Transcript Some remarks about the 8th SAC Seminar

STRENGTHS AND
WEAKNESSES OF EU-RUSSIA
COOPERATION IN SCIENCE &
TECHNOLOGY
J.P. CONTZEN
ISTC-STCU International
Conference
Ljubljana, March 10th, 2008
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND
RUSSIA (1)

Beyond a strong common historical and cultural
background, does the rationale for international
cooperation apply to the relations between the
European Union and Russia? The answer requires
a comparative analysis of the strengths and
weaknesses of the respective S&T systems
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND
RUSSIA (2)
The rough image of the Russian S&T system:




The heir to a superb scientific system yielding excellent
technologies in a certain number of areas corresponding to
the national priorities of the Soviet Union
In phase of recovery from the catastrophic 90s, has shown
its resilience during these difficult years
For decades, funded and demand-driven through
governmental plans, notions of market and pricing still
largely absent
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND
RUSSIA (3)





Maintaining strength in basic science, somewhat weaker in
translation sciences, uneven technological level
Universities still lagging in research
Relatively modest Industry-funded (and -performed?) S&T
explaining weakness in industrial innovation, deepened
through absence of a significant internal market
Not fully integrated in the international networking
Abundant human resources but what about the future
generations?
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND
RUSSIA (4)

Beyond the perception of those in direct contact
with the Russian system, what do the S&T
indicators tell about this system? The very recent
OECD Science, Technology and Industry
Scoreboard 2007, the EC Science, Technology an
Innovation Key Figures 2007 contain very useful
information, complemented by other relevant data
sources, e.g. the European Patent Office
SOME DATA ABOUT S&T (1)
The following indicators are helpful in assessing the
respective strengths of potential partners:
 Gross Expenditure on R&D (GERD) and R&D
intensity, i.e. GERD as % of GDP
 R&D by source of funding and by performing sector
 Researchers in total workforce
 Strength of tertiary education
SOME DATA ABOUT S&T (2)
Gross Expenditure on R&D (GERD) in Billions US$
(PPP 2005) and average annual growth 1995-2005:





EU 27
231 B$, + 3%
OECD
772 B$, + 3.5%
Russian Fed. 16.7 B$, + 6%
Italy
17.7 B$, + 2.5%
Slovenia
0.55 B$, - 3% (2000-2005), growing now
SOME DATA ABOUT S&T (3)
R&D intensity, i.e. GERD as % of GDP:





EU 27
1.84
OECD
2.2
Russian Fed. 1.1
Italy
1.1
Slovenia
1.22 (1.49 in 2005)
In terms of GERD and R&D intensity, Russia is quite
similar to Italy
SOME DATA ABOUT S&T (4)

In terms of source of funding and performing sector,
the Russian Federation is quite different from most
EU countries and notably Slovenia:
 In Russia only 30% of GERD is financed by business
enterprise vs. 60% in Slovenia (above EU 27 average of
54.5%)
 In Russia, about 65% of the total R&D is performed
according to OECD by business (careful about
definition of business performers in the RF!) while in
Slovenia this figure is about 60%
SOME DATA ABOUT S&T (6)

In terms of researchers in the total workforce:
 Russia has to be considered as “overstaffed” according
to world standards but the current attrition of the R&D
workforce will bring it back to the general trend
experienced elsewhere
 Slovenia with 6.5 Researchers (FTE) per 1000 total
employment for a R&D intensity of 1.50 is in excess of
the EU average and slightly above this general trend
SOME DATA ABOUT S&T (7)

In terms of strength of the tertiary education:
 Russia leads with 55% of the total population aged 25
to 64 having a tertiary degree, well above the OECD
average of 28% while Slovenia places itself at 18%
SOME DATA ABOUT S&T (8)
 In
terms of output of any S&T system, patent filings
constitute an important element
 The degree of internationalization can be measured by
the flow of exchanged students, a condition for future
S&T collaboration and by the internationalization of
research projects
PATENTS (1)

Russia and other CIS countries are strong in national
applications as exemplified by following figures:
Patent filings by residents per Billion Dollars
GDP: world average 19, ranging from S. Korea
116.2 - Japan 107.3 - Germany 22.6 – Georgia
21.1 - USA 17.7 - Russian Federation 17.6 –
Belarus 16.9 - Ukraine 14.7 – China 9.4 - India
2.3 – and Mexico 0.6
PATENTS (2)

Patent filings by residents per Million Dollars spent
in R&D: world average 0.81, ranging from S.
Korea 4.60 - Japan 3.49 - Belarus 3.15 - Russian
Federation 1.46 – Ukraine 1.42 - Germany 0.92 China 0.78 - USA 0.71 - India 0.23 - Mexico 0.14 –
Belgium 0.08- Portugal 0.07
PATENTS (3)
BUT
 Weakness of Russia for registering international
patents, notably the triadic patents, about 5% of the
total (EU 27 shares 28% of the total)
 These international patents are generally with
foreign co-inventors and Russia has the highest
share (64%) of foreign ownership of domestic
inventions filed internationally
PATENTS (4)

In Russia, very few patents are owned by
universities, less than 2% to be opposed to nearly
10% in Ireland
PATENTS (5)

What about Slovenia? As shown by the next graph,
Slovenia is performing fairly well for EPO patent
applications, not very far from the Irish
performance
RUSSIA’S INTERNATIONALIZATION
OF STUDENTS
 If
Russian Universities are still attracting foreign
students (3% of world total), the number of
Russian students enrolled in Universities of
OECD countries is quite low: less than 17,000
from Russia over a total of 900,000 in 2002; in
comparison China sent 152,000 students and
India 82,000
 The flow increased significantly recently: about
50,000 Russian students went abroad in 2007
RUSSIA AND THE EUROPEAN UNION
 The
following diagram demonstrates the strength of
Russia as foreign participant in the Framework
Programme of the European Union, in this particular
case FP6
Comparison of foreign participations in FP6
LESSONS FOR EU-RUSSIA
COOPERATION (1)
 The
statistical data confirm the intuitive feeling about
Russian S&T strengths and weaknesses with question
marks about the importance of business R&D and
about the validity of patents as an indicator of the
innovation potential
 Basically, cooperation could rely on the current
strengths of Russia:


Basic science
Big science: Fusion, Space, High Energy Physics
LESSONS FOR EU-RUSSIA
COOPERATION (2)

Technological niches: materials, nuclear technologies,
biotechnologies, remembering that they rely essentially on
public financing and public execution
 Using
a more refined approach, cooperation might be
beneficial on emerging industrial products: the recent
development of small and medium size enterprises in
Russia could constitute a favorable factor in this
respect
LESSONS FOR EU-RUSSIA
COOPERATION (3)

To facilitate cooperation, Russia should surmount
some basic weaknesses linked to its too much inward
looking approach. Such approach could be explained
by several factors:
 Language
 Weak networking in the past
 Lack of active presence in international meetings
 Different approach to cooperation, notably
reluctance to share financial burden
LESSONS FOR EU-RUSSIA COOPERATION (4)






Discrepancies in Intellectual Property Rights
policies
Different project management styles
Political obstacles such as visas, export control and
information disclosure issue
Differences in S&T structures
Weak implication of industry
Meager involvement of the younger
CONCLUSION
 In
spite of these obstacles, Russia remains for the
European Union an attractive partner for S&T
cooperation. Real opportunities exist for creating
win-win situations. Beyond a better mutual
understanding based on enhanced personal contacts,
what is mostly needed , is the manifestation of a clear
political will, on both sides, for removing the most
worrisome obstacles.
спасибо за ваше внимание
HVALA ZA VASHO
POZORNOST