febrero 2008
(Europa Press). Las empresas familiares españolas son "poco innovadoras", cuentan con un entorno poco favorable para desarrollar proyectos de I+D+I e invierten menos en innovación que el resto de compañías, según explicó el responsable de estudios del Instituto de la Empresa Familiar, Javier Quintana.
Leer más
(DV). Alrededor de 2.700 pymes vascas no innovan o lo hacen menos que los países europeos punteros en la materia, fundamentalmente Finlandia y Suecia.
Leer más
(Diario Vasco) Halaxe adierazi du Richard Freeman Harvardeko Ekonomi katedradunak.
Richard Freeman Harvardeko Unibertsitateko Ekonomi katedradunak atzo esan zuenez, langileek zenbat eta gehiago parte hartu enpresaren finantza egituran, hainbat eta emaitza ekonomiko hobeak lortzen ditu enpresak, horrez gain, lan harremanak hobetu egiten dira eta langileek enpresako erabakietan parte hartzen dute, hori dela eta, Richard Freeman-ek kooperatiben partaidetzako eredua gehiago hedatu beharko litzatekeela uste du. Gainera, Freeman-en iritziz, kooperatibek beste enpresa batzuek baino hobeto aurre egin diezaiekete ekonomiaren motelaldiei “ malguagoak direlako”. Richard Freeman-ek atzo eta gaur Arantzazun egiten ari den Ikerketa eta Ekonomia Sozialari buruzko II. Nazioarteko Kongresuan parte hartu du. Mondragon Unibertsitateak antolatu du kongresua.
El catedrático de Economía de la Universidad de Harvard Richard Freeman defendió ayer que cuanto mayor es la participación fianciera de los trabajadores en las empresas cooperativas, mejores son los resultados económicos, las relaciones laborales y el nivel de participación de los trabajadores en las decisiones, por lo que aboga por extender el modelo cooperativo más participativo. Además, apunta que las coopeativas están mejor preparadas para aguantar los momentos de desaceleración económica o de recisión que el resto de las empresas «porque son más flexibles». Richard Freeman participa en el II Congreso Internacional de Investigación y Economía Social promovido por la Facultad de Ciencias Empresariales de Mondragon Unibertsitatea, que se celebra ayer y hoy en Aránzazu.
Leer más
(El Pais) Los nuevos modelos de éxito restan estudiantes a las ciencias - Pero España precisará 50.000 científicos en cuatro años.
Leer más
BBC Mundo). Es una realidad innegable: Europa envejece y sigue sin encontrar la solución al problema de su creciente déficit demográfico.
Leer más
(EurActiv.com) Según los líderes de las grandes corporaciones, la falta de claridad en cuanto al tipo de medidas que la UE adoptará para salvaguardar la competitividad de sus empresas, debido a que no se ha acordado ningún pacto global en torno al reto climático , está forzando a las empresas a retrasar importantes decisiones en inversiones.
Leer más
(BBC Mundo). Enpresa eta unibertsitateek ohartarazi dute goi mailako heziketako autonomía eta aniztasun falta kalte egiten ari zaiela Europako unibertsitateen lehiakortasun eta kalitateari; eta, baita, EBko industria eta enpresak beren inbertsioak EBtik kanpo egitera daramatzatela, EB barruan beharrean.
Leer más
El Consejo de Gobierno vasco ha aprobado las convocatorias para este año de los distintos programas de internacionalización y creación de empresas de base científica y tecnológica que, en conjunto, suman ayudas por valor de algo más de 18,4 millones de euros.
Leer más
El sector de máquina herramienta (M-H) afronta una nueva edición de la Bienal de Bilbao con los "deberes cumplidos", un crecimiento notable de su negocio el pasado ejercicio y una cartera de pedidos con un volumen importante para el presente. Xabier Ortueta se muestra satisfecho con la evolución de esta rama industrial pero advierte de la creciente falta de profesionales que protagonicen el necesario relevo generacional. "Debemos atraer más alumnos a las carreras técnicas".
Leer más
Cerca de 35.000 trabajadores españoles optaron por acogerse a esta fórmula el año pasado Euskadi es la comunidad donde más se recurre a este sistema de retiro.
Leer más
DV. El déficit comercial en el sector del automóvil aumentó el 35% en 2007 respecto a 2006 y alcanzó una cifra negativa de 8.071 millones de euros, lo que supone el mayor déficit de su historia. Según los datos del Ministerio de Industria, Turismo y Comercio, este incremento del déficit se debió a que las importaciones crecieron más (el 8,7%) que las exportaciones (el 3,8%), lo que supone claramente una balanza negativa.
Leer más
Armeria Eskola de Eibar, los ayuntamientos de Eibar y Ermua, la agencia comarcal Debegesa y los centros de Educación de Adultos (EPA) de Eibar y Ermua han puesto en marcha el nuevo programa Debabarrena Integra - Bat eginez .
Leer más
Aunque la Unión Europea ha reducido de forma significativa su diferencia en materia de innovación respecto a Estados Unidos entre 2003 y 2006, en 2007 esta reducción ha sido “muy modesta”. EEUU sigue aumentando el valor de sus exportaciones de alta tecnología y la inversión pública en investigación y desarrollo.
EE.UU. mantiene su liderazgo sobre la UE en 11 de los 15 indicadores de innovación, incluidos el numero de matriculas en la enseñanza superior, el gasto público y privado en I+D, y el número de patentes registrados, según en el panel de mando europeo de la innovación 2007 (European Innovation Scoreboard, EIS, publicado el 14 de febrero 2008)
Leer más
En un Chat organizado por el periódico "Le Monde" el famoso economista francés Elie Cohen afirma que después del periodo 1978-1985, Francia está sufriendo una segunda ola de desindustrialización desde 2002.
Elie Cohen subraya que se han perdido más de 500.000 puestos de trabajo industriales desde 2002 y repasa los motivos de esta perdida de competitividad de Francia.
Leer más
Las empresas con mayor número de mujeres en sus puestos de dirección obtienen mejores resultados económicos en general.
Leer más
Bic Berrilan, una entidad pública encargada del apoyo a la creación de empresas en Gipuzkoa, ha sido premiada por la organización holandesa Science Alliance por su capacidad de incubación de nuevas compañías. La organización vasca ha sido reconocida especialmente por haber logrado el crecimiento más rápido de las firmas que ha promovido y la generación de empleo en las mismas.
Leer más
La Sociedad para la Promoción y la Reconversión Industrial (Spri) respaldó cerca de 8.000 proyectos de empresas vascas durante 2007, un ejercicio que ha permitido a la sociedad alcanzar «los mejores números de su historia», señaló su director general, Mauri Lazkano.
Leer más
El saldo negativo de la balanza comercial española sufrió un nuevo deterioro en 2007. En el pasado ejercicio el déficit comercial alcanzó los 98.952 millones de euros, lo que representa un incremento del 10,3% respecto a 2006, y un 9,4% del PIB.
Leer más
Los planes formativos de la Diputación de Bizkaia y del Foro Marítimo Vasco insertaron a 241 desempleados en el sector naval el pasado año, según los datos oficiales.
Leer más
Armeria Eskola de Eibar ha evaluado de forma positiva el funcionamiento del nuevo programa puesto en marcha para que alumnos de ciclos formativos de este centro puedan trabajar de forma remunerada en actividades relacionadas con sus estudios en empresas.
Leer más
España quedó excluida de los 25 destinos más atractivos de inversión extranjera en 2006, según el Índice de Confianza de Inversión Extranjera Directa (FDI Confidence Index) elaborado por ATKearney. En concreto, perdió 18 puestos tras pasar del número 17 en 2005, al 35 al año siguiente.
Los primeros puestos del FDI fueron, en este orden, para China, India, Estados Unidos y Reino Unido, que se mantuvieron en la misma posición que en 2005. Les siguieron Hong Kong, Brasil, Singapur, Emiratos Árabes, Rusia y Alemania, que cerraron la lista de los 10 primeros. Tras éstos se situaron Austria, Vietnam, Francia, Canadá y Japón, así como Malasia, países del Golfo Pérsico, Sudáfrica, México y Turquía. Los últimos puestos fueron para Indonesia, Polonia, Asia Central, Corea del Sur y República Checa.
En rueda de prensa, el 'senior director' del Global Policy Council y autor del estudio, Martin Walker, explicó que fueron las preferencias europeas las que eliminaron a España del grupo de los más atractivos. Así, España se situó en el número 47 de la lista de países preferentes para los inversores europeos, mientras que ocupó los puestos 22 y 33 en el ranking de preferencia de norteamericanos y asiáticos, respectivamente.
Asimismo, Walker señaló que "España ha experimentado un declive desde 2002, año en el que consiguió su mejor posición, el puesto 7". Desde entonces, ha ido cayendo a los puestos 10 (2003), 13 (2004) y 17 (2005).
“Los inversores ven que España está bien, pero no es un país en el que 'hay que estar', como Estados Unidos, Reino Unido o China, entre otros", aseguró el responsable del estudio. Por este motivo, Walker indicó que el país "tendrá que estar atento a qué es lo que quieren los inversores". En este sentido, citó aspectos como la existencia de una fiscalidad predecible, la igualdad de condiciones entre las empresas locales y las extranjeras, la seguridad de las inversiones y la escasa intervención estatal.
Walker explicó que una de las dificultades "que siempre ha tenido España" es su posición geográfica, ya que "no es un punto natural de entrada para los inversores". No obstante, apuntó al fuerte crecimiento de la región del Sur del Mediterráneo y al crecimiento del puerto de Tanger como dos oportunidades de las que podrá aprovecharse para mitigar esa desventaja.
LIDERAZGO EN RENOVABLES Y BANCA
A pesar de ello, el autor del estudio puntualizó que hay campos en los que España "es un jugador importante" como las energías renovables o la banca.
"Ha cambiado algo fundamental en la naturaleza de la economía española, porque ha pasado de ser un país emergente, que importaba inversiones, a ser una economía madura, que las exporta", añadió Walker. En 2006, España recibió 20.000 millones de dólares en inversiones y exportó 89.000 millones, según datos de ATKearney. "En el período de 1990 a 2006, España obtuvo 443.000 millones de dólares en inversiones mientras que envió fuera 570.000 millones, la mayor parte de ellas, en el último año", concretó.
INVERSIONES A PESAR DE LA CRISIS 'SUBPRIME'
Respecto a la Inversión Extranjera Directa (IED) a nivel mundial, el responsable del informe señaló que "las dificultades financieras en Estados Unidos por la crisis 'subprime' podrían provocar una caída" aunque indicó que la mayoría de los encuestados había manifestado su voluntad de mantener la inversión en este ejercicio.
El estudio revela que el 52% de los inversores planea aumentar su inversión en Estados Unidos en los próximos tres años, un dato que "representa un claro voto de confianza en la estabilidad del entorno macroeconómico de Estados Unidos y en lo que representa como mercado de consumo, entre otros factores", afirmó Walker.
Entre los que indicaron que disminuirán o no variarán sus inversiones en Estados Unidos, los principales motivos fueron la disponibilidad de otras opciones de inversión en el extranjero (62%), el riesgo de la bajada del dólar (54%) y la desaceleración de la economía en Estados Unidos (46%).
En este sentido, lo que sí pone de manifiesto el estudio es que que mala situación de la economía norteamericana es el principal factor que afecta a la hora de tomar decisiones de inversión en el 55% de los casos. Le siguen la volatilidad del dólar (45%), la subida de los tipos de interés (39%), el aumento de la regulación gubernamental (38%) y la inestabilidad de los precios energéticos (37%).
PAÍSES EMERGENTES Y GLOBALIZACIÓN 3.0
Sobre los cambios de tendencia en la IED, el estudio revela que los países emergentes como China, India, Brasil o Emiratos Árabes, además de ocupar los primeros puestos como destinos de inversión, son los que registran los niveles más bajos de percepción negativa.
Sin embargo, Walker aseguró que, "aunque estén en una buena posición, los flujos que reciben siguen estando muy por debajo de los que reciben las grandes economías occidentales". Así, China recibió una IED de 67.000 millones de dólares en 2007, mientras que Reino Unido logró 170.000 millones.
Por otro lado, el autor del estudio aseguró que la economía mundial ha pasado a la Globalización 3.0, "un modelo que representa un cambio de patrón en el que occidente ya no reina como antes". En este sentido, explicó que el modelo de intercambios ha pasado de ser Norte-Sur a ser Sur-Sur y destacó el papel de regiones como China, India, Oriente Próximo y África "porque combinan energía, materias primas y bajo coste de la mano de obra".
Leer más
Bilbao. El reducido tamaño de muchas empresas españolas, su escasa capacidad tecnológica, los idiomas y la lejanía cultural son los principales obstáculos que impiden a las compañías españolas expandirse hacia Asia y los nuevos países de la Unión Europea y aprovechar las oportunidades que ofrecen estos mercados. Así lo constata el Banco de España en su último boletín, donde, no obstante, la entidad afirma que entre 2001 y 2006, los procesos de inversión de las empresas españolas en los nuevos socios de la UE han experimentado un "notable crecimiento" en este periodo.
Sin embargo, indica que la presencia del Estado español como inversor en los nuevos países de la UE es menor que la de otras economías de la zona euro, que originan la mayoría de las inversiones en este área, como Alemania, Países Bajos, Austria y Francia.
En el caso de Asia, la entidad financiera explica que el diferencial del volumen de inversiones españolas respecto a otros países es "especialmente significativo". Así, destaca que Asia, entre 2000 y 2006, captó el 19% de toda la IED -inversión extranjera directa- mundial y sólo el 2% de la española.
A pesar de esta reducida presencia española, asegura el Banco de España, las inversiones de otras economías europeas en Asia tampoco son "particularmente" elevadas en términos relativos, al tiempo que aprecia una "clara" tendencia creciente de las inversiones españolas en Asia los últimos años.
La lejanía geográfica, la ausencia de lazos culturales y el patrón de especialización de Asia y los nuevos miembros de la UE son los principales factores que condicionan la menor orientación de las empresas de España hacia estas economías.
Un análisis sectorial revela que las empresas del sector servicios fueron las más activas a la hora de invertir en el extranjero entre 2000 y 2006, con un promedio del 78% de la IED.
Leer más
Clausurado en Sevilla el I Foro internacional Saberes para el Cambio.
La Universidad Internacional de Andalucía celebró en Sevilla, entre el 29 de enero de 2008 y el 1 de febrero de 2009, el I Foro Internacional Saberes para el Cambio. El Papel de la ciencia y el arte ante el cambio global. Dirigido por Carlos Montes, catedrático de ecología de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid y por María Novo, directora de la cátedra UNESCO de Educación Ambiental y Desarrollo Sostenible,el Foro fue clausurado por Federico Mayor Zaragoza. Tras las intensas jornadas de trabajo que congregaron a un importante grupo de expertos nacionales e internacionales de las distintas ramas del saber, los congregados firmaron el siguiente "Manifiesto sobre el papel de la Ciencia y el arte ante el cambio global".
Leer más
Clausurado en Sevilla el I Foro internacional Saberes para el Cambio.
La Universidad Internacional de Andalucía celebró en Sevilla, entre el 29 de enero de 2008 y el 1 de febrero de 2009, el I Foro Internacional Saberes para el Cambio. El Papel de la ciencia y el arte ante el cambio global. Dirigido por Carlos Montes, catedrático de ecología de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid y por María Novo, directora de la cátedra UNESCO de Educación Ambiental y Desarrollo Sostenible,el Foro fue clausurado por Federico Mayor Zaragoza. Tras las intensas jornadas de trabajo que congregaron a un importante grupo de expertos nacionales e internacionales de las distintas ramas del saber, los congregados firmaron el siguiente "Manifiesto sobre el papel de la Ciencia y el arte ante el cambio global".
Leer más
El mundo se vuelca en la revolución nanotecnológica - La ciencia trata de imitar a la naturaleza partiendo del átomo para introducir nuevos materiales que cambiarán la vida cotidiana.
Leer más
This memo provides a synopsis of the innovation performance of the different Member States. This analysis is taken from European Innovation Scoreboard and thematic papers on Innovation in Services and on Innovation Efficiency. Commissioned by the Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry of the European Commission, the European Innovation Scoreboard is prepared by the Maastricht Economic and social Research and training centre on Innovation and Technology (MERIT) assisted by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission.
Overall innovation performance is calculated on the basis of 25 indicators covering five dimensions of innovation (see Table 1):
• Innovation drivers measure the structural conditions required for innovation potential;
• Knowledge creation measures the investments in R&D activities;
• Innovation & entrepreneurship measures the efforts towards innovation at the firm level;
• Applications measures the performance expressed in terms of labour and business activities and their value added in innovative sectors; and
• Intellectual property measures the achieved results in terms of successful know-how.
Based on performance over a five year period, four main groupings of countries emerge (see Table 2):
• Sweden, Switzerland, Finland, Israel, Denmark, Japan, Germany, the UK and the US are the innovation leaders, with scores well above that of the EU27 and most other countries. Sweden is the most innovative country, with the highest score of all countries
• Luxembourg, Iceland, the Netherlands, Ireland, Austria, France, Belgium and Canada are the innovation followers, with scores below those of the innovation leaders but equal to or above that of the EU27.
• Australia, Estonia, Slovenia, Norway, Czech Republic, Italy, Cyprus and Spain are the moderate innovators with scores below that of the EU27.
• Malta, Lithuania, Hungary, Greece, Slovakia, Poland, Croatia, Bulgaria, Portugal, Latvia and Romania are the catching-up countries. Although their scores are significantly below the EU average, these scores are increasing towards the EU average over time with the exception of Croatia. Turkey is performing below the other countries.
As part of the 2007 European Innovation Scoreboard, assessments were made of trends in innovation performance see Table 3 - and the innovation efficiency with which countries transform innovation inputs into outputs (see Table 4).
Country performances
Austria
Austria is in the group of "innovation follower" countries whose innovation performance is above the EU average but below the "innovation leader" countries. Other EU countries in this group which therefore have a similar level of performance are Belgium, France, Ireland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Its innovation performance has improved over the last 5 years relative to the EU average.
Within the five dimensions of innovation, Austria performs well above the EU average in the Knowledge Creation and Intellectual Property dimensions, with relatively high levels on indicators of R&D expenditure, patenting and numbers of Community trademarks and industrial designs. However, Austria has relative weaknesses in Innovation Drivers, due to lower levels of tertiary education and lifelong learning, and in Applications stemming from lower employment in high-tech services, and lower shares of new to firm and new to market products. Austria has above average efficiency in transforming innovation inputs into outputs.
Belgium
Belgium is in the group of "innovation followers" and its innovation performance is just above the EU average, but below the "innovation leader" countries. Other EU countries in this group with a similar overall level of performance are Austria, France, Ireland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Its innovation performance has declined relative to the average EU growth rate in the last five years.
Within the five dimensions of innovation, Belgium performs above the EU average on the Knowledge Drivers, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, and Intellectual Property. It is below EU average in Knowledge Creation, with a relatively lower level on the indicator of R&D expenditure, and in Applications where it is relatively low on the indicator of exports of high technology products, and sales of new to firm and new to market products. Belgium is above average in the efficiency of transforming innovation inputs to Application outputs but below average for Intellectual Property outputs.
Bulgaria
Bulgaria is included in the group of "catching-up countries", with an overall innovation performance that is below the EU average. Other EU countries in this group which have a similar level of performance are Malta, Lithuania, Hungary, Greece, Slovakia, Poland, Latvia and Romania. Its innovation performance over the last five years has increased relative to the EU average and would converge to the EU average in around 20 years if current trends continue.
Bulgaria performs relatively well on the Innovation Drivers dimension, where it is above the EU average on the indicator of youth education attainment level. It has a relatively weaker performance in the Intellectual Property dimension.
Bulgaria is also below the EU average in terms of its innovation efficiency in transforming innovation inputs into Applications and Intellectual Property outputs. Bulgaria has a high level of non-R&D innovators (companies that innovate without conducting formal R&D activities).
Cyprus
Cyprus is one of the "moderate innovators" group of countries, with an overall innovation performance that is below the EU average but above the level of the "catching up countries". The other EU "moderate innovator" countries are Estonia, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Italy and Spain. Cyprus' innovation performance has improved over the last five years compared to the EU average and its performance would converge with the EU average in about 10 years if current trends continue.
Cyprus has a relatively strong performance in the Innovation & Entrepreneurship dimension, where it is ranked third in the EU. In particular, it has a relatively high level on the indicators of SMEs innovating in-house, innovative SMEs cooperating with others, innovation expenditure and SMEs using organisational innovation. It has a relative weaker performance in the Applications dimension, with low levels on the indicators of employment in high-tech services, sales of new-to-market products, sales of new-to-firm products and employment in medium-high/ high-tech manufacturing. Cyprus has an above average efficiency in transforming innovation inputs into Intellectual Property outputs, but a below average efficiency for Applications outputs.
Czech Republic
The Czech Republic is among the group of "moderate innovators" with an overall innovation performance that is below the EU average but above the level of the "catching up countries". The other EU "moderate innovator" countries with similar levels of performance are Estonia, Slovenia, Italy, Cyprus and Spain. The Czech Republic's innovation performance has improved over the last five years compared to the EU average and its performance would converge with the EU average in about 10 years if current trends continue.
The Czech Republic has a relatively strong performance in the Applications dimension, and has high levels on indicators of sales of new-to-market products, sales of new-to-firm products and employment in medium-tech/ high-tech manufacturing. It has relative weaknesses in the Innovation Drivers and the Intellectual Property dimensions. The Czech Republic has above average efficiency in transforming innovation inputs into Application outputs, but is below average in the efficiency of transforming such inputs into Intellectual Property outputs.
Denmark
Denmark is amongst the “innovation leaders” with an overall innovation performance well above the EU average. Other EU countries in this group are Sweden, Finland, Germany and the UK. Denmark has a negative trend in its innovation performance over the past 5 years compared to the EU average.
Denmark has the highest position in the Innovation Drivers dimension of innovation, where it is particularly strong on the indicators of population with tertiary education, broadband penetration rate, and participation in life-long learning. It has a relative weakness in the Applications dimension where it is below the EU average, where it is below average on indicators of exports of high technology products, sales of new-to market products, sales of new-to-firm products and employment in medium-high/ high tech manufacturing. Denmark is above the EU average in its efficiency of transforming innovation inputs into outputs (both Applications and Intellectual Property).
Estonia
Estonia’s innovation performance ranks it among the “moderate innovators” with a performance that is below EU average but above the group of “catching up” countries. Other EU countries that have a similar performance as “moderate innovators” are the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Italy, Cyprus and Spain. Estonia’s innovation performance has been increasing over the past 5 years compared to the EU average. It is on track to reach the EU average level of innovation performance within 10 years if current trends continue.
Estonia is ranked fourth in the EU in the Innovation & Entrepreneurship dimension, where it well above average on the indicators of SMEs innovating in-house, ICT expenditures and SMEs using organisational innovation. It also has a relative strength in the Innovation drivers dimension, where it is already above the EU average on indicators of population with tertiary education, broadband penetration rate and youth education attainment level. However, Estonia is relatively weaker in the Knowledge creation dimension, where it scores well below average on indicators of business R&D expenditures, enterprises receiving public funding. It is also relatively weaker in the Intellectual property dimension. Estonia is below EU average in its efficiency of transforming innovation inputs into outputs (both Applications and Intellectual Property).
Finland
Finland ranks behind Sweden as the most innovative country in the EU and is among the group of “innovation leaders”. Besides Sweden, other EU countries with a similar overall performance as “innovation leaders” are Denmark, Germany and the UK. Finland’s innovation performance has decreased over the last 5 years relative to the average EU trend.
Finland is among the top three EU countries in the dimensions of Innovation Drivers, Knowledge Creation and Applications and it is among the top three European countries in the indicators of Tertiary education, Public and business R&D expenditures, Early-stage venture capital, and patenting. Its relatively weakest performance is in Intellectual Property where it is below EU average on the indicator of Community industrial designs. The analysis indicates that it is above average in terms of the efficiency of transforming innovation inputs into outputs.
France
France’s overall innovation performance places it among the group of “innovation followers” with a performance that is above EU average but behind the group of “innovation leaders”. Other EU countries with a similar performance as “innovation followers” are Luxembourg, Ireland, Austria, the Netherlands and Belgium. The trend in France’s innovation performance over the last 5 years is about the same as the EU average trend.
In terms of the five dimensions of innovation performance, France is above EU average on Innovation Drivers and on Knowledge Creation, but marginally below EU average on Innovation & Entrepreneurship, Applications and Intellectual property. The analysis suggests that France is above average in its efficiency of transforming innovation inputs into Application outputs, but below average in transforming such inputs into Intellectual property outputs.
Germany
Germany’s overall innovation performance places it among the group of “innovation leaders”. Other EU countries in this group are Sweden, which shows the highest level of innovation performance, and Finland, Denmark and the UK. Over the past five years, the trend in Germany’s overall performance has been about the same as the EU average trend.
Germany shows relative strengths in the Applications and Intellectual property dimensions of innovation performance, where it has a particularly strong performance on the indicators of Sales of new to market products, Medium-high/ high-tech manufacturing employment as well as a high level on the indicators of patenting. However, it is below the EU average in the Innovation drivers dimension, where it is behind the EU average on indicators of S&E graduates, participation in life-long learning and youth education attainment level. Germany shows one of the highest efficiencies in the EU in terms of transforming innovation inputs into outputs
Greece
Greece has an overall level of innovation performance that places it in the group of "catching-up" countries. Other EU countries in this group with a similar level of performance are Malta, Lithuania, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, Portugal, Bulgaria, Latvia and Romania. Greece's innovation performance has remained at about the same level compared to the EU average over the past 5 years.
Greece has a relatively strong performance in the dimension of Innovation & Entrepreneurship where it is above EU average on the indicators of SMEs innovating in-house, innovation expenditures, and SMEs using organisational innovation. It is relatively weaker on the Applications and Intellectual Property dimensions. Greece seems to be below EU average in its efficiency in transforming innovation inputs into outputs (both Applications and Intellectual Property).
Hungary
Hungary’s overall innovation performance ranks it in the group of “catching-up countries” with a performance below the EU average. Other EU countries with a similar level of performance as “catching-up countries” are Malta, Lithuania, Hungary, Greece, Slovakia, Poland, Portugal, Bulgaria, Latvia and Romania. Over the past five years Hungary’s innovation performance has increased relative to the EU average.
Hungary has a relatively strong performance in the Knowledge creation and Applications dimensions where it is close to the EU average level. In these dimensions, Hungary ranks above EU average on the indicators of share of medium-tech/ high-tech R&D, employment in high-tech services, exports of high technology products and employment in medium-tech/ high-tech manufacturing. It has a relative weakness in the Innovation & entrepreneurship dimension, with low levels on indicators of SMEs innovating in-house and SMEs using organisational innovation.
Ireland
Ireland’s overall innovation performance places it among the group of “innovation followers” with a level of performance above the EU average but below the group of “innovation leaders”. Other EU countries with a similar level of performance as “innovation followers” are Luxembourg, Austria, the Netherlands, France and Belgium. The trend in Ireland’s innovation performance over the last five years has been about the same as the EU average trend.
Among the five dimensions of innovation, Ireland is strongest in Innovation drivers where it is well above the EU average on indicator of S& E graduates. It is relatively weaker in the Intellectual property dimension, where it is below EU average on the indicators of patent applications and Community industrial designs. The analysis suggests that it has above average efficiency in transforming innovation inputs into Application outputs, but is below average in transforming such inputs into Intellectual property outputs.
Italy
Italy has an overall innovation performance that places it in the group of “moderate innovators” with a performance below EU average but above the group of “catching up countries”. Other EU countries with a similar level of performance as “moderate innovators” are Estonia, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Cyprus and Spain. Italy’s overall performance has marginally increased compared with the EU average over the past 5 years.
Italy has relative strengths in the Knowledge creation and Intellectual property dimensions of innovation where it is close to the EU average. Within these dimensions it has an above average level on the indicators of share of medium-tech/ high-tech R&D, enterprises receiving public funding and Community industrial designs. The level of Italy’s performance is relatively lowest in the Innovation drivers and Innovation & entrepreneurship dimensions. The analysis suggests that Italy has a high efficiency in transforming innovation inputs into Intellectual Property outputs, but a lower efficiency in transforming such inputs into Applications outputs.
Latvia
Latvia's overall innovation performance places it among the group of "catching-up countries" with a performance that is well below EU average but increasing towards the EU average over time. Other EU countries within this group and with a similar level of performance are Malta, Lithuania, Hungary, Greece, Slovakia, Poland, Portugal, Bulgaria and Romania. Based on current trends, Latvia would reach the EU average level of innovation in performance in around 20 years.
Latvia ranks relatively highly on the dimension of Innovation drivers where it is above the EU average on the indicator of Youth education attainment level. It performs relatively weakly on the dimension of Applications, where it is well below the EU average on the indicators of Exports of high technology products, Sales of new-to-firm products and Medium-high/ high-tech manufacturing employment. The analysis shows that Latvia is below average in its efficiency of transforming innovation inputs into outputs.
Lithuania
Lithuania has an overall innovation performance that places it among the group of “catching- up countries” with a performance that is well below EU average but increasing towards the EU average over time. Other EU countries within this group and with a similar level of performance are Malta, Latvia, Hungary, Greece, Slovakia, Poland, Portugal, Bulgaria and Romania. Over the past 5 years Lithuania’s innovation performance has increased rapidly and based on this trend it would reach the EU average level of performance within ten years.
Lithuania performs particularly strongly on the dimension of Innovation drivers, where it is above EU average on the indicators of S&E graduates, Population with tertiary education and Youth education attainment level. It performs at a relatively lower level on the dimension of Intellectual property. The analysis indicates that Lithuania is less efficient than EU average in transforming innovation inputs into outputs.
Luxembourg
Luxembourg’s innovation performance ranks it among the group of “innovation followers” with an overall performance that is above EU average but below the group of “innovation leaders”. Other EU countries with a similar overall level of performance are Ireland, Austria, the Netherlands, France and Belgium. Luxembourg’s innovation performance has been on a positive trend in recent years compared with the EU average, and it is close to joining the group of “innovation leaders”.
Luxembourg has relative strengths in the dimensions of Innovation & entrepreneurship, Applications and Intellectual property and it has particularly high levels on the indicators of Enterprises receiving public funding, Exports of high-technology products, Triad patents and Community trademarks. The analysis shows that it is among the most efficient EU countries in terms of transforming innovation inputs into outputs.
Malta
Malta has an overall innovation performance that places it among the group of “catching-up countries”. Other EU countries in this grouping are Lithuania, Hungary, Greece, Slovakia, Poland, Portugal, Bulgaria, Latvia and Romania. Malta’s innovation performance has been increasing in the last five years and if this trend continues it would reach the average EU level of performance in around 20 years.
Malta performs particularly strongly in the dimension of Applications where it is the leading EU country, and where it performs well above EU average on the indicators of Exports of high-technology products, Sales of new-to-market products and Sales of new-to-firm products. It performs at a relatively lower level in the dimensions of Innovation drivers and Knowledge creation.
Netherlands
The Netherlands’ overall innovation performance ranks it among the group of “innovation followers” with a performance that is above EU average but behind the group of “innovation leaders”. Other EU countries in this grouping with a similar level of performance are Luxembourg, Ireland, Austria, France and Belgium. The trend in the Netherlands’ innovation performance has been about the same as the EU average over the last five years.
Among the five dimensions of innovation performance, the Netherlands performs relatively strongly on Intellectual property where it is well above the EU average on the indicator of Triad patents. It has a relatively lower performance on the dimensions of Innovation & entrepreneurship and Applications. The analysis indicates that the Netherlands is above average in its efficiency of transforming innovation inputs into outputs.
Poland
Poland has a level of innovation performance that places it in the group of “catching up countries”. Other EU countries in this group with similar overall levels of performance are Malta, Lithuania, Hungary, Greece, Slovakia, Portugal, Bulgaria, Latvia and Romania. Poland’s innovation performance has increased relative to the EU average trend over the past five years. If current trends continue it would reach the EU average level of performance within twenty years.
Poland has a relatively even level of performance across the five dimensions of innovation. It shows relative strengths in the indicators of Youth education attainment level, ICT expenditures, and Sales of new-to-market products. It is well below the EU average on the indicators of Business R&D expenditures, Early-stage venture capital, and patenting activities. The analysis indicates that Poland is below average in its efficiency of transforming innovation inputs into outputs.
Portugal
Portugal’s overall innovation performance places it among the group of “catching-up countries”. Other EU countries in this grouping are Malta, Lithuania, Hungary, Greece, Slovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, Latvia and Romania. Portugal’s innovation performance has been increasing relative to the average EU trend over the past five years.
Portugal performs best on Innovation & entrepreneurship, in particular on the indicators Share of SMEs innovating in-house, ICT expenditures and Share of SMEs which have introduced organisational innovations. Portugal has relative weaknesses in the dimensions of Knowledge creation and Intellectual property, in particular in the indicators of Business R&D expenditures and all forms of patenting. Despite its lower level of performance in Intellectual property, Portugal is showing a high level of efficiency of transforming inputs into Intellectual Property outputs while the efficiency in Applications outputs is below average.
Romania
Romania has a level of innovation performance that places it in the group of “catching-up countries”. Other EU countries in this group are Malta, Lithuania, Hungary, Greece, Slovakia, Poland, Portugal, Bulgaria and Latvia. Romania’s innovation performance has been increasing significantly faster than the EU average trend over the last five years.
Romania performs relatively well in the Applications dimension of innovation, where it is above the EU average on the indicator of Sales of new-to-firm products. It is relatively weaker in the dimensions of Knowledge creation and Intellectual Property. The analysis shows that Romania is relatively efficient in transforming innovation inputs into Application outputs, but inefficient at transforming such inputs into Intellectual Property outputs.
Slovakia
Slovakia’s overall innovation performance ranks it among the group of “catching-up countries”. Other EU countries in this grouping are Malta, Lithuania, Hungary, Greece, Poland, Portugal, Bulgaria, Latvia and Romania. Slovakia’s innovation performance has been increasing over the last five years compared to the EU average and if these trends continue it would reach the EU average level of performance in around 20 years.
Among the five dimensions of innovation performance, Slovakia performs strongly in Applications where it is above the EU average and performs particularly well on the indicators of Sales of new to market products and Medium-tech/ high-tech manufacturing employment. It is relatively weaker on the dimension of Knowledge creation, in particular due to a lower indicator of business R&D expenditure. The analysis shows that Slovakia is relatively efficient at transforming innovation input into Output applications, but below EU average efficiency for transforming such inputs into Intellectual property outputs.
Slovenia
Slovenia has an overall level of innovation performance that places it among the “moderate innovators”. Other EU countries in this group and with a similar level of performance are Estonia, the Czech Republic, Italy, Cyprus and Spain. Slovenia’s innovation performance has been increasing relative to the EU average over the past 5 years and if these trends continue it would reach the EU average level of performance in around 13 years.
Regarding the five dimensions of innovation performance, Slovenia performs particularly well on Innovation drivers where it is above the EU average where it performs strongly on the indicator of Participation in life-long learning. It is, however, relatively weaker in the dimension of Intellectual property with lower levers on the indicators of US and Triad patents. The analysis indicates that Slovenia is below average efficiency in transforming innovation inputs into outputs.
Spain
Spain’s overall innovation performance places it in the group of “moderate innovators”. Other EU countries in this group and with a similar level of performance are Estonia, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Italy and Cyprus. The trend in Spain’s innovation performance has been about the same as the EU average trend over the last five years.
Within the five dimensions of innovation performance, Spain performs relatively well on Innovation drivers where it is close to the EU average and has an above average performance on two indicators: Population with tertiary education and Participation in life-long learning. It is relatively weaker in the dimension of Innovation & entrepreneurship with a particularly low level on the indicator of Innovation expenditures. The analysis of innovation efficiency shows that it is above average in transforming innovation inputs into Intellectual property outputs but below average in transforming such inputs into Applications.
Sweden
Sweden has the highest overall level of innovation performance of all the countries included in the European Innovation Scoreboard. Other EU countries with the most similar level of performance as “innovation leaders” are Finland, Denmark, Germany and the UK. The growth trend of Sweden’s innovation performance over recent years has been below the average trend rate of the EU.
Among the five dimensions of innovation performance, Sweden performs particularly strongly on Knowledge creation and on Innovation & entrepreneurship: in both cases it is the best performing country. It performs at a relatively lower level in the dimension of Applications, although this is still above the EU average. The analysis of innovation efficiency indicates that Sweden could increase the efficiency in transforming innovation inputs into outputs.
United Kingdom
The UK’s overall level of innovation performance places it among the “innovation leaders”. Other EU countries within this group with a comparable overall performance are Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Germany. The trend in the UK’s innovation performance over recent years has been about the same as the EU average growth rate.
Regarding the five dimensions of innovation performance, the UK performs particularly strongly in Innovation & entrepreneurship with a relatively high level on the indicator of Early-stage venture capital. It performs below the EU average in the dimension of Intellectual property with a relatively lower level on the indicators of Triad patents and Community designs. The analysis of innovation efficiency suggests that the UK is above the EU average in transforming innovation inputs into Applications, but below average in transforming such inputs into Intellectual property outputs.
Leer más
Eustat.
Respecto al segundo trimestre de 2007, el crecimiento en el número de usuarios de Internet para el conjunto de la C.A. de Euskadi fue del 3,5%.
Leer más
Un total de ocho comunidades autónomas --Madrid, País Vasco, Navarra, Cataluña, Baleares, La Rioja, Aragón y Cantabria-- superan ya el Producto Interior Bruto (PIB) medio de la Unión Europea, según los datos difundidos hoy por la oficina estadística Eurostat correspondientes a 2005. En el extremo contrario, Extremadura (69,7% del PIB medio europeo) y Andalucía (80,4%) son las dos regiones españolas que más se alejan del promedio comunitario.
En todo caso, ninguna comunidad autónoma española se sitúa entre las 15 regiones más ricas de la UE --una clasificación que encabezan Londres, Luxemburgo, Bruselas, Hamburgo, Viena, la región de París y Estocolmo--, ni tampoco entre las más pobres, que son las regiones de Rumania, Bulgaria y Polonia.
La comunidad autónoma española más rica es Madrid (133,9% de la media de la UE), seguida por el País Vasco (130,8%), Navarra (129,2%) y Cataluña (122,1%). A continuación, se sitúan Baleares (113,7%), La Rioja (110%), Aragón (109,5%) y Cantabria (100,9%).
Ya por debajo de la media de los Veintisiete se encuentran Castilla y León (97%), Comunidad Valenciana (94%), Canarias (93,7%), las ciudades autónomas de Melilla (91,3%) y Ceuta (93,5%) y Asturias (90,2%).
De acuerdo con los datos de Eurostat, el PIB per cápita de Murcia se situó en 2005 en el 87,7% de la media de la UE, mientras que Galicia alcanzó el 84,2% y Castilla-La Mancha el 81,8%. Andalucía registró un PIB per cápita del 80,4% de la media comunitaria y Extremadura es la única región española que en estos momentos se situaría entre las regiones con derecho a más ayudas comunitarias por tener un PIB inferior al 75% de la media (en concreto, el 69,7%).
Leer más
martes, 12 de febrero de 2008 |