Based on the number of basic patents, i.e. applications may have been submitted 1-2 years before the basic patent was eventually granted, which explains why the effects of 2008 crisis are seen only in 2009.
No region pursues a stable policy of improving intra-country knowledge flows and promote interactive learning with colleagues in other regions.
Russia's nanotechnology growth: a study of cross-country and cross-regional collaboration networks
Russia’s nanotechnology growth: a study of cross-country and cross- regional collaboration networks Evgeny A. Klochikhina and Philip Shapiraa,b,c a. Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, MBS, University of Manchester, UK b. School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA c. Center for Nanotechnology in Society, Arizona State University, USA
Background• After the USSR collapsed, some liberals proclaimed ‘the end of history’ with an emerging paradigm of global economy, society and values (Fukuyama, 1992)• Although not recognized as market economies immediately, post-communist states were considered as part of the world capitalist system by the merit of their structural reform and establishment of recognized market mechanisms• However, many institutional, social and cultural frameworks remain in transition countries (including Russia) that have substantial impact on their contemporary development and policies
Research questions• How Russia and China can exploit their science and technology (S&T) history to promote indigenous innovation development and resolve the weaknesses of the former state planning system?• Are there any particular complementarities between the Russian and Chinese innovation that can contribute to their socioeconomic development?• What are the current and emerging opportunities for mutual leaning between the two countries?• What is the role of technology-based growth strategies in this process?
Nanotechnology• Can it be implemented bypassing the major system weaknesses and path dependencies?• Can it help resolve the major challenges and break the existing lock-ins in the construction of effective national innovation systems in transition economics?
Context• Nano – next transformative technology like electricity or Internet?• Who will get the most benefits from nano revolution: the poor or the rich, the smaller or the larger?
National nano initiatives• USA is the first to launch a National Nanotechnology Initiative in 2000• More than sixty countries joined global nanorace (Shapira and Wang, 2010; Sargent, 2008)• Various starting points (Court et al., 2004): Front runners: China and India Middle ground: Thailand, the Philippines, South Africa, Brazil, and Chile Up and comers: Argentina and Mexico
Russia China Brazil USALaunch of the national 2007 2001 2004 2000nano programSignificance of nano Highly important One of the areas to One of the areas to Importantcomponent in STI support supportpolicyPolicy design Highly centralized Dispersed among Balanced: national Balanced: diverse programs and and state programs centralized institutions, center and plus autonomous coordination plus regions policy objects much autonomy left for the agenciesScale Several fields ‘Across the board’ (but Focused ‘Across the board’ (mostly mostly nanomaterials) nanomaterials)Regional spread Across the Concentrated in several Several university Concentrated in country key regions centers and most major clusters developed citiesCommercialization Rusnano Tianjin Nanotech Nanotech is Issue left to policymechanism Industrialization Base; included in the objects (so far) Shanghai Nano Industrial, Promotion Center; Technology and Suzhou-Nanopolis Trade Policy (2004)Regular evaluations Annual, carried Varied (basically, part N/A Triannual, out by MES of larger S&T independent evaluations) evaluationsELSI component No Vague No Yes
Top-5 nanopubs producing countries, 1990-2010 25,000 20,000Number of Publicatoins 15,000 China USA 10,000 Japan Germany South Korea 5,000 0 YearSource: Arora et al. (2012)
Russia and China - nanopubs 35Number of nano publications, thousands 30 25 20 15 Russia China 10 5 0 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year of publicationSource: own calculations based on Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science
Russia and China - nanopatents 7000 6000Number of basic patents 5000 4000 3000 Russia China 2000 1000 0 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Basic patent yearSource: own calculations based on Thomson Reuters ISI Derwent Innovations Index
Methodological framework: six impacts• Institutional development, knowledge flows, and network efficiency• Research and education capabilities• Industrial and enterprise development• Regional spread• Cluster and network development• Product innovation and market growth
Nanopubs: cross-country collaboration Russias top five international collaborators, nanotechnology, 1996-2011 350 300Number of collaborative papers 250 200 Germany USA 150 France UK 100 Japan 50 0 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year of publication Source: own calculations based on Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science
Nano patents: how close to market? 250 200 IndustryNumber of basic patents 150 Individuals Russian Academy of Science (basic res) Universities 100 Research institutes (applied R&D) 50 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Basic patent year Note: calculations based on the number of basic patents, i.e. applications may have been submitted 1-2 years before the basic patent was eventually granted, which explains why the effects of 2008 crisis are seen only in 2009.
Industry-science links: evidence of technology transfer 6 5Percent of total patents 4 Share of industry-RAS co- invented patents 3 Share of industry-university co-invented patents Share of industry-research 2 institutes co-invented patents 1 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year
Regional spread Distribution of nanotechnology publication output across Russian regions in 2001-2011 60 50Number of regions in each percentile 40 2011 30 2001 2006 20 10 0 0 0.01-4 4-8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-28 28-32 32-36 Share of papers by region in total nano publications output, % Source: own calculations based on Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science