Science and Technology (S&T) Development Indicators in the Arab Region: A comparative study of Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries Paper Submitted for the ERF 10 th Annual Conference: 16-18 December 2003: Morocco Samia Satti O. M. Nour* (October 2003) Abstract In this paper we use the OECD (1997) definition of Science and Technology (S&T) indicators and employees the descriptive and comparative approaches to discuss S&T development in the Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries. Our findings show that neither the Gulf nor the Mediterranean countries possessed sufficient human and financial resources necessary to promote S&T performance. Hence, both the Gulf and Mediterranean countries have manifestly lagged behind both advanced and leading developing in term of S&T input and output indicators, the poor S&T input indicators lead to poor S&T output indicators. In both regions, most of R&D and S&T activities are allocated within both public and universities sectors, with very small contribution from the private sector. When comparing S&T indicators in the two region, we find that despite the high standard of economic development as measured by GDP per capita incomes and HDI in the Gulf countries, however, Mediterranean countries show better performance in term of most of S&T input and output indicators. Moreover, we show the very limited scientific cooperation within and between the Gulf and Mediterranean countries and between them and other Arab countries, while, Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia show active scientific cooperation with the international community, especially the OECD and France. Hence, our findings indicate that social proximity (sharing similar religion, language, culture, etc) does not help Arab regional scientific cooperation, while geographical proximity of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia to Europe motivates their scientific cooperation with international community and Europe. Keywords: S&T input indicators, S&T output indicators, Gulf countries, Mediterranean countries. JEL Classification: O0 * The United Nations University (UNU) - Institute for New Technologies (INTECH) - Keizer Kareplain-19-6211 TC Maastricht - The Netherlands Phone: + 31 (43) 350 6 300 Fax: + 31 (43) 350 6 399 - E-mail: nour@intech.unu.edu. The Usual disclaimer applies.
1. Introduction The need for Science and Technology (S&T) development is intensified in the recent years, particularly, with the evolution of the new economic system, which is characterizing by rapid progress of both globalization and the revolution in information and communication technologies (ICT). Science and Technology (S&T) development becoming not only the key elements of economic growth, industrial competitiveness, but also essential for improving the social development, the quality of life and global environment. For instance, the state of economic and social development of today s industrialized countries is largely the fruit of the efforts of the past intensive investment in S&T. Similarly, the catching up of the newly industrialized countries is most likely attributed to active development of S&T. Access to scientific and technological knowledge and the ability to exploit it are becoming increasingly strategic and decisive for the economic performance of countries and regions in the competitive globalized economy. The 50 leading S&T countries have enjoyed longterm economic growth much higher than the other 130 countries of the rest of the world. Between 1986 and 1994 the average growth rate of this heterogeneous group of countries was around three times greater than that of the rest of the world. The average economic wealth per capita of these 50 countries has grown by 1.1% per year. On the other hand, the per capita income of the group of 130 countries which perform less well in education, science and technology - has fallen over the same period by 1.5% per year. These trends prefigure a new division of the global economy, based on access to knowledge and the ability to exploit it. (European Second Report on S&T Indicators 1997: Executive Summary P.IX) Hence, based on this context, the aim of this paper is to assess S & T development indicators within the Arab region, in particular to compare between Arab Mediterranean countries and Arab Gulf countries and between them and the rest of the World countries. 1 Given the recent progress of economic globalization and the emergence of new nations, which are most active in S&T developments in the other region of the World, it might be interesting and relevant to extend the comparison to include them as well as EU, USA and Japan, and then to draw some policy implications and recommendations suggesting the ways of enhancing S & T indicators in the Arab region. 1 The Arab Mediterranean includes seven Arab countries: Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, Syria, and Tunisia and the Arab Gulf includes six Arab countries: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. 1
This study differs from the European Second Report on S&T Indicators (1997) 2 that provide an excellent and in-depth analysis of S&T indicators in the Mediterranean countries. First, we distinguish between the Arab Mediterranean countries and the non- Arab Mediterranean countries and extend the analysis to compare between Arab Mediterranean and Arab Gulf countries. Second, we attempt to use an update date when ever possible. This study is relevant to contribute to establishing a base of information and knowledge in the Arab region. In addition to stimulate the development of S&T indicators and support the efforts addressing the needs for policies aim at enhancing S&T development in the Arab region. This kind of study is relevant and important not only for improving the quality of scientific and technological indicators, which Arab needs in order to improve the status of S&T indicators especially relative to other regions of the World. But also for enhancing the recent efforts aimed at creating an effective/ active Arabian system of S&T indicators, which will ultimately contribute to accelerate the achievement of development in the region. Furthermore, it also contributes to obtain the most positive impact from technological progress on growth, employment and the well - being of all Arab citizens. The paper will be organized in the following way: Section two shows the literature on the subject, focusing on the definition and significance of S & T indicators. Section three shows the general socio economic characteristics of the two groups of countries. Section four discusses S & T development indicators in the Arab countries and compares between them (in particular compares between Arab Mediterranean and Arab Gulf countries) and between them and the rest of the World countries. Finally Section five, provides the conclusions and proposes policies to enhance S&T indicators in the Arab region benefiting from the experiences of the other World countries. The Definition and Significance of Science and Technology (S&T) Indicator 3 : Science and Technology (S & T) System is often defined as a system including all the institutions/ organizations essential to the education of scientific people, for instance, R&D institutions, professional societies, professional organizations link individual scientists to others and to their socio-economic environment. The theoretical and empirical literature on S&T identifies the important role of science and technology in promoting economic growth and development process in both the developed and the developing countries. 4 2 Probably, the only shortcoming of the excellent and comprehensive analysis of S&T indicators in the Mediterranean countries offered by the European Second Report on S&T Indicators (1997), is the negligence of the case of Palestine, the lack of data and information constrained our attempts to fill this gap. 3 See Box 1 for definition and summary of S&T indicators. 4 For detailed theoretical and empirical literature and assessment studies, see for instance, Freeman and Soete (1997), Dasgupta and David (1994), Foray (1999), Mytelka (2001), Cooper (1991, 1994), Subahi (1998), Zahlan (1999), Fergany (1999), ESCWA (1999), ESCWA UNESCO (1998a, 1998b). 2
The literature on S&T development often distinguishes between input (resources) and output (performance) indicators. For instance, the European Second Report on S&T Indicators (1997) discusses numerous traditional input (resources) and output (performance) indicators for S&T development. First, the input (resources) indicators are often classified into Financial and Human resources or input indicators. First Financial resource or input indicator includes R&D expenditure- the most widely accepted indicator for evaluating and comparing S&T efforts in different countries and regions. Often, the level/ intensity of R&D expenditure is measured as a percentage of GDP or per capita to assess both area of performance and origin of funding. Second, in addition to financial resources, human resources are central to research and technological innovation activities. Human Resources in Science and Technology (HRST) (such as the number of science and technology graduates and the number of scientists and engineers employed in R&D) are one of the key resources for economic growth, competitiveness and more general social, economic and environmental improvement. Related to this indicator, there exist four major points: demographic trends, the development of public spending on education, the performance of education systems and researchers and engineers active in R&D. Second, the output (performance) indicators of S&T includes economic, technological and scientific indicators. Provided, the long- term nature of such investments, the benefits are multi-facetedand extremely difficult to measure. In general, however, output measures can be classified according to three parameters:. First, many economists view increases in productivity as a major economic outputs/ result of technological investment. Moreover, Neo- classical economists view export as a prime component of a country s economic growth. Investment in research and technological development (R&D), should generates some export of high technology. Therefore, the percentage of high-tech exports in total export figures emerges as a potentially useful means of economic measurement that reflects the economic yields of the technological process. Second, because not all results are measurable in economic terms, patents and patent applications are the most commonly- applied indicator to assess the technological output (performance) indicator. It is often used to cite the learning experience/ benefit of engaging in R&D activities, to assess the quality of accumulated knowledge/ the stock of technical knowledge and the intensity and specialization in high technology in a given country. Third, the scientific output/ performance technology indicator is often measured by direct research output or publication that reflects the impact of the publication output of a given country or zone and comparing it to the number of publications produced over a certain period of time. (The European Second Report on S&T Indicators (1997)) 3
Box 1: Method and Data: Variables/ Indicators, Sources, Available Time Span and method of Analysis Types: A. Input (Financial and Human) Resources) S&T indicators, B. Output (Economic, Technological and Scientific) (Performance) S&T indicator Potential Sources (1990-2001) Method of Analysis Variables/ Indicators 1. Financial resources: The percentage of R&D expenditure to GDP or per capita, R&D area of performance and origin of funding. 2. Human resources: Human Resources in Science and Technology (HRST): including the following related measurements: a. The overall population size, which represents the human resources potential of each country; the number of young people, which shows the potential for new addition to the workforce. b. The evolution of public spending on education in relation to GDP and the total population of the countries and regions. c. The educational attainment of the labour force and graduation rates, which show the rate at which newly educated graduates are available at the country level to enter the labour force, particularly the scientific and technological qualifications, and doctorates levels (a key group who often, but not always, the main source of entrants to R&D). In addition to the number of science and technology graduates. d. The human capital engaged in science and R&D including the number of scientists and engineers employed in R&D. Economic output indicators of S&T potentially include the following measurements: a. Growth in Productivity/ economic outputs as a major result of technological investment. b. The percentage of high- technology exports in total export. c. Technological. Output indicators of S&T including patents and patent applications. d. Scientific Output performance/ technology indicator measured by direct research output or publications produced over a certain period of time. For example: The World Bank, UNDP Human Development Report, ESCWA, UNESCO: www.unesco.org, European Second Report on S&T Indicators (1997), The United States Patent and Trademark office web site: www.uspto.gov.). (ESCWA and ROSTAS, 1998). Zahlan, A., (1999a.b), and other relevant sources. The paper will use both the descriptive and comparative approaches employing different sources of secondary data and information 3. General Socio-Economic characteristics of Gulf and Mediterranean countries: Before discussing and comparing S&T indicators in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries, we thought that it might be interesting to shed some lights on the general socio economic characteristics of the two groups of countries. Hence, Table 1 shows the demographic structure and the major socio- economic characteristics of the Gulf and Mediterranean countries. We observe the considerable diversity between Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries in term of geographical size, demographic composition, standard of economic development as indicated by GDP per-capita and human development index. For instance, Table 1 illustrates that the Gulf countries are characterizing by 4
small geographical size (total areas of land), small density of population (except Saudi Arabia) and high standard of economic development and growth indicators as measured by GDP percapita. For instance, the World Bank classification of economies indicates that four of the Gulf countries are amongst higher income and the other two are amongst the upper medium income economies. Moreover, the UNDP Human development indicators show that the average GDP per capita in all the Gulf countries are higher than those of world average. It also indicates that in term of human development indicator, life expectancy and literacy rate, four of the Gulf countries are amongst high world countries and the other two amongst the medium world countries. While in contrast, the Mediterranean countries are characterizing by both large geographical size (total areas of land) and the large demographic composition (large population size) and low standard of economic development and growth indicators as measured by GDP per capita incomes compared to the Gulf countries. For instance, the World Bank classification of economies put all the Mediterranean countries amongst lower medium income group, with the exception of Lebanon, which is classified amongst the upper medium income economies. Moreover, the UNDP Human development indicators show that the average GDP per capita in all the Mediterranean countries are amongst world medium income countries and on average is lower than those of the Gulf countries. That also holds for human development index and the indicators of average life expectancy, average literacy rate and combined enrolment ratios. For instance, Table 1 indicates that in term of human development indicator, life expectancy and literacy rate, the average performance rates for the Gulf countries are higher than those of the Mediterranean countries. In contrast, average combined enrolment ratio for the Mediterranean countries is little higher than those of the Gulf countries. Amongst the Arab Mediterranean countries the performance in both economic and human development indicators are much better in both Lebanon and Tunisia compared to the other Arab Mediterranean countries. Moreover, combined enrolment ratio is higher in Palestine, Tunisia, Lebanon and Egypt. While across the Gulf countries, the performance in both economic and human development indicators are much better in the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait compared to both Saudi Arabia and Oman. Furthermore, while the incidence of poverty is widely recognized across most of the Mediterranean countries especially in both Egypt and Algeria, none of the Gulf countries reported to experience the same phenomenon. Moreover, according to the World Bank-WEO (2002) estimates, average unemployment rates across the Mediterranean countries exceed those of the Gulf countries, however, the trends of unemployment rates show either slow increase or decline across the Mediterranean countries compared to rapid increase across the Gulf countries. 5
4. S&T Indicators in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries: This section presents S&T indicators including both S&T inputs (financial and human resources) and output (scientific and technological) indicators. 4.1. S&T Human and Financial (resources) Input indicators: 4.1. 1. S&T Financial (resources) Input indicator: Starting with S&T input indicators, we observe that in term of both financial and human S&T input/ resources indicators there are some differences between the Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries and between them and other World countries. For instance, Tables 2 and 3 show that both financial and human S&T input indicators in the Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries are lagging behind those of the advanced and leading developing countries. In particular, Table 2 shows that the financial resources as measured by the percentage share of spending on R&D to GDP is poor in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries compared to both advanced and leading developing countries like Singapore and Korea. For instance, in the period 1996-2000, the Arab Mediterranean and Gulf countries devotes only about 0.3 and 0.2 percent of their GDP to R&D compared to industrial advanced countries like Sweden, which devotes about 3.7 percent of GDP to R&D during the same period of time. While, the financial resources as measured by the share of expenditure on R&D in Egypt and Saudi Arabia are higher compared to other Mediterranean and Gulf countries, however in general, their performance fall far behind those of the advanced and leading developing countries. Moreover, Table 2 indicates that on average, priority of financial resources devoted to education as measured by public spending on education as percentage of GDP and total government expenditure in both Mediterranean and Gulf countries are near to those of the advanced countries. When comparing S&T indicators in the two region, our findings in Table 2 indicate that the Mediterranean countries show better performance than the Gulf countries in term of total R&D spending and average expenditure on education and R&D as percentage of GDP. In addition, Table 4 shows the positive change and increasing trend in R & D spending in both Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries during the period (1992 1996). It also indicates that the performance of Mediterranean countries is higher than those of the Gulf countries in term of both average spending on R&D and the contribution on average share of Arab R&D spending. Moreover, although the average percentage change in GDP Per capita across Mediterranean countries exceeds those of the Gulf countries, however, the percentage change in R&D is higher in the Gulf compared to Mediterranean countries. 6
Furthermore, Table 5 presents data on the distribution of R&D institutional units by types, it indicates that public sector is responsible from most of R&D activities and contribute by 49.4 and 80.4 per cent of total R&D institutions in both Gulf and Mediterranean countries respectively. Next to public sector, the universities sector contributes by 43.5 and 13.4 per cent of total R&D institutions in both Gulf and Mediterranean countries respectively. While, the minor contribution comes from the private sector, which accounts only for 7 and 6.2 per cent of total R&D institutions in both Gulf and Mediterranean countries respectively. The Mediterranean countries appear to be more dependent on the public sector compared to the Gulf countries. Therefore, our results in Table 5 imply that most of R&D and S & T activities in both Gulf and Mediterranean countries are mostly allocated within both public and university sectors. While, the private sector and hence, industry have minor contribution in total R&D activities compared to most of the industrialized countries, in which more than half of R&D expenditure are financed by industry. 5 4.1.2. S&T Human (resources) Input indicator: Moreover, concerning human resources in S&T, Table 2 shows that the number of scientists and engineers in R&D are poor in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries compared to both advanced and leading developing countries like Singapore and Korea. Moreover, the OECD (1997) Second European Report on S&T indicators, shows that R&D personals of the Mediterranean countries proportionally ten times fewer than in the European Union. When comparing the two groups of countries, our findings in Tables 2 and 5 indicate that the Mediterranean countries show better and average high performance than the Gulf countries in term of both the number of R&D employees and the number of scientist and engineers in R&D. In addition, human resources in S&T as measured by skill indicators in Table 3 show the low skill indicators in both the Gulf and the Mediterranean countries compared to advanced countries. For instance, Harbison Myers index, technical enrolment index, engineering index, gross enrolment ratio at tertiary education, the share of tertiary students in science, math and engineering and school life expectancy in the Gulf and the Mediterranean countries are poor compared to advanced and developing countries like Korea. Probably, the only exception is the share of tertiary students in science, math and engineering in Algeria, which is higher in comparison with both advanced and developing countries. When comparing average skill indicators of the Gulf with those of the Mediterranean countries, our findings in Table 3 indicate that on average, the Mediterranean countries show 5 See the Second European Report on S&T (1997). 7
better performance than the Gulf countries in most of skill indicators. In particular, in term of Harbison Myers Index, technical enrolment index, engineering index, the share of tertiary students in science, math and engineering and school life expectancy, while, on the other hand, on average the Gulf countries have little better performance in term of gross enrolment ratio at tertiary education. Skill indices are higher in both Lebanon and Kuwait, gross enrolment ratios at tertiary education are higher in both Egypt and Lebanon followed by Qatar and Bahrain. The share of tertiary students in science, math and engineering is much higher in Algeria, followed by Syria, Oman, Morocco, the UAE and Tunisia, with notable exception of Algeria enrolment in science, math and engineering has been lower than other fields in all other Mediterranean and Gulf countries. School life expectancy is higher in Tunisia, Qatar, Bahrain and Lebanon. Moreover, concerning human resources devoted to R&D, Table 5 shows the distribution of human resources available to R&D organizations, which is defined by the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) 6 researchers. Table 5 indicates that majority of FTE researchers are employed by public and university sectors, for instance, the percentage share of FTE researchers in the public sector estimated at 49.2 and 74.9 of total FTE researchers in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries respectively. Next to the public sector, the percentage share of FTE researchers in the universities accounts for 49.3 and 23.63 per cent of total FTE researchers in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries respectively. While the percentage share of private sector is very marginal and accounts for 1.4 and 2.56 per cent of total FTE researchers in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries respectively. The Mediterranean countries appear to be more dependent on the public sector compared to the Gulf countries. Hence, These results together with our results in the earlier section imply the major share of both public and universities sectors and the minor contribution of the private sector in both R&D activities and FTE researchers in both the Gulf and Mediterranean countries. 4. 2. Science and Technology Output indicators: This section discusses S&T output indicator as measured by patent, scientific publications (the number of scientific publications in the international refereed literature) and the share of high technology manufacturing exports. Due to some limitations concerning data availability, it would not be possible to address the impact of technological development on economic/productivity growth in very much detail. We will argue that due to poor financial and human S&T indicators in both Gulf and Mediterranean countries compared to developed and leading developing countries, consequently 8
S&T output indicators are particularly very poor in both Gulf and Mediterranean countries compared to both advanced and leading developing countries. For instance, Table 2 shows that both patent and the percentage of high technology exports in all Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries are lagging very far behind those of the advanced and leading developing countries. 4.2.1. Scientific Publications 7 : Regarding S&T output indicator as measured by the number of scientific publications, when comparing the status of the Gulf with those of the Mediterranean countries, our findings in Table 4 indicate that the Mediterranean countries show better performance than the Gulf countries in term of scientific publications. This might be interpreted as a consequence of better performance of Mediterranean countries compared to the Gulf countries in most of technology indicators, in particular, in term of total expenditures on both education and R&D, the number of R&D employees and R&D scientist and engineers. Moreover, Table 4 indicates that on average both total number of publications and the percentage share in total Arab publications are higher in the Mediterranean compared to the Gulf countries, despite the growing number of publications in the period (1970/1975 1990/1995) in both Gulf and Mediterranean countries. Within the Mediterranean countries, the performance in both Egypt and Morocco are relatively high compared to other Arab Mediterranean countries. In addition, Table 6 shows that, although the percentages share in total world publications have been better in Egypt compared to the other Arab Mediterranean countries, however, the share of all Arab Mediterranean countries together remain very low compared to those of USA, EUR 15 and Israel. In addition, Table 6 shows that the percentages share of all Arab Mediterranean countries together in the total paper and citation in the Mediterranean region publications have been far behind Israel. Again, Egypt has better performance amongst the Arab Mediterranean countries, followed by the group of Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia and then Lebanon, Syria, Malta, Albania and Cyprus. However, still the performance of all these groups together is far behind Israel. Moreover, the performance of both Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia and then Lebanon, Syria, Malta, Albania and Cyprus, even lagging far behind Turkey. Across all Arab Mediterranean countries the percentages share of papers and citation respectively shows an opposite declining and increasing trends during the period (1980-1984) and (1990-1995). In 6 The concept of full time equivalent researcher is adopted by UNESCO statistics on R and D personnel. 7 Moreover, the OECD (1997) The Second European Report on S&T Indicators indicates that the prizes awarded to individual scientists is one extreme indicator of performance and is one way of measuring R&D outputs. Of all scientific prizes the Noble prizes for science, which have been awarded to scientists in the field of chemistry, physics and medicine/physiology since 1901, are probably the most prestigious and constitute indicators of scientific performance. For all Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries, the Noble prizes for science has been awarded only one time to one Egyptian scientist in chemistry. 9
particular, the percentages share show a declining trends in Egypt, compared to rapid and slow increasing trends in both Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia group and Lebanon, Syria, Malta, Albania and Cyprus group respectively. Moreover, Table 6 shows that during the period (1980-1995) Morocco, Algeria together with Albania are leading in term of coordination, cooperation and networking amongst R&D staffs and internationally co-authored paper of the Mediterranean countries with EUR 15. In particular, they have higher performance/ share compared to Cyprus, Malta, Tunisia and Syria then Lebanon, Israel, Egypt, and Turkey. Furthermore, despite, the increasing importance of international cooperation among scientists, however, Table 7 indicates that there is very limited cooperation as indicated by the number of joint publications and co-authorship amongst scientists in both Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries. In particular, there is no significant cooperation amongst the Gulf countries scientists, for instance, Table 7 indicates that scientific cooperation amongst Gulf countries accounts for less than 2 percent of their worldwide cooperation. Zahlan, (1999a) finds that the Gulf countries, in 1990, co-authorship within the Gulf countries was only 1.4 per cent of all co authored papers; this increased to 3 per cent in 1995. The limited regional cooperation also holds for the Mediterranean countries, for instance Zahlan (1999a) finds that in 1995, scientists in Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia published 1,205 publications; of these 769 were coauthored with scientists outside their own countries. Very surprisingly, only 11 (of the 769) involved scientists from two Maghreb countries. Even then, only one (of the 11) did not involve an OECD partner. Moreover, Table 7 shows the absence of scientific cooperation and co-authorship of scientists between both the Gulf and Mediterranean countries and between them and other Arab countries. The Gulf countries cooperation with Arab scientists tend to be limited to fewer number of Arab countries, according to Zahlan (1999a) joint co-authorship with non Gulf Arab countries merely reflects the fact that Gulf countries universities employ professors from other Arab universities. The limited cooperation with other Arab scientists also holds for the Mediterranean countries, for instance, Zahlan (1999a) finds that the cooperation between Maghreb countries and other Arab scientists accounts only for 3 and 3.5 per cent of total joint published papers in 1990 and 1995 respectively. In addition, the Gulf countries also have limited cooperation with foreign institutions, for instance, while, the number of the published papers in the Gulf countries increased from 1,722 in 1990 to 2,716 in 1995, however, only one quarter was co-authored with foreign institutions. In strong contrast, the Mediterranean countries have significant cooperation with foreign institutions. In particular, the Maghreb countries of Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia have 10
significant cooperation with the OECD, for instance the joint papers with the OECD accounts for 90 and 81.33 per cent of total joint publications in 1990 and 1995 respectively. Within the OECD countries, France has the highest share of cooperation and joint papers with Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia, on average the Maghreb countries cooperation with France accounts for 67 and 61.67 per cent of total joint papers in 1990 and 1995 respectively. Zahlan (1999a) finds that scientific workers in the Maghreb, become deeply integrated into the international scientific community. Hence, despite the social proximity between Arab population in terms of religion, language, culture and traditions, however, scientific cooperation is limited within and between both the Gulf and Mediterranean countries, and between them and other Arab countries. While, in contrast, international scientific cooperation with other world countries is very active and deep for some of the Mediterranean countries, but very limited for all the Gulf countries. Zahlan (1999a) argues that scientific workers in the Maghreb, on an individual level, have become deeply integrated into the international scientific community. They do not appear, however, to have become integrated into their own national or regional economies or societies. It is clear from the data shown that the level of co-operation within two regions is very limited. In light of the more recent literature on the role of geographical location and proximity relation to promotion of S&T indicators and the transfer of knowledge (cf. Arundle, et al., 2001). So, we can interpret our findings with respect to active cooperation with OECD, particularly with France amongst the Maghreb countries, to both geographical location/proximity and colonial ties of Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia with France. 8 Hence, we argue that social proximity (sharing the same religion, language, culture, etc) does not matter for scientific cooperation in the Arab region, while geographical proximity of Maghreb to Europe matter for scientific cooperation of the Maghreb with international community and Europe. 4.2.2. Technological Indicators: Application to Patent: Moreover, regarding S&T output indicators as measured by the number of patents applications, Table 2 shows the low number of patents applications and hence S&T output indicators in both the Gulf and the Mediterranean countries compared to advanced and leading developing countries like Singapore, Korea and China. In light of our earlier findings, the poor application to patent can be attributed to the low percentage share of spending on R&D to GDP and the number of scientists and engineers in R&D in Gulf and Mediterranean countries compared to advanced and developing countries like Singapore, Korea and China. The low patenting applications imply the 8 See also OECD (1997) The Second European Report on S&T Indicators. 11
low innovative activities across both Arab Mediterranean and Gulf countries compared to both advanced and developing countries like Singapore, Korea and China. In addition, Table 8 shows that during the period (1980-1995), patent application from residents is lowest than those of the non-residents in both cases all Arab Mediterranean countries are lagging very far behind Israel. Amongst the Arab Mediterranean countries, the highest numbers of patent applications were registered in Egypt, followed by Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and finally Syria, which has been recently lagging even far behind Cyprus. Moreover, Table 8 shows that the application of all Arab Mediterranean together in both Europe patents and USA patents trade offices/ markets have been low and lagging very far behind those of Israel. When comparing between the Gulf and Mediterranean countries in term of S&T output as measured by the number of patents applications in USA patents trade offices, our findings in Table 2 indicates that the Gulf show better performance compared to Mediterranean countries. 4.2.3. The Share of High Technology Manufacturing Exports: Moreover, regarding S&T output indicators as measured by the share of high technology manufacturing exports, Table 2 shows the low share of high technology manufacturing exports, in both the Gulf and the Mediterranean countries compared to advanced and leading developing countries like Singapore, Korea and China. In addition, Table 4 indicates that the share of high technology manufactures in 1996-1997 across both Gulf and Mediterranean countries fall below those of the world average, Latin America and Caribbean and developing Asia, Singapore, Malaysia, Korea, Mexico, Brazil and even Sub-Saharan Africa. Hence, the low share of high technology manufacturing exports can be explained in relation to our earlier findings concerning poor spending on R&D, number of scientists and engineers in R&D and patent in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries compared to advanced and developing countries like Singapore and Korea. When comparing the average performance of the Gulf with those of the Mediterranean countries, our findings in Table 2 indicate that on average the Mediterranean countries show better performance than the Gulf countries in term of export of high technologies manufactured in 1997. However, available information from the OECD Second European Report on S&T (1997) indicates that the performance of Arab Mediterranean countries remains lagging far behind those of Malta and Israel. For instance, while, the total exports from the Arab Mediterranean countries to Europe and World ranged between 0.7-17 and 0.8-22 respectively, the comparable percentages in both Malta and Israel respectively are much higher and ranged between 66-66 and 32-35. 12
4.2.4. TFP and Productivity Growth: Moreover, concerning S&T output indicator as measured by economic growth performance and TFP growth measures, our findings in Table 9 indicates that both economic growth performance and TFP growth measures are better for the Mediterranean countries compared to those of the Gulf countries. On average GDP Per capita annual Growth rate in percent during the periods 1975-2001 and 1990-2001 and the average real GDP growth during the period 1995-2000 are higher in the Mediterranean countries compared to those of the Gulf countries. Moreover, the average TFP during the period 1991-2001 in the Mediterranean countries is positive, and on average the TFP productivity growth rate during the period 1960-1997 in the Mediterranean countries is positive and greater than that of Kuwait. Moreover, during 1999-2001, the Mediterranean countries show continuous growth, while on the other hand, the Gulf countries are experiencing first rapid economic growth, then rapid slow down. Furthermore, Table 4 indicates that concerning the percentage change in GDP per capita during the period (1992-1996), both the average percentage and the share in Arab region for the Mediterranean countries are higher than those of the Gulf countries. 4.2.5. Technology Infrastructures and Technology achievement index: Furthermore, Table 10 indicates that both the Gulf and Mediterranean countries are lagging behind the world advanced and developing countries in term of both basic and high technology infrastructures (BTI, HTI). 9 On average the Gulf basic technology infrastructure are better than the Mediterranean countries, while the opposite is true for the high technology infrastructure. In general, both the Gulf and Mediterranean countries have poor high technology infrastructure as consequence of poor basic technology infrastructure (cf. Rasiah, 2001). Moreover, according to UNDP HDI (2001) classification of world countries according to technology achievement index (TAI) 10, both the Gulf and Mediterranean countries are lagging far behind the world advanced and leading developing countries like Singapore and Korea. For instance, majority of the Mediterranean countries are classified amongst the dynamic adopter of technologies, while the status of the Gulf countries with respect to the same classification is unclear, as none of the Gulf countries are classified as either leader, potential leader, dynamic or marginalized adopter. 9 Rasiah (2002) defines basic technology infrastructure (BII) as weighted proxies representing basic education (enrolment in primary schools), health (physicians per thousand people) and communications (main telephone lines per thousand people). And defines high technology infrastructure (HII) as weighted proxies represents R&D investment in Gross National Investment and R&D scientists and engineers per million people. Rasiah (2002) argues that BII is an essential but not sufficient condition for economies to achieve technological capabilities, the incidence of economies generating innovation is higher when they also have the high technology support institutions, the lower BII the lower the capacity and resources for high technology development. 10 For definition and details about TAI see UNDP (2001). 13
5. Conclusions: This paper shows the status of S&T indicators in the Arab Gulf and Mediterranean regions, despite some similarities of S&T indicators in the region, it is nevertheless clear that there exists great disparity between them in term of both input and output indicators. Both Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries have also manifestly lagged behind the world developed and leading developing countries in term of both inputs and output S&T indicators. The poor S&T input/ resources indicators in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries lead to poor S&T output (performance) indicators. Moreover, we find that most of R&D and S&T activities in both Gulf and Mediterranean countries are mostly allocated within both public and university sectors. While, the private sector and industry have minor contribution in total R&D and S&T activities. When comparing S&T inputs and output indicators of the Gulf with those of the Mediterranean countries, our findings indicate that the Mediterranean countries show better performance than the Gulf countries in term of most of S&T input (both financial and human resources) indicators. That also holds for the average share of high technology exports, TFP growth and GDP per- capita growth, scientific publication, and international cooperation, while the performance of the Gulf countries is only better with respect to application to patent. Moreover, we observe that the Mediterranean countries appear to have benefiting from geographical location and proximity to Europe, this appears is the high significant cooperation with the OECD and France. In this way, social proximity (sharing the same religion, culture, language, values and traditions) intra regional linkage, network and social and cultural proximity does not matter for scientific cooperation. While, for some of the Mediterranean countries, geographical proximity and external regional linkage and network with Europe matters for scientific cooperation for Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia. Hence, the major policy implications from our results indicates that in order to improve S&T performance/ indicators, the Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries need to invest heavily in both financial and human resources and to learn from the lessons of the advanced and newly active S&T development nations. In this respect, the proximity of Arab Mediterranean countries and direct co-operation with Europe, probably might induces knowledge spillover/ knowledge transfer with particular positive scientific cooperation with Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. Although, it was evident that neither Arab Gulf nor Mediterranean countries possessed all the human and financial resources necessary to promote S&T, however, these countries could have a wider range of capabilities to promote S&T in the region through a pooling and integrating of resources. Therefore, an active and effective scientific and technological cooperation and 14
integration between all the Arab countries will most likely enhance knowledge, science and technology development and hence the long-run harmonious development in the region. To catch up, the Arab countries need to invest heavily in both financial and human resources, to encourage private sector involvement, to motivate national, regional and international scientific cooperation and to benefit from the lessons of the advanced and newly active S&T development nations. 6. References: Arundle, A. and Geuna A. (2001). Does Proximity Matter for Knowledge Transfer from Public Institute and Universities to Firms?. SPRU Electronic Working Paper Series No. 73. University of Sussex. CIA World Factbook (2001): www.globastat.com Cooper. C. (1991) Are Innovation Studies on Industrialized Economies Relevant to Technology Policy in Developing Countries? - UNU/INTECH Working Papers, No. 3 UNU/INTECH, 1994- Maastricht The Netherlands) Cooper. C. (1994) Science and Technology in Africa Under Conditions of Economic Crisis and Structural Adjustment - UNU/INTECH Working Papers, No. 4 UNU/INTECH, 1994- Maastricht The Netherlands) Dasgupta and David (1994) Toward a New Economics of Science - (MERIT Research Memoranda, No. 2/94-003) MERIT, 1994 - Maastricht -Netherlands ESCWA (1999) Science and Technology Policies and Strategies for the Twenty First Century. New York. September 1999. ESCWA UNESCO (1998a), Research and Development System in the Arab States: Development of Science and Technology Indicators, 1998 ( E/ ESCWA/ TECH/ 1998/Rev. 1) ESCWA UNESCO (1998b), Research and Development System in the Arab States: Development of Science and Technology Indicators 1998 (E/ ESCWA/ TECH/ 1998/3). Fergany, N. (1999) Science and Research for Development in the Arab Region (February 1999) Foray, D. (1999) Science, Technology and the Market, World Social Science Report, UNESCO, Publishing/ Elsevier. Freeman, C. and Soete, L. (1997). The Economic of Industrial Innovation. 3rd Edition. London and Washington Printer. Haddad, M (2001) Export Competitiveness: where does the Middle East and North Africa Region Stand? Background paper to Economic Trends in the MENA Region. Cairo: Economic Research Forum (ERF). In ERF (2002) LIRHE Data: National OECD, WIPO- Geneva: Second European Report in S&T Indicators (1997) P. 464. Lall, S (2002) Competing with Labour: Skills and Competitiveness in Developing countries. Issues in Development Discussion Paper No. 31. Development Policies Department ILO - Geneva. Makdisi, S. Fattah, Z and Limam, I. (2003) Determinants of Growth in the MENA Countries. API/WPS 0301- Arab Planning Institute- Kuwait. Mytelka, L. (2001) Do the Least Developed Countries need Science and Technology for Sustainable Development Prepared for the Third UN Conference on Least Developed Countries, Round Table: "Education for All and Sustainable Development in LDCs"- 16 May, 2001- conference and workshop report: http://www.intech.unu.edu/publications/index.htm 15
OST, Data: INPI/EPO (EPAT): Second European Report in S&T Indicators (1997) P. 462 Qasem, S. (1998) Research and Development in the Arab States: Development of Science and Technology Indicators. RASCI, Data: Science Citation Index: Second European Report in S&T Indicators (1997) PP. 455, 460. Rasiah, R. (2002) TRIPs and Capability Building in Developing Economies. UNU/INTECH DP 2002-1 March (2002). OECD (1997) The Second European Report in S&T Indicators (1997). OECD. 1997. The United States Patent and Trademark office web site: www.uspto.gov The World Bank (2002). World Economic Outlook: the Middle East and North Africa Regional Outlook September. UNDP (2001). Summary Human Development Report (2001): Making new technologies work for human development. UNDP- New York- Oxford- Oxford University Press (2001). UNDP (2002). Human Development Report (2002): Deepening Democracy in a fragmental World. UNDP- New York- Oxford- Oxford University Press (2002). UNDP (2003). Human Development Report (2003): Millennium Development Goals: A compact among nations to end human poverty" - New York, Oxford- Oxford University Press- July 2003. UNESCO: www.unesco.org. WTO: DG XII-AS4/CEFI, Data: WTO: Second European Report in S&T Indicators (1997) P. 449 Zahlan, A., (1999a). Science Policy for the Twenty- First Century: Mobilization and Development in ESCWA Proceedings of the Expert Group Meeting on Science and Technology Policies and Strategies for the Twenty- First Century ESCWA- Beirut- 10-12 March 1999. PP. 14-16. Zahlan, A., (1999b). Arabs and the challenge of Science and Technology, Progress without Change. Center for Arab Unity Studies (CIUS). Beirut, March 1999. 16
1. Appendix: Table 1-General Socio-Economic Characteristics: Demographic composition, Economic Growth and Human Development Index in the Arab countries (1990-2000) Country Area (thousand s KM 2 ) a Total Population (Million) (2001) b GDP/per capita (PPP US $) (2000) b Arab Gulf countries High income HDI Life Literacy Combin Population below income (%) Expectancy Rate (%) ed poverty line % (1983-2000) b (2000) (years) (2000) b enrolme b (2000) b nt ratio $ 1 day $ 2 day (%) (1990-2001) (1990-2001) (1999) b PPP US $) b PPP US $) b United Arab Emirates 83 2.9 20,530 0.816 74.4 76.7 67 Na Na Qatar 11 0.6 19,844 0.826 71.8 81.7 81 Na Na Kuwait 18 2.4 18,700 0.820 76.3 82.4 54 Na Na Bahrain 0.647 0.7 16,060 0.839 73.7 87.9 81 Na Na Upper Middle income Oman 212 2.7 12,040 0.755 72.2 73.0 58 Na Na Saudi Arabia 1,961 22.8 13,330 0.769 71.9 77.1 58 Na Na Total Gulf 2285.647 28.5 15,373 0.795 72.8 79.2 66.8 Na Na Arab Mediterranean Upper Middle income Lebanon 11 3.5 4,170 0.752 73.3 86.5 76 Na Na Lower Middle income Tunisia 164 9.6 6,390 0.740 72.5 72.1 76 <2 10.0 Algeria 2,382 30.7 6,090 0.704 69.2 67.8 71 <2 15.1 Egypt 1,001 69.1 3,520 0.648 68.3 56.1 76 3.1 43.9 Syria 185 17 3,280 0.685 71.5 75.3 59 Na Na Morocco 447 29.6 3,600 0.606 68.1 49.8 51 <2 14.3 Occupied Palestine Na 3.3 Na 0.731 72.1 89.2 77 Na Na Territories Total/ Average Arab 4190 157.3 4,453 0.685 69.83 67.05 69.17 <2-3.1 7.5 52.7 Mediterranean Other Arab countries Upper Middle income Libyan Arab Jamahiriya 1,759 5.3 7,570 0.773 70.5 80.0 92 Na Na Lowe Middle income Jordan 92 4.9 3,966 0.717 70.3 89.7 55 <2 7.4 Djibouti 22 0.6 2,377 0.445 43.1 64.6 22 Na Na Iraq 437 22.946 Na Na 58.7 55.9 49 Na Na Lower income Sudan 2,506 31.1 1,797 0.499 56.0 57.8 34 Na Na Somalia 638 8,778 Na Na 46.9 Na 7 Na Na Yemen 528 18.3 893 0.479 60.6 46.3 51 15.7 45.2 Mauritania 1,031 2.7 1,677 0.438 51.5 40.2 40 28.6 67.8 17