UNESCO notes rising global spending on science

Despite all the difficulties, humanity is still moving along the path of science, technology and innovation. The expenditures on science in state budgets are growing every year in both absolute and relative terms, follows from the latest report of UNESCO on science “On the way to 2030” .

UNESCO prepares such reports every five years, focusing on long-term trends rather than short-term annual fluctuations. More than 50 experts participated in the preparation of this report, each of whom analyzed the situation in the region or country of origin.

Over five years, the global R&D intensity in the world has grown from 1.57% (2007) to 1.70% (2013) of GDP. In 2013, global gross R&D expenditures reached $ 1,478 billion (at purchasing power parity) and increased by 47% compared with 2007. The

number of scientists and researchers has sharply decreased in Russia over five years, and the share in global GDP has fallen and in the global VRNIOKR, expenditures as a percentage of GDP remained at the same level of 1.12%, but per capita increased significantly.

Geopolitical events and science

UNESCO identifies three geopolitical events that have had the greatest impact on science and technology in the last five years: the “Arab Spring” 2011, the nuclear deal with Iran in 2015, and the creation in 2015 of the Economic Community of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). “At first glance, many of these events have little to do with science and technology, but their indirect impact was often significant. In Egypt, for example, after the “Arab Spring” there was a radical change in STI policies. The new government is considering creating a knowledge economy as the best way to leverage an effective driver of growth, UNESCO writes. - The Constitution adopted in 2014 allows the state to allocate 1% of GDP for research and development (R&D) and provides,

A nuclear deal concluded in 2015 could be a turning point for science in Iran, however, as noted in a UNESCO report, international sanctions have already prompted this regime to accelerate the transition to a knowledge economy in order to compensate for the loss of oil revenues and international isolation by creating local products and processes. The inflow of revenues resulting from the lifting of sanctions should give the government the opportunity to increase investment in R&D, which in 2010 accounted for only 0.31% of GDP.

In other words, scientific and technical research does not hang in a vacuum, but is highly dependent on political factors and the general state of government.

Environmental crises and science

Another important factor that forces humanity to invest more resources in scientific and technological research is environmental crises of a natural and anthropogenic nature.

“The growing concern over recurring droughts, floods and other natural disasters, although not reflected in the press headlines, over the past five years has forced governments to adopt strategies to deal with these phenomena. For example, California, the largest economical state in the United States, has been suffering from drought for years; in April 2015, the state government announced the goal of a 20% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030 compared with 1990 levels. ” Naturally, this is possible only by switching to more modern technologies in industry, transport, energy, etc.

On the other hand, technological disasters can, on the contrary, turn society away from science. “The consequences of the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011 affected far beyond Japan. This catastrophe forced Germany to commit itself to gradually abandon the use of atomic energy by 2020 and stimulated discussions in other countries about the risks of nuclear energy. In Japan itself, the triple catastrophe had a huge impact on society. Official statistics show that the tragedy of 2011 undermined public confidence not only in nuclear technology, but also, more broadly, in science and technology. ”

These are very sad and unpleasant side effects of R&D.

Hard times

“Overall, 2009-2014 was a difficult transition. Beginning in the 2008 global financial crisis, this transition period was characterized by a serious debt crisis in richer countries, uncertainty about the sustainability of subsequent recovery, and the search for an effective growth strategy, according to a UNESCO report.

In the US, the Obama administration has made investing in climate change research, energy, and healthcare one of its priorities, but its growth strategy is largely in conflict with Congress’s priority to reduce the federal budget deficit. Over the past five years, most federal research budgets have remained the same or declined in dollar terms, adjusted for inflation.

Some difficulties in finding their own growth strategies are experiencing the European Union, Japan. After August 2015, even in China, they began to question the strategy that should switch from export-oriented growth to consumption-based growth: “There is also some concern among the political leadership that massive investment in R&D is for the last decade has not been accompanied by scientific returns. ”

Brazil has not yet been able to use innovation for economic growth; the same problem exists in the Russian Federation.

Experts note that the conclusion from a report five years ago about the insignificant impact of the crisis on global investment in R&D was likely to be correct. A UNESCO report published fundamental statistics on GDP and R&D expenditures in different regions of the world. Despite all the difficulties, spending on science is still growing faster than GDP, which is good news.







Note: VRNIOKR figures are expressed in dollars at purchasing power parity (PPP) at constant 2005 prices.





Currently, about 7.8 million scientists are employed in scientific research around the world. In Russia, the number of researchers in 2007-2013 decreased from 469.1 thousand to 440.6 thousand. The EU remains the world leader in the number of researchers (its share is 22.2%). Since 2011, China (19.1%) overtook the United States (16.7%), Japan's share in the world decreased from 10.7% (2007) to 8.5% (2013), and the share of the Russian Federation from 7.3% to 5.7%.

But in 2008-2014, the number of scientific publications in Russia increased from 27,418 to 29,099, and by this indicator, Russia almost overtook the Arab states (29,944).

We need to pay attention to a very serious increase in the number of USPTO patents registered in 2008-2013. Over five years, their number increased from 157 768 to 277 832, including Russian inventors - from 281 to 591.

Russian Federation

“In the Russian Federation, due to the global financial crisis of 2008, economic growth slowed down, and in the third quarter of 2014 the country entered a recession as a result of a sharp drop in world oil prices, as well as the imposition of sanctions by the EU and the United States in response to events in Ukraine.

The reforms implemented since 2012, which are part of the innovation growth strategy, have encountered structural problems that impede economic growth in the Russian Federation, in particular, with limited market competition and persistent barriers to entrepreneurship. These reforms include attempts to attract scientific personnel to work in “research deserts” by increasing their wages and encouraging state-owned enterprises to innovate. Government allocations for R&D in 2013 reflected the increased focus on the needs of the manufacturing sector over the previous five years, to the detriment of basic research, the funding of which decreased from 26% to 17% of the total amount allocated by the state.

Despite the efforts of the government, the financial contribution of industrial sectors to gross domestic expenditure on R&D in Russia for the period 2000-2013. decreased from 33% to 28%, despite the fact that the manufacturing sector accounts for 60% of ARNIOKR. As a rule, an insignificant part of industrial investments is spent on the acquisition of new technologies; the creation of new high-tech enterprises remains a rare occurrence. The still modest investment in sustainable technologies can be largely explained by the weak interest of the business sector in ensuring green growth. Only one out of four (26%) innovative enterprises is engaged in environmental inventions. The government has high hopes for the Skolkovo innovation center. Adopted in 2010 the law provides residents with generous tax benefits for a 10-year period and provides for the establishment of the Skolkovo Fund to support the creation of a university on the basis of this facility. One of the largest partners of this center is the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (USA).

The low rate of patenting in the business sector indicates a lack of coordination between the very decisive efforts of the government to promote the development of research relevant to the economy and the activities of the business sector, which is not focused on innovation. So, after the government included nanotechnology in the list of priority growth areas in 2007, production and exports increased, but the intensity of patenting the results of relevant studies remained at a very low level.

There is some growth in the production of scientific products, which, however, has a relatively weak effect. A certain impetus to university research was given by a recent government initiative to create a Federal Agency for Scientific Organizations, to which the function of financing research institutes and managing their property will be transferred from the Russian Academy of Sciences. In 2013, the government created the Russian Science Foundation to expand the range of funding mechanisms for research on a competitive basis.

---

In general, developing a successful national science and innovation policy remains a very difficult task, UNESCO notes. Experts note a trend of a sharp increase in the number of researchers (Russia is one of the few countries in the world where their number has decreased), as well as the influence of the Internet and “open science”, which contrasts with closed borders between nation-states:

“The Internet has brought“ open science ”with it, paving the way for online international collaboration in research, as well as open access to publications and the data they contain. At the same time, there has been a worldwide movement towards “open education” with the widespread development and accessibility of online university courses (MOOCS) offered by new global university consortia. In other words, academic research and the higher education system are rapidly internationalizing, which has a serious impact on the traditional national system of organization and financing.

The problem is that cross-border flows of knowledge in the form of the movement of researchers, scientific co-authorship, joint ownership of the right to inventions and financing of research also depend heavily on factors that have little to do with science. Today, there is a lot of commercialism in the development of national STI policies. All governments are keen to increase high-tech exports, but few are willing to discuss eliminating non-tariff barriers (such as government procurement) that could impede their import. Everyone wants to attract foreign R&D centers and qualified specialists (scientists, engineers, doctors, etc.), but only a few are ready to discuss the basis for facilitating cross-border movement (in both directions). EU decision to introduce in 2016

Resource Curse for Science

The extraction of resources allows the country to accumulate significant wealth, but in the long term, sustainable economic growth is rarely provided solely on natural resources, UNESCO notes. A number of countries, apparently, have not yet been able to use the opportunities for raw material growth to strengthen the foundations of their economy. In this connection, the conclusion suggests itself that in countries rich in natural resources, high growth rates due to the extraction of minerals deprive the business sector of incentives to focus on innovation and sustainable development.

The end of the recent boom in commodity markets, combined with the collapse of world oil prices in 2014, highlighted the vulnerability of national innovation promotion systems in a number of resource-rich countries that are currently struggling to maintain their competitiveness: Canada, Australia, Brazil, and Arab states - oil exporters, Azerbaijan, Central Asia and the Russian Federation. At the same time, some countries whose economic development has traditionally depended on the export of raw materials are making extra efforts today to make knowledge-based development a priority.

In normal circumstances, resource-rich countries can afford the luxury of importing the technology they need as long as the favorable environment persists (Gulf states, Brazil, etc.). In exceptional circumstances, when resource-rich countries face an embargo on technology purchases, they resort to import substitution strategies. So, from mid-2014, the Russian Federation expanded its import substitution programs in response to trade sanctions affecting the import of critical technologies. At the same time, Iran’s example shows how a long trade embargo could encourage the country to invest in endogenous technological development.