Keine Notizen für die Folie
This is R&D investment data das ist die Quelle: http:// ec.europa.eu / information_society / istevent /2006/ cf /document.cfm?doc_id=2087
This slide integrates two set of data: the production value of the ICT sector, and the RD intensities of the sector. In both cases, this data is disaggregated at subsector level and available for the EU and the US. This data has been compiled by the ETEPS network and IPTS. This is a very rich figure. It shows the sectoral composition in terms of value added by sub-sectors and the R&D intensities of these subsectors. The sectoral composition in terms of value added is quite similar, but I would like to stress two aspects, First of all, the levels of R&D intensity seem to be higher in manufacturing in the US than in the EU. This may have several reasons, e.g. the higher level of manufacturing offshoring More interesting are the different levels of R&D intensity in the same sectors. In both cases, the question becomes: WHY? Why in manufacturing and in Computer services are the US much more RD intensive than the EU? Why are is Europe in IT components and telco services at a higher level? Well, this is obviously a matter of specialisation, apparently also in R&D It indicates that the high volume of knowledge flows could be due to complementary specialisation profiles in R&D. This is a hypothesis that would require additional research, e.g. using patent data and/or case-studies on R&D strategies First it shows the structure, the composition of the ICT Sector in subsectors and compares EU and US this is done by calculating the share of the production of each subsector (NACE taxonomy, v3) in the total ICt sector, in EU and in US (VA produced by the subsector / VA of the total ICT sector) The slide is presenting clockwise from the biggest to the smallest industrial sectors of the ICT. Which also organises them from services (light blue) to manufacturing (dark blue). The ICT sector appears to be quite similarly distributed in EU and US: the services generate in both cases some 75% of the total value added, and the manufacturing the remaining 25% Interesting enough this lack of difference rather shows that the differential in RD intensity is NOT explained by the sole composition of the ICT sector in EU vs US (NB: the slightly bigger EUTelco services (very low RD intensive) and the slightly smaller IT components sector, together, explain a small share of the total RD differential. But nothing radical!) The second set of data maps on that structure the RD intensities (BERD/VA) of each subsector. And here the difference is striking. It is illustrated by the blue colour: the deeper the colour, the higher the RD intensity (that is: the relative effort in RD done by the sub sector). First, the very high RD intensities concentrate in the manufacturing. But while they are present across the full range of ICT manufacturing activities in US, they are limited to the components industry in EU. Second, and certainly as important, while the Telecom services appears to be a very low intensive RD sector, the computer services show to be twice more RD intensive in the US than in EU. In both cases, the question becomes: WHY? Why in manufacturing and in Computer services are the US much more RD intensive than the EU? Why are IT components and telco services different
neither in terms of investment, nor in terms of patenting Share at national level: 34 Billions: shares Big countries, but not SP, IT, PL Small specialised: Finl, Sweden, NL 10 MS from May 2004 = 1%!! We have recurred here to the investment data, because in many countries the no. of patents is simply to low
The importance of US – EU relationships is confirmed by patent statistics These data may be a bit outdated, but siemens oder nokia wär da vielliecht ein besseres beispiel, das niveau der concentration bei philips nimmt nämlich kaum ab über die Jahre! Enterprises show de-concentration trend away from the home country, but also very different levels of concentration… Share of US locations is rising in all cases … … but the home base still matters a lot We have similar data for US firms, showing essentially the same features, namely an even greater reliance on foreign, and especially European , but also Japanese sources for their patenting activities
Especially the latter case shows that MNEs do not fit national borders anymore The integration function matters most!