russia and china in the global knowledge economy
Post on 22-Jan-2016
79 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
RUSSIA AND CHINA IN THE GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY
HARLEY
BALZER
GEORGETOW
N UNIV
ERSITY
CEIP, N
OV. 30, 2
012
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 2
BOOK OUTLINE
• Puzzle: Why China, Not Russia?
• Existing Explanations
• Alternative: Quality of Integration With Global Economy
• Focus On 4 INTERRELATED Topics:– Economic Regionalism– Leading Sectors– Corruption– Education, Science & Technology, Innovation
2
3
Puzzle• Why China and not Russia? NOT what
modernization theory would have predicted
• December 2004:– Baikal Finanz buys Yuganskneftegaz– Lenovo buys IBM PC Division
• Commodities vs. Industry
• Best (China) and Worst (Russia) G-20 performers in 2008-12 crisis
3Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
4
OUTLINE FOR TODAY
• Russia and China in Global Knowledge Economy• Education• S&T Indicators/Cases/Innovation
– Some Numbers– Autos– Nanotech– IT
• Changing Relationship• Conclusion: Why China, Not Russia
4Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
2 DISCLAIMERS
1. I derive no pleasure from this depiction of the Russian case.
2. The China story describes how they got to where they are; it is not a prediction of where they will be in the future (Winners problem. Pettis 2011).
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 5
6
LIVANOV RIGHT ABOUT DECLINE• Russia finally joined WTO
• Worst performance among emerging markets in crisis.
• Lost decade; no diversification
• Medvedev claimed lessons from crisis
• But few concrete achievements
• Russia losing Education and S&T capacity
6Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
7
Output Growth (%)
Russia China
2008 5.6 9.6
2009 -9.0 8.7
2010 3.6 10.0
2011 3.4 9.7
2012 (estimates) 3.5 7.5
7Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
H. Balzer London Oct. 2010 8
Growth in Research Output, 1999-2008
8Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Share of Global Publications, 2010
9Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
10
NOT What Everyone Expected• Modernization theory
– Literacy; higher education– Urbanization; industrialization– Media; communication
• Asian miracle– Education necessary, not sufficient
• Cf 1950s predictions: Rangoon and Manila, NOT Seoul.
• China got education and S&T systems from USSR = similar challenge to adapt.
10Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
11
Existing Explanations for China’s Economic Performance
• Initial Conditions
• Policy
Will go fast; can come back in Q&A11Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
12
Initial Conditions I• Abundant supply of low-cost labor not
covered by the welfare system• Decision to begin reforms with agriculture• Shorter duration of communist rule• Fewer distortions• Less complete Communist Party
penetration of society • Qualitative differences in leadership (Stalin
vs. Mao)
12Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
13
Initial Conditions II
• Communities of co-ethnics willing to provide investment capital
• “Continuity hypothesis” (2 versions)– Neo-Ming: restore position before the
18th century = world leader;
– Maoist: strong, sovereign state and cohesive ruling party. (Putin’s favorite)
13Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
14
Policy
• Gradual approach
• Stable environment
• Authoritarian leadership (Putin’s other favorite)
14Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
15
Gradualism?• USSR 30 years of reforms.
• Hungary “goulash communism”
• China Rapid de-collectivization
• “Fevers” and intense competition resulting from partial openings (Zweig).
• Real gradualism was gradual acceptance of unintended private sector. Not necessarily permanent.
15Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
16
Stable?• Democracy Wall 1979
• Anti-Spiritual Pollution 1983
• Bourgeois Liberalism 1987
• Tiananmen 1989
Each time, economic reforms resumed, due to COALITIONS of winners, investors and political leaders.
Zweig: Development coalitions
Pei: “Social takeover coalitions”
Howell: “Spiraling out”16Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
17
Authoritarian?• Deng’s “Three No’s”
– No promotion of privatization– No propaganda campaign– No crackdown
• Competition
• Repeated pattern: success where state partially lost control (Zweig, Nee and Opper)
• State priorities often not achieved, but (some) regions develop
17Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
18
Alternative Explanation• Character of integration with the
international economy: “Thick” vs. “Thin” • NOT simply open or closed (cf Japan)• China’s Thick integration generated
coalitions of entrepreneurs, officials and foreign investors = able to win (some) battles: BOTTOM-UP DEVELOPMENT
• Nothing comparable in “ democratic” Russia
18Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
19
Chinese Elites Embrace Globalization, Russians Not
• Bolshevik heritage?
• Time under communism?
• Timing of the opening?
– Cultural Revolutions
– Self-confidence of leaders
19Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
20
Quality of Integration
• China Thick; Russia Thin
• Chinese see Globalization as their best chance to catch up and surpass
• Russians view Globalization as Americanization, designed to relegate them to junior partner status or worse. Threatens epistemic communities.
20Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
BOOK OUTLINE:FOUR INTERRELATED TOPICS
DEMONSTRATINGQUALITY OF INTEGRATION
1. REGIONALISMS (Sub, Trans, Multi-National)
2. SECTORAL POLICY
3. CORRUPTION
4. EDUCATION, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATION
21Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 22
4) Education, Science & Technology,Innovation
• Stunning reversal of positions
• Russian Universities in decline
• China now the fastest-growing R&D community, changing innovation model.
• Russia less integrated with global S&T = increasingly less important.
22
INTERRELATED• Regions become financial supporters of
education, R&D, innovation. Competition.
• Growing industrial sectors create demand for R&D and innovation, & provide jobs.
• Less damaging forms of corruption = less severely distort merit-based decisions, less inhibit competition
• Knowledge economy more likely to promote merit and competition.
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 23
Global Education Competition:(human & financial resources, status)• For students (both bodies and brains)• For faculty (teachers and researchers; stars)• For managers (education, research,
development)• For status = RATINGS GAME• For financial support (state and private)CIRCULATION KEY = INCREASES
COMPETITION
24Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
25
Higher Education• Rapid expansion in both sysems = quality
problems: students AND faculty• Both emphasizing elite institutions
– China 211 (106; 9 top priority)– Russia National Research (29) and Federal (8 +
2) Universities• Chinese internationalizing; Russians losing the
best graduates, weak linkages• China far greater success in attracting SOME
returnees
25Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
26
Increased EnrollmentsRussia: China:
1990 2,824,500 (2%) 1997 1,000,000
2008 7,513,000 (5%) 2006 5,500,000
(China target of 30,000,000 by 2010)
Neither increasing faculty to keep up
26Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 27
Doctoral Degrees: Science & Eng.
Nov. 30, 2012
Foreign Student Enrollment 2009
Russia: 90,000- 20% Kazakhstan- 20% Other CIS- 40% Asia (majority
from China)
China: >300,000
Top 5 Sources:- South Korea- Japan- United States- Vietnam- Thailand
28Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Students Abroad
Nov. 30, 2012 29
30
The Education Ratings Game
• U.S. News & World Report
• Times Higher Education Supplement
• Jiao Tong U. Shanghai
• Spanish Web-based
• Russian system
• Grande École des Mines Paris Tech
• 2011 Iranian “Islamic Universities”
30Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
31
Times Top 200, 2009
• Hong Kong: ( 5) #s 24, 35, 46, 124, 195
• China: (6) #s 49, 52, 103, 153, 154, 168
• Russia (2):– 155 Moscow Lomonosov– 168 St. Petersburg State (Mendeleev)
2012 Russia drops out of top 200
31Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
32
Shanghai Jiao Tong Top 100
• 77: Moscow State (Lomonosov)
• No Chinese or Hong Kong Universities in the top 100
32Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
33
Russian Version of Rankings
TOP 10 (Global universities ranking)
1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA2 California Institute of Technology, USA3 University of Tokyo, Japan4 Columbia University, USA5 Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia6 Harvard University, USA7 Stanford University, USA8 University of Cambridge, UK9 Johns Hopkins University, USA10 University of Chicago, USA
33Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
34
Results of Russian Ranking
• 2 in Top 100 (Moscow & St. Petersburg)
• No Chinese or HK in Top 100
• U. of MN # 26; U. of MD # 28
• Second 100: 2 Russia; 2 China; 2 HK
• Third 100: 3 Russia; 2 China
• 301-430: 45 Russian
52 of 430 = 12%
34Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Real Life: ШПАРГАЛКИ
35Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Real Life: внедрение
36Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Russian Mass Tertiary Education = Growing Burden on Students
• 2/3 at State institutions pay tuition
• No price competition (yet)
• Cost rising, tied to budget students
• Corruption/Fraud
• Demographic situation makes this unsustainable
37Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
38Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
39Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
40
Perspective:Russia enrolls more students into higher education
than graduate from secondary school.China has a goal of enrolling 25% of secondary
school graduates in all forms of advanced education by 2010.
BUT China appears to be getting a higher return on its investment.- Better ratings- PISA scores (Shanghai)- Returnees
40Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Emigration a Problem for Both
• China now losing entrepreneurs
• Russia losing creative class.
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 41
42
Migration & Creative Class• quality of life and community• even more pronounced for S&T. • Best scientists go where the best work
is being done = Technology clusters
• Focus on brain drain often ignores
brain gain, and brain circulation.• Putin willing to let creative people
leave if they are potential opposition.42Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
43
Chinese Understanding of Issue
• Initial Drain. Deng said necessary & unavoidable. He underestimated by 50%.
• Learned to compete to attract SOME OF them back
• Competition between regions and institutions = INCENTIVES
• Returnees in general better than those who stayed home (self-selection.?)
43Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
44
Russian Ambivalence• Resentment of those who left• Housing issue• Subject to all problems of managing
research in Russian environment.• Do not recognize foreign degrees• Do not permit back-and-forth (beginning to
change).• Official Programs vs. epistemic
communities & corruption.
44Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.H. Balzer London Oct. 2010 45
Growth in Research Output, 1999-2008
Nov. 30, 2012
46
Publications Growth, 1990-2008
46Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
47
Numbers of Researchers
47Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 48
Change in # of Researchers
Nov. 30, 2012
PATENT APPLICATIONSTOP FIVE OFFICES, 1995 & 2010
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 49
PATENT GRANTSTOP FIVE OFFICES, 1995 & 2010
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 50
PATENT GRANTS, 2010
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 51
UTILITY MODEL GRANTS, 2010
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 52
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN APPLICATION/REGISTRATION
TRENDS
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 53
PROBLEMS IN THE RUSSIAN SYSTEM
• Science “a system for generating knowledge”
• “Science policy” does not include technology or innovation
• Low financing, almost entirely from State budget: 29th in world in share of GDP.– (OECD 2/3 private funding; Russia just 27%)
• Cadres
• Bureaucracy and Corruption
Nov. 13, 2012 Balzer, Govt 407, S T & I 54
CHINA PROBLEMS• Corruption and Falsification, including by
returnees
• Overly rigid incentives/criteria
• Nobel mania
• Time Horizon
• Lack of new product innovation
• Competition sometimes excessive
• Quality
• Growing role of SOEs deprives SMEs of talent and financing.
Nov. 13, 2012 Balzer, Govt 407, S T & I 55
AUTO & TRUCK PRODUCTION, 2011
• Russia 2 of top 50 Producers (24 & 46)
• China 16 of top 50 producers (17, 19, 20, 23, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 32, 35 37, 40, 42, 43, 47, 48)
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 56
57
BMW 7 vs BYD F6
57Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
58
Logos
58Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
SETTING PRIORITIESOvercoming the resource curse works when the resource sector becomes the Knowledge-based sector•Russia buying foreign technology for oil and gas
•Russian priority sectors (to 2020) are:
Information & Telecom Nanotechnology
Life Sciences Biotechnology
Transport & Space Clean Energy
Security & Counter-terror Advanced WeaponsNov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 59
60
Nanotechnology
• THE Russian program for Putin– Not clear why: not a strength
– Too small to see?
• Dwarfed by U.S. spending• China major program with little fanfare
World Nanotechnology Patents 2004-06:
USA 43%
China 1% (13th)
Russia 0.4% (22nd)
60Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Home Country: Nanotech Patents
Nov. 13, 2012 Balzer, Govt 407, S T & I 61
62
Skolkovo: The Innovation Center
• Chosen over Tomsk, Novosibirsk, & St. Petersburg, March 19, 2010.
• Intend to develop as rapidly as possible
• Dvorkovich and Surkov describing different planets.
• System change or Enclave?
62Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
63
Zhongguancun
63Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
64
Zhongguancun
64Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
H. Balzer London Oct. 2010 65
Skolkovo Site 2009
65Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 66
Skolkovo, 2009
66
Skolkovo, 2010
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 67
Skolkovo Hypercube, 2012
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 68
69
Explaining Zhongguancun Success• Beijing government liberal approach to networks;
some funding. (Good Mother-In-Law, Segal 2003)• Nonhierarchical relationships: Lacked power to
control SOEs or spin-offs• Ownership restructured = shareholders
(Market provides capital, undermines hierarchy)• Outperformed Shanghai, Xi’an & Guangzhou• Indigenous companies learn from MNCs but focus
on domestic market. (Zhou 2008) • Key role of returnees.• Red Queen innovation model.
69Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
INNOVATION• No Russian Global Manufacturing Brands
• China gets bad press on innovation– Just imitate (cf Japan 1950s)– Do take risks; innovation happening– Lenovo, Heier, Baidu, Tencent
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 70
Value Added Computers, etc.
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 71
Value Added in High-Tech
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 72
Value-Added in Business/Financial Services and Communic. (3 to 7%)
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 73
74
Solving the Puzzle
• Why has Russia not maintained its lead in Education and S&T?
• China higher rankings, more spending
• China growing value-added
• China leading in “clean” technology, nanotech and IT.
74Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
75
Misleading Answers
• Soviet system overrated
• Money
• Resource curse
• Flawed privatization
• Flawed policy advice
• “Mentalitet”
• State programs by authoritarian regime75Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
76
More Promising Answers
• Incentive structures & Competition
• Epistemic communities
• Institutions (including corruption)
• This is good news: problems can be mitigated through incentives and competition
76Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
AVOID IDEALIZING CHINA• Not yet product innovation (though rapid
manufacturing changes; Red Queen)
• Much assembly of foreign components
• Competition also produces fraud and angst
• BUT:– Enormous domestic market for small steps– Far higher value-added than would predict (3 times)– Avoid first mover costs, for now– Investment in Education and S&T could pay off in
next decade77Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
78
The Lessons from China• Student has become the model
• Embracing Globalization reflects/creates economic and social interests.
• Domestic market and global production allow Red Queen Run (Breznitz & Murphree)
• Self-interested actors allied with supporters of reform fight retrenchment. Battle ongoing.
• KEY IS PARTIAL LOSS OF CONTROL.
• COMPETITION/EPISTEMIC COMMUNITIES78Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
THANKS FOR STAYING AWAKE
QUESTIONS?
79Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 80
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 81
82
Trade Restrictions 2008-09
82Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 83
1) Economic Regionalism:Within, Across and Among States
• Both lost control over regions in 1980s– In China, this produced rapid growth in some areas– In Russia, “Involution”
• Russia-China border weakest integration in East Asia.
• Asian region dynamic; CIS moribund; Eurasian Union not promising
• Chinese regions support education & innovation
83
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 84
2) Leading Sectors
• Perhaps overdetermined:
Resources vs. Industry
• BUT not clear in 1991, especially given inherited human capital & oil prices at time
• China commerce and manufacturing, increasingly value-added (3x expected); new varieties of innovation
• Russia low productivity outside energy sector; diversification a slogan, not practice.
84
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 85
3) BRIC CORRUPTION 2009
Transparency International: Corruption Perceptions Index:
• India 74
• China 79
• Brazil 84
• Russia 146
85
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
DOING BUSINESS 2009
• CHINA # 20
• RUSSIA # 21
• EXTENT vs. QUALITY of Corruption
86
BRIC GLOBAL BRANDS
• CHINA: Lenovo, Huawei, Haier
• INDIA: Tata, Infosys, Wipro
Synonomous with offshore IT
• BRAZIL: Embrarer; BioTech
Leader in Synfuels and Agribusiness
• RUSSIA: Gazprom; Lukoil
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 87
G-20 Science, 1996-2008
88Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 89
Industrial Design Applications, 2007(different scales)
Nov. 30, 2012
PROBLEMS IN THE RUSSIAN SYSTEM
• Science “a system for generating knowledge”
• “Science policy” does not include technology or innovation
• Low financing, almost entirely from State budget: 29th in world in share of GDP.– (OECD 2/3 private funding; Russia just 27%)
• Cadres
• Bureaucracy and Corruption
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 90
CADRES
• Large Brain Drain, Internal & External
• No Brain Gain, Little Circulation
• Ageing – Age 40-59 HALF of proportion in U.S.– Over 60 3 times share in U.S.
• Programs to attract talent from abroad modest and insulated.
Nov. 13, 2012 Balzer, Govt 407, S T & I 91
Bureaucratic Obstacles
• Grants small; funds often late
• Ambiguous legal status
• Federal Programs not transparent; criteria vague
• Regulations often limit awards: – Cost and length rather than quality– Specific budget categories
• Resist competition
Nov. 13, 2012 Balzer, Govt 407, S T & I 92
CORRUPTION
• Customs barriers
• No competitive bidding on equipment
• Cost effectiveness about 10-15% of what is realized abroad
• Officials emphasize infrastructure projects
• Travel and large equipment purchases
Nov. 13, 2012 Balzer, Govt 407, S T & I 93
Russia and Global Knowledge Econ.• Russia Similar in what it confronts:
– Mass Tertiary Education– Demands of Knowledge Economy– Resource Constraints
• Russia outlier in:– Demographic crisis– Academy of Sciences Role– Bureaucratic obstacles– Not confronting fraud and corruption– Resistance to internationalization
(epistemic communities)94Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Institutional ExpansionNumber of VUZy in Russian Republic/Federation at beginning of
academic year:
YEAR TOTAL STATE PRIVATE
1940/41 4811945/46 4561950/51 5161960/61 4301970/71 4571975/76 4831980/81 4941985/86 5021990/91 5141991/92 5191992/93 5351993/94 626 548 781994/95 710 553 1571995/96 762 569 1931996/97 817 573 2441997/98 880 578 3021998/99 914 580 3341999/00 939 590 3492000/01 965 607 3582001/02 1008 621 3872002/03 1039 655 3842003/04 1044 652 3922004/05 1071 662 4092005/06 1068 655 4132006/07 1090 660 4302007/08 1108 658 450
[Rossiiskii statisticheskii ezhegodnik, 2002, p. 227; 2004; 2008]95Nov. 30, 2012
For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
State vs. Private
• Russian Private VUZy:
42% of institutions
17% of the students
• Full-Time Study:
State: >50%
Private: <25%
Nov. 30, 2012 96
For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
VUZ Faculty ResourcesYEAR STATE PRIVATE
1993/94 239,800 3,800
1995/96 240,200 13,000
2000/01 265,200 42,200
2005/06 322,100 65,200
2007/08 340,400 78,800
2008/09 341,100 63,400
2009/10 342,700 54,800
(Students increase 165%; Faculty 66%; includes sovmetitelstvo.)
Nov. 30, 2012 97
98
Russian Elite Universities
• 2006-08: 57 Innovative Universities
• 2009-2010: Research Universities
2 Pilot; 12 & 15 by competitions = 29
• Moscow and St. Petersburg
• Federal Universities (no competition)
2 Pilot; 6 by decree = 8 (could increase)
(Total of 39 with special status, of 660)
98Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
99
Chinese “Key” Universities
• 1956 11
• 1978 88
• 1993 211 program goal of 100 by 2000
Currently 106
• 985 Program in 1998: 9 special funding– About 30 early 2000s– 2010 included 49
99Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
U.S. News USA Top 20, 2011
1. Harvard2 Princeton3 Yale4 Columbia5 Stanford5 U. Pennsylvania7 California Inst. Techno.7 MIT9 Dartmouth9 Duke
9 U. Chicago12. Northwestern13. Johns Hopkins13. Washington U. (St. Louis)15. Brown15. Cornell17. Rice17 Vanderbilt19 Notre Dame20 Emory
100Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
U.S. News #s 21-25, 2011
21 Georgetown
22 U. California Berkeley
23 Carnegie Mellon
23 U. of Southern California
25 UCLA
25 U. of Virginia
25 Wake Forest U.
[ONLY 3 of top 27 Not Private]
101Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Male Births
102Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.H. Balzer London Oct. 2010 103
Research Articles by Field
Nov. 30, 2012
G-20 Science, 1996-2008
104Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Patent Per R&D $, 2001-10
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 105
106
Chinese Policies for Returnees
• May choose where to work; Given decent housing• Special grants, plus competition for national research
support• Special schools for children with poor Chinese language
skills• WTO Membership increased demand.• 2002 “Diaspora Model:” Accepted that most/best would
not return permanently.• 2003 Hu and Zeng “three talks:” Returnees Irreplaceable • Focus on improving overall climate.
106Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
107
Not Entirely Positive
• Conflicts between retuning “sea turtles” and “land turtles” who did not go abroad.
• Some leave again; others go into business.
• Recourse to “swallows” who spend part of year in China: only way to get the top people.
• Fraud/including by those overseas
107Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
108
Benefits Outweigh Costs
• Returnees more likely to import technology.• Stronger global networks; more grants and
fellowships; publish more in international journals.
• Market forces most important factor in attracting people back: Incentives and competition.
• Virtuous circle (Jonkers 2010): returnees demand international standards
108Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
109
Lada 2010
109Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
110
Mass Automobile Production
110Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
111
Top 4 Auto Producers, 2000-06
111Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
112
Auto Manufacture in China, 2000-06
112Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
113
Mercedes C vs. Geely Merrie 300
113Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
114
Smart/Chinese Smart
114Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
115
Lada C Concept Car
115Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
116
Lada 2010
116Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
117
IT: Skolkovo vs. Zhongguancun
• Unique phenomena
• Most Tech Corridors NOT in Capitals:– Silicon Valley; Route 128, N. VA.
– Bangalore
– Grenoble
– Cambridge
– Milan
117Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U.
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 118
Zhongguancun
118
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 119
Skolkovo Architect Plans
119
Medvedev’s 5 Priority Sectors, November, 2011
• Medical Technology
• Energy and Energy Efficiency
• Information Technology
• Space & Space Science
• Telecommunications
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 120
CADRES
• Large Brain Drain, Internal & External
• No Brain Gain, Little Circulation
• Ageing – Age 40-59 HALF of proportion in U.S.– Over 60 3 times share in U.S.
• Programs to attract talent from abroad modest and insulated.
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 121
Bureaucratic Obstacles
• Grants small; funds often late
• Ambiguous legal status
• Federal Programs not transparent; criteria vague
• Regulations often limit awards: – Cost and length rather than quality– Specific budget categories
• Resist competition
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 122
CORRUPTION
• Customs barriers
• No competitive bidding on equipment
• Cost effectiveness about 10-15% of what is realized abroad
• Officials emphasize infrastructure projects
• Travel and large equipment purchases
Nov. 30, 2012 For CEIP, H. Balzer, Georgetown U. 123
top related