Under this heading Nature News write two reports by the European Commission, namely the

Under this heading Nature News write two reports by the European Commission, namely the "2008 Innovation Scoreboard" and "2008 Science, self service cmsv Technology and Competitiveness key figures". Speech is of course the famous Lisbon Strategy-intention to EU by 2010 including self service cmsv the 3% of GDP to research and development. The reality is somewhat different - the volume of expenditure on research and development namely since the beginning self service cmsv of the nineties is located on the same 1.84%. The Lisbon strategy self service cmsv up or down. The following is an eloquent picture that says it all about what you do during this European competitors. While the U.S. still touch a constant advantage over the EU, but we strongly ahead of the Asian superpower (Japan and South Korea) or rapidly catching up (China). The latter in 2006, has already made 1:42% of GDP for science and research, which can be compared with the Slovenian 1:59%. For comparison may be some countries which want to compare: Italy 1:09%, 0.87% Croatia, Austria 2:55%, U.S. 2.61%, 2.90% Switzerland, self service cmsv Finland self service cmsv 3:37% Israel 4.65%. self service cmsv While the report self service cmsv offers a bunch of other interesting self service cmsv information. For example, the EU's share of global patent filings has fallen from 36% in 2000 to 31% in 2005 (biotechnology and nanotechnology we have slightly increased). The initial cost of a patent application EPO, which covers the 12 EU Member States and Switzerland are 20 times higher than similar costs in the U.S. and 13 times higher than in Japan, while the maintenance of patent rights in all 27 EU Member States as much as 60 times more expensive than in the U.S.! The number of researchers from 1.1 million in 2000 rose to 1.3 million in 2006 (of course, self service cmsv the same proportion of GDP on science and development also means that they are under funded ...). In 2005, the EU-27 awarded 100,000 doctoral titles in the U.S. and 53,000 self service cmsv in Japan, 15,000. The share of researchers in the whole body of work in the EU 12:56%, 0.98% in the U.S. and Japan, 1:07% (0:57% self service cmsv Slovenia) From 2000 to 2006, the number self service cmsv of researchers in China doubled to 1.22 million. Research and development has gone into Slovenia 2006 484 million, self service cmsv representing 0.2% of the EU-27 (while the proportion of the population 0.4%) from 2000 to 2006, expenditure on research and development in Slovenia increased faster than GDP (8.5 % compared to 6.3% per year) in Slovenia, the number of researchers from 2000 to 2006 grew from 4336 to 5834th Slovenia is the first place the involvement of researchers in European programs (depending on the number of researchers).
Interesting data. For the full picture, you may want to take into account the size of a country's GDP. The EU should (according to the IMF) had in 2007 GDP almost 17 trillion, almost 14 USA, China 3.3 trillion U.S. (as the fourth country self service cmsv in the world just behind Germany). Also in the case of China, I am also interested in how the percentage devoted to researching, changes to economic growth. Data from a table, for example ranging up to 2006. In China, the GDP (according to Wikipedia, which refers to official Chinese data) in 2008 already 4.2 trillion, which is far outpacing Germany. In one year, ie almost one trillion self service cmsv USD more (although this may also be the result of load or more correct to take into account some of the undetected sectors, such as services). Have accordingly increased the resources devoted to research? As a result, it is another interesting arithmetic. If you can take it to compare GDP data for 2007 and the percentage of research funding in 2006, then EU research funding earmarked 311 billion dollars to 1.3 million researchers, or about 240 thousand dollars per researcher; China is 46.6 billion USD 22.1 million researchers or over 38 thousand dolarev per researcher. Given that the absolute number of researchers are comparable, the absolute investment in research in the EU, therefore, ten times larger than the Chinese. It is true that numbers alone do not tell the whole story - such as these, how many EU grants (and probably all over) doctoral titles. Sounds good, but a big part of this will be at least in the future will account for PR trick in the Bologna reform, which will result in the desired EU nominally "highly educated" workforce University PhD under the new system 3 +2 +3 or 4 +3 +1 awarded for a little more effort than that it is so far (if it has been seriously implemented) require Master's degree, master's degree just for a bit of more work than it has so far asked for undergraduate studies. After all, we are probably all (including national and European rulers) are interested in research achievements, this means making the best researchers and the best possible research conditions. Both also requires money, which in itself is not enough of course, but it is a necessary precondition: this money only for higher education and for the subsequent working conditions of researchers. (This last section is devoted to just the aforesaid sovereigns that my comments will not be seen as a provocation to have a more permanent stagnation.) Delete Reply
I'm glad that even on vacation thinking on the European money for scientific research self service cmsv :-) Otherwise, the data