On May 29 and 30, the event was held in Medellín Innovation Land 2024a space that has been consolidating itself as the main forum for discussion of different topics related to innovation in the country and which in this edition featured a panel of experts with the suggestive title: “What has to happen for Colombia to go from 66th place in the global Innovation Index to the top 10?”
In this space, some key elements that shed light on the provocative question were discussed. However, it is worth delving into some of the most relevant results that the Global Innovation Index (GII) reveals about the country’s performance in this matter.
The Global Innovation Index (GII)
The GII is an annual classification carried out by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Cornell University and the European Institute of Business Administration (Insead) that places the different States according to their capabilities and results in innovation. To this end, the GII seeks to map the behavior of around 80 indicators to provide a comprehensive analysis of innovation performance in approximately 132 economies.
Of course, there is no shortage of critics of the GII approach who point out the rigidity of its measurement variables, the biases in its methodological design that tends to emphasize aspects specific to the innovation dynamics of the most developed economies, among many other aspects. However, in the absence of better instruments, the GII offers us valuable information to understand our performance in innovation and compare ourselves with others.
Colombia’s performance in the GII
In the last edition of this instrument, carried out in 2023, Colombia ranked 66th among 132 economies, maintaining the same position as the previous year. Without going into an in-depth review of all the dimensions of the index, it is important to keep in mind that, according to it, the country faces important challenges in areas such as institutions, human capital, research capabilities, infrastructure, and business and market sophistication.
Strengthening these dimensions is essential. Although there has been plenty of analysis on this topic, addressing the needs of a political environment that generates distrust for investments in innovation, which essentially benefit mainly from medium and long-term efforts, is vital. According to the GII, factors such as political stability, government effectiveness and the quality of regulations are determinants for the development of a favorable environment for innovation.
Addressing the challenges in quality and coverage of the Colombian educational system (including tertiary education) is essential to strengthen the capabilities of human talent (ranked 81 in the GII) that the country requires to carry out research and development activities with industrial relevance.
According to the World Bank, Colombia invests only 0.24% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in research and development (R&D), a figure well below the average of the countries of the Organization for Cooperation and Development. Economics (OECD). This shows the need to generate incentive schemes and mechanisms that ensure academia-industry collaborations in the long term.
We urgently need to make our rulers and policy makers understand that advancing in the degree of penetration and appropriation of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) is not the same as promoting innovation. The Global Competitiveness Report, which places Colombia in 67th place, shows that, despite progress in the adoption of ICT, we still face great challenges in the innovation capacity of companies and in their effective use. More computers, without the talent, skills and mindset for innovation, are not the miraculous solution to convert a society anchored in traditional economic sectors into a new “software valley.” Neither does creating expensive centers for the design of public policies.
As the GII shows, Colombia faces enormous challenges in converting its investments into innovative products and technologies. In this area, it is evident that the repetition of the same strategies for several years has not produced significant impacts on the innovative performance of society and companies. Colombia’s path to innovation is hindered by challenges that prevent it from converting its investments into innovative technologies and products, negatively impacting its overall innovation output.
What could we do differently?
A first proposal has to do with “deselitizing” the language and culture of innovation as an exclusive matter of large companies and the most sophisticated sectors, making them more accessible to small companies and communities. The culture of innovation must have a more “earthly”, human and social scope. In this context, actors such as universities, companies and the public sector can generate significant contributions. Examples of this exist aplenty and can be found in different social innovation initiatives and grassroots innovations (grassroots innovations).
On the other hand, the financing system for science, technology and innovation activities, under which projects of a diverse nature and isolated efforts are supported without an integrative view of the country’s major social, economic and environmental problems, has proven its effectiveness. obsolescence. Some of these great directions have already been proposed in exercises such as the Mission of the Wise, but each year this vision is lost amidst the lack of funding for small projects. Large R&D agendas take time to consolidate and although both officials and those in charge of the finance area of some companies do not understand it, we are even talking about time horizons that, depending on the sector of activities, can exceed a decade.
In this context, a plausible and effective approach can be found in mobilizing the efforts of different actors to address some of the country’s most pressing challenges. For example, Colombia has large rural areas in which there are enormous obstacles to the provision of energy services, affecting, according to Promigás data, more than 9.6 million people (18.5% of the population), which They are in a condition of energy poverty (population that cannot meet basic human needs using adequate energy).
How about we start by working on accelerating innovative solutions on issues like this, with medium and long-term time horizons, and where it would be possible to leverage considerable investments through public-private partnership schemes, the use of underutilized instruments such as public procurement of innovation, and the sandboxes or special treatment areas for testing technologies and production and consumption schemes?
For now, let us hope that, with the arrival of new local administrations to the different municipalities and departments of Colombia during this year, little by little we will be able to mobilize efforts to enhance human capital, strengthen the ties between the actors of the quadruple helix, and move towards the implementation of a more inclusive and long-term oriented culture of innovation.
Let’s look at the GII next year, and the next, and the next, and we will find more and more ideas, and hopefully less of the same.
