Search

The main objective of this Working Paper is to show a set of indicators on the knowledge-based economy for China, mainly compiled from databases within EAS, although data from databases maintained by other parts of the OECD are included as well. These indicators are put in context by comparison with data for the United States, Japan and the EU (or the G7 countries in case no EU totals are available) and data for some of the Asian neighbours of China (Korea, Singapore, Chinese Taipei and Hong Kong) where data for these countries were readily available. This document draws heavily on the Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard, copying many of the indicators presented there and borrowing a substantial amount of contextual and methodological explanations. After listing the main outcomes of this study, the paper starts with a section on the economic structure of China and the other economies, followed by a set of trade indicators, showing the opening up of China's economy and the growing importance of trade in high-technology products. Two indicators of foreign investment in China are examined: foreign affiliates and foreign direct investment. Recognizing the importance of human resources to a knowledge-based economy, a range of human resources indicators is presented. Final sections present indicators on R&D (as one of the inputs to the innovation process), and patents (as one of the outputs). A statistical annex brings together a selection of tables of the main indicators shown in the document. OECD database information is also annexed. (A bibliography is included. Contains 11 footnotes, 60 figures, 5 boxes and 26 tables.)

Is the United States getting it wrong when it comes to educating tomorrow's innovators in critical fields? It has been known for years that the only way to compete globally in information technology, engineering, nanotechnology, robotics and other fields is to give students the best educational opportunities possible. But do individuals have a successful formula when it comes to science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education? In this report, the authors challenge the nation's approach to STEM education and argue that reforms are urgently needed to better match the talents of students, the needs of employers, and its goals. (Contains 19 tables, 42 figures, and 623 endnotes.) [Funding for this paper was provided by the Intel Corporation. For "Refueling the U.S. Innovation Economy: Fresh Approaches to Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education. Executive Summary," see ED521736.]