1. The Performance of the Portuguese NIS
National Innovation Systems in Perspective:
The Performance of the Portuguese NIS
Manuel Mira Godinho
(ISEG/Technical University of Lisbon and CISEP)
Paper presented to
«The Network Society and the Knowledge Economy: Portugal in the Global Context»
Seminar promoted by His Excellence The President of the Portuguese Republic
Lisbon, 5-6 March 2005

2. Structure of the presentation:
NIS: The Concept
Analytical Framework
Framework deployment
The Portuguese NIS
Concluding Remarks

3. 1. National Innovation Systems (the NIS concept)
Diversity of actors
Links and communication
Density of interactions
Production and distribution of knowledge
Other resources (labour, finance…)
Learning dynamics
History and previous conditions
Institutions

4. 2. The Analytical Framework
4 groups of factors
8 dimensions
29 variables
69 countries

5. 4 groups of factors and 8 dimensions
Preconditions
1.1. market conditions
1.2. institutional conditions
2. System Inputs
2.1 intangible and tangible investments
2.2. basic and applied knowledge
3. Structural organization
3.1. economic structure
3.2. external communication
4. System outputs
4.1. diffusion
4.2. innovation

6. 8 dimensions 29 indicators
Dimension 1 - “Market conditions”
Income per capita
Overall GDP size
Population density
8 dimensions 29 indicators
Dimension 2 - “Institutional conditions”
GINI index
Youth of population
Life expectancy
Corruption index
Dimension 3 - “Intangible and tangible investment”
Education expenditures as a percentage of GDP
Education expenditures per capita
GERD as a percentage of GDP
GERD per capita
Investment rate (GFCF as a percentage of GDP)
Dimension 4 - “Knowledge”
Population with 2+3 Education as a percentage of total population
Researchers as a percentage of labour force
Scientific papers per Capita
Tertiary enrolment in technical subjects as a percentage of the population

7. 8 dimensions 29 indicators
Dimension 5 - “Economic structure”
Value Added in High-Tech & Medium High-Tech Activities (%)
High-Tech & Medium High-Tech Exports (%)
Sales of home-based top 500 global R&D companies / GDP
Dimension 6 - “External communication”
(Exports + Imports) / GDP
(Inward + Outward stocks of FDI) / GDP
Bandwidth in international connections (bits per Capita)
Dimension 7 - “Diffusion”
Personal Computers per capita
Internet Hosts per capita
Internet Users per capita
Cellular Phones per capita
ISO ISO Certificates per capita
8 dimensions 29 indicators
Dimension 8 - “Innovation”
US Patents per Capita
Trademarks per Capita

8. 69 Countries Developed, emerging and developing economies
Countries with > 20 million inhabitants
Overall: 87.4% of the world population

9. 3. Framework deployment Aggregation procedure Mapping and map analysis
NIS Ranking
Cluster analysis
NISs taxanomy

10. Aggregation procedure
Between 2 and 6 indicators per dimension
Weight of each indicator: 1; 0,5
Standardisation of indicators
In each dimension  0 value ≈ sample mean

11. Mapping… … and benchmarking

12. Analysis: NIS “evenness” etc.

13. NIS ranking 1. Switzerland 1,15 24. Hungary 0,27 47. India -0,39
2. Sweden
1,13
25. Czech R.
0,23
48. Turkey
-0,42
3. Netherlands
0,91
26. Slovenia
49. Ukraine
-0,43
4. Denmark
0,90
27. New Zealand
0,21
50. Egypt
5. Finland
28. Portugal
0,13
51. Romania
-0,45
6. Hong Kong
29. Malta
0,05
52. Venezuela
-0,52
7. United Kingdom
0,88
30. Malaysia
53. Bulgaria
-0,56
8. United States
0,86
31. Slovak R.
0,00
54. Indonesia
-0,58
9. Singapore
32. Greece
-0,07
55. Morocco
-0,59
10. Japan
0,85
33. China
-0,10
56. Viet Nam
11. Germany
0,81
34. Estonia
-0,11
57. Colombia
-0,63
12. Ireland
35. Poland
-0,12
58. Algeria
-0,67
13. Korea (R. of)
0,67
36. Mexico
-0,23
59. Peru
-0,68
14. France
0,62
37. Cyprus
-0,26
60. Iran (I.R.)
-0,75
15. Taiwan
0,60
38. Thailand
61. Bangladesh
-0,77
16. Austria
0,57
39. Brazil
-0,27
62. Pakistan
-0,82
17. Norway
0,51
40. Lithuania
-0,29
63. Nigeria
-0,89
18. Belgium
0,50
41. Chile
64. Kenya
-0,94
19. Spain
42. Russia
-0,30
65. Ethiopia
-0,97
20. Canada
0,44
43. Latvia
66. Myanmar
-0,98
21. Italy
44. Argentina
-0,35
67. Tanzania
-0,99
22. Austrália
0,40
45. South Africa
68. D.R. Congo
-1,05
23. Luxembourg
0,38
46. Philippines
-0,36
69. Sudan
-1,06
NIS ranking
1. Switzerland1,1524. Hungary 0,2747. India -0,392. Sweden 1,1325. Czech R.0,2348. Turkey -0,423. Netherlands0,9126. Slovenia0,2349. Ukraine -0,434. Denmark 0,9027. New Zealand0,2150. Egypt -0,435. Finland 0,9028. Portugal0,1351. Romania -0,456. Hong Kong0,9029. Malta 0,0552. Venezuela-0,527. United Kingdom0,8830. Malaysia0,0553. Bulgaria-0,568. United States0,8631. Slovak R.0,0054. Indonesia-0,589. Singapore0,8632. Greece -0,0755. Morocco -0,5910. Japan 0,8533. China -0,1056. Viet Nam-0,5911. Germany 0,8134. Estonia -0,1157. Colombia-0,6312. Ireland 0,8135. Poland -0,1258. Algeria -0,6713. Korea (R. of)0,6736. Mexico -0,2359. Peru -0,6814. France 0,6237. Cyprus -0,2660. Iran (I.R.)-0,7515. Taiwan 0,6038. Thailand-0,2661. Bangladesh-0,7716. Austria 0,5739. Brazil -0,2762. Pakistan-0,8217. Norway 0,5140. Lithuania-0,2963. Nigeria -0,8918. Belgium 0,5041. Chile -0,2964. Kenya -0,9419. Spain 0,5042. Russia -0,3065. Ethiopia-0,9720. Canada 0,4443. Latvia -0,3066. Myanmar -0,9821. Italy 0,4444. Argentina-0,3567. Tanzania-0,9922. Austrália0,4045. South Africa-0,3568. D.R. Congo-1,0523. Luxembourg0,3846. Philippines-0,3669. Sudan -1,06

14. Cluster analysis Object of the analysis
69 countries X 8 NIS dimensions
Results’ interpretation led to a three-level structure
1st level  2 “Mega-clusters”
2nd level  6 “Clusters”
3rd level  15 “Sub-clusters”

15. 1st and 2nd level Groups Megacluster 1 – Developed NIS
Cluster 1.1 – Dynamic innovation systems
Cluster 1.2 – Performing innovation systems
Cluster 1.3 – Unevenly developed NISs
Megacluster 2 – Developing NIS
Cluster 2.1 – Catching up NISs
Cluster 2.2 – Hesitating NISs
Cluster 2.3 – Unformed NISs

17. 3rd level (a) MEGACLUSTERS CLUSTERS SUBCLUSTERS Groups of Countries
M.0. Hong-Kong C.0 G1
M.1.
C Ireland + Netherlands Switzerland + Finland + Singapore + Sweden G2
C.1.2
S.C Germany + UK + France + Italy + South Korea + Taiwan G3
S.C U.S. + Japan G4
S.C Canada + Norway + Australia +
Austria + New Zealand + Spain G5
C Denmark +Belgium Luxembourg G6

18. 3rd level (b) MEGA-CLUSTERS CLUSTERS SUBCLUSTERS Groups of Countries
S.C Portugal + Greece + Poland +
Hungary + Czech R. + Slovenia G7
S.C Malaysia + Malta G8
S.C Latvia + Estonia + Lithuania
+ Slovak R. + Ukraine G9
C.2.2
S.C Russia
G10
S.C China + Brazil + South Africa
+ Thailand + Argentina +
India + Mexico
G11
S.C Turkey + Colombia + Bulgaria
+ Indonesia + Philippines +
Peru + Romania
G12
S.C Egypt + Cyprus +
Chile + Venezuela
G13
C.2.3
S.C Algeria+Vietnam+Iran+
Morocco+Bangladesh
G14
S.C Pakistan+Kenya+Ethiopia+
Myanmar+Tanzania+Sudan Nigeria+ D.R. Congo
G15

19. Sub-cluster 2.2.2

20. NIS taxonomy Contingency factors Innovation vs. diffusion Country Size
Geography and natural endowments

21. (Innovation, Diffusion…) Clusters and subclusters
Critical dimensions
(Innovation, Diffusion…)
Absolute high values
Absolute Low values
Megaclusters
M. 1
M. 2
Clusters and subclusters
Relatively High in Innovation and Low in Diffusion
Relatively Low in Innovation and High in Diffusion
Relatively Low both in Innovation and Diffusion
Critical contin-gency
factors
Country Size
Large/ /Very large
C.1.2
C.2.2.
Small/ /medium
C.1.1
C.1.3
↓(DK)
C.2.1
C.2.3
Good natural resources endowment
Subclust.1.2.3 ↑
(Nigeria,
others?)
NIS taxonomy (1)

22. (Innovation, Diffusion…) Clusters and subclusters
Critical dimensions
(Innovation, Diffusion…)
Absolute high values
Absolute Low values
Megaclusters
M. 1
M. 2
Clusters and subclusters
Relatively High in Innovation and Low in Diffusion
Relatively Low in Innovation and High in Diffusion
Relatively Low both in Innovation and Diffusion
Critical contin-gency
factors
Country Size
Large/ /Very large
C.1.2
C.2.2.
Small/ /medium
C.1.1
C.1.3
↓(DK)
C.2.1
C.2.3
Good natural resources endowment
Subclust.1.2.3 ↑
(Nigeria,
others?)
NIS taxonomy (2)

23. …somewhere in-between
4. The Portuguese NIS...
…somewhere in-between
Market
Institutions
Investment
Knowledge
Structure
Openness
Diffusion
Innovatio

24. …and NIS neighbours

25. Evolution of the Portuguese NIS 1996-2000-2004
Market
Institutions
Investment
Knowledge
Structure
Openness
Diffusion
Innovatio

26. Portuguese NIS: Recent evolution of the “Knowledge” dimension (#4)

27. Portuguese NIS: Recent evolution of the “Diffusion” dimension (#7)

28. Concluding Remarks NIS Dualism Stronger aspects (+) Investment
(+) Diffusion
(+) Knowledge

29. Concluding Remarks Weaker aspects (-) Structure (-) Openness
(-) Institutions

30. Concluding Remarks “Frontier” sub-cluster
Further catching up? Or falling behind? Need of adaptation:
 Economic structure
 FDI, links abroad
 Innovation (IPR…)