A real quick post since I haven’t made an entry in some time (due in part to ongoing Android development[read: cursing at Java books and Sun Microsystems]), but I thought this was an interesting article at Science Daily.  The article delves into the recent Science and Engineering Indicators (SEI) report that outlines the health of the U.S.’s science and engineering system via a number of markers such as total R&D costs and patent fillings.  The gist is that Asian countries, particularly South Korea, are starting to make a significant splashes in the global science and technology pool, and in a round-a-bout way at the expense of U.S. developers.  The article noted that “[a]nnual growth of R&D expenditures in the U.S. averaged 5 to 6 percent while in Asia, it has skyrocketed. In some Asian countries, R&D growth rate is two, three, even four, times that of the U.S.”  It goes on to say that foreign inventors seeking patent protection in America is on the rise from nations such as Taiwan and South Korea, though (somewhat) surprisingly is still relatively low in major countries like India and China.

At first blush, that sounds like the U.S. is losing ground, which would keep in line with the pessimistic outlook of this country’s future that has been circulating for some time.  As the U.S. becomes more of a “knowledge economy” driven by intellectual property and technological innovation, maintaining itself as a leader in engineering and science is essential.  True, the U.S. has not completely abandoned its manufacturing roots, and high-tech areas such as alternative fuel and defense development are likely to remain “in-house”, so to speak, for some time.  At the same time, though, if the U.S. expects to maintain its position as a leading global power, it must continue to be a leader in innovation and technological growth internationally, especially as Asian countries continue their impressive growth.

My issue with the article, and I guess the growing mindset that America is losing ground to other Eastern countries, is that most of these reports seemingly disregard the immense differences in the economies and growth patterns of the various countries.  While the U.S. is a mature nation with an established research base, nations like Taiwan, Korea, and even China are relative newcomers to the global technological stage, and all realize that to become a player they need to increase their production significantly.  That means more and more money being dedicated to research and development in order to spur on growth, but always with the caveat that most of the countries are still lagging significantly behind other developed countries in terms of innovation.  Without delving too deeply into the report (which can be found here for anyone who has a masochistic desire to skim 730+ pages of small text), the numbers show that while growth in foreign countries outstrips America’s, the total output by the U.S. still dwarfs the efforts from these rising nations.  So while it is still impressive to see 3x growth per year in some countries, the massive grain of salt is that they are based on much smaller starting bases.  And while the size of the countries should obviously be taken into account when analyzing the raw numbers, the fact remains that the U.S. should remain an innovation leader for years to come.

Of course, this position relies on a continued stream of high-quality engineers and scientists being produced by American schools and employers, which this report showed was eroding somewhat.  Less Americans are graduating college with degrees in engineering and the sciences than in years past, and even where there is growth it is somewhat minimal or due to classifications of “science” degrees that may not translate to real R&D growth.  And yes, the rending of clothes and gnashing of teeth over America’s struggles to promote science to a younger generation cannot be ignored.  But as others have noted, looking at raw numbers like graduation rates and total degrees being issued can be immensely misleading, since how ones defines a science background is obviously open for interpretation.  Also, quality of education at many of these schools is dubious at best, resulting in individuals graduating in a couple of years with degrees that are engineering degrees in name only.  So while the focus on science in America certainly needs to be reinforced (a position taken by President Obama both during his campaign and since entering office), the notion that America is about to be lapped in the server farms and laboratories by other nations is a bit premature.

No Comments »

Comments are closed.