| Abstract: |
Relationship between innovation performance and economic development is
well-recognised all over the world (Mairesse, Lotti, & Mairesse, 2009,
Grossman & Helpman, 1990, Hall, 2001). There are numerous of studies
confirming that innovation development leads to economic growth, better
productivity and increase in sustainable competitiveness. The assessment
contributes to theoretical analysis on innovation and significantly broadens
knowledge of innovation performance in developing countries. But the most
considerable contribution is made to innovation system of Kazakhstan, which is
very poor researched and published. Results of the study provide strengths and
weaknesses of innovation performance in Kazakhstan and its position in the
global landscape, which can be useful information for future policy making to
improve social and economic development of the region. Besides The European
Innovation Scoreboard, the most prominent innovation measurement indices are:
1. OECD Science, Technology, and Industry Scoreboard 2013 2. The World Bank’s
Knowledge Assessment Methodology (KAM) 2012 3. The World Economic Forum’s
Global Competitiveness Report 2013-2014 Taking into account data availability
and level of innovation development, European Innovation Scoreboard is most
appropriate tool to measure innovation performance in Kazakhstan. For example,
The World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report is difficult to
implement due to comprehensive nature of data required that is not publicly
available. Moreover, some innovation indicators used in scoreboard are
elaborated particularly for developed and sophisticated innovation system.
Therefore they include variables that have interpretation value only in case
of developed countries. European Innovation Scoreboard is not optimal choice
to measure innovation performance in Kazakhstan. However, perfect fitting to
Kazakhstan’s economy innovation measurement is unlikely will be comparable for
other countries as well. Our goal was to find innovation measurement
(scoreboard) that can satisfy our targets to elaborate innovation indicators
that can be easily interpreted, providing exhaustive analysis of innovation
situation in Kazakhstan; and to be able benchmark the country with similar
economies (catching-up countries). According to Archibugi, Denni, & Filippetti
(2009), European Innovation Scoreboard shoud be considered as measure of
innovation performance rather than others. Because it takes into account new
forms of innovation. Others mostly represent current endowment of country to
develop its competitiveness and growth through technological innovations. The
methodology includes 29 indicators, grouped over 7 different innovation
dimensions and 3 major groups of dimensions. The group of “Enablers” captures
the main drivers of innovation that are external to the firm and it is divided
into two dimensions: “Human resources” and “Finance and support”, capturing in
total 9 indicators. Some indicators are subject to national context.
Therefore, more detailed information about issues regarding the calculation of
the indicators is presented in the whole version of the paper. The results of
study revealed relative competitiveness of the region in supply of human
capital. However, the rapid pace of economic development requires highly
skilled workforce, especially technical and engineering specialist, in order
to support innovation performance in the country. Besides the importance of
participation in long-life learning for on-going technical development and
innovation, this number is extremely low in Kazakhstan. The main factors
hampering innovation performance are insufficient R&D investments (public and
private), poor infrastructure, weal linkages between main stakeholders of
innovation process. This everything is a result of inefficient public policy
on innovation and historical and cultural circumstances. The study has found
that generally the innovation performance of the region is similar to that of
the country. The indicator of the country and region are slightly different.
Unsurprisingly, the indicators have shown that the region is placed at the
bottom of catching-up countries. The current research was limited to evaluate
factors related to qualitative characteristics of the indicator. Moreover,
measuring regional innovation performance showed that more progress is needed
on the availability and quality of innovation data at regional level. In
general, research showed that innovation level of the country is very low even
in comparison with catching-up countries. It can be explained by economic
model where output is mainly driven by increased used of labour and capital.
As a result a low demand for knowledge and weak linkages between key actors.
“Knowledge producing and processing sectors and actors so far remain largely
isolated from one another, and their activities are structurally mismatched.
This may be explained by the lack of incentives in the business sector to
innovate, as innovation is often not seen as necessary to maintain or develop
competitive advantages. In addition, the commercial orientation of public R&D
capacities (knowledge supply) remains limited. This vicious cycle seems to
have locked the national innovation system into a suboptimal, low knowledge
intensity equilibrium (Innovation performance review of Kazakhstan, 2012)” See
above See above |