- India
must develop tech solutions: Leyland MD
http://sify.com/finance/fullstory.php?id=13970367
Monday,
24 October , 2005, 09:33
Chennai:
India cannot stop with just being the shop floor of the world but must take the
next step to develop technology solutions and create a wealth of intellectual
property, according to R. Seshasayee, Managing Director, Ashok Leyland. Today
in Sify Finance Addressing the inaugural of the SAEIndia International
Mobility Engineering Congress and Exposition 2005 here today, he said after gaining
global attention in manufacturing "India can emerge as a major source of
design skills for the world." It has the potential for technology development
with its resource of skilled engineering capabilities, the proposed setting up
of a National Automotive Testing and R&D Centre and the presence of a critical
mass of component industries. Tamil Nadu, particularly Chennai, is richly endowed
in this regard, he said. The advantage for an emerging market like India
is that it can leapfrog to the latest in technology as it did in telecommunications,
he added. Inaugurating the exposition, Ted Robertson, President, SAE International,
said India has the potential to "solve the (technology) problems of the world."
He said that in his 35 professional years, he had come across a number of outstanding
engineers from India. | Read more Finance news. | According to Seshasayee,
even a few years ago, the Indian auto components industry was worried about foreign
competition. "But now, the mood is different," he said, adding that
the industry had beaten the target for reaching $1 billion in exports by a good
two years. He observed that the Indian automotive industry had effectively
countered the challenge of meeting emission standards in "an extremely compressed
timeframe." Dr V. Krishnamurthy, Chairman, National Manufacturing
Competitiveness Council, said the automotive sector is fully focussing on manufacturing
of `hardware' but with electronics playing a prominent role in modern vehicles
there is a need for developing software. In this segment too India could dominate
as it does in information technology software. The Union Minister for Information
Technology, Dayanidhi Maran, in his address said India has to move into design
development from the low end of technology. The automobile industry should
actively involve itself in the proposed National Automotive Testing and R&D
Infrastructure Project, an automotive testing, homologation and research facility
proposed near Chennai at a cost of Rs 1,700 crore, he said. With electronics
constituting 40 per cent of modern automobiles and embedded Electronic Control
Units (ECUs) playing key roles, the demand for such components is bound to increase.
There is a need to develop low cost ECUs. To be competitive Indian OEMs and component
manufacturers need to design and develop them for proprietary rights on the intellectual
property. Government institutions and laboratories, manufacturers and IT
companies and associations can come together to develop generic solutions. Agencies
under the Ministry of Science and Technology, Information Technology and the Indian
Institutes of Technology at Mumbai and Chennai could collaborate in focussed industry-academy
interaction, he added.
- R&D
Scorecard Global Top 1,000 Companies: US firms dominate; 86% of total R&D
comes from just 6 countries out of 36
By Finfacts Team
Oct
24, 2005, 09:42
The
increase in corporate R&D investment for 2004-05 was 2 per cent in Europe
but 7 per cent in the US and Asia, according to the International R&D Scoreboard,
produced by the UK's Department of Trade and Industry. There are two Irish companies
among the top 1,000 global companies: Kerry Group has a 416th ranking and Elan
Pharmaceuticals has a 806th rank .
The
USA has 6 of the 15 largest companies by R&D (see figure ES3) but 6 of the
top 10 larger companies by growth of R&D and 11 of the top 15 by R&D intensity.
Europe has 6 of the top 15 by R&D but 1 of the top 10 by growth and 4 of the
top 15 by R&D intensity. Amongst R&D-intensive middle-sized companies
(sales up to £500m and R&D intensity over 4.5%) in the Global 1000,
the USA has the largest proportion (38%) of its Scoreboard companies in this category.
However, the UK is second of the 6 major countries by proportion with 22% of its
companies in the middle – sized category. Using the US, EU and UK Scoreboards,
the proportions of sizeable companies (R&D over £6.4m) in each R&D
intensity band can be displayed. For the highest R&D intensity bands above
10%, the UK has a higher proportion than the EU ex UK although less than the USA
(see figure ES4). The UK’s number of companies in this category has increased
by 77% between the 2001 and 2005 Scoreboards.
The
Scorecard of the the world's top 1,000 companies by R&D spending, shows that
European companies as a whole have not increased R&D investment over the past
four years, while US companies are spending 12 per cent more on R&D than their
four-year average. The US continues to score highly when "R&D intensity"
- R&D in relation to sales - is measured. American companies invested 4.5
per cent of sales revenues in R&D, compared with 4.0 per cent for Japanese
and 3.3 per cent for European companies.
This partly reflects the fact that
the US is strongly represented in the three big R&D-intensive sectors of industry:
pharmaceuticals, IT hardware and software.
Key Points
R&D: the global picture
1.
The business climate for R&D-active companies continued to improve in the
period covered by the Scoreboard, with increases in overall sales growth, profitability
and R&D levels for the top 1000 companies across the world. Growth in all
three measures was stronger in the Americas than in the Asia-Pacific region or
Europe. The United States continues to be the strongest R&D nation with 6
of the top 15 biggest R&D investing companies; Europe collectively has 5.
The USA also has 11 of the top 15 larger companies by R&D intensity (R&D
as % sales); Europe has the remaining 4.
2. R&D is still overwhelmingly
concentrated in the largest countries, sectors and companies:
a.
86% of total R&D in the Scoreboard comes from just 6 countries out of 36;
b. 82% of R&D is in the top 7 sectors out of 31; and
c. 64% of R&D is done in the top 100 companies
of the global 1000.
This concentration means that country or sector
changes can be dominated by changes at a few large companies.
3. For
countries, the Scoreboard identifies significant growth in R&D from South
Korea and Taiwan, which now contribute 33 companies to the global 1000. With firms
like Hyundai (R&D of £976m, double the previous year’s) and Samsung
(R&D of £2.5bn, up 37%) now major R&D investors, South Korea is
the eighth largest country in the Scoreboard and is growing its R&D faster
than any other significant R&D country. So far, the Scoreboard has found no
evidence of substantial R&D spending in Chinese or Indian companies.
4.
Pharmaceuticals and automotive R&D are increasing. Amongst the top five sectors,
pharmaceuticals had the largest increase over the previous year with 10% followed
by automotive with 7%. In automotive, 70% of the increase was contributed by 5
companies out of 68, Hyundai having the largest change.
5. The Scoreboard
also looks at countries’ R&D vigorous companies (R&D Global 1000
companies with sales up to £500m and R&D intensity of at least 4.5%).
The USA has the highest proportion of its companies (38%) in this growing middle-sized
catergory followed by the UK with 22%. This reflects US and UK vigour in the highly
R&D-intensive sectors of pharmaceuticals, IT hardware and software. This is
confirmed by a comparison of US,UK and EU ex UK companies with very high R&D
intensity and by UK data in key point 7.
The importance
of sectors
6. The major R&D nations have different R&D
sector specialisations, with the USA strong in IT hardware, software and pharmaceuticals,
Japan in automotive and electronics, Switzerland in pharmaceuticals and the UK
in both pharmaceuticals and aerospace. The proportions of large companies in R&D-intensive
sectors such as these, or in lowintensity sectors such as oil & gas, mining,
utilities and telecomms, are quite different between countries. Japan and Germany
are R&D specialists: they have more than twice the proportion of companies
in the R&D Global 1000 than they have in the FT Global 500 list of the world’s
largest companies; Canada, by contrast, has only one third as many R&D Global
1000 companies as FT Global 500. The US has similar proportions in both lists
and the UK, with its strength in financial services, resources and retailing,
has a 50% larger proportion in the FT Global 500. The UK is thus a value specialist
with a high presence in sectors with a high wealth creation efficiency whether
they be R&D-intensive (such as pharmaceuticals), Capex intensive (e.g. oil
& gas) or services (e.g. financials).
The benefits of R&D
investment
7. There are well-established links between R&D
and company performance: R&D intensity is strongly correlated with sales growth,
wealth creation efficiency and market cap to sales ratio. The Scoreboards demonstrate
that:
a. 81% of companies with above average wealth
creation efficiency also have above average investment intensity in R&D, Capex
or both (for 12 sectors where such investment is important).
b.
84-96% of companies with above average market cap-to-sales ratio also have above
average R&D intensity (for the 3 sectors with the highest R&D intensities).
c. The growth in market value for the portfolio
of FTSE 100 companies with the highest R&D intensities was 69% over the last
8 years compared to just 7% for the FTSE 100 index. However, company success depends
not only on wise and balanced investment in R&D and other factors (capital
investment, brands, skills, market development) but also on good strategic choices
and operational excellence.
Patents and R&D
8.
As noted in key point 7, there are major differences in patent-to- R&D ratios
between sectors. 2004 data on US patents granted to some 240 companies in 12 sectors
also shows:
a. A few companies have consistently higher
patent-to-R&D ratios than their sector averages. Examples are Canon and Seiko
Epson in electronics, Honda in automotive and Pfizer in pharmaceuticals.
b.
The number of larger companies by patent count in each sector tends to reflect
regional strengths – the US in pharmaceuticals, Japan in electronics.
c.
In some sectors, a few companies contribute a sizeable fraction of the 2004 patents.
For example, the top 2 of 34 pharmaceuticals companies contribute 27% of the patents.
d. Most companies in the chemistry-based sectors (pharmaceuticals,
chemicals, health) reduced their number of 2004 patents over 2003 whereas most
in the physics-based sectors (aerospace, automotive, electronics, IT hardware,
software) increased their patent count.
Improvements in this
year’s Scoreboard
9. The expansion to 1000 Global R&D
companies (from 700) and 750 UK companies (formerly 700) allows more meaningful
comparisons between major countries and allows us to extend our analysis to smaller
firms (down to £22m R&D globally).
- Education
in Bihar
by Bibhuti Bikramaditya
Chairman, BiharBrains
Seoul,
South Korea
http://www.patnadaily.com/readerswrite/2005/oct/bibhuti_bikram1.html
October
22, 2005
In July-August
of 2005, I was in India for a short period of 20 days and spent most of my time
with professors, teachers, students, scientist, Vice Chancellors (VCs) and discussed
ways to improve education in Bihar. I had long talk with three VCs of Bihar,
namely Patna University, Mithila University, and BN Mandal University. They all
talked about some developmental steps taken by them but they are not satisfactory. In
the inaugural speech of "Bihar Brains Scholastic Center" Dr. Rajmani
Sinha, VC Mithila University, talked about his mission for modernizing the university,
starting courses on fishing technology, opening technical college for women, and
his meeting with the President of India. Dr. J Thakur Ex-VC of Patna University,
during my talk with him, openly admitted that these days even the professors don't
want to read books. The VCs don’t have enough funds to give salaries to the
employees on time, give scholarships to the students, and start courses on modern
technology and placement of their students. Patna University, one of the
oldest universities in northern India, once was the center of excellence known
as the "Cambridge of Bihar" and the very name of Patna Science College
and Patna College was enough to judge the capability and intellect of a student.
Students were getting scholarship on time and hostels were full of bona fide students.
The situation has changed dramatically now. Hostels are full of political and
non-political "Gundas" and the politicians are misusing them very smartly. Till
early 90’s, the reputation of some more colleges of Bihar namely LS College
under Bihar University, T.N.B College under Bhagalpur University, CM Science College
in Mithila University, and Gaya College in Magadh University were considered good
because of a good system in place with emphasis on the adherence of strict
rules by the students, professors, and the employees. Students were working in
the labs, professors were delivering lectures on time, and labs were regularly
maintained. Now the situation has reversed. In my view, this is not only because
of a bad governmental policy or non-availability of funds but also because of
a lack of vision among the higher authorities of universities and colleges. With
the changing of time, the universities of Bihar have not been able to revise their
rules, update their syllabus. Professors have also failed to 'update' their knowledge,
and in general, have failed to keep up with the recent advancement in the science
and technology field. As a result, the research and development has suffered.
Teachers, professors and other college employees, because of a 'don't-want-to-learn'
attitude, are hesitant to use modern technology. Most teachers and students don’t
have email ids; don’t know how to use computers and Internet and email facilities. What
can we do? For this, we as sensible citizens of India should come
up with the best possible solution and not mere discussion on problems. Passing
bucks to political or non-political groups should be stopped. I believe that besides
a bad government policy, the elite class of Bihar, business communities, NRIs,
educationists have also contributed to this pathetic condition. I do strongly
feel that there must be coordination, co-operation and active association among
the erudite of this region who should come forward for establishing R&D centers
and business houses in Bihar.
In my view, we need to invest more in
education sector from primary level to university and research level. We can invest
as an individual or as groups or giving assistance to the group/society in the
following fields ASAP.
a. Providing good infrastructure and creating
work environment in university/colleges.
There are no good labs for
science as well as engineering or medical students in colleges or the universities.
No experiments are being carried out by the students in most of the colleges.
As result, students are afraid of instruments/apparatus.
We as group/individual
can give monetary assistance for the maintenances of labs and open free education
for students aspiring to appear in competitive exams within the university campus
itself. We must work on creating a work environment in the colleges/university
departments.
b. Open more and more engineering and medical colleges:
In my view, we need a minimum of 50 engineering and medical colleges in Bihar.
That could be opened under a society or trust. We can learn from Maharashtra,
Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu where societies/trust have played significant
role in opening colleges/university and providing better education with good infrastructure.
People of Bihar, particularly NRIs/ business community, should come forward to
minimize the flight of the students to other states.
c. Open R&D
houses: Bihar has enough potential in dairy technology, fishing technology; sugar
Industry and engineering technology/basic sciences.
NRIs of Bihar can invest
in opening R&D houses in these fields. Private companies must be attracted
by the government.
As an initiative, biharbrains.org is planning to
establish "Aryabhatt Center for R&D" in association with NRIs and
professionals from Bihar who are in India and abroad for which huge investment
is needed. We welcome donation and support from all citizen of India for this
noble cause. We have already established Bihar Brains scholastic center at Patna
and now going to open a "Resource center" at Patna University for which
recommendation has already been made by the present VC, Patna University.
d. Primary/secondary schools: Though in almost every state, government primary
and secondary schools are not doing well, in Bihar the situation is particularly
alarming.
Now we must be active for the development of this sector
and contribute ourselves in whatever way we can. In my view, we can contribute
in following ways for improving the condition of primary and secondary schools.
1. Group
sponsorship: We can donate money to the schools for their infrastructure development
by forming society by taking one school as test case and then move on to another
school in the same fashion.
2. Individual sponsorship: All
capable individual should start thinking about his/her own school where he studied
and then contribution can be made to those schools. If he studied from the good
schools then he can take one school as model test case and try to develop it in
his own way.
3. Pressure on government: Our society/trust should
make this as a task and talk to the government to show some actions. For this,
a mass movement is required, no other way around it.
Make
a fortune Bamboo flowered last in 1959, fuelling famine and the creation
of a
new state Mizoram. It will flower again in the northeast in 2006-07.
This
time around can the region turn the emerging threat into an
economic opportunity?
Will the National Bamboo Mission take off in
time to help? Read
the article online>>
http://www.downtoearth.org.in/cover_nl.asp?mode=1
- Key
Technologies for Europe reports recommend six pillars for a research strategy
'Beyond Lisbon'
[Date: 2005-10-21]
http://ica.cordis.lu/search/index.cfm?fuseaction=news.simpledocument&N_RCN=24650
Fifteen
expert reports on key research and technology domains for Europe's future are
now available; having been debated at a recent conference on 'Key Technologies
for Europe'. The final report compiled by the group of experts attempts to look
beyond the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) and the Lisbon Agenda to make recommendations
for the future research priorities of the European Union. Attendees at
the conference, in debating the conclusions of the expert group's foresight report,
have made six recommendations for a research agenda 'beyond the Lisbon strategy'.
The report draws together in one document the detailed reports prepared by experts
in the group on each of their technological fields; including existing areas in
transition such as agriculture or energy, and emerging or converging fields such
as biotechnology, cognitive science, information technology (IT) and nanotechnology.
The group, assembled by the European Commission, aims to produce recommendations
for a research strategy that look towards an Eighth Framework Programme (FP8)
and beyond. Both the report and conference attendees agreed that Europe must adopt
a more optimistic and proactive approach to its research policy, while balancing
conflicting aims and trends. For example, there is a need for a dual strategy
that incorporates flexibility in addressing short to medium-term needs, while
working within a long-term framework for research policy. Similarly, Europe needs
to address its innovation systems failures, such as weak knowledge transfer mechanisms
and poor absorption capacity for innovation, while engineering creative long-term
transition. This should be achieved through a differentiation approach, based
on its own strengths, rather than imitation of the United States and Japan.
The
report goes on to say that this long-term strategy then needs to be translated
into an action plan based on six pillars. Firstly, the EU needs to project a global
vision that responds to emerging players in key technologies and supports the
research strategies of neighbouring countries and regions. Secondly, Europe should
follow a 'creative system disruption' approach that identifies emerging sectors
where a research gap has not yet developed, and targets investments in key technologies
as drivers of social change. This would be complemented by changing research strategies,
shifting towards a bio-economy, capitalising on IT and making a transition towards
sustainable lifestyles. The EU then needs a new long-term research agenda,
with an emphasis on basic research, developing infrastructures and clustering
multidisciplinary research teams. This also needs to address issues such as the
scientist-citizen divide and risks in investing in new technologies. The fourth
pillar would be based on foresight approaches that analyse the evolution paths
of key technologies, bridge between framework programmes and contribute to bottom-up
priority setting through technology platforms. The expert group recommends
that Europe change its linear framework for the exploitation of knowledge creation.
It must overcome poor knowledge transfer, and exploit the capacity of SMEs, as
well as invest in and protect European intellectual property. Lastly, the EU needs
to invest in societal learning; engaging the public and addressing cultural constraints
on investment and acceptance of key technologies. Speaking at the conference,
held in Brussels on 19 and 20 September, Science and Research Commissioner Janez
Potocnik welcomed the recommendations with the words, 'we need to think beyond
Lisbon, we need to think in the long-term and make decisions which will be in
line with a long-term approach'. Attendees took part in wide ranging discussions
on the report and the various technological fields, including the relevant members
of the expert group. 'Design' and 'context' emerged as key concepts, linking the
different technologies and the systematic challenges. Early in the conference,
Josephine Green of Philips Design in The Netherlands had suggested that as the
economy moved away from products and consumers, it would be based more on co-existence
with technology, emphasising experiences, transformation and systems. Such a 'context-driven'
economy might move beyond productivity as a basis for prosperity, towards sustainability.
As the work of the expert group points out, products and services are increasingly
being brought together in complex systems, and there is a need for more specific
research into interdisciplinary fields, such as robotics, statistical and dynamical
models, pharmacology and linguistics. Beyond the production of knowledge,
EU policy makers need to know how it is shared and used - knowledge diffusion
is the issue. Some think fields such as complexity theory and cognitive sciences
can contribute to greater understanding of knowledge systems and help close the
science-technology gap. Europe enjoys strengths due to its potential for empirical
study (linguistic, cultural and socio-economic diversity) and a wealth of applications,
challenges and research approaches. Meanwhile new application areas are
emerging; like services, where society is running far ahead of our institutional
framework, or security and safety, where technology is driven by both political
incentives and public concerns. One delegate commented that from a social science
perspective, such emerging fields, whether driven by new applications or new technologies,
could be seen in terms of 'new engineering professions'. Some attendees characterised
the next stage as a 'knowledge-based bio-economy', and concluded that there is
a greater need than ever for a proactive approach to dialogue with the public,
civil society and legislators or policy makers. Other conference contributions
concentrated on the challenges facing Europe and the world. While energy efficiency
technology is available now, it was pointed out, it is far from certain that the
technologies needed for the world's energy needs in 2040 will be available in
time. Speakers contrasted the urgency of action needed with the research topics
being pursued. One suggestion was that technology platforms involving stakeholders
and policy makers might help to address and raise awareness of these issues. In
presenting his report on foresight activities on the final morning, Professor
Emilio Fontela, from the Universidad Antonio de Nebrija, spoke on developing a
long-term future scenario for the next technology wave, and what he called the
'sustainable knowledge economy'. The key policy issues would revolve around cooperation
in science and technology, efficient research structures and the design of socio-technical
systems. In his view, foresight and social sciences must try to build bridges
between demand-pulled technological fields (agri-food, manufacturing, environment)
and supply-pushed areas (nano- and biotechnologies, IT and cognitive sciences).
It is in this second group that the European and international dimension for cooperation
will be most important.
- India sign
accords with Mexico
http://www.siliconindia.com/shownewsdata.asp?newsno=29755
Friday,
October 21, 2005
NEW
DELHI: India and Mexico today signed five agreements for enhancing cooperation
in education, science and technology and other areas, providing a major impetus
to bilateral ties. The accords are on cooperation between diplomatic academies,
cultural and educational exchange programs for 2005-07, program for cooperation
in Science and Technology and for exemption of visa requirements for official
and diplomatic passport holders. They were signed after wide-ranging discussions
between Minister of State for External Affairs Rao Inderjit Singh and visiting
Mexican Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs Lourdes Aranda Bezaury who led their
respective delegations at the fourth India-Mexico Joint Commission meeting. As
part of effort to promote trade, investment and economic cooperation, it was decided
that agreements on customs cooperation, avoidance of double taxation and promotion
and protection of investment should be concluded at the earliest, a joint communiqué
issued at the end of the five-day visit of the Mexican minister here said. The
two sides also agreed to strengthen cooperation in agriculture, fisheries, oil
and gas, non-conventional and renewable energy sources, science and technology,
telecom, IT including e-governance, tourism and other areas of mutual interest. |
