The Financial Times of June 9, 2005 includes comment and analysis entitled “Innovative Asia: how spending on R&D is opening the way to a new sphere of influence.”
The article asserts that scientists in the region have begun to make global impact and are attracting foreign investment, but that a number of remaining weaknesses mean it is premature to talk of a competitive threat to the west.
Strengths cited are good supply of trained scientists and engineers; strong work ethic; public and government support for science; low(er) costs; and traditional aptitude of math and chemistry.
Weaknesses cited are that many of the best scientists still work abroad; universities below western standards; bureaucratic regulations; generally poor infrastructure; shortage of true fundamental innovation, and traditional weakness in life sciences.
The article includes OECD statistics about percentage of gross R&D expenditure as percentage of GSD. For 2002 Japan leads at 3% followed by US (2.6%), S. Korea (2.5%), OECD-30 riches nations (2.2 %), China (1.2), and India (0.8). In absolute terms the US in $277B, China $72B, and India $20B.
The commentary opines that “Asia is not yet as competitive in its scientific capabilities as sometimes believed and that rather than being a threat, Asia offers a scientific a scientific opportunity to the world. There are many challenges that we all face -- and instead of reacting in a protectionist way, we should welcome Asia’s growing scientific resources and work with them.”
Reading this article raised questions in my mind about the potential role of CI-enhanced science and engineering in relation to both competition and collaboration with Asia. Can it be a factor in helping the US continue to use science and engineering research to maintain economic competitive advantage at the top of the intellectual value chain?? Or will the flattening effect dominate? Can it be used to enhanced global cooperation to accelerate solving problems of crucial important to all of us?
The Biomedical Information Research Network (BIRN) directed by Mark Ellisman may be an example of the later. It is building international partnerships in Asia and has in fact made the world largest electron microscope in Japan routinely available to US scientists.
What are other examples?
How could we better understand in more quantitative terms the answers to these questions?
Comments