Andrew Wyckoff

Download Report

Transcript Andrew Wyckoff

The Changing Dynamics of the Global
Market for the Highly-skilled
Andrew Wyckoff
OECD
Advancing Knowledge and the Knowledge Economy
National Academies, Washington, D.C.
10 January 2005
1
2
PISA: Mean mathematics scores – overall
(All)
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
Hong Kong-China
Finland
Korea
Netherlands
Liechtenstein
Japan
Canada
Belgium
Macao-China
Sw itzerland
Australia
New Zealand
Czech Rep.
Iceland
Denmark
France
Sw eden
Austria
Germany
Ireland
Slovak Rep.
Norw ay
Luxembourg
Poland
Hungary
Spain
Latvia
USA
Russian Fed
Portugal
Italy
Greece
Serbia
Turkey
Uruguay
Thailand
Mexico
Indonesia
Tunisia
Brazil
US mean score ranks in range
24th to 28th in 41 countries.
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2003, Table 2.5c, p.356.
3
US as the benchmark
4
Competitiveness Rankings
IMD
2004/2003
WEF
2004/2003
1
US / US
FIN / FIN
2
SING / LUX
US / US
3
CAN / FIN
SWE / SWE
4
AUST / SING
TAIW / DNK
5
ICE / DNK
DNK / TAIW
6
HK / CAN
NOR / SING
Source: IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook, 2004 and World Economic Forum’s Global
Competitiveness Report, 2003-04
5
How could the authors of “A Nation at
Risk” have gotten it so wrong?
6
Foreign PhD Students
% of total enrolment, 2001
Number by host country, 2001
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Belgium
United States
Sweden
Canada
Austria
Norway
Belgium
Austria
Finland
Iceland
Czech Republic
Turkey
Slovak Republic
Mexico
Italy
0
Australia
Denmark
Finland
10
Spain
Canada
Portugal
20
26 143
Sweden
Czech Republic
30
United Kingdom
Switzerland
New Zealand
40
78 884
Australia
Spain
%
United States
Portugal
Norway
Denmark
Turkey
New Zealand
Italy
Slovak Republic
Mexico
Iceland
7
0
2 500
5 000
7 500
10 000
% of 1998-01 Foreign S&E US Degree Recipients with
“plans to stay” in the US
y
an
wa
n
Ta
i
a
al
an
ad
C
G
er
m
Source: NSF, S&E indicators, 2004
To
t
K
U
In
di
a
C
hi
na
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
8
Stock of Highly Skilled* Immigrants in OECD Countries
9,000,000
8,000,000
7,000,000
6,000,000
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
0
USA CAN AUS GBR DEU FRA
ESP CHE
NLD SWE
* Age 15+, ISCED 5/6
9
Source: Dumont and LeMaitre, 2004
Changing Dynamics of the Market
9/11
 EU & Japan
 China & India
 MNEs

10
11
Annual Percent Change of International Student
Enrolment in US Higher-education Institutions
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
89
19 /90
90
19 /91
91
19 /92
92
19 /93
93
19 /94
94
19 /95
95
19 /96
96
19 /97
97
19 /98
98
19 /99
99
20 /00
00
20 /01
01
20 /02
02
20 /03
03
/0
4
-1
19
-2
-3
12
Source: IIE (2004), “Open Doors Report,” http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/
New Demand: the EU & Japan
13
EU Lisbon & Barcelona Goals
Lisbon 2000
“The Union has today set itself a new strategic goal for the next
decade: to become the most competitive and dynamic
knowledge-based economy in the world capable of
sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and
greater social cohesion.
Barcelona 2002
[o]verall spending on R&D and innovation …should be
increased with the aim of approaching 3% of GDP by
2010. Two-thirds of this new investment should come from
the private sector.”
14
Additional Researchers Required to meet EC
Barcelona 3% R&D Target
Public sector
Private sector
Total
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
-100,000
-200,000
0%
1%
2%
3%
15
Japanese Foreign Workers w Special
and/or Technical Skills
180000
160000
140000
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2001
16
Source: METI, 2003
New Demand: China & India
17
Number of Chinese students enrolled in
tertiary education in the United States,
Japan and the EU, thousands
United States
Japan
EU
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1998
1999
2000
2001
18
Doctoral Degrees Awarded in China
20000
18000
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
8
19 9
90
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
9
19 5
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
19
88
19
87
19
86
19
85
19
84
19
83
19
19
82
0
19
Source: Weiguo and Zhaohui, 2004
Number of researchers, thousands of FTE
United States
EU
China
Japan
1400
1200
1000
800
600
*
400
200
0
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
Growth of R&D expenditure, annual average
growth rate 1991-2001
%
(based on national currencies in constant prices)
16
12
8
4
0
China
(1991-02)
Singapore
(1994-02)
Korea
Source: Schaaper, 2004
Chinese Taipei United States
(1991-03)
(1995-01)
EU
Japan
21
Gross Domestic Expenditure on R&D
(2002, $Bill GDP PPPs)
US
277.1
Japan
106.8
China
72.0
Germany
53.9
France
36.6
UK
31.0
Korea
23.5
22
Source: OECD, MSTI, 2004/1
Patent applications to the SIPO, by
residence of inventors
China
Japan
European Union
Korea
Hong Kong, China
Singapore
United States
18 000
16 000
14 000
12 000
10 000
8 000
6 000
4 000
2 000
0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
Note: Data are by priority year and are provisional.
Source: OECD, Patent Database, July 2003
1997
1998
1999
23
USPTO Patents by Chinese Inventors
By Priority Date
China
United States
Chinese Taipei
Other countries
400
338
400
350
300
254
250
206
200
103
78
56
71
84
58
38
1
0
2
3
3
4
9
97
150
130
117
100
100
53
50
15
0
1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Source: OECD, Patent Database, December 2004
24
Policy Implications: an Initial Mapping
1. National Systems of Innovation (NSI)
– Short-term: must compete in this global market
– Long-term: need to increase indigenous supply
– Increased global competition will make it will be more
difficult for young researchers to be recognised, publish
and get appointments at top-institutions (D.Hicks)
25
Policy Implications: an Initial Mapping
2. Macroeconomic Effects
– Demand
, Supply
, then Price
– Return flows will diffuse and create pressure to adopt
push best practices (Saxenian)
– Need for more global coordination of economic policies
and data (esp. MNEs & flows of highly skilled) to guide
these policies.
26
Policy Implications: an Initial Mapping
3. Extending the Global K-Network
– Need to reconfigure the global knowledge network,
– Tap into the “transnational technical communities”
– Pivotal role of the US
– Coordinating role of the IOs.
27