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

Review - The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies

The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies by Scott E. Page My rating: 4 of 5 stars Generally, I found the book most engaging for understanding perception, heuristics and decision making, although this did not seem to be the primary premise of the book. As for the writing, it was a bit long-winded, using analogies to make points, even though the concepts themselves are readily accessible without elucidation. As to its purported focus, it provides academic, empirical, and statistical support for diversity, not necessarily racial or ethnic, with the premise being that diversity of viewpoint within groups is powerful, so much so that it trumps individual excellence. View all my reviews

In Amazon Fight, Progressives Showed What They Want: A New Economic Agenda

In the end, the failure of this deal lays at the feet of Cuomo and De Blasio. It's a deal that should have never been made or should have been done in a way that wasn't filled with one-sided giveaways. As Amy Liu, vice president and director of the Metropolitan Policy Program at the Brookings Institution, describes, Virginia worked with local constituents to address concerns, negotiated a deal that required jobs from Amazon in exchange for incentives, and put more money into developing an education-focused job pipeline, rather than a simple giveaway to Amazon. Many people are going to blame a vocal minority for the failure when the problem was the deal itself. It could have been done to satisfy the critics, or at least mollify them, while still delivering for New York. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/business/amazon-economy-taxes.html?comments#permid=30664506

Happy New Year! May Your City Never Become San Francisco, New York or Seattle - Responses

#1 I'm a long-time New York resident, have watched the real estate market for years, and wonder about the cause and effect of high prices. My sense is that developers develop for the high-end because that is where the profits are. Not justifying the inequality, but over time, the only place to make major profits has been to either reduce costs at a huge scale, e.g., Amazon and Walmart, or to focus on smaller opportunities but aimed at the affluent, e.g., the luxury retail sector. Yes, it is not that simple, since cost is affected by regulations and taxation, but on its face, the high costs of developing in Manhattan, and maybe anywhere in NYC, force developers to focus on the luxury segment. At one time, significant government investment and support in affordable housing made it profitable for developers to build for average incomes, but much of that has been wiped away, along with other supports for the middle class over the past few decades, driving much of our inequality, th...