R&D Spending Around the Globe

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has a 35 nation membership and provides economic analysis and guidance in an effort to sustain open democratic governance with a mission to promote policies that will improve economic and social well-being of people around the world. This analysis of R&D spending is one of the many reports issued by OECD and reflects country spending relative to GDP which provides an indicator of future technological development within society. The associated national wealth is measured through patents and patent protections for development of the technological breakthroughs for ownership claims of corporate and industry developments for expansive application around the world. Included is the use of military R&D for national defense which can have application within social technology usage and country business systems.

The analysis measurement is R&D spending as a percent of GDP and although other nations may have a higher spending rate than the United States, the United States still spends more on a dollar basis due to the larger economy.

"The United States, which spends more than any other country on R&D and accounts for around 40% of total OECD R&D expenditure, saw its R&D intensity rise slightly from 2.76% in 2014 to 2.79% in 2015. Meanwhile, China continued its steady increase in R&D intensity, reaching 2.1% in 2015 – only 0.3 of a percentage point below the OECD average. In volume terms, China’s R&D spending was equivalent to 81% of the United States level in 2015 and 9% higher than that of the EU. The latest patent data show the number of patents filed by Chinese inventors continued to rise in 2014, while filings under the Patent Cooperation Treaty by United States inventors declined."

U.S.A. Economic Development

Update 12/21/2010: Just wanted to acknowledge the new US Census population data compared to the estimates used in the worksheets and analysis of this post. The estimate used in the analysis from wikipedia was 0.6% greater than the actual count in the 2010 Census. Because the actual population count is less than the estimate, the US measurement metric increased by 0.01 with similar small adjustments to State metric measures. The impact does not change the narrative assessment of the analysis.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As an extension of previous data analysis of world development, I looked at a comparative assessment of United States economic development as well as some countries around the world using available data from wikipedia and the CIA Fact Book. Primarily, it began as an initiative to find some relative measure to compare activity and levels of development regarding political discussions of states competing for corporate investment. Multiple factors are considered for such activity depending on the objective of the corporation and theoretically, an educated, multi-skilled work force has higher earnings. 
A note of importance: The data is economic activity not individual earnings!

The basic calculation of the measure is the state % of US economic activity divided by the state % of US population [US Basis]. I have additional work on a world basis for the upcoming World Data Comparison II updated blog post. The Development Metric provides a quick comparative level assessment of US development (regions and states). Since the total United States activity is the basis of measurement its metric is 1.00 relative to the individual states, although not reflected for reasons that may be obvious to some. The Metric of 4.44 and 5.37 is the World Economy basis Development Metric.

Obvious economic impacts are (1) the petroleum industry in Texas and Alaska; (2) finance industry in the Northeast; and (3) the political and lobby spending in DC (not a state but included anyway).

Latin America GDP Analysis

Earlier blog discussions centered around economics and social designations relative to the united society creating the United States. Comparisons were made to primarily European countries and I wanted to complete the perspective by including Latin America. The data also provides a clear view of the immigration topic relative to our neighbors in the Americas south of US.

Slides: Latin America GDP Comparison [revised]

Related Topic Website:

Council on Foreign Relations - Latin America

Related Blog Posts:

Social Spending and GDP

Assets and Values

Explanation and Critique of Quadrant Labels

Assets and Values

Governments and Corporations have as an objective to increase asset value to benefit stakeholders working to nurture and create future value and performance. The U.S. Constitution with Amendments set forth that the value to the country is its free citizens. The document identifies managing principles of citizens’ freedoms, rights, and protections. This recognition created the foundational understanding for the Separation of Church and State, Civil Rights, public education, Medicare/Medicaid, and now Healthcare. It also provided the way for infrastructure investment beneficial to all without regard to means. The importance of Separation of Church and State is evident in the current financial crisis as explained by the founders: Religious freedom to practice and prevention of corruption of the Church; and protection against discriminatory influences on the State. Current public furor would be directed at the Church if it was responsible for financial legislation and deregulation of controls that protect savings and retirement funds at the expense of executive bonuses.

This original structure has come to provide a base level of subsistence for American life and a high level of economic productivity, as measured by GDP, with comparatively broader levels of earnings distribution. However, what still exists are the varying levels of importance and priority placed upon input capital and resources (assets) that are deterministic of individual economic outcomes. The emphasis upon “tribes” and fraternal affiliations (social and religious) establishes informal groupthink criterion of morality and loyalty tests in order to access capitalistic factors of enterprise. In reality, native tribes were more integrated than presently credited. These exclusionary practices not only limit economic production for competitive protective purposes, but they are also destructive to social values increasing the burden on the state to provide benefits for the maintenance of a harmonious society (limiting crime, unemployment, and human exploitation). Moreover, the practices directly contradict the individual - conservative “boot-strap” ideology and substitute control through “social” organizations. As a youth in Alabama from Massachusetts, the systematic separation was apparent even after the days of George C. Wallace’s political grandstanding. Violations [interracial or non-traditional relationships] meant limited access with exceptions only to the extent of religious affiliation. The order was maintained by both Black and White racial groups further revealed in conversational dialogue of the Black American community regarding an unofficial “oppression grading” by skin tone to psychologically justify success through “family” (race) commitment [unconstitutional Southern moral code violating civil rights]. Moral liability (real or fabricated) has been historically used for leverage to maintain systemic order and control of capital at a high social cost (inequality) for progressive economic advancement of a UNITED humanity, society, and Country.

The individual – conservative identification is an observational label personally used to create an understanding of the Religion and Preferences for Social Insurance graphic presentation in my Social Spending and GDP blog post. To better understand and interpret the graphic data, I applied quadrants to the Least Squared Sum regression describing the relationship by country between Social Spending in % GDP and the average reported importance of God in a person’s life. The quadrants were identified by a personal definition of two distinguishing factors of varying adaptability: (1) governing philosophy related to rights and benefits of its citizens [Social or Individual]. Social meaning a shared responsibility of community to ensure care for the human condition; and, (2) the religious perspective of the society and its belief of impact on daily life [Conservative or Liberal]. The countries were further listed by quadrant and respective economic performance compared. It is important to note that the countries of comparison are primarily of Europe and European origin (includes U.S., Australia, & Canada) plus Japan.

Comparing the Per Capita GDP of the countries without the benefit of statistical testing to measure and control the factors of country size (geographic and population), natural resources, and location, the United States is a leader in economic production and greatly influences results. Luxembourg and Norway have greater per capita GDPs, but are too small in size and population to have much influence. It is only because of the United States that the Individual-conservative governing ideology leads in productivity. When the U.S. is excluded, not much difference is reflected in the productivity of the personally defined governing ideologies. But, the Social and Liberal economies are slightly better performing. I want to reiterate that this is not a scientific study with rigorous testing. It is based upon observation and personal ordering to provide some understanding of the information and graphic presented in the Religion and Preferences for Social Insurance paper referenced in my Social Spending and GDP blog post.

The performance of the United States is reflective of the corporate focus, size advantage, and effective employment of resources. However, comparing the GDP to Per Capita Earnings reveals another aspect of U.S. capital management. Traditional factors of production include land, labor, and capital goods. Updates have added ecosystems with land, human capital (education & skills), and financial capital (money, equity). The income data reflects the beneficial impact of ownership (equity) in the corporate structure and disguises (at least until the financial crisis and high unemployment rates) the downside of placing a priority on maximizing one or two factors of production (return on capital and return on equity). Corporations have been focused like laser beams to reduce cost, improve profitability, and grow earnings. Social impacts are not included in any of these objectives and become an issue for the state and federal governments. Reducing taxes further increases the problem by limiting the ability of government to assist its citizens. A quick summary of the systemic problem provides the following: Corporations focused performance improvement on stockholders at the expense of all other stakeholders (employees, suppliers, communities, & government). To improve return to stockholders, costs throughout the supply chain have to be reduced. Labor must be more productive or found cheaper in a less restrictive environment which means layoffs and relocation of assembly operations. Suppliers reduce cost at the expense of profitability lessening their ability to invest in innovation which would also benefit the OEM. In addition to these actions, tax policy is attacked to lower rates which have no other purpose than to lower money provided to government entities and retain earnings within the corporate treasury.

This blog post may provide an opportunity for critique and claims of anti-business sentiments. However, I am a true capitalist that considers the long-term implications and sustainability of such a narrowly focused economic philosophy in light of the high-technology era of competitiveness we are entering. An example of this evolution is evident in the history of the television. The focus on financial capital (return to stockholders) and technical measures employed indicated that the solid state technology was declining in profitability. After all cost reduction attempts, profitability was difficult to maintain. Present Value analysis increased management pressure by indicating the sale of the business to maximize return of capital. Semiconductors, microchip, and nanotechnologies were not foreseen or were factored as risky incorporations too far in the future. Thus, technology is transferred to Asia; improved with chip technology and product expansion into flat screens, computer monitors, automobile GPS, and etc…. The point is that the social costs of business decisions should be incorporated into strategic, financial decision-making at some level within the organization.

Ultimately, the question will come down to if there is a God advantage to economic performance and social spending? I have a perspective, but will reserve the right to hold my opinion and leave the proposition unanswered for now.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GDP and Social Policy Graphic Analysis

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8-29-2013

Social Spending and GDP

Updated 4/10/2010: Reading through some of the research, I can see where some in society could use it to promote religion as a fix for the current economic state, particularly the psychological. There is, however, some contradictory evidence for an honest discussion.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perspective on a Tea Party!

I found this graphic in a paper “Religion and Preferences for Social Insurance” published in the Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 2006, 1:255-286, written by Kenneth Scheve and David Stasavage.

It was also reproduced in a presentation lecture by Roland Bénabou, 2007, Groupthink and Ideology. 

GDP and Social Policy

Reported importance of religion from a statistical sample of opinion from the populations!