This paper brings together recent statistical evidence on international (co-)publications and (foreign) PhD-students and scholars
to document shifts in geographic sources of scientific production and the impact this has on flows of scientific talent and
partnering for scientific collaboration. The evidence demonstrates that despite the continued dominance of the US and the
increasing importance of the EU, the TRIAD is in relative decline. Other geographic sources of science outside the TRIAD are
rising, both in quantity, but also, although still to a lesser extent, in quality. Especially China drives this non-TRIAD
growth. This catching-up of non-TRIAD countries drives a slow but real process of global convergence. It nevertheless leaves
a less equal non-TRIAD science community, as the growth of China, is not matched by other non-TRIAD countries. Despite the
rise of China’s own scientific production, and the increasing return flows of overseas students and scholars, the outward
flows of Asian talents have not diminished over time. The data suggest a high correlation between the patterns of international
mobility of scientists and the patterns of international collaborations. The large and stable flow of Chinese human capital
into the US forms the basis on which stable international US-Chinese scientific networks are built. With the EU lacking this
Chinese human capital circulation, it is more difficult to build up similar strong and stable networks.
Transition economies that formerly were within the Soviet Union’s political and economic sphere exhibited high economic growth before the crisis. In part, increasing total-factor productivity (TFP), a’ residual’ growth factor commonly interpreted as reflecting technological progress, was behind higher growth rates. This paper zooms in on TFP’s contribution to growth in the transition countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia, in order to identify which countries have established a knowledge-based growth path or have the potential to develop one in the near future. We start by looking at how the transition countries covered by the paper measure up according to traditional innovation input and output indicators. But the major part of our analysis focuses on identifying countries’ potential for future knowledge-based growth. Few transition economies have highly-developed innovation profiles. Analysis of the prerequisites for knowledge-based growth indicates that transition countries are at a systemic disadvantage relative to the US, the EU-15 and Japan, and have limited potential for knowledge-based growth.
Authors:K. Debackere, M. Luwel and Reinhilde Veugelers
The study tries to analyze regional technological capabilities, linking technological positions to economic strength of the
region. To measure this link, we correlate the EPO patent data with trade data to assess the degree to which technological
advantages are translated into comparative advantages for the Flemish region in Belgium. The analysis for Flanders provides
some interesting insights. Following the skewed distribution of firms, the technological areas in which Flanders is able to
build, a strong position are very specific: printing technology, weaving technology, photography and recently also telecommunications.
Weak positions are outspoken in car technology. Linking these strengths and weaknesses in technological areas to economic
activity revealed an important mismatch between both. Most of the Flemish patents are in sectors without any comparative advantage,
while most of the sectors where Flanders does hold a comparative advantage, like chemicals and pharmaceuticals, do not show
strong technological advantages in terms of patents. Given the mismatch that was detected between technological positions
and economic advantages, it is of crucial importance to better understand the (missing) links between the various actors in
the regional innovation system. The analysis points out two important issues. The large and growing number of foreign applications
to Belgian/Flemish inventors and the large number of subsidiaries of foreign firms among Belgian/Flemish applications illustrate
the pervasiveness of the foreign dimension in the Belgian/Flemish technological landscape. Also very specific to the Belgian/Flemish
situation, is the limited importance of universities or research centers in terms of patenting activities.
Authors:Michele Cincera, Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie and Veugelers Reinhilde
International R&D activities have grown significantly over the last two decades. Both the number of actors involved, as well
as the importance of the technological activity carried out abroad, has considerably increased. We aim to quantify the international
generation of knowledge for the case of Belgium, using indicators based on EPO and USPTO patent data (1978-2001). We distinguish
among Belgian applicants, affiliates of foreign firms located in Belgium as well as Belgian based firms with affiliates abroad.
This approach allows to improve existing indicators of internationalisation of technology based on patent data. The results
are consistent with what can be expected for a small open economy as Belgium. A large part of patents with Belgian inventors
are assigned to Belgian affiliates of foreign firms. Hence our more complete indicator of foreign ownership gives a substantially
higher foreign control of Belgian inventors. Relatively more knowledge generated by Belgian inventors flows out of the country
towards foreign owners of technology, than that knowledge generated abroad is owned by Belgian patent applicants. But the
share of foreign inventors to Belgian assigned patents is considerably increasing over time, especially in the subcategory
of Belgian firms with foreign affiliates.
Authors:Bart Looy, Edwin Zimmermann, Reinhilde Veugelers, Arnold Verbeek, Johanna Mello and Koenraad Debackere
We investigate the relationship between the science intensity of technology domains and country's performance within these
domains. The number of references in patents to scientific articles is considered as an approximation of the science intensity
of a technology domain whereas a country's technological performance is measured in terms of its technological productivity
(i.e. number of patents per capita). We use USPTO patent-data for eight European countries in ten technological domains. A
variance analysis (ANOVA) is applied. Country as an independent variable does not explain a significant portion of the observed
variance in science intensity (p=0.25). Technology domain, however, explains a significant portion of the observed variance
(p<0.001). Moreover, in science intensive fields we find a positive relation between the science linkage intensity of these
fields and the technological productivity of the respective countries involved. These findings seem to suggest the relevancy
of designing innovation policies, aimed at fostering interaction between knowledge generating actors and technology producers,
in a field specific manner.