For this sixth edition, the Global Innovation Index 2013 (GII) covers 142 economies, accounting for 94.9% of the world’s population and 98.7% of the world’s Gross Domestic Product (in US Dollars).
Global Innovation Index 2013 (GII) relies on two sub-indices, the Innovation Input Sub-Index and the Innovation Output Sub-Index, each built around key pillars.
Five input pillars capture elements of the national economy that enable innovative activities: (1) Institutions, (2) Human capital and research, (3) Infrastructure, (4) Market sophistication, and (5) Business sophistication. Two output pillars capture actual evidence of innovation outputs: (6) Knowledge and technology outputs and (7) Creative outputs.
Each pillar is divided into sub-pillars and each sub-pillar is composed of individual indicators (84 in total). Sub-pillar scores are calculated as the weighted average of individual indicators; pillar scores are calculated as the weighted average of sub-pillar scores. Four measures are then calculated:
- The Innovation Input Sub-Index is the simple average of the first five pillar scores.
- The Innovation Output Sub-Index is the simple average of the last two pillar scores.
- The overall GII is the simple average of the Input and Output Sub-Indices.
- The Innovation Efficiency Ratio is the ratio of the Output Sub-Index over the Input Sub-Index.
Global Innovation Index 2013 Conceptual Framework
The GII gathers data from more than 30 sources, covering a large spectrum of innovation drivers and results; privileging hard data over qualitative assessments (only five survey questions are included this year).
The framework is revised and adjusted every year in a transparent exercise. Out of 84 indicators, 64 are identical to GII 2012, and a total of 20 indicators were modified in 2013: ten indicators were deleted/replaced, and ten underwent methodological changes (new computation methodology at the source, change of scaling factor, change of classification, etc.).
Even if the framework is kept relatively stable, this implies that the GII must be seen more as a yearly cross-sectional evaluation of innovation performance, than as a time series or longitudinal study; and that year-on-year comparisons are not necessarily valid or straightforward.
Adjustments to the framework led to three substantive improvements:
- Analytically, the most interesting adjustment relates to the inclusion of variables which assess the quality over the quantity of innovation inputs and outputs (Box 3 in Chapter 1).
- The cooperation with other international organizations was reinforced to obtain key indicators, such as, among others, high- and medium-tech output over total manufactures output (UNIDO), creative goods exports (UNESCO).
- The collaboration with some high-quality private data sources was strengthened to improve metrics in areas such as expenditures on software, venture capital deals, Internet domain registrations, top university rankings, etc.