Over the last few years, the Global Innovation Index (GII) compiled
annually by INSEAD, WIPO and Cornell University has become the most commonly
accepted global indicator of nations’ innovation performance. So, there has
been much angst in India over the last couple of weeks once it emerged that
India has fallen 10 places in the last year from 66 to 76. [Link]
About the Global Innovation Index
I have written about the GII in this blog before. Just by
way of reminder, the GII measures national innovation performance by looking at
a whole set of variables related to both innovation input and output. The
innovation input index is a function of institutions, human capital and
research, infrastructure, market sophistication and business sophistication.
The output index considers knowledge and technology outputs as well as creative
outputs.
My main reservation about the way this index is computed is
that some of the variables are general business climate variables and not
specific to innovation per se. I also wonder whether there is a degree of
double counting in the index – at the minimum, I suspect some of the variables
they measure are strongly correlated with each other.
But the good thing about the GII is that it has now fallen
into a pattern, is fairly stable in the way it is compiled year after year, and
therefore should give us a sense of broad trends even if the exact score
computed is not sacrosanct.
Why are we slipping?
To see why we are slipping, I took a closer look at the
scores of India vis-à-vis China. As the two “emerging market” giants, the world
often sees China and India as competitors (though we all know, of course, that
China has been ahead of India in the economic sweepstakes). And, to make it
even juicier, China’s rank on the GII has been improving unlike ours which has
been steadily declining!
There is not much difference in scores between India and
China as far as institutions are concerned and this has been the case for the
last few years. Not surprisingly, China scores much better than India on
infrastructure, but many of the infrastructure variables captured in the GII
are broad ones like electricity output and logistics performance, and we know
that India has a long way to go on these parameters. So, there is no great
surprise here.
On market sophistication (credit, investment, trade and
competition), India has actually pulled marginally ahead of China in GII 2014,
though we trailed China last year. Many of the parameters that go into this
metric are again broad ones that would go into any competitiveness study and
are not specific to innovation.
On business sophistication (knowledge workers, innovation
linkages, knowledge absorption), China is ahead, but the gap has declined
marginally from 2013 to 2014. That’s a good sign, and India is even ahead of
China on a couple of sub parameters that add up to this score – state of
cluster development and joint venture/strategic alliance deals.
Then, where is the slippage and is it a cause for concern?
Yes there is a concern, because the most serious gaps
between India and China are on two critical parameters that are linked
intimately to innovation: the input parameter relating to human capital and
research, and the output parameter relating to knowledge and technology
outputs.
Though we keep emphasizing the importance of leveraging the
demographic dividend, and both education and skill development have been
flagged for some years now as critical issues, India’s Achilles heel continues
to be what is represented by the Human Capital and Research (HCR) parameter of
GII.
We are behind China on every single component of this parameter.
The three main constituents of HCR are (school) education, tertiary education
and research and development. On both (school) education and R&D, the gap
between India and China is widening fast. Only in tertiary education is the gap
narrowing, and that is because of recent improvements in India’s Gross
Enrolment Ratio.
School Education
This assessment of (school) education is corroborated by
reports like the Annual Survey of Education (ASER). ASER 2013 shows that while
the percentage of children out of school has declined, the percentage of
children in Standard V who can read a Standard II text has also declined from
52.9% to 47% between 2009 and 2013. While
there have been noteworthy efforts to improve school education including the
government’s Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan (which can take some credit for the
improvement in school enrolments) and private efforts like that of the Azim
Premji Foundation on the quality side, clearly we have a long way to go before
we can ensure a foundation of good schooling to our kids.
Research and Development
The R&D issue is more tricky. India’s R&D intensity
has remained stubbornly range-bound between 0.9% and 1% for the last two
decades. We pride ourselves on our ability to make do with less as exemplified
by the achievements of the Space programme in the public sector, and that of
automotive and pharmaceutical companies in the private sector. Yet, our adverse
trade balance and poor standing in high technology industries (except for a
small number of honorable exceptions) show that we have been unable to develop
the sophisticated technological capabilities needed to hold our own in global
markets.
There is a “chicken and egg” problem here – some firms don’t
invest in R&D because they don’t have the right people to do R&D. And,
in those companies where they do have the right people, the top management does
not have the confidence to put enough resources behind the team. Either way, firms fail to develop a sound
R&D and innovation capability.
Given these problems, it is not surprising that India lags
on knowledge and technology output as well.
I have my doubts about the GII’s methodology in calculating
the other output parameter – creative outputs. GII shows a huge swing from 2013
to 2014 on this parameter with India well ahead with respect to China last
year, yet lagging China significantly in 2014. Since a country’s creative
outputs can’t change that rapidly, I am inclined to just ignore this parameter.
Conclusion
I am not too optimistic about India reversing this downward
trend in GII quickly. Some of the announcements by the new government will help
enhance economic institutions, investments and infrastructure if they are
pursued seriously. But, it is not clear how and when the slide in human capital
and research (as measured by the GII) will be arrested. Some of my pet ideas in
this direction are in the slide below.
[The views expressed here are the personal views of the
author.]
Please have a look at the perspective described in http://www.currentscience.ac.in/php/forthcoming/GA3565.pdf
ReplyDelete