Ethiopian National Innovation Survey 2005_2007. Introduction S&T data are not readily available in the country; and where they exist, they are not in.

Ethiopian National Innovation Survey 2005_2007

Introduction

• S&T data are not readily available in the country; and

• where they exist, they are not in systematic manner

• Implication is that the country’s performance in S&T is difficult to assess.

General Objective of the National Innovation Survey 2008

The primary objective is to develop an acceptable set of Innovation indicators

for monitoring, benchmarking, evaluating and forecasting STI

performance in the country and for the overall policy making, planning and

decision making purposes

Specific Objectives of the national Innovation Survey 2008

– produce a set of internationally comparable data and indicators for  providing insights into the patterns of innovation in the manufacturing and services sectors in the country

– collect information on the sources and resources for innovation in enterprises

– provide an indication of  the extent of public funding for innovation activities that is taken up by enterprises

– draw national, regional and international comparisons of innovation intensity

– obtain an understanding of the importance of R&D and non-R&D based innovation in different sectors

Justification

The purpose is to assist policy makers in the short, medium and especially long term planning aimed at strengthening developmental activities and stimulating economic growth

Accomplishments1. Established a 4-person Steering committee;

– National coordinator- MOST– Representative from CSA– Representatives from R&D institutions – Representative from MoE

2. Trained two members in the development of STI Indicators.

– Training in South Africa After participating in the African Inter-gov. Committee meeting and AMCOST III

3. Project Proposal developed ,approved by ESTA Officials and sent to the NEPAD – OST for evaluation

Accomplishments…

• 4.Looking for essential ManualsThe Frascati Manualused as international guides for conducting similar surveys – Correspondences Made:

• Prof M.Kahn (CeSTII) Frascati Manual –For R&D Survey• Dr. Fred Gault (OECD,-NESTI)

The OSLO Manual• Designed by the OECD as part of the Frascati family• Focuses on innovation at firm level• Provided by NEPAD-OST

– Report prepared by UNU/MERIT for NEPAD entitled “Designing a Policy-relevant Innovation survey for NEPAD”

– Innovation survey reports (Malaysia2002-2004....)

Accomplishments…• 5.Understanding Basic Concepts in innovation

Innovation: • not a new phenomenon.• As old as mankind itself• "Creative destruction" of existing structures(Joseph

Schumpeter)• Role in economic and social change(Introducing

novelty/variety in to the economic sphere)• Four types:

– new products (Product innovation)– new methods of production ( Process innovation)– the exploitation of new markets (Market innovation)– new ways to organize business (Organ-l Innovation)

Including the 10 entries we agreed up on during the Training workshop in RSA

Accomplishments…6. Questionnaire (Amharic and English

versions) developed based on:– NEPAD guideline and Proposal– South African Questionnaire, 2005– CIS IV-OECD 30

7.Guideline prepared8. Key Data sources identified

– CSA– Chamber of Commerce( Directory)– Internal sources-Industry Dept

Accomplishments…

• 9.Preparing ISIC 3.1 Revision 2002 Classification

Major Division Divisions Major Group

Accomplishments…10.Recruitment and Training

– Graduates were recruited on a transparent way using defined sets of criteria

• Mathematics, Statistics, Engineering, Computer Science

– Presentations (Objective of the ENIS, Survey methodology, discussion on each item and practice)

Accomplishments…

11. Dispatched to Five Routes– Sample Data Collected covering all Regional

states and City Administrations

Survey Detail• Data collection method was census which tried to

make contact with each firm undergoes innovation. didn’t cover all the area that under go innovation.

• Total population size is 2126 enterprises.

due to time constraint, we didn’t cover all the area that under go innovation. As result 305 enterprises data was collected. or

14.3%of population.• Response rate by sector

Result • After data was collected from different

region of the country:

• Analysis was made in the form of

-Descriptive method

-Tabular Method

- using different types graphs (Bar graph and pie chart)

Year of Establishment of Firms• Most of the firms established during the last 3-15 years.

Educational Level of Managers

40.3% firms’ of managers are university/ college graduates

The Ownership of the Firms 74.43% are owned by local private owners

Main activity of the firm 30.5% of the firms Production of house and office Furniture

Number of Workers in 2007 Compare with 2005 Number of firms increased by 40.3%

The value of sales of firms in 2007 compare with in 2005

Increased by 48.5%

Innovating activities that undergo by the firm

• 197 (64.6%) firms introduced quality control

• 170 (53.7%)firms introduced maintenance routines for innovation purpose.

• 162(53.1%) firms improved an existing product

Importance of reasons for Innovation

• " very important” reasons for innovation include :

213 (69.84%) firms improved product quality

209 (68.52%) firms Improve working condition

179 (58.69%) firms Avail government support

173 (56.72%) firms Comply with local laws or

standards

172(56.39) firms Deal with new competitors at

home

Source of Information for Innovation

• Very important source of information for innovation

201 (65.90%)firms from customers

171 (55.07%) firms with in the firm

116 (30.08) firms from suppliers of equipment materials

& component s or software

Type of information obtained from the sources

Firms can obtain various information from different sources, which help to enhance their firms.

with in the firms

174 firms quality related

138 firms market related

160 firms process related

150 firms product related

From customers

172 firms quality related

136 firms market related

Cooperation

• Firms made cooperation or joint innovative activity highly - with customers, it covers 50.82%.

- With suppliers 43.93%. Impact of innovation against firm performance -The impact of innovation can be seen from

-Profitability 60%

-Market share (domestic market) 58.69%

-Diversification 48.85%

-Product differentiation including (changes in quality) 64.59%

-Reduced time to respond to the customer or supplier need

61.31%

-Improved quality of your goods or services 63.28%

- Improved employee satisfaction 63.28%

-Reduced rate of employee turn over 63.28%

Obstacles or hindrances to innovation activity

Very significantly obstacles /or hindrances to their innovative activity was

- Domestic economics (recession, inflation) 65.90%

- Shortage of finance 52.79%

- Lack of information in technology 38.39%

- High cost of the innovation project 36.39%

Research and development activities - 78.69% of the respondents indicted that firms have no R&D

activities.

- 7.89% responded that they do R&D activities.

- 13.42% of the respondent don’t give any response to the issues.

• How R&D activities is performed Of all 24 firms which have R&D activities: -19 firms performed in-house (Intramural) -7 firms performed outsource (extramural

• Total R&D expenditure in 2007

- 24 firms doing R&D

- 8 firms gave response

- Total R&D expenditures ($6,496240.93)

• Patent granted to firm - No firm have been granted regarding to patent on the given period.

• Internet Service - 50 firms have internet service and - 239 firms have no internet services

Sources of support

– Federal government

Loan 2.9%

Training 2.3%

Technical support 1.31%

Infrastructure support 3.28%

– Regional governments and city administration

Loan 9.18%

Training 8.52%

Technical support 7.87%

Infrastructure support 7.21%

There are others supporters like National funding agencies & foreign

governments.

• Challenges

-Complex work and tight schedule

-Limited experience and capability in STI indicators-

-Problems in key areas e.g concepts interpretation etc

-Reliability of the list of firms we got from various sources.

-Non response -for the committee members