressure, eg –financial liberalization, –new WTO trade disciplines –agricultural subsidies in the developed countries. Analyse the role of implicit and explicit policies –impact of structural adjustment policies and policies towards FDI upon innovation systems. –Industrial and innovation policies –Implicit policies –policies toward education, skills and the development of human capital.
The BRICS Project Research Institutions –Economics Institute, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil –Center of Development Studies, Trivadrum, Kerala, Índia –Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa –Tsinghua University, Beijing, China –Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia Coordinators –José E Cassiolato – Brazil –K.J. Joseph – India –Rasigan Maharaj – South Africa –Liu Xielin – China –Leonid Gokhberg – Russia
Objectives of the BRICS Project stimulate interactions and the exchange of experiences between researchers and policy-makers interested in innovation in BRICS aiming at creating capabilities and finding joint workable solutions; characterize the structure of BRICS´ national innovation systems, their recent evolution and perspectives; compare the five countries innovation systems, identifying differences and similarities, common bottlenecks and complementarities; develop and use concepts and information capable of representing the Innovation Systems of BRICS; discuss policy implications and put forward policy recommendations, extracting lessons that can be useful not only for these countries but also for other developing countries.
BRICS – 1st phase Reports on NIS of BRICS 5 comparative studies on selected horizontal themes A discussion on appropriate indicators
The Broad IS Often policy makers and scholars have applied a narrow understanding of the concept (of Innovation System) and this has given rise to so-called ‘innovation paradoxes’ which leave significant elements of innovation-based economic performance unexplained. Such a bias is reflected in studies of innovation that focus on science- based innovation and on the formal technological infrastructure and in policies aiming almost exclusively at stimulating R&D efforts in high-technology sectors. Without a broad definition of the national innovation system encompassing individual, organizational and inter-organizational learning, it is impossible to establish the link from innovation to economic growth. (Lundvall, 2007, p. 1-2) In Lundvall, B.-Å. (ed.) (2007), National Innovation Systems: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, London, Pinter Publishers (2nd edition of the 1992 book).
Need to focus on learning and capacity-building and not R&D Within most OECD economies, policymakers remain heavily focused on ICT, biotech and nanotechnology issues (both in innovation and diffusion policy) to the exclusion of most of the areas of knowledge that are, in fact, producing change across major industries. Policy remains focused on a science-based model of innovation to the exclusion of a genuinely learning-based approach (Smith, 2004).
Report on NIS The Broad NIS –Geo-Political, Social, Political, Economic, Cultural & Local Context –Sub-System: Production & Innovation –Sub-System: Capacity-building, Research & Technological Services –Sub-System: Policies, Representation & Financing –Demand Income distribution Structure of consumption Social organization Social demand (basic infra-structure, health, education)
Complexity of BRICS NISs Two different views of NIS: Narrow (and very narrow) Broad
NIS: The Narrow Version Firms S&T infrastructure Demand Narrow S&T&I Policy
NIS: the Broad Version Subsystem Production/Innovation Subsystem Capacity-Building, Research & Technology Services Demand (segmented) Broad Geo-Political, Social, Political, Economic, Cultural & Local Context Subsystem Policy, Promotion, Representation & Financing Narrow
Geo-Political, Social, Political, Economic, Cultural & Local Context Geo-political context Social, Political & Economic context Cultural aspects Regional & local characteristics
Production & Inovation Structure of economic activities Sectoral distribution Spatial distribution Employment Size Degree of Informality (the Second Economy) Innovative effort (more than R&D!!!)
Capacity-building, Research & Technological Services Education (basic, technical & graduation) Pos-graduation R & D infrastructure Training & Capacity-building S&T Information Metrology Consulting Intelectual Property
Demand Income Distribution (impact on innovation capabilities) Structure of consumption Social Organization Social demand (basic infrastrucutre, health, education)
5 Comparative studies Innovation Systems and Inequality in BRICS, Finance and Funding in the National System of Innovation The role of SMEs in the National Innovation System The role of the State in the National Innovation System Transnational corporations and the National Innovation System
BRICS – Total R&D Employees and Scientists Source: Cassiolato and Stalivieri 2008
BRICS – Scientist intensity and density Source: Cassiolato and Stalivieri 2008
BRICS – Publications in SCI – Total and World Share Source: Cassiolato and Stalivieri 2008
BRICS – Publications per unit of GDP and per scientist Source: Cassiolato and Stalivieri 2008