Innovation and Commercialism

An innovative and commercial spirit is the lifeblood of a thriving economy. The drive to tinker and invent, to discover, to improve from prior failures—this is how people learn and find new and better ways of creating things of value. In a market-based system, the most powerful way to drive innovation is to bring new ideas to market, to commercialize and profit from them. The marketplace is generally efficient in weeding out the good ideas from the bad and pricing what innovations are most valued by society. In this way the concepts of innovation and commercialism go hand in hand. They capture whether people in a society value finding new knowledge or creating new things, and whether their incentives are aligned to encourage them to seek a profit by commercializing these ideas. The following statistics measure the level of innovation and commercialism in different countries and their correlations with future growth.

创新和商业精神是蓬勃发展的经济的命脉。发掘，发现，从以前的失败改善的驱动力 - 这就是人们如何学习和找到创造有价值的新的更好的方式。在市场化的体系中，推动创新的最强有力的方式是将新的想法推向市场，从而实现商业化和获利。市场一般来说有效地消除了好坏的想法和定价，哪些创新是社会最重视的。以这种方式，创新和商业主义的概念相辅相成。他们掌握社会中的人是否重视发现新知识或创造新事物，以及他们的激励是否一致，以鼓励他们通过商业化这些想法谋利。以下统计数据衡量不同国家的创新和商业主义水平及其与未来增长的相关性。

We looked at a variety of measures to triangulate these concepts. For both scientific and commercial innovation, we wanted to have a balance between indicators that captured outputs (new inventions or businesses), and indicators that measured inputs (values, investment, and people) that we thought would logically lead to innovation. We weigh the inputs and outputs equally. The pieces of our innovation and commercialism indicator are shown in the following table. Overall, the raw indications of innovation and commercialism are stronger in higher-income countries, especially measures of investment (like R&D expenditure) that require a certain level of resources, or measures of knowledge creation (like patent creation) that require a level of acquired knowledge. What we are focused on with our culture measures, however, are the underlying values of a society independent of its wealth and development stage (which we proxy in a simple way with income levels). Once we exclude the effect of income, our gauge of innovation and commercialism is 49% correlated to historical future growth in income per capita. It's notable that before this adjustment there is no relationship between a country's future growth and the level of observed innovation and commercialism.

我们研究了各种措施来对这些概念进行三角测量。对于科学和商业创新，我们希望在获得产出的指标（新发明或业务）之间取得平衡，以及衡量我们认为在逻辑上导致创新的投入 （价值观，投资和人力）的指标。我们权衡投入和产出同等。我们的创新和商业主义指标的部分如下表所示。总体来说，高收入国家的创新和商业主义的原始迹象更为强烈，特别是需要一定资源水平的投资措施（如研发支出），或需要一定水平的获得知识的知识创造措施（如专利创造）知识。然而，我们关注的是我们的文化措施，是独立于其财富和发展阶段的社会的基本价值观（我们以简单的方式代表收入水平）。一旦我们排除收入的影响，我们对创新和商业主义的衡量与人均收入的未来增长率呈49％的相关性。值得注意的是，在这种调整之前，一个国家的未来增长与观察到的创新和商业主义水平之间没有任何关系。

On the next page we show our current measures for the aggregate indicator with and without the effect of income, as well as for the components of our indicator. Where applicable we look at each measure that goes into these gauges relative to the number of people in the society or the size of the economy.

在下一页，我们将显示我们目前对总体指标的衡量指标，并且不考虑收入的影响，以及指标的组成部分。在适用的情况下，我们将考察相对于社会人数或经济规模进入这些量表的每项措施。

In terms of our ratings of countries on this gauge, Korea and the US rank as being the most innovative and commercial-minded both on an absolute basis and after we take out the effect of income. Korea invests a lot of capital and people toward research and has reaped the rewards in the form of a high number of new patents and royalties. Along with relatively high investment in research, Americans stand out as highly entrepreneurial. Germany and Japan aren’t far behind, each investing high amounts of R&D and researchers into the innovation process and seeing the benefits from things like new patents, businesses, and websites. China is roughly neutral on our measures on an absolute basis, but it jumps to the top third once you take into account the fact that its proportion of people creating new businesses and gross expenditure in R&D are fairly high given how poor it still is. India is less innovative but it’s much poorer, so it moves ahead of China once you adjust for the effect of income. Latin America and emerging Europe score in the middle to bottom end of the range whether you adjust for the effect of income or not, especially Russia and Mexico. Once you adjust for income, Europe’s periphery fares poorly, particularly Italy, which is at the bottom of the list. Mostly, their innovation and commercial inputs like researchers or entrepreneurship prevalence are moderate, but those aren’t leading to the scientific or business outputs you’d expect for countries at their income level.

在我们对这个指标的国家评级方面，韩国和美国在绝对的基础上，在我们取消收入的影响之后，是最具创意和商业意识的。韩国投入大量资金和人力进行研究，并以大量新专利和特许权使用费形式获得了奖励。随着研究投入相对较高，美国人高度创业，脱颖而出。德国和日本并不遥远，每个投入大量的研发和研究人员进入创新过程，并看到新专利，企业和网站等收益。中国在绝对基础上对我们的措施大致中立，但是考虑到创新业务和研发总支出的比例相当高，因为中国的差距还是很大的。印度的创新力不大，但是这样做却差一些，所以一旦调整了收入的影响，就会在中国领先。拉丁美洲和新兴欧洲的成绩在中下档，无论你是否适应收入的影响，特别是俄罗斯和墨西哥。一旦你调整收入，欧洲的周边地区的票价就不好了，特别是意大利，这是列表的底部。大多数情况下，他们的创新和商业投入，如研究人员或企业家精神流行率是温和的，但这些并不会导致您对国家收入水平期望的科学或商业成果 。