Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 102
“A Time Series Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures

“A Time Series Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D”

In relation to (PP-CT-M2-2005-0001):

“Framework Service Contract for Expert Support with the Production and

Analysis of R&D Policy Indicators”

Final Study Report for Specific Assignment 4 (SPA4):

Literature Review, Feasibility Study, Collection of Field Statistics, Calculation of Indicators, Survey, Conclusions

Developed by:

IDEA CONSULT (Coordinator)

FRAUNHOFER-ISI, NIFU STEP, ZEW

Contact persons:

Arnold Verbeek (IDEA Consult) Overall Coordinator

Elissavet Lykogianni (IDEA Consult) Assignment Manager

Brussels, December 2008

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

5

Part 1:

Policy relevant considerations and findings

7

1

Introduction

8

1.1 R&D intensities as indicators of progress

8

1.2 The analytical framework

9

2

Co-evolution of R&D expenditures and GDP growth over time

13

3

Publicly funded R&D and its influence on the research base

17

4

Country specific findings

18

4.1

Introduction

18

4.2

France

19

4.3

Germany

20

4.4

United Kingdom

21

4.5

Spain

22

4.6

Austria

23

4.7

Italy

24

4.8

The Netherlands

25

4.9

Greece

26

4.10 Denmark

27

4.11 Finland

28

4.12 Slovenia

29

4.13 Latvia

30

4.14 United States

31

4.15 Japan

32

5

Policy relevant findings

34

Part 2:

Technical background

37

1 Literature Review

38

 

1.1 R&D expenditures and economic growth

38

1.1.1

Growth theory: an introduction

38

1.1.2

Endogenous growth: the effect of R&D and spillovers

39

1.1.3

The determinants of R&D

40

1.2 The effects of Public R&D expenditures

43

1.2.1

Rationale

for Public R&D

43

1.2.2

Effects of Public R&D

44

2 Feasibility study

48

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

2.1 The conceptual framework

48

2.2 Collection of Indicators

49

2.3 Data analysis strategy

50

2.3.1 Data sources used

50

2.3.2 Data coverage and analysis

50

2.4 Expert involvement and validation

51

3 The co-evolution of GDP and R&D

53

3.1 Descriptive Statistics

53

3.1.1

R&D intensity in the EU

53

3.1.2

Co-evolution of GDP and GERD: Changes in GERD and GDP

55

3.1.3

Beyond the Co-evolution of GDP and GERD

59

3.2 Empirical

analysis

64

3.2.1

Co-evolution of GDP and R&D: a test

64

3.2.2

Granger Causality and Co-integration tests by country

65

3.2.3

Regression analysis

70

4 Public R&D and the research base

72

4.1 Government funding of R&D

72

4.2 Regression analysis

73

4.2.1 Public R&D and the output of research

73

4.2.2 Public R&D and research input

74

References and bibliography

76

Annex 1:

List of indicators collected

80

Annex 2:

Additional Statistics

86

Annex 3:

Additional graphs based on the data collected

89

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

Acknowledgements

This report was prepared by Elissavet Lykogianni (Assignment manager and lead researcher), and Arnold Verbeek (Overall coordinator and supporting expert).

We would like to acknowledge the insightful comments and suggestions of Professor Georg Licht (ZEW, Germany) throughout the various phases of this study. We also acknowledge the valuable contributions of Thomas Stahlecker (Fraunhofer ISI, Germany) during the data collection phase and Mark Knell (NIFU STEP, Norway) during the literature-review phase.

Finally, we have very much appreciated the valuable comments of the experts that were consulted during the validation phase of the study, being:

Dominique Guellec (OECD)

Hugo Erken (Ministry of Economic Affairs in The Netherlands)

Nick Von Tunzelmann (SPRU, University of Sussex, UK)

Piet Donselaar (Ministry of Economic Affairs in The Netherlands)

Philip Shapira (University of Manchester and Georgia Institute of Technology in the US)

Evanthia Schmidt (Aarhus University, Denmark)

Gonzalo León (Polytechnic University of Madrid, Spain)

Antoine Schoen (ESIEE Engineering, France)

Andreas Reinstaller (WIFO, Austria)

Kai Husso (Ministry of Employment and the Economy, Finland)

Maja Bucar (University of Ljubljana, Slovenia)

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The contribution of this small-scale study is twofold: first of all, the relationship GDP and R&D over time are investigated; secondly, the relationship between public R&D and the research potential of a country is analysed. The focus of the study lies on the analysis of quantitative patterns and developments rather than the more qualitative explanation of these patterns. The main findings of this study can be summarised as follows:

As intuitively expected, levels of R&D spending are interrelated to the levels of economic growth; growing R&D expenditure levels might not always be completely reflected in the R&D investment intensities.

The evidence shows that R&D intensities are temporarily influenced by the levels of GDP growth, which is expectable as GDP is the denominator in the calculation of the R&D intensities. In other words, high levels of GDP (growth) in a certain time frame may very well push the R&D intensity downwards. The opposite is valid as well: in periods of declining GDP growth R&D intensities may move upwards for a certain period of time. This brings us to our following policy message.

A longitudinal approach seems more suitable for monitoring progress in R&D and innovation expenditures: in view of temporal fluctuations of R&D intensity due to short-term GDP developments, R&D intensity should be used to monitor R&D expenditure levels over a longer period of time. For monitoring in the short term, it would be appropriate to develop indicators at a lower level.

The development patterns of GDP and R&D differ strongly among countries. The study provides several indications that R&D expenditures lag GDP growth. In some countries the lag occurs already after 1 year while in others it only occurs after 3-5 years. A possible explanation is that it takes some time before R&D expenditures have an impact on GDP (this is also what the co-integration test shows). Moreover, it seems that in general private R&D expenditures seem to have shorter lag intervals with GDP than public expenditures, which suggests a closer interrelation with GDP growth than public expenditures on R&D.

The evolution of GDP versus R&D expenditures and R&D personnel depends on several structural characteristics like governance structure, policy priorities, and systemic features like industry and academic structures. Understanding R&D expenditure patterns and performance, requires in depth knowledge of this characteristics. A ‘one size fits all’ approach seems too simplistic.

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

The effect of government-performed R&D is significant and positive on the number of publications and patent applications (the output side). Public R&D expenditures are positively correlated with the overall research base measured by the number of R&D personnel as well as the scientific output in terms of publications and patents of a country, but with a time lag of 1-2 years. R&D performed by the business sector positively influences the number of patent applications, which could be expected, as the proximity to patent in the business sector is in general higher than for the public sector.

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

Part 1: POLICY RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS AND FINDINGS

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

1

Introduction

1.1 R&D intensities as indicators of progress

In the context of the Lisbon Agenda and the 3% R&D investment target (the so- called Barcelona target), the progress of the Members States regarding their R&D investments and, more importantly, their R&D intensities, has become a central topic in the ongoing debate about Europe’s innovation and R&D performance. The R&D investment intensity ratios (R&D expenditures as a percentage of GDP) are used as the main indicators for monitoring R&D and innovation performance. Recently, however, there are concerns expressed about the use of these intensity ratios as (the sole) indicators of a nation’s innovativeness (Zuleeg, 2008).

In general, Europe (EU27) shows lower R&D investment intensities than the US and Japan. These differences are not necessarily due to the importance given to R&D in general, but are also the result of structural differences (e.g. industry/sector structure) among these regions. The R&D intensity in 2005 in the EU27 was 1.84%, compared with 2.68% in the US and 3.18% in Japan. In 2005, China’s R&D investment intensity amounted 1.34%, which reflects the fast pace of R&D investment growth in this country. Difference in R&D intensities among the Triad regions mainly reflect differences in levels of privately funded R&D. In 2004, for the EU27, R&D financed by the business sector was equal to 55% of total R&D investments, compared to 64% in the US, 76% in Japan and 66% in China.

Also within the EU27 there are large differences. There are countries that show impressive growth rates in R&D intensities: in 2005 already, Sweden and Finland demonstrated R&D intensities above the overall 3% target, respectively 3.86% and 3.48%. All other EU27 Member States show R&D intensities below 3%, 21 states even below the EU-average of 1.84%. At the same time, several Member States have increased their budgets for R&D (in real terms), e.g. Ireland and Spain which have doubled their real R&D expenditures between 1995 and 2005. Growth in absolute terms is also registered for Austria, Greece and Portugal. Despite these significant growth rates in absolute terms for many of the EU27 Member States, it seems rather disappointing to have to conclude that the R&D intensity ratios only reflect this partially.

The question that arises with many policy makers is then whether the R&D intensity indicators are adequate to measure a nation’s R&D investment performance, and if yes, what are the limitations? From a measurement point of view, one could argue that the stagnation (and even decline) of R&D intensities can be partly attributed to higher growth rates of GDP. This is certainly an interesting argumentation which may hold (as we will see) for a certain period of time, namely the period in which economic growth evolves faster than the growth in R&D investment. At some point

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

in time, by simplifying, R&D investments and R&D intensities are expected to catch- up and to reach a sort of (temporary) equilibrium.

At the same time, it is also important to understand how these fluctuations in R&D investments affect the research potential of countries. For example, growth in R&D investments do not necessarily translate in higher levels of research potential (more research output or more researchers) but may very well translate in higher wages for existing researchers: not ‘more’ research thus, but more ‘expensive’ research. The latter is difficult to investigate in view of the only partially available data, but the former can be investigated by looking at the levels of R&D personnel (input) and the levels of publication output (performance).

The contribution of this small-scale study to the above summarized debate is twofold: first of all the relationship between levels and growth patterns of GDP and R&D over time are investigated; secondly, the relationship between publicly funded R&D and the research potential of a country is analysed as well. The focus of the study lies on the analysis of quantitative patterns and developments rather than the more qualitative explanation of these patterns.

1.2 The analytical framework

The analytical framework setup for this study is based on a thorough screening of the literature on the topic (see Box 2 for several highlights). This has lead to a so- called conceptual framework, which formed the basis for a number of statistical analyses (e.g. regression analyses, time series analyses). The main two objectives of the study can thus be summarised as follows:

1. To analyse and understand the co-evolution of R&D expenditure, R&D intensity and GDP growth over time and the interrelation between R&D expenditures and GDP growth.

2.

To

expenditures and the public research base.

analyse

and

understand

the

relationship

between

public

R&D

As mentioned in the Terms of Reference for this study “some Member States have impressive developments in R&D intensities, whereas others have managed to increase R&D expenditures, but have experienced stagnating or declining R&D intensities due to strong underlying GDP growth”; therefore “in order to properly assess progress on the 3% R&D investment target, there is a need for the Commission to better understand these developments”.

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

These two objectives are too broad to form a basis for analysis. Therefore, a further breakdown in research questions seemed appropriate. The following research questions have thus been formulated in order to guide the research efforts.

1. Can high GDP growth be considered as a reason for the stagnation (or even

decrease) of R&D intensity in the EU?

a. What are the tendencies within the EU regarding the evolution of R&D

intensity?

b. How can the EU compare to the US and Japan with respect to R&D funding

and R&D intensities?

c. Does R&D intensity differ substantially between countries with high GDP

growth rates and countries with low GDP growth rate?

d. Are there any country differences detected in the relationship between

R&D and GDP?

2. What is the effect of public R&D on the research base?

a. How does public R&D affect the research output?

b. How does public R&D affect the research input?

Box 1: Highlights literature review

Innovative activity can depend on market demand following the fluctuations in economic activity (Schmookler, 1966).

There are both pro- and counter-cyclical patterns of business innovative activities found (Heger,

2004).

Support is found on the pro-cyclical (positive correlation of R&D with the overall state of the economy) arguments on R&D (Hall and Mairesse, 1995)

Pro-cyclical behaviour of innovation and patents is found in the UK during 1948-83 (Geroski and Walters, 1995).

It is found that the effect of government funding on business R&D depends on its level as it varies with respect to its generosity: it increases up to a certain threshold and then decreases beyond that point (Guellec and Van Pottelsberghe, 2003).

Increasing dependence of patents on results of publicly funded basic research is found, indicating increasing science-technology links (Narin et al., 1997).

Publicly-funded research is found not to substitute industrial R&D but instead, it stimulates industrial R&D, i.e. “crowding-in” (Nelson, 1994).

Publications resulting from publicly funded research are found to expand the opportunities of companies to access this stock of knowledge (Dasgupta and David, 1994).

First of all we have produced descriptive statistics on the evolution of R&D expenditures and GDP in the EU-27, thereby comparing to the US and Japan. In a second stage the analysis focused on a subset of the EU countries (France, Germany, the UK, Spain, Austria, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Greece, Denmark, Finland, Slovenia, and Latvia), the US and Japan. However, due to data availability reasons, the more elaborative statistical analyses have been carried out for the whole of EU27, US and Japan. The data and indicators (see Box 2) used for this study have mainly been derived from the official data providers Eurostat and the

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

OECD. Data collection phase was carried out during the summer of 2008, meaning that data available at that point in time were collected.

During the study, and mainly in the phase of interpretation of the outcomes, we

involved a number of experts in the field:

Dominique Guellec (OECD)

Hugo Erken (Ministry of Economic Affairs in The Netherlands)

Nick Von Tunzelmann (SPRU, University of Sussex, UK)

Piet Donselaar (Ministry of Economic Affairs in The Netherlands)

Philip Shapira (University of Manchester and Georgia Institute of Technology in the US)

Evanthia Schmidt (Aarhus University, Denmark)

Gonzalo León (Polytechnic University of Madrid, Spain)

Antoine Schoen (ESIEE Engineering, France)

Andreas Reinstaller (WIFO, Austria)

Kai Husso (Ministry of Employment and the Economy, Finland)

Maja Bucar (University of Ljubljana, Slovenia)

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

Box 2: Collected data and indicators

The following data and indicators were collected.

Data on macro-economic conditions:

o

GDP (in nominal and real terms)

o

GDP growth

Financial market and financial resources:

o

Real interest rate

o

Venture capital

Market regulations:

 

o

Labour market regulations: Employment Protection Legislation (EPL)

o

Restrictions on inward FDI

IPR system STI resources:

o

 

o

Research input (human resources in R&D)

 

R&D personnel

Scientists and engineers

Number of graduates

Number of researchers

 

o

Research output

 

Publications

Patenting activity

Public policies:

o

Public R&D expenditures (also as percentage of GDP) in real terms, split up (if appropriate) between

 

Government-sector expenditures on R&D (GOVERD), and

Higher-education sector expenditures on R&D (HERD)

Government budget appropriation or outlays for R&D (GBAORD)

R&D expenditure:

o

Gross R&D expenditures (GERD) and percentage of GERD in GDP (by sources of financing)

o

Business Enterprise R&D expenditures (BERD) and percentage of BERD on GDP

For more details on the approach we refer to the technical report (part 2). In the subsequent sections of this part, we shall focus on the main findings of this study (where possible, on a country by country basis).

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

2 Co-evolution of R&D expenditures and GDP growth over time

When comparing R&D intensities (see figure 1) in the so-called Triad regions (EU, US and Japan) we see that Japan has by far the highest R&D intensity (in 2005, 3.32%) ratio, followed by the US (in 2005, 2.61%) and the EU27 (in 2005, 1.84%). This gap in R&D intensities between the US and EU or Japan and the EU can to some extent be accounted for by the gap in privately funded R&D intensities.

Figure 1: R&D intensity among the Triad regions (GERD as % of GDP), 1995-2005

3,6 3,4 3,2 3 2,8 2,6 2,4 2,2 2 1,8 1,6 1,4 1,2 1 EU15
3,6
3,4
3,2
3
2,8
2,6
2,4
2,2
2
1,8
1,6
1,4
1,2
1
EU15
EU27
Japan
United States
R&D Intensity (GERD as % of GD
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005

When we look at the shares of R&D funding by the various sectors (private, public), the privately funded R&D share in Japan and in the US is remarkably higher than in the EU27 (see figure 2). The private sector contribution to the funding of R&D has more or less stagnated in the EU27 during 1995-2005, whereas especially in Japan, the share of R&D expenditures financed by the business sector has considerably increased. On the other hand, publicly financed R&D is the highest in the EU, compared to the US and Japan.

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

Figure 2: GERD financed by business enterprises and by government as % of GDP: 1995-

2005

3 Private sector 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 Public sector ---- 0 1995 1996 1997
3
Private sector
2,5
2
1,5
1
0,5
Public sector ----
0
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
GERD as a % of GD

Year

JP

US

EU27

US

EU27

JP

As other scholars have pointed out, this ‘funding gap’ can largely be attributed to the industrial/sectoral structure of the EU compared to the US and Japan. The value-added shares of high-tech sectors in the EU are smaller than in the US or Japan; the EU is mainly specialized in medium-tech sectors. This difference in industrial structures provides a possible explanation for the differences in R&D intensities, although this type of explanation goes beyond the mandate of this study.

The R&D intensity indicator is the result of R&D investments in absolute terms, divided by GDP in absolute terms. This implies that when GDP (economic growth) grows much faster than R&D investments in a certain period, the R&D intensity indicator may slightly drop, in that specific period. Presumably, until R&D investments (public and/or private) ‘catch-up’ as well. This is a pure statistical reasoning and does not necessarily reflect the real drivers of GDP and or R&D investments (cf. growth theory). The issue is reduced to the question whether the R&D intensity indicator is influenced by periods of fast GDP growth or GDP decline.

In order to address this question we have used a simple approach. We have computed the average R&D intensity of the group of countries with high GDP growth and the group of countries with low GDP growth (the former is 1.4% and the latter is 1.6%). The difference between the two averages is statistically significant, which suggests that countries with higher GDP growth (and not equally growing R&D expenditure) show on average lower R&D intensities. In figure 3 we present an overview of the real GDP growth in relation to real growth in GERD.

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

Figure 3: Real GDP Growth and Real Growth in GERD between 1995-2005 1,2,3

250 LT 200 150 LV FI ES IE 100 EL HU AT PT CZ DK
250
LT
200
150
LV
FI
ES
IE
100
EL HU
AT PT CZ
DK
SE
50
US
SI
BE
PL
PL
JP
DE
IT
EU15
UK
FR
NL
0
BG
0
20
40
SK
60
80
100
120
-50
Real GDP Growth 1995-2005
Real Growth in GERD 1995-2005

1

²

3

Source: Eurostat

For Luxembourg, Cyprus, Estonia, Malta, Romania and EU27 average: data on Real GERD (in Millions of 1995 PPS) are not available for the year 1995.

For Malta and Romania: data on Real GDP were not available for the year 1995.

The data on the EU15 average of real GERD in 2005 and 2004 were still only provisional numbers, so we have taken the data on real GERD for the EU15 average for 2003 instead of 2005. The percentage change in Real GERD for the EU15 is thus the difference in real GERD between 1995 and 2003.

45 degree line has been added to the graph to assist in deriving the following

interpretation: countries situated below this line have experienced higher GDP growth than growth in R&D expenditures; countries situated above the line have experienced lower growth in GDP than in GERD. If a large proportion of EU Member States lies below the 45 degree line, this would indicate that the stagnating R&D intensity in the EU coexists with a higher real GDP growth. We should note that this graph shows the relative change in GERD with respect to the relative change in GDP for the period 1995-2005, it however does not investigate the relationship between GDP growth and GERD growth (as indicated elsewhere).

A

A second, more complex, line of reasoning is based on a so-called panel data

analysis where we econometrically tested for the relation between GERD and GDP (logarithmic differences have been used). Based on the coefficient in the regression (0.7689) which relates the log difference of GERD to the log difference of GDP, we

see that (since this is lower than 1) the percentage increase in GERD at time t will

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

be less than the percentage increase in GDP in t-1 (see Table 10 of the Technical Report). This also suggests that GDP growth is not immediately followed by growth in R&D investments, which subsequently (temporarily) influences the R&D intensity ratio. Country specific patterns and evolutions will be depicted in chapter 4 of Part 1.

Both indications suggest that R&D intensity indicators are influenced by abrupt changes on GDP growth patterns (albeit this being of a temporary nature). The potential message to policy makers thus (see chapter 4 of Part 1) would be to take a more longitudinal approach in comparing and evaluating R&D intensities (and growth patterns).

In the subsequent chapter, we shall investigate the relation between R&D expenditure, mainly publicly funded R&D, and the research base.

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

3 Publicly funded R&D and its influence on the research base

The second objective of this study has focused on the effect of public R&D on the research base of the countries. Here, with research base we imply both the research input and the research output of the R&D process. We ‘proxy’ research output with the number of publications and the patent applications and research input with R&D personnel. Underlying this, we also looked into the question whether there is any evidence that higher levels of public R&D expenditures do not necessarily lead to more R&D personnel, and thus a higher R&D performance capacity. Higher publicly funded R&D expenditures may very well flow into new R&D instrumentation and/or higher wages for existing R&D personnel. In view of the problems of obtaining data on researcher’s wages, we have limited the discussion to the number of R&D personnel (in FTE).

On an overarching level of analysis, we have applied panel-data regression analysis (taking into account the data for all EU27 including the US and Japan). The estimations indicate that R&D performed by the government significantly affects the level of research input and output. The research output is proxied by the number of publications and the number of patent applications. In both cases the positive effect is statistically visible for up to 8 years (time lags); (see Table 11 of the Technical Report).

We consider R&D personnel as an appropriate indicator as it includes not only researchers and scientists, but also people providing direct services to the research/innovation process, e.g. R&D managers, administrators, etc. (see also Eurostat, 2008). R&D performed by the government affects positively the share of R&D personnel in the R&D systems with a time lag of up to 2 years. But as the individual country fiches presented below show, this varies strongly from one country to another. In general however, based on our regression analysis, one can conclude that higher levels of public R&D expenditures positively influence the future levels of R&D personnel.

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

4 Country specific findings

4.1

Introduction

Besides the above discussed general findings, which are based on a more aggregate type of analysis, it is also of interest to zoom into the specific characteristics of individual countries (as far as available data allows).

Subsequently, we will zoom into R&D and GDP co-evolution patterns and the influence on the research based of France, Germany, the UK, Spain, Austria, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Greece, Denmark, Finland, Slovenia, Latvia and Poland, the US and Japan.

For each country, two blocks of analysis and discussion will be presented.

1. R&D expenditures and co-evolution with GDP

2. Research base and relation with publicly funded R&D

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

4.2

France

A. R&D expenditure patterns and co-evolution with GDP

 

Gross Expenditures on R&D (GERD)

Gross Domestic Product

GERD/GDP ratio

Country

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

 

(Millions of 1995 PPS)

(Millions of Chain linked 2000 Euros)

 

France

23091

26746

16

1255031

1565465

25

2,29

2,12

-7

EU27 1

140804 5

114891

-18 6

7972659

10028033

26

1,81

1,84

2

Japan

69326

88447

28

4817346

5396222

12

2,92

3,32

14

US

154414

221825

44

8696081

11898549

37

2,49

2,61

5

 

France

France

 
28.000 1.800.000 1.600.000 24.000 1.400.000 20.000 1.200.000 16.000 1.000.000 12.000 800.000 1980 1985 1990
28.000
1.800.000
1.600.000
24.000
1.400.000
20.000
1.200.000
16.000
1.000.000
12.000
800.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
GERD
Real GDP
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
Real GDP in millions of euro
16.000 14.000 1.800.000 12.000 1.600.000 10.000 8.000 1.400.000 GERD in millions of PPS at 1995
16.000
14.000
1.800.000
12.000
1.600.000
10.000
8.000
1.400.000
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
6.000
1.200.000
4.000
1.000.000
800.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Real GDP in millions of euro

Real GDP GERD (funded by business) GERD (funded by government)

Despite a continuous growth of GDP, we see that between 1995-2000 GERD has stabilized In the period after 2000, GERD grew faster than real GDP Since 2005, GERD and GDP seems to co-evolve From 1993 onward, publicly funded R&D declined, despite the growth of GDP; this until 1997 where it started ‘following’ GDP again Privately funded R&D continued to follow the evolution of GDP Around 2001, privately funded R&D grew faster than GDP Real GDP interrelates with levels of GERD with a delay of 1-4 years; a co-integrating relationship occurs after 3 years Privately funded R&D is not that volatile to changes in GDP, whereas publicly funded R&D is

B. Research base and relation with publicly funded R&D

 

R&D-personnel 1

Scientists and engineers 2

 

Graduates 2

Country

2000

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

France

1,64

1,73

5%

4,60

5,80

26%

18,50

22,50

22%

EU27 5

1,36

1,45

7%

 

5,50

8,80

13,20

50%

Japan 3, 5, 6

1,71

 

12,30

13,70

11%

US 3, 4, 5, 6

 

9,20

10,60

15%

France

GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices 11.000 10.000 400.000 9.000 300.000 8.000 200.000
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
11.000
10.000
400.000
9.000
300.000
8.000
200.000
7.000
100.000
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
R&D personnel in full time equivalents

R&D personnel (all sector)

R&D personnel (government sector)

GERD by government

Between 1990 and 1993 publicly funded R&D

grew much faster than the number of R&D personnel

This may suggest that the extra funds were

absorbed by other factors than numbers of R&D

personnel (e.g. wages and/or equipment)

Interesting enough, from 1996 onwards, public funding of R&D and the numbers of R&D personnel ‘follow’ each other quite well

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

4.3

Germany

A. R&D expenditure patterns and co-evolution with GDP

 

Gross Expenditures on R&D (GERD)

Gross Domestic Product

GERD/GDP ratio

Country

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

 

(Millions of 1995 PPS)

(Millions of Chain linked 2000 Euros)

 

Germany

33804

43564

29

1867388

2122106

14

2,19

2,48

13

EU27 1

140804 5

114891

-18 6

7972659

10028033

26

1,81

1,84

2

Japan

69326

88447

28

4817346

5396222

12

2,92

3,32

14

US

154414

221825

44

8696081

11898549

37

2,49

2,61

5

Germany

48.000 2.300.000 44.000 2.200.000 40.000 2.100.000 2.000.000 36.000 1.900.000 32.000 1.800.000 1.700.000 1980
48.000
2.300.000
44.000
2.200.000
40.000
2.100.000
2.000.000
36.000
1.900.000
32.000
1.800.000
1.700.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
GERD
Real GDP
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
Real GDP in millions of euro

Germany

32.000 28.000 24.000 20.000 16.000 2.300.000 2.200.000 12.000 GERD in millions of PPS at 1995
32.000
28.000
24.000
20.000
16.000
2.300.000
2.200.000
12.000
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
2.100.000
2.000.000
1.900.000
1.800.000
1.700.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Real GDP
GERD (funded by business)
GERD (funded by goverment)
Real GDP in millions of euro

GERD and Real GDP have nicely coevolved between 1994 and 1998

In the period 1998-2000 GERD has increased steeper than GDP

In 2003/2004 we see a consolidation of both GERD and Real GDP

After a status quo in real GDP early 2000, the two series seem to evolve similarly after 2005

Since 1993 R&D funded by the government seems to be stable over time

Business funded R&D has, after a decline in 1990-1995, grown since the late 1990s

Business funded R&D seems to follow a more volatile path than public funded R&D

B. Research base and relation with publicly funded R&D

 

R&D-personnel 1

Scientists and engineers 2

 

Graduates 2

Country

2000

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

Germany

 

1,85

5,90

6,60

12%

8,80

9,70

10%

EU27 5

1,36

1,45

7%

 

5,50

8,80

13,20

50%

Japan 3, 5, 6

1,71

 

12,30

13,70

11%

US 3, 4, 5, 6

 

9,20

10,60

15%

Germany

GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices 14.000 13.600 13.200 12.800 600.000 12.400 500.000
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
14.000
13.600
13.200
12.800
600.000
12.400
500.000
400.000
12.000
300.000
200.000
100.000
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
R&D personnel in full time equivalents

R&D personnel (all sectors)

R&D personnel (government sector)

GERD by government

R&D personnel has grown strongly between

1990-1991

After 1991 a decline trend can be observed

until the turnaround in 1996

Between 1998 and 2003 publicly funded

R&D grew much faster than the number of

R&D personnel Although public funded R&D decreased substantially between 2003 to 2005, R&D personnel has continued increasing; this may point to alternative sources of funding

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

4.4 United Kingdom

A. R&D expenditure patterns and co-evolution with GDP

 

Gross Expenditures on R&D (GERD)

Gross Domestic Product

GERD/GDP ratio

Country

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

 

(Millions of 1995 PPS)

(Millions of Chain linked 2000 Euros)

 

UK

18409

22048

20

1343023

1776388

32

1,94

1,76

-9

EU27 1

140804 5

114891

-18 6

7972659

10028033

26

1,81

1,84

2

Japan

69326

88447

28

4817346

5396222

12

2,92

3,32

14

US

154414

221825

44

8696081

11898549

37

2,49

2,61

5

UK

24.000 2.000.000 22.000 1.800.000 20.000 1.600.000 18.000 1.400.000 16.000 1.200.000 14.000 1.000.000 800.000
24.000
2.000.000
22.000
1.800.000
20.000
1.600.000
18.000
1.400.000
16.000
1.200.000
14.000
1.000.000
800.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
GERD
Real GDP
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
Real GDP in millions of euro

UK

11.000 10.000 9.000 8.000 2.000.000 7.000 1.800.000 GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
11.000
10.000
9.000
8.000
2.000.000
7.000
1.800.000
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
6.000
1.600.000
5.000
1.400.000
1.200.000
1.000.000
800.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Real GDP
GERD (funded by business)
GERD (funded by government)
Real GDP in millions of euro

During the period 1995-2005 the percentage increase in GDP in the UK was higher than that of GERD resulting in lower levels of the R&D intensity indicator Real GDP is constantly increasing the last 25 years; GERD is also increasing showing however more fluctuations over time GERD funded by the government has seen a decline in the period 1985-1995 not ‘matched’ however by business-funded R&D Since 1995 publicly funded R&D is increasing as well Intuitively, we do not see a strong co-evolution between business funded R&D and Real GDP evolution Statistically, we find that GDP only affects GERD after about 5 years (Granger causality)

B. Research base and relation with publicly funded R&D

 

R&D-personnel 1

Scientists and engineers 2

 

Graduates 2

Country

2000

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

UK

 

7,80

5,60

-28%

15,50

18,40

19%

EU27 5

1,36

1,45

7%

 

5,50

8,80

13,20

50%

Japan 3, 5, 6

1,71

 

12,30

13,70

11%

US 3, 4, 5, 6

 

9,20

10,60

15%

UK

GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices 8.000 7.500 7.000 6.500 400.000 6.000 300.000
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
8.000
7.500
7.000
6.500
400.000
6.000
300.000
5.500
200.000
100.000
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
R&D personnel in full time equivalents

R&D personnel (all sectors)

R&D personnel (goverment sector)

GERD by government

Between 1980 and 1993 R&D personnel

has been steadily decreasing, in line

with the decrease in publicly funded R&D

From 1995 onwards, publicly funded

R&D is regaining ground and thus

increasing

The fragmented data available show higher levels of R&D personnel around 2005, which may suggest indeed that additional public funding translated into more R&D personnel

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

Real GDP in millions of euro

Real GDP in millions of euro

4.5

Spain

A. R&D expenditure patterns and co-evolution with GDP

 

Gross Expenditures on R&D (GERD)

Gross Domestic Product

GERD/GDP ratio

Country

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

 

(Millions of 1995 PPS)

(Millions of Chain linked 2000 Euros)

 

Spain

4204

8533

103

515405

740129

44

0,79

1,12

42

EU27 1

140804 5

114891

-18 6

7972659

10028033

26

1,81

1,84

2

Japan

69326

88447

28

4817346

5396222

12

2,92

3,32

14

US

154414

221825

44

8696081

11898549

37

2,49

2,61

5

Spain

10.000 900.000 800.000 8.000 700.000 6.000 600.000 4.000 500.000 2.000 400.000 0 300.000 1980 1985
10.000
900.000
800.000
8.000
700.000
6.000
600.000
4.000
500.000
2.000
400.000
0
300.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
GERD
Real GDP
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
Real GDP in millions of euro

Spain

5.000

900.000 800.000 700.000 600.000 500.000 400.000 0 300.000 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
900.000
800.000
700.000
600.000
500.000
400.000
0
300.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005

4.000

3.000

2.000

1.000

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 4.000 3.000 2.000 1.000 Real GDP GERD (funded by business)

Real GDP GERD (funded by business) GERD (funded by government)

Spain is a nice example of almost perfect co-evolution between GERD and Real GDP GERD and real GDP have nicely co-evolved since the 1980s; even the flattening of the curves in the early 1990s is similar Deviations in the last years are due to larger increase in Government budget for R&D As a result, we also statistically find fast response time (lags) between GERD and GDP (1 year) Both government-funded R&D and business-funded R&D closely follow the growth path of real GDP A co-integration relationship (1 year) between GERD and Real GDP confirms the close interrelation In the early 90s both business-funded and government-funded R&D have grown until the mid-1990s, until Real GDP growth slowed down a bit Spain shows how the effort on R&D follows the cycles of the economy, as increases (decreases) in real GDP are followed by increases (decreases) in GERD with some time lag

B. Research base and relation with publicly funded R&D

   

R&D-personnel 1

Scientists and engineers 2

 

Graduates 2

Country

2000

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

Spain

 

1,49

4,60

5,40

17%

8,00

11,80

48%

EU27 5

1,36

1,45

7%

 

5,50

8,80

13,20

50%

Japan 3, 5, 6

1,71

 

12,30

13,70

11%

US 3, 4, 5, 6

 

9,20

10,60

15%

Spain

GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices 5.000 4.000 200.000 3.000 150.000 2.000 100.000
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
5.000
4.000
200.000
3.000
150.000
2.000
100.000
1.000
0
50.000
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
R&D personnel in full time equivalents

R&D personnel (all sectors)

R&D personnel (government sector)

GERD by government

R&D personnel and government-funded

R&D follow similar growth patterns from 1980 onwards

R&D personnel has increased more rapidly

than government-funded GERD between

1990-1994 followed by a decrease around

1995

After 1995 the two series are increasing following a similar growth pace

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

4.6

Austria

A. R&D expenditure patterns and co-evolution with GDP

 

Gross Expenditures on R&D (GERD)

Gross Domestic Product

GERD/GDP ratio

Country

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

 

(Millions of 1995 PPS)

(Millions of Chain linked 2000 Euros)

 

Austria

2430

4775

96

179137

225483

26

1,54

2,43

58

EU27 1

140804 5

114891

-18 6

7972659

10028033

26

1,81

1,84

2

Japan

69326

88447

28

4817346

5396222

12

2,92

3,32

14

US

154414

221825

44

8696081

11898549

37

2,49

2,61

5

 

Austria

Austria

 
6.000 280.000 5.000 240.000 4.000 3.000 200.000 2.000 160.000 1.000 0 120.000 1980 1985 1990
6.000
280.000
5.000
240.000
4.000
3.000
200.000
2.000
160.000
1.000
0
120.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
GERD
Real GDP
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
Real GDP in millions of euro
2.500 280.000 2.000 240.000 1.500 GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices 200.000 1.000
2.500
280.000
2.000
240.000
1.500
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
200.000
1.000
160.000
500
120.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Real GDP
GERD (funded by business)
GERD (funded by government)
Real GDP in millions of euro

GERD and real GDP have both increased in the period 1995-2005; however, the percentage increase of real GDP has been lower than that of GERD Since the 1980s GERD and GDP seem nicely co-evolve Both government-funded R&D and business-funded R&D seems to closely follow Real GDP growth Business funded R&D grows faster than Real GDP from 2000 onward; we see that publicly funded R&D follows this growth pace since 2005 A co-integration relationship between GERD and Real GDP (1 year time lag), indicates the close evolution over time

B. Research base and relation with publicly funded R&D

   

R&D-personnel 1

Scientists and engineers 2

 

Graduates 2

Country

2000

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

Austria

 

2,40

3,60

50%

7,90

9,80

24%

EU27 5

1,36

1,45

7%

 

5,50

8,80

13,20

50%

Japan 3, 5, 6

1,71

 

12,30

13,70

11%

US 3, 4, 5, 6

 

9,20

10,60

15%

Austria

GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices 2.000 1.750 60.000 1.500 50.000 1.250 40.000
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
2.000
1.750
60.000
1.500
50.000
1.250
40.000
1.000
30.000
750
20.000
500
10.000
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
R&D personnel in full time equivalents

R&D personnel (all sectors)

R&D personnel (government sector)

GERD by government

The number of R&D personnel is

constantly increasing since 1980s

Government-funded R&D seems to

follow a similar path, however data

availability is significantly restricted

here (only a few data points available) Nevertheless, publicly funded R&D seems to feed into the growth pattern of R&D personnel in Austria

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

4.7

Italy

A. R&D expenditure patterns and co-evolution with GDP

 

Gross Expenditures on R&D (GERD)

Gross Domestic Product

GERD/GDP ratio

Country

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

 

(Millions of 1995 PPS)

(Millions of Chain linked 2000 Euros)

 

Italy

9827

12645

29

1084023

1243525

15

0,97

1,09

12

EU27 1

140804 5

114891

-18 6

7972659

10028033

26

1,81

1,84

2

Japan

69326

88447

28

4817346

5396222

12

2,92

3,32

14

US

154414

221825

44

8696081

11898549

37

2,49

2,61

5

Italy

Italy

14.000 1.300.000 12.000 1.200.000 10.000 1.100.000 1.000.000 8.000 900.000 6.000 800.000 700.000 1980 1985
14.000
1.300.000
12.000
1.200.000
10.000
1.100.000
1.000.000
8.000
900.000
6.000
800.000
700.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
GERD
Real GDP
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
Real GDP in millions of euro
7.000 6.000 1.300.000 5.000 1.200.000 GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices 4.000 1.100.000
7.000
6.000
1.300.000
5.000
1.200.000
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
4.000
1.100.000
1.000.000
3.000
900.000
800.000
700.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Real GDP in millions of euro

Real GDP GERD (funded by business) GERD (funded by government)

Over the period of 1995- to 2005 both real R&D and GERD have increased GERD seems to have increased faster than real GDP in the period 1985 to 1990 A decline in GERD has followed after that and until 1995; at the same period real GDP has continued to increase The statistical tests indicate that a co-integrating relationship between real GDP and GERD exists with a 2-year lag; Granger causality tests indicate a relationship with a 4 year time lag, meaning that a change in the values of the one is followed by the other after 4 years Business-funded R&D and government-funded R&D follow similar growth paths, increasing from 1980 till the early 1990s and decreasing thereafter until 1995; no data is available for the following periods

B. Research base and relation with publicly funded R&D

   

R&D-personnel 1

Scientists and engineers 2

 

Graduates 2

Country

2000

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

Italy

1,08

1,23

14%

3,00

3,70

23%

5,10

12,40

143%

EU27 5

1,36

1,45

7%

 

5,50

8,80

13,20

50%

Japan 3, 5, 6

1,71

 

12,30

13,70

11%

US 3, 4, 5, 6

 

9,20

10,60

15%

Italy

GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices 7.000 6.000 5.000 200.000 160.000 4.000 120.000
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
7.000
6.000
5.000
200.000
160.000
4.000
120.000
3.000
80.000
40.000
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
R&D personnel (all sectors)
R&D personnel (government sector)
GERD by government
R&D personnel in full time equivalents

R&D personnel has been increasing

steadily since the 1980s, similar to the

growth path of publicly funded R&D

The decline in publicly funded R&D after

1990 is partly mirrored in the number of

R&D personnel (less sharp however)

Since 2000 R&D personnel is increasing;

however, no data for government-funded GERD is available to compare with

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

Real GDP in millions of euro

4.8 The Netherlands

A. R&D expenditure patterns and co-evolution with GDP

 

Gross Expenditures on R&D (GERD)

Gross Domestic Product

GERD/GDP ratio

Country

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

 

(Millions of 1995 PPS)

(Millions of Chain linked 2000 Euros)

 

Netherlands

5513

6305

14

342776

443937

30

1,97

1,74

-12

EU27 1

140804 5

114891

-18 6

7972659

10028033

26

1,81

1,84

2

Japan

69326

88447

28

4817346

5396222

12

2,92

3,32

14

US

154414

221825

44

8696081

11898549

37

2,49

2,61

5

The Netherlands

7.000 500.000 6.000 450.000 400.000 5.000 350.000 4.000 300.000 250.000 3.000 200.000 1980 1985 1990
7.000
500.000
6.000
450.000
400.000
5.000
350.000
4.000
300.000
250.000
3.000
200.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
GERD
Real GDP
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
Real GDP in millions of euro

The Netherlands

3.600 3.200 GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices 2.800 500.000 2.400 450.000 2.000
3.600
3.200
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
2.800
500.000
2.400
450.000
2.000
400.000
1.600
350.000
300.000
250.000
200.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
250.000 200.000 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Real GDP GERD (funded by business) GERD (funded

Real GDP GERD (funded by business) GERD (funded by government)

GERD and real GDP have increased steadily between 1995 until 2005; over that period, the percentage change of GDP is higher than that of GERD GERD and real GDP have followed similar growth paths since 1980; GERD seems to be more volatile over time compared to real GDP; the slight stagnation around 2000 is reflected in both variables The tests indicate that a co-integrating relationship between real GDP and GERD exists with a 1-year lag; this means that GDP and GERD follow each other closely Both business-funded and government-funded R&D seem to be more volatile over time than real GDP From 1995 onwards we see business and publicly funded R&D evolve differently; whereas publicly funded R&D is stabilizing and even decreasing, business funded R&D continues to grow

B. Research base and relation with publicly funded R&D

 

R&D-personnel 1

Scientists and engineers 2

 

Graduates 2

Country

2000

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

Netherlands

 

1,40

6,10

6,90

13%

6,00

8,60

43%

EU27 5

1,36

1,45

7%

 

5,50

8,80

13,20

50%

Japan 3, 5, 6

1,71

 

12,30

13,70

11%

US 3, 4, 5, 6

 

9,20

10,60

15%

The Netherlands

GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices 2.600 2.400 2.200 100.000 2.000 80.000 1.800
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
2.600
2.400
2.200
100.000
2.000
80.000
1.800
60.000
1.600
40.000
20.000
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
R&D personnel in full time equivalents

R&D personnel (all sectors)

R&D personnel (government sector)

GERD by government

R&D personnel has been increasing

steadily since the 1980s

In view of the fact that publicly

funded R&D has been fluctuating

more over time, it seems that the R&D personnel volume has evolved rather independently from publicly funded R&D (see evolution in times of decline in publicly funded R&D)

25

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

4.9

Greece

A. R&D expenditure patterns and co-evolution with GDP

 

Gross Expenditures on R&D (GERD)

Gross Domestic Product

GERD/GDP ratio

Country

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

% change

 

(Millions of 1995 PPS)

(Millions of Chain linked 2000 Euros)

 

Greece

508

1000

97

116419

170799

47

0,43

0,58

35

EU27 1

140804 5

114891

-18 6

7972659

10028033

26

1,81

1,84

2

Japan

69326

88447

28

4817346

5396222

12

2,92

3,32

14

US

154414

221825

44

8696081

11898549

37

2,49

2,61

5

Greece

Greece

1.200 200.000 1.000 180.000 800 160.000 600 140.000 400 120.000 200 0 100.000 1980 1985
1.200
200.000
1.000
180.000
800
160.000
600
140.000
400
120.000
200
0
100.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
GERD
Real GDP
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
Real GDP in millions of euro
500 200.000 400 180.000 300 160.000 200 140.000 100 GERD in millions of PPS at
500
200.000
400
180.000
300
160.000
200
140.000
100
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
120.000
0
100.000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Real GDP in millions of euro

Real GDP GERD (funded by business) GERD (funded by government)

GERD and real GDP have increased steadily between 1995 and 2005; the percentage change of GERD is higher than that of real GDP In view of the data points available, it is interesting to note the almost parallel co-evolution between publicly and privately funded R&D Due to the scarce data available, our statistical test do not reveal any additional significant results

B. Research base and relation with publicly funded R&D

 

R&D-personnel 1

Scientists and engineers 2

 

Graduates 2

Country

2000

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

1998

2005

% change

Greece

 

1,41

4,00

4,50

13%

 

10,10

EU27 5

1,36

1,45

7%

 

5,50

 

8,80

13,2

50%

0

Japan 3, 5, 6

 

1,71

   

12,3

13,7

11%

0

0

US 3, 4, 5, 6

 

9,20

10,6

15%

0

Greece

GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices 500 40.000 400 30.000 300 20.000 200
GERD in millions of PPS at 1995 prices
500
40.000
400
30.000
300
20.000
200
10.000
100
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
R&D personnel in full time equivalents

R&D personnel (all sectors)

R&D personnel (government sector)

GERD by government

Data availability is significantly restrictive here; however, again by looking at the data points one notices the co-evolution between

publicly funded R&D and the R&D personnel

Analysis of the Development in National R&D Intensities and National Public Expenditures on R&D

4.10

Denmark

A. R&D expenditure patterns and co-evolution with GDP

 

Gross Expenditures on R&D (GERD)

Gross Domestic Product

GERD/GDP ratio

Country

1995

2005

% change

1995

2005

%