Skip to main content

Patents and Innovation

Over dinner, a friend mentioned that she thought a particular country produced the most patents, and although I remember reading the same article about 10 years ago, - I believe it was in the NY Times - it is no longer true if it ever was. Looking at patents per capita, I found a variety of articles based on quality sources, and although the country does not rank in the top 10, it does rank well in Bloomberg's Innovation Index.

The latter is not solely based on patent numbers since one needs to consider other measures of innovation. Bloomberg's scoring includes indicators such as R&D spending, manufacturing, the number of high-tech companies, secondary education attainment, and the number of research personnel.

On a separate note, countries with large engineering and semiconductor industries and those that score well in international comparisons on science and math will dominate patents and innovation, as well as those countries with freer cultures, although this is synergistic, in that both the industries and social capital measures feed each other.

Some of my own informal research into Hofstede's cultural dimensions and patent production found that the two (2) dimensions with the highest correlations and P-values under .01 were Uncertainty Avoidance and Individuality. Essentially, cultures that tolerate ambiguity and are the least rule-based, along with having high individuality, produce a larger number of patents.

Because of the high tech industries they support, their high levels of education, and their generally free culture, Scandinavia performs well. It is similarly so for South Korea and Japan, although they generally do not have what we would think of as free cultures, being much more rigid and rule-based, they do have very high levels of technical education and industries that rely on those skills.

Related

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

For Trump, ‘a War Every Day,’ Waged Increasingly Alone - Responses

#1 @Jim Cricket - I think there might have been a more direct or apropos moral to the story, at least as it relates to Trump, in that he goes around blaming everyone else, fires them, until his term ends -  the bottom of the bowl -  and there is only one person left, and everyone realizes that there is only one person to blame, Trump himself. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/22/us/politics/trump-two-years.html?comments#permid=29862349:29864948 #2 Some people have seen a method to the madness of Trump, but he has always been a blithering, destructive idiot, and artless, heartless, and ignorant man. The only real question is how can we stop him? Minor mention, many, myself included, have thought impeachment might be problematic, Trump replaced by Pence, but considering all the harm Trump has caused, Pence would never really be quite so bad. Bad, but not nearly so.

Review: Valuing Wall Street

Valuing Wall Street by Andrew Smithers My rating: 5 of 5 stars The material was simple enough to digest, and certainly believable. It also provided good insights on the real behavior of investors, i.e. most investors are not long-term investors and the perils of retiring during a down period. The book also provides a good benchmark for when to invest, although the fact that I rode the market up on its fallacious valuation has not harmed me, since I transferred my portfolio to bonds before the market started heading down. View all my reviews

Response: Paging Robert Burns by Krugman

Along these lines, from a recent release, and supportive of your post: "Previous portraits of Davos delegates as uprooted jetsetters or global networkers easily overlook their influence on society. Our findings reveal that the forum actively shifts the burden for the solution of problems from governments and corporations to individual consumers, with significant personal and societal costs," the authors conclude. The release from Eurekalert