Science, Technology And Innovation In Egypt
The Egyptian Center for the Advancement ofScience, Technology, and InnovationScience, Technology and Innovationin EgyptStatus BriefJune 2014
123About Us4Scope of the report5Introduction6The Egyptian STI System: Key Actors8National Competitiveness and Innovation Performance103.1. Global Competitiveness Index3.1.1. Definition of Competitiveness3.1.2. Trends in Egypt’s Competitiveness Ranking3.2. Global Innovation Index4Relationship between Industry and R&D5Going Forward4.1.4.2.20Company Spending on R&DAcademia and Industry24
What is the Egyptian Center for theAdvancement of Science, Technolgy,and Innovation (ECASTI)?The Egyptian Center for the Advancement ofScience, Technology and Innovation (ECASTI)is a start-up non-governmental foundationaiming to enhance the framework of Scienceand Innovation in Egypt and monitor thecountry’s performance in this field. ECASTI isregistered under number 9312 for the year2013.During this critical phase in Egypt’s history,it is essential that we integrate Science,Technology, and Innovation (STI) into nationaldevelopment policies and the economicreform agenda, using the efforts of all actorsand stakeholders to build Egypt’s renaissance.Government cannot be expected to take thefull responsibility for the Scientific Researchand Innovation System; rather, the privatesector and civil society organizations have akey role to play in driving STI in Egypt.In this context, the role of ECASTI becomesparticularly important. Our mission is to“consolidate and increase the importance ofSTI and its outcomes in Egyptian society inorder to achieve sustainable socio-economicdevelopment that is commensurate with theaspirations of this nation.”For more information about ECASTI, kindlyvisit our website at www.ecasti.org.Scope of the reportThis report is based on consolidatingnational and international studies aboutEgypt’s position in STI and its impact onthe socio-economic development of thecountry, with additional analysis by ECASTI.It examines the Egyptian STI system,assesses this system based on the GlobalCompetitiveness Index and the GlobalInnovation Index, and finally arrives at a setof recommendations to move forward.
1IntroductionEgypt is the cradle of civilization. This is not an empty mottoor a cliché, but a historical fact that some may forget in light ofthe challenges the country has faced in recent years. However,with the advent of the January 25 Revolution came a renewedhope for Egypt and an opportunity for revival, one that canonly be built through innovation and hard work.Experiences of “developing” countries that have becomesignificant economic powers show that such transformationcan only be achieved through an integrated ecosystemdriving innovation and linking the various stakeholders.This ecosystem includes not only innovative technologygeneration, but also supportive laws and legislation thatincentivize innovation and reward success, a venture capitalsystem, as well as financial, material and human resources.Such an innovation ecosystem is the foundation of globalcompetitiveness.While significant effort has gone into attempting to build atechnology-driven economy, these efforts have not achievedthe anticipated success for many reasons, chief amongstwhich is the absence of this integrated ecosystem serving aclearly defined national vision. Egypt, like most developingcountries, is therefore a consumer and not a producer oftechnology. Consequently, it is essential to recognize theimportance of the local production of new technologies andits impact on Egyptian national sovereignty and security. Inthis report, we present the key existing components in theecosystem and the current performance of Egypt as a firststep to identifying the way forward.
2The Egyptian STI System: Key ActorsThese centers are being reorganized under the umbrella of the Supreme Councilof Scientific Research Centers and Institutes in order to create more cohesionamong their activities (Bond et al., 2013).Egypt’s STI system is characterized by a high degree of centralization anddomination by the public sector. At the top, we have the Higher Councilfor Science and Technology, consisting of a panel of ministers and experts(including expatriate scientists) that are re-elected every three years. This councilis responsible for identifying Egypt’s developmental priorities and the scienceand technology research strategy necessary to support them (Bond, Maram,Soliman, & Khattab, 2013).Within the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, the Academyof Scientific Research and Technology (ASRT) is responsible for raisingawareness and promoting scientific culture and thinking, assessing scienceand technology indicators, and encouraging the complete cycle of innovation(Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, “Science, Technology, andInnovation System in Egypt”).The Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research is responsible forimplementing the national research policy and strategy of all public universitiesand research institutes (Bond et. al, 2013).Finally, there is also the Science and Technology Development Fund (STDF),a peer-review grant-awarding body that was modeled on Germany’s DFGand which now serves as the main research funding channel in Egypt, a rolepreviously occupied by the ASRT (Bond et al., 2013).The actual research and development field is largely the domain of state-rununiversities and research centers. According to a Scientific Research InstitutionsMap issued by the Ministry of Scientific Research (2010), the Ministry has 13affiliated research centers, in addition to those affiliated with public and privateuniversities.There are also a number of research centers affiliated with a range of otherministries: Ministry of Communication and Information Technology (1 research center) Ministry of Investment (1 research center) Ministry of Housing ( 3 research centers) Ministry of Petroleum (6 research centers) Ministry of Trade and Industry (3 research centers) Ministry of Education (2 research centers) Ministry of Agriculture ( 24 research centers) Ministry of Health and Population (7 research centers) Ministry of Civil Aviation (1 research center) Ministry of Energy and Electricity (6 research centers) Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation ( 15 research centers) Ministry of Transportation (2 research centers)In an independent exercise conducted by ECASTI, our research team hasidentified a total of 429 research centers in Egypt, including both publicly andprivately-funded centers. Figure 1 shows the distribution of these researchcenters among the various entities with which they are affiliated. The majority(60%) are affiliated with one of Egypt’s public universities. In fact, Cairo Universityalone claims nearly one quarter of all identified research centers.Figure 1: Affiliation of Identified Research CentersCairo UniversityAin Shams UniversityOther Public UniversitiesPrivate UniversitiesGovernment MinistriesOther Government BodiesIndependent CentersPrivate Sector9The Egyptian Center for the Advancement ofScience, Technology, and Innovation
3National Competitivenessand Innovation PerformanceAfter reviewing the main institutions shaping the STI field in Egypt, it is equallyimportant to assess the effectiveness of the STI system and how it affects variousaspects of the socio-economic reforms required at this critical stage of Egypt’shistory. These can be assessed through two main comprehensive internationalindices: The Global Competitiveness Index The Global Innovation Index3.1.Global Competitiveness IndexThe World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) measuresthe competitiveness of various countries using more than 130 indicators. Inpublication for over 30 years, the GCI currently covers approximately 148 countriesand is recognized as the most reliable international metric for benchmarkingcompetitiveness.Prior to the January 25 Revolution, Egypt’s social, institutional, and economicchallenges were reflected in Egypt’s low ranking on the GCI. Its position has sincedeteriorated further, dropping by 11 positions to reach a ranking of 118 out of 148countries in 2013-2014.3.1.1. Definition of CompetitivenessAccording to the 2013-2014 Global Competitiveness Report, competitiveness isdefined as “the set of institutions, policies, and factors that determine the level ofproductivity of a country” (Schwab, 2013). This level of productivity determinesthe level of prosperity that can be achieved by an economy as well as the ratesof return on investment, both of which are fundamental drivers of growth rates.An economy’s competitiveness therefore increases with the likelihood that it willgrow faster over time (Schwab, 2013).The GCI measures various aspects of competitiveness through weighted averagesof a number of determinants that drive productivity, all of which are groupedinto 12 pillars of competitiveness, shown in Figure 2 (Schwab, 2013). Thesepillars, which are based on the economic theory of development stages, are notindependent; rather, they tend to reinforce one another, wherein a weakness inone pillar often has a negative impact on others.Figure 2: The Global Competitiveness Index FrameworkGLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS INDEXBASIC REQUIREMENTSSUB-INDEXPillar 1. InstitutionsPillar 2. InfrastructurePillar 3. MacroeconomicenviromentPillar 4. Health and primaryeducationKey forfactor-driveneconomiesEFFICIENCY ENHANCERSSUB-INDEXINNOVATION AND SOPHISTICATIONFACTORS SUB-INDEXPillar 5. Higher education andtrainingPillar 6. Goods market efficiancyPillar 7. Labor market efficiencyPillar 8. Financial marketdevelopmentPillar 9. Technological readinessPillar 10. Market sizePillar 11. Business sophisticationPillar 12. InnovationKey forefficiency-driveneconomiesKey forinnovation-driveneconomiesSource: Schwab, K., World Economic Forum (2013). The GlobalCompetitiveness Report 2013-2014. Geneva: World Economic ForumAccording to this theory, countries go through three stagesof economic development. In the first stage, economiesare factor-driven and competitiveness is based on factorendowments, mainly low-skilled labor and natural resources.While firms sell basic products or commodities and competeon the basis of price, their low productivity is also reflectedin low wages. At this stage, competitiveness is thereforedependent upon well-functioning public and privateinstitutions (pillar 1), a well-developed infrastructure (pillar2), a stable macroeconomic environment (pillar 3), and ahealthy workforce with at least a basic education (pillar 4)(Schwab, 2013).However, both productivity and wages increase as countriesbecome more competitive and move into the efficiencydriven stage of development. At this stage, productionprocesses become more efficient and product quality mustimprove in order to remain competitive as wages increase.Competitiveness is therefore powered by higher educationand training (pillar 5), efficient goods markets (pillar 6), wellfunctioning labor markets (pillar 7), developed financialmarkets (pillar 8), the ability to harness the benefits of existingtechnologies (pillar 9), and a large domestic or foreign market(pillar 10) (Schwab, 2013).Finally, the increase in wages andassociated standard of living will only besustainable if businesses can competewith new and unique products (Schwab,2013). Competitiveness then becomesdriven by the use of sophisticatedproduction processes (pillar 11) and theinnovation of new ones (pillar 12) ascountries enter the innovation-drivenstage.11The Egyptian Center for the Advancement ofScience, Technology, and Innovation
3.1.2.Trends in Egypt’sCompetitiveness RankingAs noted earlier, Egypt dropped by 11 positions inthis year’s GCI, ranking 118 out of 148 countries. Thiswas likely influenced by Egypt’s continued transition,political instability, and deteriorating security situationsince the January 25 Revolution, all of which posea challenge to the country’s competitiveness andeconomic growth. It is crucial to consider Egypt›sranking in comparison to other relevant countries. Inthis report, we chose to contrast Egypt’s performanceagainst that of Jordan as a comparable country,Malaysia and Turkey as Islamic countries that haveexperienced significant advances, and Israel as theinnovation leader in the Middle East. Table 1 focuseson the pillars directly related to STI: primary education,higher education and training, labor market efficiency,and innovation. The bold numbers represent thehighest rankings in the group.12The Egyptian Center for the Advancement ofScience, Technology, and InnovationTable 1: STI Indicators in the Global Competitiveness IndexPillars directly influencing the STIEgyptian Ecosystem (according to the2013-2014 GCI/148 countries)EgyptJordanIsraelMalaysiaTurkeyHealth and Primary Education10065383359Primary enrollment5896455523Quality of primary education14844713392Higher Education and Training11856344665Secondary education enrollment102792810589Tertiary education enrollment8270326246Quality of the educational system14527561991Quality of math and science education145307827101Quality of management schools145474235101Internet access in schools12544393663Availability of research and training services10343342070Extent of staff training13883491165Labor Market Efficiency1461015725130Redundancy costs, weeks of salary13614124110128Reliance on professional management13786502166Capacity to retain talent (brain drain)13353492078Innovation1205332550Capacity for innovation1116941545Quality of scientific research institutions1276212763Company spending in R&D1239061768University – industry collaboration in R&D1338581652Gov. procurement of advancement techproducts116519423Availability of scientists and engineers54781953PCT patents. application/million pop.748753141Source: Schwab, K., World Economic Forum (2013). The GlobalCompetitiveness Report 2013-2014. Geneva: World Economic Forum.13The Egyptian Center for the Advancement ofScience, Technology, and Innovation
Table 1 shows that Egypt ranks 145 out of 148 countriesin the quality of its educational system as a whole. Withregards to the quality of primary education in particular,Egypt’s ranking has deteriorated dramatically from 137out of 144 countries in 2013, reaching the last position outof 148 countries this year. This raises a red flag regardingthe quality of the educational system, particularly sinceprimary education forms the basis for all levels of educationthereafter.Further insight into Egypt’s performance in education canbe drawn by comparing its GCI rankings over the past fiveyears. Because the total number of countries surveyedvaries from report to report, we have converted the scoresinto percentile rankings to avoid data inconsistencies. Thus,for example, in the 2013-2014 Global CompetitivenessReport, Egypt scored in the 61st percentile in primaryeducation enrolment. This means it scored higher than 61percent of all countries in that category.Figure 3 shows Egypt’s percentile rank in a selected numberof education indicators over the past five years. It is clearthat Egypt’s scores in school enrolment—whether primary,secondary, or tertiary—have consistently been significantlyhigher than those in the quality of education.education. For example, between 20102013, Egypt’s percentile rank in primaryeducation enrolment increased from47 to 61, while its percentile rank in thequality of primary education fell from9 to 0—the lowest ranking on the GCI.This suggests that while Egypt maybe seeing some success in increasingenrolment, particularly in primaryeducation, the quality of the outputis decreasing. In other words, Egypt’smain problem appears to be one ofquality, not quantity.Another particularly low rankingis Egypt’s position in labor marketefficiency, which placed it at 146 outof 148 countries. This low ranking isa result of insufficient labor marketflexibility in the formal labor marketand the insufficient use of talent. Itcan also be linked to the fact that theEgyptian education system does notseem to produce the skills needed bythe labor market.In some cases, it appears that there is an inverse relationshipbetween educational enrolment and the quality ofWhen it comes to innovation, Egypt’s overall rank has fallen53 places over the last seven years, from 67th place out of 131countries in the 2007-2008 GCI, to 83rd place out of 139 countriesin the 2010-2011 GCI, to 109th place out of 144 countries in the2012-2013 GCI, finally reaching 120th place out of 148 countriesin the most recent GCI. This is due to a decline in Egypt’s rankin the capacity for innovation, the quality of scientific researchinstitutions (127th out of 148), company spending on R&D,university-industry collaboration in R&D, and governmentprocurement of advanced technology products (EgyptianNational Competitiveness Council, 2012).Here, it is once again useful to compare quantity vs. quality.Figure 4 shows Egypt’s percentile rank in the quality of scientificinstitutions and availability of scientistsand engineers over the past five years.Again, there is a consistent trend in whichEgypt has scored significantly higher inthe availability of scientists and engineersthan in the quality of its scientificinstitutions. The gap between these twoindicators illustrates that Egypt’s majorchallenge lies in extracting valuableoutput from its resources.Figure 4: Egypt’s Percentile Rank in Innovation Indicators, GCI 2009-201390807060504030Figure 3: Egypt’s Percentile Rank in Education Indicators, GCI 2009-2013201070060Primary Education Enrolment2009-1050Quality of Scientific InstitutionsSecondary Education Enrolment40Tertiary Education Enrolment3020Quality of Primary Education10Quality of The Educational System2010-112011-122012-132013-14Availability of Scientists and EngineersFigure 5 compares the number of researchers in R&D to variousmeasures of innovation output, based on the latest availabledata extracted from the World Bank and the World IntellectualProperty Organization (WIPO).1 The graph indicates that in2011, one scientific journal article was produced for every 17researchers, one patent application wasmade for every 70 researchers, and onlyone patent application was granted forevery 709 researchers.The World Bank data indicates that there were 524 researchers in R&D per million people. This number was multipliedby the estimated population of Egypt in 2011 (82.537 million, according to UN estimates). Researchers in R&D aredefined as “professionals engaged in the conception or creation of new knowledge, products, processes, methods,or systems and in the management of projects concerned.” This includes postgraduate PhD students. Scientificand technical journal articles, according to the World Bank, refer to the number of scientific and engineeringarticles published in the fields of physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics, clinical medicine, biomedical research,engineering and technology, and earth and space sciences.102009-10142010-11 2011-12The Egyptian Center for the Advancement ofScience, Technology, and Innovation2012-13 2013-1415The Egyptian Center for the Advancement ofScience, Technology, and Innovation
Figure 5: Innovation Output Compared to Available Researchers, 2011Figure 6: Global Innovation Index FrameworkGLOBAL INNOVATION INDEX (average)43,24940000INNOVATION EFFICIENCY RATIO (ratio)20000Innovation InputSub-IndexInnovation OutputSub-Index2,5156180Humancapital essSophisticationKnowledge nlinkagesKnowledgeimpactCreative goodsand servicesBusinessenvironmentResearch &developmentEcologicalsustainabilityTrade nlineCreativity61Resident PatentGrantsResident PatentApplicationsScientific & Technica
aiming to enhance the framework of Science and Innovation in Egypt and monitor the country’s performance in this field. ECASTI is registered under number 9312 for the year 2013. during this critical phase in Egypt’s history, it is essential that we integrate Science, Technology, and Innovation (STI) into national
The National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI), is established by the Science, Technology and Innovation (ST&I) Act, 2013. NACOSTI is the successor the National Council for Science and Technology (NCST) which was established by the Science and Technology Act, Cap 250 of the Laws of Kenya in 1977
to assign priority to the development of science, technology and innovation; to entrench science, technology and innovation into the national production system and for connected purposes [L.N. 94/2013.] PART 1 – PRELIMINARY 1. Short title and commencement This Act may be cited as the Science, Technology and Innovation Act, 2013,
The National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy therefore aims in broad terms, to provide a framework for stimulating innovation in the economy and the society. The Ministry of Environment, Science, Technology and Innovation (MESTI) has the mandate to promote science and technology application in the
The principal thrust of the National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy is to ensure that science and technology pervades all sectors of the economy. In order to achieve these objectives, sectoral policies, programmes and strategies would be implemented on the basis of the overall National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy.
Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Review of Uganda vii NSI National system of innovation NSSF National Social Security Fund NSTP National Science, Technology and Innovation Plan OWC Operation Wealth Creation PIBID Presidential Initiative on Banana Industrial Development RASA Real Agricultural Solutions for Africa RCDF Rural Communications Development Fund
Basic Concepts of Innovation and Innovation Mgmt M.Lorenzo 2010-03-253 Introduction What is Innovation? Innovation is typically understood as the introduction of something new and useful Innovation is
1 The Atlas of Islamic-World Science & Innovation Guide to Research Methodology December 2009 Revised in June 2011. The aim of The Atlas of Islamic-World Science and Innovation is to provide an insightful overview of science and science-based innovation across the Islamic-world, an independent, objective and authoritative assessment of
Plan National Technology Plan 1995 National Science & Technology Plan 2000 Science & Technology 2005 Plan Science & Technology 2010 Plan Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2015 Plan Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2020 Plan Budget 2 billion 4 billion 6 billion 13.5 billion 16 billio
