1. EPO patent applications
Motivation / Objectives
The rapid pace of technological development and the need of remaining competitive in an increasingly knowledge-based global economy requires countries to focus even more on R&D, innovation and technology in order to achieve the transition from resource based to technology-based industries. However, despite the importance of innovation, Turkey and some EU countries face difficulties in strengthening in this issue. In this context, it is important to present countries’ position in reserach and innovation. Thus, this paper seeks to evaluate and compare the innovation performance of Turkey and the EU both of which in particular suffer from low levels of R&D investments.
Approach
An evaluation of Turkey's innovation performance vis-a-vis the EU can be made by using various indicators of technological innovation. In this context, R&D expenditures, high-tech trade, human resources in science and technology and patenting activity are used to present the technological and innovative capacity of Turkey and the EU.
The State of Innovation Activity in Turkey and the EU
R&D Intensity
As set by the Lisbon strategy, the EU’s 2010 targets in R&D, is to achieve R&D intensity of 3 % of GDP as well as having two thirds of R&D spending coming from the private sector. In a similar manner, Turkey aims is to increase expenditure on R&D from 0.48% in 2000 to 2% by the year 2010.
The EU countries allocate about 1.85 % of their GDP to R&D. R&D expenditures are lagging behind in the EU compared to the US and Japan. R&D intensity has remained significantly lower in the EU than in both Japan (3.40) and the US (2.67). On the other hand, Turkey allocate about 0,72% of her GDP to R&D which remained lower than most EU states.
On the other hand, variation within the EU is large. Among the EU states Sweden, Finland, Austria, Denmark, Germany and France spend more than 2%, with the three Nordic countries are among the biggest R&D spenders. On the contrary, the southern member states and the new members spend much less on R&D. The EU states with the lowest R&D intensity were Cyprus, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Romania. It is a fact that, these countries have some distance to meet the 3% Lisbon target on R&D. Indeed, some EU states have made important progress on increasing investment in R&D in real terms, but overall EU R&D intensity has remained unchanged. Turkey is also far from meeting the 2% target.
NOTES
1. Poster Title
• Replace the mock-up text of the poster title (”Joint Research Centre”) with the text of your own title.
• Keep the original font colour (100c 80m 0y 0k).
• Keep the flush-right justification.
• Set it in Helvetica Rounded Bold Condensed, if you own the typeface. Otherwise, in Arial, Helvetica or Verdana – plain or bold.
• Keep the original font body size (102 pt or, preferably,120 pt) and the title on a single line whenever possible. Reduce the body size and/or set the title on more than one line only if unavoidable.
2. Poster Subtitle
• Replace the mock-up text of the poster subtitle (”Place Your Poster Subtitle Here”) with the text of your own subtitle.
• Keep the original font colour (black).
• Set it in MetaPlusBook-Roman, if you own the typeface. Otherwise, in Arial, Helvetica or Verdana.
• Keep the original font body size (72 pt) and the subtitle on a single line whenever possible. Reduce the body size and/or set the subtitle on more than one line only if unavoidable.
• If your poster does not have a main subtitle, delete the subtitle mock-up text or its text-box altogether.
3. Poster Main Text and Illustrations
• Replace the mock-up text of the poster with your own text. Keep it within the boundaries of the two main-text boxes provided.
• Should you need a second colour within your text, use the same one of the poster title (100c 80m 0y 0k).
• Keep the flush-left justification.
• Set the main text in MetaPlusBook-Roman and the section headings in MetaPlusBold-Roman, if you own the typefaces. Otherwise, the main text in Arial, Helvetica or Verdana, and the section headings in their respective bold weights.
• Adjust the font body size and leading to the needs of your own text, depending on its overall length, for optimal display and legibility.
• Should you need a second level of text, set it in a smaller body size than that of your main text (and, in the case of photo captions, in italics, too).
• Place your illustrations (pictures, graphs, etc.) within the boundaries of the two main-text boxes. Adjust your text-flow as needed.
4. Contact Box
• Replace the mock-up contents of the contact box with your own data.
• Keep the contact box in place if possible. Place it elsewhere only if unavoidable for layout reasons, but in that case try, at least, to align it with some main element of the poster.
5. Additional Logos
• Should you need to display additional logos (e.g., of partner organizations or universities), reduce or enlarge them to a height within those of the JRC logo and the Directorate or Institute logo.
• Place any additional logos on the bottom of the poster, evenly spaced between the JRC and (if there is one) the Directorate or Institute logo, and vertically centred with them.
NOTES
1. Poster Title
• Replace the mock-up text of the poster title (”Joint Research Centre”) with the text of your own title.
• Keep the original font colour (100c 80m 0y 0k).
• Keep the flush-right justification.
• Set it in Helvetica Rounded Bold Condensed, if you own the typeface. Otherwise, in Arial, Helvetica or Verdana – plain or bold.
• Keep the original font body size (102 pt or, preferably,120 pt) and the title on a single line whenever possible. Reduce the body size and/or set the title on more than one line only if unavoidable.
2. Poster Subtitle
• Replace the mock-up text of the poster subtitle (”Place Your Poster Subtitle Here”) with the text of your own subtitle.
• Keep the original font colour (black).
• Set it in MetaPlusBook-Roman, if you own the typeface. Otherwise, in Arial, Helvetica or Verdana.
• Keep the original font body size (72 pt) and the subtitle on a single line whenever possible. Reduce the body size and/or set the subtitle on more than one line only if unavoidable.
• If your poster does not have a main subtitle, delete the subtitle mock-up text or its text-box altogether.
3. Poster Main Text and Illustrations
• Replace the mock-up text of the poster with your own text. Keep it within the boundaries of the two main-text boxes provided.
• Should you need a second colour within your text, use the same one of the poster title (100c 80m 0y 0k).
• Keep the flush-left justification.
• Set the main text in MetaPlusBook-Roman and the section headings in MetaPlusBold-Roman, if you own the typefaces. Otherwise, the main text in Arial, Helvetica or Verdana, and the section headings in their respective bold weights.
• Adjust the font body size and leading to the needs of your own text, depending on its overall length, for optimal display and legibility.
• Should you need a second level of text, set it in a smaller body size than that of your main text (and, in the case of photo captions, in italics, too).
• Place your illustrations (pictures, graphs, etc.) within the boundaries of the two main-text boxes. Adjust your text-flow as needed.
4. Contact Box
• Replace the mock-up contents of the contact box with your own data.
• Keep the contact box in place if possible. Place it elsewhere only if unavoidable for layout reasons, but in that case try, at least, to align it with some main element of the poster.
5. Additional Logos
• Should you need to display additional logos (e.g., of partner organizations or universities), reduce or enlarge them to a height within those of the JRC logo and the Directorate or Institute logo.
• Place any additional logos on the bottom of the poster, evenly spaced between the JRC and (if there is one) the Directorate or Institute logo, and vertically centred with them.
Innovation Performance of Turkey and the EU: A comparative analysis
Zeynep KAPLAN
Motivation / Objectives
The rapid pace of technological development and the need of remaining competitive in an increasingly knowledge-based global economy requires countries to focus even more on R&D, innovation and technology in order to achieve the transition from resource based to technology-based industries. However, despite the importance of innovation, Turkey and some EU countries face difficulties in strengthening in this issue. In this context, it is important to present countries’ position in research and innovation. Thus, this paper seeks to evaluate and compare the innovation performance of Turkey –as an EU candidate- and the EU both of which in particular suffer from low levels of R&D investments.
Approach
An evaluation of Turkey's innovation performance vis-a-vis the EU can be made by using various indicators of technological innovation. In this context, R&D expenditures, high-tech trade, human resources in science and technology and patenting activity are used to present the technological and innovative capacity of Turkey and the EU for the period 2000 and 2007.
The State of Innovation Activity in Turkey and the EU
---R&D Intensity
As set by the Lisbon strategy, the EU’s 2010 targets in R&D, is to achieve R&D intensity of 3 % of GDP as well as having two thirds of R&D spending coming from the private sector. In a similar manner, Turkey aims is to increase expenditure on R&D from 0.48% in 2000 to 2% by the year The EU countries allocate about 1.85 % of their GDP to R&D. R&D expenditures are lagging behind in the EU compared to the US and Japan. R&D intensity has remained significantly lower in the EU than in both Japan (3.40) and the US (2.67). On the other hand, Turkey allocate about 0,72% of her GDP to R&D which remained lower than most EU states. The variation within the EU is also large. Among the EU states Sweden, Finland, Austria, Denmark, Germany and France spend more than 2%, with the three Nordic countries are among the biggest R&D spenders. On the contrary, the southern member states and the new members spend much less on R&D. The EU states with the lowest R&D intensity were Cyprus, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Romania. It is a fact that, these countries have some distance to meet the 3% Lisbon target on R&D. Indeed, some EU states have made important progress on increasing investment in R&D in real terms, but overall EU R&D intensity has remained unchanged. Turkey is also far from meeting the 2% target.
National R&D Expenditures in 2000 and 2007 EU-27, EU-15, US, Japan and Turkey (% of GDP)
Source: Eurostat.
On the other hand, although the business enterprise sector leads in R&D expenditure in developed countries such as EU, the situation in Turkey is just the opposite. Around 63 % of R&D expenditures in the EU-27 is undertaken by the private sector, while in Turkey the figure is at around 41 % as of In Turkey, as stated in the 9th Development Plan, R&D activities are designed as to produce innovations and to be market oriented. In this context, measures are taken to increase both the share of R&D expenditures in GNP and the share of the private sector in the expenditures. Thus, R&D expenditures in both the government and the business sector still need to rise substantially.
R&D expenditure by sector (% of GDP)
---High-Tech Exports
Trade of high-tech products is essential in estimating a country’s capacity to carry out R&D, to develop new knowledge, and to transform it into high-tech goods to be sold. High-tech products are grouped according to the R&D intensity of products. Nine SITC Rev3 groups of products are considered as high-tech: aerospace, computers-office machinery, electronics-telecommunications, pharmacy, scientific instruments, electrical machinery, chemistry, non-electrical machinery and armament. In the case of high-tech exports, the US and Japan was closely followed by the EU. The EU’s world market share of high-tech exports started to decline more recently. Turkey's share of global high-tech exports declined from 3.9 % in 2000 to 1.6 % in Moreover, there is a sharp decline of the Japanese share (from 26.9 % to 20 %) and of the US share (from 29.9 % to 26.1 %). China has become the largest exporter of high-tech products in the world and China’s share increased from 4.1 % in 2000 to 17.1 % in The large production of ICT products (computers and office machinery sector as well as in the electronics and telecommunications sector) in China explains why China's high-tech exports are now higher than those of the US and EU-27.
High-tech exports, (% of total exports)
Source:Eurostat
---Patenting activity
Patents reflect part of a country’s innovation activity. Patents also show the country’s capacity to exploit knowledge and translate it into potential economic gains. In this context, indicators based on patent statistics are widely used to assess the innovation performance of a country. The number of patent applications filed at the EPO per million population varies considerably across the EU states ranging from 290 (Germany) to 0.45 (Romania). Germany, Finland, Sweden are registered the highest number of EPO patent applications. Japan is more active in applying for EPO patents than the EU states. The high costs of patents in Europe could explain some of the difficulties that Europe has in moving towards a more knowledge-intensive economy. However, Turkey lags behind the EU states in terms of patenting activity and R&D personnel. As expected, there is a positive correlation between patenting activity, R&D personnel and also R&D intensity. Thus, the countries with high levels of R&D intensity and R&D personnel have higher numbers of patent applications.
Patent applications to the EPO (per million inhabitants)* and R&D personnel (% of total employment)**
Source:Eurostat.
---Employment in high and medium-high-tech sectors
High-tech sectors are generally considered key drivers for economic growth and productivity. They are associated with innovation and hence tend to gain a larger market share, create new product markets and use resources more efficiently.
Employment in high and medium-high-tech manufacturing, EU-27 and Turkey (% of total employment)
Employment in high-tech and medium-high-tech manufacturing represented 6.9 % of total employment in EU-27, while it only represented 3.6 % of total employment in Turkey. The share of employment in manufacturing industry is in general larger in EU-12 than in EU-15. High-tech and medium-high-tech industries have large shares of employment in total manufacturing industry in the Czech Republic, Germany and Slovakia.
Employment in high and medium-high-tech manufacturing, EU-12 and Turkey (% of employment)
Source: Eurostat, data for 2000 for Turkey is not available.
Results
R&D, innovation and technology policies are determining factors in global competition. In addition, R&D, innovation and technological capacity are considered as the most important factors of competitive advantage and economic development. However, there are worrying trends both for Turkey and the EU. In the case for the EU, R&D intensity is close to stagnation at 1.84% of GDP which is well below the US and Japan.
Turkey's innovation performance still needs improvement. In comparison with the many EU states the current innovation performance of Turkey lags behind. Increasing investment in R&D and the number of R&D personnel are two of the main challenges facing Turkey. Indeed, Turkey has suffered from a low level of funding for R&D activities due to lack of political support and lack of resources to support the proper development of science and technology policies. In addition, the implementation of science and technology policies had always been problematic in Turkey, because of the lack of ownership, society involvement and political support; isolated science and technology policies and the fragmentation of researchers and resources. Another significant weakness resides in the relatively weak Turkish industry. In Turkey, for instance, production processes and technologies are considered important for the sustainability of competitiveness in areas such as automotive engineering, textiles and the production of household goods. Increasing the innovation performance of Turkey is important to withstand the competitive pressures of the EU’s single market and global markets.
EPO patent applications
R&D personnel
EU-27
114.91
1.45
Austria
185.73
1.98
Estonia
7.12
1.31
Germany
290.92
1.85
Greece
10.94
1.41
Cyprus
25.04
0.71
France
134.69
1.95
Portugal
13.15
0.87
Romania
1.59
0.45 UK
85.94 -
Poland
3.41
Lithuania
3.24
1.11
Italy
85.21
1.23
Hungary
13.7
1.27
Latvia
9.84
0.92
Spain
33.43
1.49
Slovakia
6.09
1.01
Sweden
269.55
2.71
Belgium
137.92
Slovenia
57.6
1.33
Japan
163.69
1.71
Luxembourg
231.79
2.59
Malta
33.75
0.89 US
114.68
Denmark
207.81
2.44
Czech Rep.
10.8
1.37
Turkey
2.72
0.44
Netherlands
205.75
1.40
Finland
247.34
3.22
Ireland
65.33
Bulgaria
3.48
0.63
Country
R&D
Expenditures
Expentidures
2000
2007
EU-27
1,85
1.85
Ireland
1,12
1.31
Bulgaria
0,52
0.48
EU-15
1,91
1,93
Austria
1,94
2.56
Estonia
0,61
1.14
Germany
2,45
2.54
Greece
0,58
0.57
Cyprus
0,24
0.45
France
2,15
2.08
Portugal
0,76
1.18
Romania
0,37
0.53 UK
1,81
1.79
Poland
0,64
Lithuania
0,59
0.82
Italy
1,05
1.10*
Hungary
0,78
0.97
Latvia
0,44
0.59
Spain
0,91
1.27
Slovakia
0,65
0.46
Sweden
4,17
3.60
Belgium
1,97
1.87
Slovenia
1,39
1.45
Japan
3,04
3,40
Luxembourg
1,65
1.62
Malta
0,26 US
2,73
2,67
Denmark
2,24
2.55
Czech Rep.
1,21
1.54
Turkey
0,48
0,72
Netherlands
1,82
1.70
Finland
3,35
3.47
All sectors
Business enterprise sector
Government sector
Higher education sector
Private non-profit sector
EU-27
EU-15 TR
2000
1,85
1,91
0,48
1,20
1,25
0,16
0,25
0,26
0,03
0,38
0,39
0,29
0,01
0,02
2001
1,86
1,92
0,54
1,21
0,18
0,04
0,40
0,41
0,32 :
2002
1,87
1,93
0,53
0,15
0,24
0,42
0,34
2003
1,19
1,23
0,11
0,05
0,43
2004
1,82
1,89
0,52
1,16
0,13
0,35
2005
1,88
0,59
1,15
0,20
0,07
2006
1,84
0,58
1,18
0,21
0.07
0,30
2007
0,72
1,24
0,08
Contact
Zeynep Kaplan
Dr./ Yildiz Technical University
Istanbul/Turkey
Tel