WHERE THE US STANDS IN THE GLOBAL R&D SCENARIO
Speaking in absolute terms, at present the United
States is still the country that invests most in scientific research. In fact,
the USA is outspending its most direct competitors (namely the EU, Japan, and
China) regarding resources deployed. In 2013, these players respectively spent
in R&D $ 340, 152 and 294 billion, against the $ 456 billion expenditure of
the United States. Moreover, government-funded programs such as the Small
Business Innovation Research (SBIR) indeed help to bridge the gap between
scientific findings and their commercial exploitation. Notably, the SBIR
program allocates roughly $ 2.5 billion per year, which amount up to 25% of all
early stage technology funding. This figure underscores the major importance of
the Governmental support to R&D. Besides, the interaction between
governmental agencies, private research institutes, and university-led
laboratories plays a significant role in catalyzing scientific development.
Nevertheless, between 1996 and 2011, the support of
the US Government for scientific research decreased by 8%. Over the same
period, Japan and the European Union registered a 5% decrease, though China
observed a remarkable 12% increase. On the one hand, this reduction in public
funding in the US has been counterbalanced by an increase in private spending,
maintaining the R&D/GDP ratio substantially unaltered. Speaking about this,
the business sector in 2013 strikingly accounted for 65% of the total American
R&D funding. On the other hand, due to the profit maximization rationale
that drives private investors, development gained a disproportionate predominance
over research. In other words, the long-run sustainability of American
scientific progress might be undermined by an imbalance between these two
factors. Anyway, between 2000 and 2010 the share of multinationals’ investments
in the US declined from 88% to 84%, meaning that also a part of the innovative
capacity has left the country. Additionally, the efficacy of American
scientific research is endangered by the climate of uncertainty researchers
have to cope with. In fact, research institutions depending from public support
cannot run the risk to undertake medium-long run projects because of the
year-by-year funding that their projects receive. Apart from that, the
different priorities that Republican and Democratic administrations impose to
scientific research also threat the coherence of American R&D strategy in
the short run.
Shifting to the international scenario, the external
pressure might also jeopardize American global scientific supremacy. In fact,
although emerging economies still lag behind regarding technological
capabilities, they are striving to reach levels of excellence. In particular,
it is likely that by 2020 China will spend more than the US in research and
development activities. Be that as it may, the improvements that Chinese
scientific expertise has made since the year 2000 are outstanding. The share of
academic publications increased from 6% to 20% of the global output, the number
of graduates in scientific subjects per year is more than five times higher,
and the share of global R&D expenditure skyrocketed from 5% to 20%.
Accordingly, the extent of China’s geopolitical ambitions reflects these
trends, as demonstrated by the renovation of the military, the consequent
territorial claims in the South China Sea, and the attempt to independently
build a space station.
However, the global scenario also offers several
opportunities to enhance the performance of American R&D. As a matter of
fact, international scientific cooperation projects allow to share and
rationalize the tasks between countries with a common goal. Thus, if carefully
planned, these mechanisms of cooperation make research activity more efficient.
In this regard, a partnership with research institutes operating in a EU-backed
framework might be useful. In fact, among the first fifteen countries for
R&D expenditures, four are part of the European Union, namely: Germany,
France, Italy and Spain. Accordingly, the total R&D spending of the EU amounts
to 20.7% of the world share, which is relatively close to the 27% of the United
States. Additionally, Europe owns a substantial scientific capital, as proved
by its 27% rate in the global output of scientific publications. However, in
contrast to the US, the EU lacks the necessary bureaucratic freedom to
translate that scientific knowledge into valuable applications. Hence, it is
likely that the US could derive higher relative gains than the European
partners from cooperation. In fact, one of the main features that made American
R&D activity successful is the capacity to transform the outcomes of
research into saleable applications.
In sum, since international competition is growing,
the US should fill three gaps that threaten its global scientific leadership.
First of all, there is a need for more flexible funding plans at home. That is,
domestic research activity should be endowed with enough resources to undertake
long run projects. Accordingly, the second fundamental point is that the Government
must enhance its support to American scientific effort. Indeed, a long-term
engagement to recover from the 8% contraction that occurred between 1996 and
2011 would create a climate of trust that would also boost private investments.
Thirdly, a particular attention should be put in nurturing the domestic and
international networks of knowledge, because they enrich the intellectual
capital and allow to valorize the available resources.
Comments
Post a Comment