Ｔｒｅｎｄｓ　ｏｆ　Ｓｃｉｅｎｃｅ　＆　Ｔｅｃｈｎ

ｏｌｏｇｙ　Ｐｏｔｅｎｔｉａｌ　ａｎｄ　Ｒ

ｅｓｏｕｒｃｅ　ｉｎ　Ｊａｐａｎ

Yuko NAGANONational Institute of Science and Technology Policy

JAPANFeb. 21th 2010

2

R&D Investment by Government and Private Enterprises

3

Japan’s ratio of total R&D Investment/GDP is relatively high, mainly due to enthusiastic investment in R&D by private enterprises.

However, government investment remains low (0.65％ ).

R&D Investment/GDP Comparison

Source: OECD Science, Technology and Industry Outlook (2008)

0.74% 0.65% 0.77% 0.70% 0.81%0.57%

0.35%

2.48%2.96%

1.88%

1.29%

1.21%

1.07%

1.83%

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

2.50%

3.00%

3.50%

4.00%

Korea J apan USA Germany France UK China

Non- Gov.

Gov.

4

Japan’s target ratio for R&D of “4% per GDP by 2020” requires more government investment.

Target-setting for Ratio of R&D Investment/GDP

Source: OECD Science, Technology and Industry Outlook (2008), etc.

0.74% 0.65% 0.77% 0.70% 0.81%0.57%

0.35%

2.48%2.96%

1.88% 1.83%1.29%

1.21%

1.07%

5.0%

4.0%

3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

2.5% 2.5%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

Korea J apan USA Germany France UK China

Non- Gov.

Gov.

Target( )

5

Excellence in Academia - Science Paper Productivity

Data shown in first two pages NOTE 1:The input data for the UK (No. of researchers, R&D expenditures) do not include university hospitals; however, hospitals are included in outputs.NOTE 2:R&D expenditures are adjusted by the GDP deflator (1996 base).Sources:(No. of published papers) Compiled by NISTEP based on Elsevier SCOPUS custom data.

(R&D expenditures) Compiled by NISTEP based on the R&D statistics and education statistics of each country.(No. of researchers) Compiled by NISTEP based on the education statistics of each country.

6

Science Paper Productivity in Natural Science & Engineering (except Clinical Medicine) of HE

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

A.1996-1998 B.2000-2002 C.2004-2006

J apan

US

UK

Germany

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

A.1996-1998 B.2000-2002 C.2004- 2006

J apan

US

UK

Germany

Productivity per expenditure (100 M $)

Productivity per 1000 researchers Number of papers

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1996-1998 2000-2002 2004-2006

J apan

USA

UK

Germany

1.19 x

1.17x

1.10x1.12x

The growth in the number of papers in Japan showed the largest increase (1.19%) of the countries.

Source: NISTEP REPORT No.118 (2009)

Paper productivity in Japan per R&D expenditures is higher than in Germany and the US. Paper productivity per researcher is higher than in Germany and the UK.

7

Science Paper Productivity in Clinical Medicine of Higher Education

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

A.1996- 1998 B.2000- 2002 C.2004- 2006

J apan

US

UK

Germany

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

A.1996-1998 B.2000-2002 C.2004- 2006

J apan

US

UK

Germany

Productivity per expenditure (100 M$) Productivity per 1000 researchers

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1996- 1998 2000- 2002 2004- 2006

J apan

USA

UK

Germany

Number of papers

The number of papers in Japan has decreased slightly, while that in other countries has recorded large increases.

Source: NISTEP REPORT No.118 (2009)

Paper productivity in Japan is lower than that in other countries. It is also low compared to other natural science and engineering areas.

8

World Share of Papers and Top 10% Papers by Field

0.0

10.0

20.0

Chemistry

Material

Physics

Computes/Mathe

Engineering

Environment/Geoscience

ClinicalMedicine

Basic biology

0.0

10.0

20.0

Chemistry

Material

Physics

Computes/Mathe

Engineering

Environment/Geoscience

ClinicalMedicine

Basic biology

Source: Science and Technology Indicators 2009, NISTEP

Note: Data above shown as a percentage, compiled by NISTEP based on Thomson Reuters Scientific “Web of Science” 2005-2007

GermanyGermany

0.0

10.0

20.0

Chemistry

Material

Physics

Compues/Mathe

Engineering

Environment/ Geoscience

ClinicalMedicine

Basic biology

KoreaKorea

0.0

10.0

20.0

Chemistry

Material

Physics

Computes/Mathe

Engineering

Environment/Geoscience

ClinicalMedicine

Basic biology

UKUK

ChinaChina

0.0

10.0

20.0

Chemistry

Material

PhysicsComputes/

MatheEngineering

Environment/ Geoscience

Clinical Medicine

Basic biology

The world share of papersThe world share of Top10 papers

JapanJapan

0.0

30.0

60.0

Chemistry

Material

Physics

Computates/Mathe

Engineering

Environment/Geoscience

ClinicalMedicine

Basic biology

USAUSA

9

R&D Activities and Innovationin Industry

10

Net Sales, R&D Expenses, and Product Innovation in Business Sectors

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Increase of atleast 10%

Increase/ decreaseof less than 10%

Decrease of atleast 10%

Net

sal

es c

hang

e

In- house R&D expenses changes

Decrease of at least 10%Increase/ decrease of less than 10%Increase of at least 10%

Net sales change vs. In-house R&D expenses changes

Source: Survey Research Activities of Private Corporations (2009) NISTEP

Net sales increase is correlated with R&D expenses increase in business sectors.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Increase of atleast 10%

Increase/ decreaseof less than 10%

Decrease of atleast 10%

In-h

ouse

R&D

exp

ense

s ch

ange

Product innovation

Innovation achieved

No innovation achieved

In-house R&D expenses change vs. Product innovation

R&D expenses increase is also correlated with product innovations achieved.

11

Why Do Enterprises Increase Internal R&D Expenses?Enterprises increase in internal R&D expenses mainly due to “expenses for specific R&D field increase”, besides “personnel expenses increase”.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Expenses increase for specific R&D field

Expansion of R&D fields

R&D Capital investment increase

R&D Personnel expenses increase

Revenue/ profit increase

Research lab construction/ extension

Internal reserves increase due to tax break

Subsidies for research

Merger/ acquisition

Other reasons

(%)

Source: Survey Research Activities of Private Corporations (2009) NISTEP

12

R&D Contribution to Economic Outcomes of Innovation

Labor

Capital(equipment investment)

Companies

Profit

Goods and services

Labor productivity

R&D R&D

IT infrastructure

Business model reform

Capital productivity

Total Factor Productivity

(TFP)

+

Labor contribution

Capital contribution

+ (the rest)TFP Growth

= EconomicGrowth

TFP can be considered as an indicator of the economic outcomes of innovation. Active R&D contributes to TFP growth.

13

According to a NISTEP’s report, the contribution of R&D investment increase is 0.67% in TFP growth ratio of 2.4%, in manufacturing companies which conduct R&D. (R&D activity’s contribution equivalent to 28% of TFP growth)

0.67% 0.44%0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

Manufactruring industries All industries

Labor & Capitalcontribution tooutput growth rate Other factorscontribution to TFPgrowth rateR&D contribution toTFP growth rate

100%

28%

Sales growth rate: 5.46% (annual average, 2003-2006)

TFP growth rate: 2.40% (annual average, 2003-2006)

R&D Contribution to TFP Growth (Estimate)

14

Industry-Academia Collaboration

15

Industry Investment in R&D by External Institutes

Foreign Institutes

Universities in Japan

( o

ne

hu

nd

red

M y

en)

(FY)

Business enterprises in Japan enthusiastically invest in foreign institutes besides universities in Japan.

16

Why Do Business Enterprises Collaborate with Universities?

Enterprises collaborate with universities to “enhance R&D/technical capability” and “access to technical knowledge /ideas”.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Other

Respond to foreign legal regulation

Develop products to meet overseasneeds

Raise the level of researchers

Obtain subsidies

Form personal connections

Access to research facilities

Access to technical knowledge/ ideas

Improve R&D efficiency

Carry out diverse R&D themes

Expand R&D scale

Enhance R&D/ technical ability

(%)Source: Survey Research Activities of Private Corporations (2009) NISTEP

17

　　　　　　　　

　　　　　　

Researchers in academia recognize the significance of collaboration other than contribution to the society.

(Objectives of collaboration) 　 (Effect on researchers themselves)

Researcher Incentives for Industry-Academia Collaboration

(N=497)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Acquire eternal funding

Creat new businesses

Learn Industry trends/ needs

Access to research resource of partners

Take advantage of facilities of own institute

Contribution to regional society

Technology transfer of research results

Lab. Activation/ education of students

New research topics identification/ expansion

Research promotion in area of own expertise

Receive research talents

others

First

Second

Third (N=466)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Outcome-driven research

IP rights intention

Increase of no. of papers/ presentations

Increased opportunities for patent application

New research topics expansion

Research promotion in own expertise

Develop own project management capabilities

Lively laboratories

Secure students's jobs

others

First

Second

Third

Source: NISTEP REPORT No.127 (2009)

Many researchers recognize “outcome-driven research” and “lively laboratories” as effects to themselves.

18

Matters for Researchers in Industry-Academia CollaborationMany researchers recognize their problems on balance between collaborative research and their own academic research.

(N=454)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Organization and skills in charge of I-A collaboration

Cooperation with ext. organizations such as TLO

PR on research results of researchers

Coordinators training, I-A collaboration matching

Systems for continuing partnerships with companies

Balance of I-A collaborative research and basic research

Feedback of results from I-A collaboration to education/research

Operation of rules related to IP and conflicts of interests

Promotion for researchers on I-A collaboration and IP activities

Systems for evaluating performance in I-A collaboration/IP activities

Systems to handle procedures for administering grants

Exchenge of more talents with companies and simplify the procedures

Others

1st

2nd

3rd

Source: NISTEP REPORT No.127 (2009)

Researchers recognize the need to “improve the organizational support system for evaluating collaborative activities”, and “build up continuing partnerships with companies”.

19

The Next Challenges for Explosive and

Persistent Innovation

Collaboration

Universities

Education

Research

Contribution to the society

Creating Knowledge

Encouraging talents

Business enterprises

Carrying out business

Supplying new products and

services

Universitiesexternal/internal

Educational effects

Access to knowledge/idea

Expanding new research areas

Enhancing R&D capability

Win-win Win-win partnershipartnershi

psps

Synergetic effectsSynergetic effects

20

Thank you for your attention!