Innovation, EU & Regions: A Way Out of Poverty? - Presentation Transcript
I NNOVATION, EU AND REGIONS: A WAY OUT OF POVERTY? Project 17: Project Leader: Prf. Dr. rer.pol. Bettina Burger-Menzel Team composition: MARÍA ANDREA VÁSQUEZ CASTILLO CHRISTINE LESSMANN JUSTINA SAKALYTE IEVA NAUJALYTE CRISTINA SALA LIDÓN MARC JUANOLA MONÉ
Contents
Introduction
Why Germany, Lithuania and Spain?
Economic Background
Study Case
Lithuania’s survey
Conclusions
1. Introduction
Germany, Spain and Lithuania as the EU members
Role of the innovation in the develop ment of the countries.
Structural and technological changes and their effects into the economies.
2. Why Germany, Lithuania and Spain?
Innovation Leaders: Germany
Catching-up Countries: Lithuania
Trailing Countries: Spain
2. Why Germany, Lithuania and Spain? Source: European Innovation Scoreboard 2006
2. Why Germany, Lithuania and Spain? Source: European Innovation Scoreboard 2006
3. Economic Background Germany Source: Eurostat “Structural Indicators and long-term Indicators” 17,1* 18,3 16,0* 19,6 Business investment as a percentage of GDP 0,9* 2,4 -0,8 6,7 Foreign direct investment intensity 8,7 8,6 9,5 7,2 Unemployment rate (as % of active population) 2,2 2,4 1,9 1,4 Inflation rate (average annual) 0,6* 1,5 0,4* 1,9 Total employment growth (annual % change) 1,6 3,9 0,9 3,2 Real GDP growth rate (% change previous year) 100 100 108,2 112,1 GDP per capita in PPS (EU25=100) 2005 2000 2005 2000 EU 25 National Performance INDICATORS
3. Economic Background Lithuania Source: Eurostat “Structural Indicators and long-term Indicators” 17,1* 18,3 18.0* 16.0 Business investment as a percentage of GDP 0,9* 2,4 0.6* 1.7 Foreign direct investment intensity 8,7 8,6 11.0 1.6 Unemployment rate (as % of active population) 2,2 2,4 1.1 0.9 Inflation rate (average annual) 0,6* 1,5 2.4 -3.7 Total employment growth (annual % change) 1,6 3,9 6.7 3.9 Real GDP growth rate (% change previous year) 100 100 48.1 38.5 GDP per capita in PPS (EU25=100) 2005 2000 2005 2000 EU 25 National Performance INDICATORS
3. Economic Background Spain Source: Eurostat “Structural Indicators and long-term Indicators” 17,1* 18,3 24.5 22.8 Business investment as a percentage of GDP 0,9* 2,4 3.2 8.4 Foreign direct investment intensity 8,7 8,6 9.2 11.1 Unemployment rate (as % of active population) 2,2 2,4 3.4 3.5 Inflation rate (average annual) 0,6* 1,5 2.6 5.1 Total employment growth (annual % change) 1,6 3,9 3.4 5 Real GDP growth rate (% change previous year) 100 100 98.3 91.3 GDP per capita in PPS (EU25=100) 2005 2000 2005 2000 EU 25 National Performance INDICATORS
4. Study Case
Definition of NIS (National Innovation System)
” The network of institutions in the public and private sectors whose activities and interactions initiate, import, modify and diffuse new technologies may be described as the “National Systems of Innovation ”
Source: Freeman, C. (1987); Technology Policy and Economic Performance – Lessons from Japan; Pinter Publishers, London.
4. Study Case Innovation Indicators Innovation System Innovation Actors
Education
R&D
Implementation
Financing
Networking
Demand
Regulation and Competition
Citizen
Enterprice
State
Source: DIW 2006 – Innovationsindikator Deutschland 2006
4. Study Case
Analysis of inputs and outputs some innovation indicators:
Education System
Research and development
Implementation
Germany, Lithuania and Spain
4. Study Case
Education : It is very important for the innovation ability. The society can be innovative o nly with qualified person nel , intelligent engineers and creative scientist s .
4. Study Case Output: Science and Technology ( S&T ) graduates per 1000 population between the age of 20 - 29 Output: Employment in high and medium high technology manufacturing sector - % total employment rate
4. Study Case
Research & Development (R&D): It is actually the branch of high technology where the needs for developing creative ideas and their conversion into innovation exist
4. Study Case
4. Study Case
Implementation of the innovation in the production: The process of the innovation reaches its target, if the companies make realisation of the products and services or procedures i n the market.
4. Study Case
6. Conclusions
6. Conclusions
GERMANY – leader.
Weakness in HR investment
Strength in use HR in high-tech industry
SPAIN – trailer.
Weakness in no efficient use of HR in high-tech industry
Strenght in investment in HR intelectual property
LITHUANIA – catching-up.
Weakness: apparently not efficient use of HR in high-tech industry BUT the „ survey “ reveals that Lithuania uses HR in a different way.
Strenght: absortive capacity for new ideas and technology innovation in all given industries, including services.
Euroweek 2007 Norway Telemark Bo Student Project wi more
Euroweek 2007 Norway Telemark Bo Student Project with the participation of Germany, Lithuania and Spain. Got 2th Place to the Best Group Presentation. less
0 comments
Post a comment