Global

Innovation
Index 2024
Unlocking
g the
Promise of Social
Entrepreneurship
Global
Innovation
Index 2024
Unlocking the
Promise of Social
Entrepreneurship

17th Edition
Soumitra Dutta, Bruno Lanvin, Lorena Rivera León
and Sacha Wunsch-Vincent

Editors
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. © WIPO, 2024

The user is allowed to reproduce, distribute, adapt, translate and publicly First published 2024
perform this publication, including for commercial purposes, without
explicit permission, provided that the content is accompanied by an World Intellectual Property
acknowledgement that WIPO is the source and that it is clearly indicated if Organization 34, chemin des
changes were made to the original content. Colombettes, P.O. Box 18 CH-1211
Geneva 20, Switzerland
Suggested citation: World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
(2024). Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social ,6%1 SULQW b
Entrepreneurship*HQHYD:,32b 10.34667/tind.50062 ISBN: 978-92-805-3681-2(online)

For any derivative work, please include the following disclaimer: “The ISSN: 2263-3693 (print)
Secretariat of WIPO assumes no liability or responsibility with regard to the ISSN: 2788-6972 (online)
transformation or translation of the original content.”

When content published by WIPO, such as images, graphics, trademarks

or logos, is attributed to a third party, the user of such content is solely
responsible for clearing the rights with the right holder(s).

To view a copy of this license, please visit https://creativecommons.org/

licenses/by/4.0

Any dispute arising under this license that cannot be settled amicably shall
be referred to arbitration in accordance with Arbitration Rules of the United
Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) then in force.
The parties shall be bound by any arbitration award rendered as a result of
such arbitration as the final adjudication of such a dispute.

The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout

this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever
on the part of WIPO concerning the legal status of any country, territory
or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers
or boundaries.

This publication is not intended to reflect the views of the Member States or
the WIPO Secretariat.

The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers does not

imply that they are endorsed or recommended by WIPO in preference to
others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.

&RYHUb*HWW\,PDJHV)ORULDQD6HYHQW\)RXU
Contents

Index to Economy Profiles 5

Foreword 6

Acknowledgments 8

Advisory Committee 11
Advisory Committee members 11

Industry Association Network 12

Academic Network 13

The GII Partners 14

Preface 14

GII 2024 at a glance 16

Global leaders in innovation, 2024 17
Global Innovation Index 2024 rankings 18
Innovation performance at different income levels, 2024 19
Key takeaways 20

Global Innovation Tracker 26

Global Innovation Tracker Dashboard 27
Science and innovation investment 28
Technological progress 39
Technology adoption 42
Socioeconomic impact 45
Conclusion 47
Data notes 48

GII 2024 results 51

Innovation leaders in 2024 52
Innovation overperformers 59
Efficiency champions: Converting innovation
investment into tangible innovation output 62
Innovation across the world’s regions 63
Conclusion 69

Cluster ranking 71
The GII 2024 top 100 science and technology clusters 72

Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of

Social Entrepreneurship 85
The state of social entrepreneurship 86
The origins of social entrepreneurship 89
Why is social entrepreneurship important now? 90
3
 4 Innovation and impact in social entrepreneurship 95
Policy opportunities to unlock the promise of social entrepreneurship 104
Conclusion 111

GII 2024 Economy profiles 112

Framework of the Global Innovation Index 2024 113
How to read the Economy profiles 114

Appendices 249

Appendix I - Conceptual and measurement

framework of the Global Innovation Index 250
Rationale and origins 250
Defining innovation in the GII 250
The GII conceptual framework 251
Adjustments to the GII model in 2024 253
Data limitations and treatment 254
Missing values 255
Treatment of series with outliers 255
Normalization 256
Weights 256
Strengths and weaknesses 256
Caveats on the year-to-year comparison of rankings 257

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre (JRC) statistical

audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index 258
Conceptual and statistical coherence within the GII framework 259
The impact of modeling assumptions on the GII results 265
Uncertainty analysis results 267
Sensitivity analysis results 272
Best-practice frontier in the GII by data envelopment analysis 275
Conclusion 279

Appendix III - Sources and definitions 281

1. Institutions 281
2. Human capital and research 283
3. Infrastructure 286
b0DUNHWVRSKLVWLFDWLRQ 
b%XVLQHVVVRSKLVWLFDWLRQ 
b.QRZOHGJHDQGWHFKQRORJ\RXWSXWV 
7. Creative outputs 300

Appendix IV - Global Innovation Index science and

technology cluster methodology 304

Bibliography 316
References 316
Global Innovation Index 2024
Index to Economy Profiles

Albania 116 Ghana 161 Norway 206

Algeria 117 Greece 162 Oman 207
Angola 118 Guatemala 163 Pakistan 208
Argentina 119 Honduras 164 Panama 209
Armenia 120 Hong Kong, China 165 Paraguay 210
Australia 121 Hungary 166 Peru 211
Austria 122 Iceland 167 Philippines 212
Azerbaijan 123 India 168 Poland 213
Bahrain 124 Indonesia 169 Portugal 214
Bangladesh 125 Iran (Islamic Republic of) 170 Qatar 215
Barbados 126 Ireland 171 Republic of Korea 216
Belarus 127 Israel 172 Republic of Moldova 217
Belgium 128 Italy 173 Romania 218
Benin 129 Jamaica 174 Russian Federation 219
Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 130 Japan 175 Rwanda 220
Bosnia and Herzegovina 131 Jordan 176 Saudi Arabia 221
Botswana 132 Kazakhstan 177 Senegal 222
Brazil 133 Kenya 178 Serbia 223
Brunei Darussalam 134 Kuwait 179 Singapore 224
Bulgaria 135 Kyrgyzstan 180 Slovakia 225
Burkina Faso 136 Lao People's DemocraticRepublic 181 Slovenia 226
Burundi 137 Latvia 182 South Africa 227
Cabo Verde 138 Lebanon 183 Spain 228
Cambodia 139 Lithuania 184 Sri Lanka 229
Cameroon 140 Luxembourg 185 Sweden 230
Canada 141 Madagascar 186 Switzerland 231
Chile 142 Malaysia 187 Tajikistan 232
China 143 Mali 188 Thailand 233
Colombia 144 Malta 189 Togo 234
Costa Rica 145 Mauritania 190 Trinidad and Tobago 235
Côte d'Ivoire 146 Mauritius 191 Tunisia 236
Croatia 147 Mexico 192 Türkiye 237
Cyprus 148 Mongolia 193 Uganda 238
Czech Republic 149 Montenegro 194 Ukraine 239
Denmark 150 Morocco 195 United Arab Emirates 240
Dominican Republic 151 Mozambique 196 United Kingdom 241
Ecuador 152 Myanmar 197 United Republic of Tanzania 242
Egypt 153 Namibia 198 United States of America 243
El Salvador 154 Nepal 199 Uruguay 244
Estonia 155 Netherlands (Kingdom of the) 200 Uzbekistan 245
Ethiopia 156 New Zealand 201 Viet Nam 246
Finland 157 Nicaragua 202 Zambia 247
France 158 Niger 203 Zimbabwe 248
Georgia 159 Nigeria 204
Germany 160 North Macedonia 205

5
Photo: WIPO / Emmanuel Berrod

Foreword

Welcome to the 17th edition of WIPO’s flagship Global Innovation Index (GII), our guide to the
innovative performance of 133 countries, as well as the world’s top 100 science and technology
clusters. This year’s special theme, Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship, explores the
link between innovation and social enterprises, and the impact this delivers for our world.

Looking at the global landscape in 2023, we find cloudy skies and gloomy weather. Following
boom years between 2020 and 2022, R&D expenditures decelerated, the number of scientific
publications fell, and venture capital investments returned to pre-pandemic levels, including
in Africa and Latin America. If tighter financial conditions persist, this will hinder needed
innovation investments in the near term.

Amidst these gray clouds and headwinds, we can see some rays of light. New innovation in
Digital and Deep Science – highlighted in GII 2022 – continue to power progress, with significant
developments in areas like genome sequencing, computer power, and electric batteries.

There are also improvements in what we term the socio-economic impact of innovation,
with positive trends in key indicators, including a decline in global poverty and rises in labor
productivity and life expectancy.In terms of rankings, we see that the top spots have remained
quite stable. I think this reflects the fact that innovation ecosystems take time to build and those
that already have strong foundations in place are reaping the benefits.

But we are seeing a continued trend of strong progress from emerging economies. Indonesia,
Mauritius, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Brazil have climbed the most in the GII over the past five
years, with China, India, Iran, Morocco, the Philippines and Türkiye the highest risers over the
past 10 years. A further 19 economies, primarily in Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia, are
outperforming their development levels in innovation.

While these trends are promising, many of these innovation ecosystems still require careful
nurturing. WIPO will continue to support countries at all stages of development to seize
opportunities for entrepreneurship and innovation-driven growth.
6
 7

The GII tends to be centered around innovation for economic growth and development. We
have broadened our scope this year and chosen the theme of social innovation. Estimates
suggest there are up to 11 million social enterprises and 30 million social entrepreneurs globally,
contributing around USD 2 trillion to global GDP. Often these organizations are at the forefront
of addressing critical issues like poverty, environmental sustainability, and social injustice.

Despite their undeniable impact, social enterprises have often been on the margins of
traditional innovation models and policies. This 2024 GII edition brings the topic to center stage,
highlighting the state of social entrepreneurship globally and offering policy recommendations
to unlock the sector's innovation potential.

We hope that these insights, alongside the GII’s wealth of data and analysis, serve as a powerful
tool for pro-innovation policymaking globally and the continued development of strong,
dynamic innovation ecosystems in all parts of the world.

'DUHQ7DQJ
Director General
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
Foreword
Acknowledgments

The Global Innovation Index 2024 was prepared under the general direction of Daren Tang,
Director General, in WIPO’s IP and Innovation Ecosystems Sector led by Marco Alemán,
Assistant Director General, and in the Department of Economics and Data Analytics led by
Carsten Fink, Chief Economist.

The report and rankings are produced by a core team managed by Sacha Wunsch-Vincent, Head
of Section, comprising Vanessa Behrens, Project Manager, Davide Bonaglia, Oriol Gisbert Martí,
Anmol Kaur Grewal (all GII Fellows), Lorena Rivera León, Economist, and Jeff Slee, Data Scientist,
from the WIPO Composite Indicator Research Section responsible for the GII, and William
Becker, consultant in a personal capacity.

Soumitra Dutta (Oxford University and Portulans Institute), Bruno Lanvin (International
Institute for Management Development, IMD and Portulans Institute), Lorena Rivera León
(WIPO) and Sacha Wunsch-Vincent (WIPO) serve as co-editors of the GII.

The following WIPO colleagues provided substantive inputs to GII elaboration or dissemination:
Kyle Bergquist, Ryan Lamb, Bruno Le Feuvre and Hao Zhou, all from the Statistics and Data
Analytics Division, as well as colleagues from the External Relations Division, the Information
and Digital Outreach Division, the IP and Innovation Ecosystems Sector, the Language Division,
the News and Media Division, the Printing Plant, the Regional and National Development Sector,
the WIPO Office in New York, and WIPO’s External Offices.

A special thank you goes to our partners at the Portulans Institute; in particular, Rafael Escalona
Reynoso, Mariam Chaduneli and Sylvie Antal for their contributions. We also thank the GII’s
Advisory Committee, the GII Industry Association Network, Academic Network and the GII Data
Collaborators for their participation, as well as the Competence Centre on Composite Indicators
and Scoreboards (COIN) team from the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre – led my
Michaela Saisana – that conducted the statistical audit. The report was edited by Richard Cook,
Andy Platts and James Cooke at Book Now Ltd. The GII interactive data website was developed
by Pere Rovira and Víctor Pascual at OneTandem.

We are grateful to the following individuals and institutions for collaborating with data requests,
and without whom the Index would not be what it is:

AlpInvest: Peter Corneliu &HQWUHIRU6FLHQFHDQG7HFKQRORJ\6WXGLHV

&:76 /HLGHQ8QLYHUVLW\: Robert Tijssen and
%ORRPEHUJ1(): Evelina Stoikou Alfredo Yegros

%UDQG)LQDQFH: Areeb Arshad, Annie Brown, &ODULYDWH$QDO\WLFV: Joseph Brightbill and

Artur Bryzghalov, David Haigh, Bethany Uwe Wendland
Johnson, Thulith Perera and Binuri Ranasinghe
GDWDDL D6HQVRU7RZHU&RPSDQ\ : Donny
&%,QVLJKWV: Matthew Rados and Kristianto and Lexi Sydow
Aaron Winkler
(QHUJ\,QVWLWXWH: Ian Jones, Ololade Osifala
8 and Sneha Thomas
 9

(XURSHDQ&RPPLVVLRQ-RLQW5HVHDUFK&HQWUH: IQVIA institute for Human Data Science:

Jaime Lagüera González, Panagiotis Ravanos, Murray Aitken
Michaela Saisana, Oscar Smallenbroek
and Carlos Tacao Moura from COIN; and /6(*'DWD $QDO\WLFV
Elisabeth Nindl
/8,66*XLGR&DUOL8QLYHUVLW\:
*LW+XE: Peter Cihon, Mike Linksvayer and Cecilia Jona-Lasinio
Kevin Xu
0RRG\ȆV$QDO\WLFV: Renato Ferrigno, Kirill
*OREDO(QWUHSUHQHXUVKLS0RQLWRU Katschura, Santhosh Metri and Sasha Uvarova
*(0 : Niels Bosma, Alicia Coduras and
Aileen Ionescu-Somers 1$6$*RGGDUG,QVWLWXWHIRU6SDFH6WXGLHV
1$6$*,66 : Reto Ruedy
*URZWK/DEDW+DUYDUG8QLYHUVLW\:
Sebastian Bustos, Timothy Paul Cheston and 1DWLRQDO,QVWLWXWHVRI+HDOWK:
Annie White Kris Wetterstrand

+DUYDUG%XVLQHVV6FKRRO +%6 : Josh Lerner 2PGLD: David Hancock

,QWHUQDWLRQDO$WRPLF(QHUJ\$JHQF\ ,$($ : 2UJDQLVDWLRQIRU(FRQRPLF&RRSHUDWLRQ

Mauro Carrara and Egor Titovich DQG'HYHORSPHQW 2(&' : Fernando Galindo-
Rueda, Tue Halgreen, Corinne Heckmann,
,QWHUQDWLRQDO(QHUJ\$JHQF\ ,($ : Miyako Ikeda, Simon Normandeau and
Aidan Kennedy, Taylor Morrison and Fabien Verger
Roberta Quadrelli
3ULFHZDWHUKRXVH&RRSHUV 3Z& : Kamlesh
,QWHUQDWLRQDO)HGHUDWLRQRI5RERWLFV ,)5 : Balasubramanian and Shreeta Sen
Susanne Bieller and Nina Kutzbach
464XDFTXDUHOOL6\PRQGV/WG: Andrew
,QWHUQDWLRQDO/DERXU2UJDQL]DWLRQ ,/2 : MacFarlane and Samuel Wong
Horacio Barría, Roger Gomis, Steven Kapsos
and Yves Perardel 5HGGH,QGLFDGRUHVGH&LHQFLD\7HFQRORJ¯D
5,&<7 : Rodolfo Barrere and Laura Trama
,QWHUQDWLRQDO0RQHWDU\)XQG ,0) : Andrea
Quevedo and Kazuko Shirono 6 3*OREDO0DUNHW,QWHOOLJHQFH: Mohsen
Bonakdarpour and Karen Campbell
,QWHUQDWLRQDO2UJDQL]DWLRQIRU
6WDQGDUGL]DWLRQ ,62 : Laurent Charlet and 6&,PDJR: Félix de Moya Anegón
Cristina Draghici
6WDWLVWLFDO2IILFHRIWKH(XURSHDQ
International Telecommunication Union &RPPXQLWLHV (XURVWDW : Malgorzata Stadnik
(ITU): Nehal Desai, Thierry Geiger, Esperanza
Acknowledgments

Magpantay, Nathan Menthon, Martin 6WDWLVWLFV1HWKHUODQGV: Klaas De Vries

Schaaper and Daniel Vertesy
7KH&RQIHUHQFH%RDUG: Dana Peterson and
Markus Schomer
 10

7UDGH'DWD0RQLWRU//&: C. Donald Brasher :RUOG(FRQRPLF)RUXP: Roberto Crotti,

Jr., John Miller, Maria Vretenicic and Philipp Grosskurth, Ricky Li and Vesselina
Altan Yurdakul Stefanova Ratcheva

TU Wien: Karl Rupp :RUOG)HGHUDWLRQRI([FKDQJHV:

Mihaela Croitoru
81(6&2,QVWLWXWHIRU6WDWLVWLFV 8,6 :
Adolfo Gustavo Imhof, Olivier Labé, Patrick :RUOG+HDOWK2UJDQL]DWLRQ :+2 :
Montjouridès, Rohan Pathirage and Richard Johnston
José Pessoa
:RUOG7UDGH2UJDQL]DWLRQ :72 : Shradha
8QLWHG1DWLRQV,QGXVWULDO'HYHORSPHQW Bhatia, Barbara Carmelina D’Andrea Adrian,
2UJDQL]DWLRQ 81,'2 : Fernando Cantú Yu Dayong, Florian Eberth, Monia Snoussi-
Bazaldua and Vladimir Lukic Mimouni, Janvier Usanase and Ying Yan

8QLWHG1DWLRQV,QWHUQDWLRQDO&KLOGUHQȆV <DOH8QLYHUVLW\: Sebastián Block

(PHUJHQF\)XQG 81,&() : Tom Slaymaker
=RRN1,&,QF: Matthew Zook
8QLWHG1DWLRQV3RSXODWLRQ'LYLVLRQ:
Patrick Gerland

8QLWHG1DWLRQV3XEOLF
$GPLQLVWUDWLRQ1HWZRUN

:RUOG%DQN: Jean-François Arvis, Tony

Fujs, Aart Kraay, Hiroko Maeda, Eric
Roland Metreau, Frederic Meunier, Florina
Pirlea, Jorge Luis Rodriguez Meza and
Christina Wiederer
Global Innovation Index 2024
Advisory Committee

Since 2011, the Advisory Committee has been guiding the strategic trajectory of the Global
Innovation Index (GII). The Committee’s purpose is to underscore the significance of innovation
in both economic and social progress and to facilitate the dissemination of GII findings across
every economy and region the world over. Consisting of a diverse array of international
policymakers, thought leaders and corporate executives, members of the Advisory Committee
are chosen from a variety of geographical and institutional contexts and make their contribution
in an individual capacity. We extend our gratitude to all members of the Advisory Committee for
their ongoing dedication and cooperation.

Advisory Committee members

5REHUW'$WNLQVRQ 3KLOLSSH.XKXWDPD0DZRNR
President, Information Technology and Professor, Université du Kwango, Democratic
Innovation Foundation (ITIF), United States Republic of the Congo, and former Executive
Secretary, African Observatory for Science,
$XGUH\$]RXOD\ Technology and Innovation (AOSTI), African
Director-General, United Nations Educational, Union Commission
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
.HQ0RRUH
'RUHHQ%RJGDQ0DUWLQ Chief Innovation Officer, Mastercard
Secretary-General, International
Telecommunication Union (ITU) 6HUJLR0XMLFD
Secretary-General, International Organization
Tan Chorh Chuan for Standardization (ISO)
Permanent Secretary, National Research
and Development, The National Research 0RQLND6FKQLW]HU
Foundation, Singapore Chairwoman, German Council of Economic
Experts, and Professor, Ludwig-Maximilians-
Philippe Varin University (LMU) Munich, Germany
Chair, International Chamber of Commerce
(ICC), France +HL]R7DNHQDND
Professor Emeritus, Keio University, Japan;
)DELROD*LDQRWWL former Minister of State for Economic and
Director-General, European Organization for Fiscal Policy, and Member of the World
Nuclear Research (CERN) Economic Forum Board of Trustees

-RKQ.DR %ODQFD7UHYL³R
Chair, Institute for Large Scale Innovation, and President, Softtek, Mexico
former Harvard Business School Professor,
United States 3HGUR:RQJWVFKRZVNL
Coordinator, Brazilian Entrepreneurial
5DJKXQDWK$QDQW0DVKHONDU Movement for Innovation (MEI), Brazilian
Former Director-General, Council of Scientific National Confederation of Industry
& Industrial Research (CSIR), former President, (CNI), Brazil
Global Research Alliance, and former Chair,
National Innovation Foundation, India 11
Industry Association Network

The Global Innovation Index Industry Association Network (GIIIAN) is made up of well-
established organizations representing a dynamic consortia of firms and private sector entities,
all dedicated to advancing innovation. Building on 15 years of robust support from the GII’s
Corporate Network, this initiative has been rebranded as GIIIAN in 2024. Currently comprising
three associations, the number of network partners will be continually expanded over time.
Companies in the Network lead in innovation and competitiveness across sectors, nations and
regions, offering invaluable insights into the best ways of measuring and fostering innovation.
They partner with WIPO to co-organize GII events and promote the GII's mission to enhance
innovation measurement and growth.

%UD]LOLDQ1DWLRQDO&RQIHGHUDWLRQRI,QGXVWU\ &1,
Antonio Ricardo Alvarez Alban, President

&RQIHGHUDWLRQRI,QGLDQ,QGXVWU\ &,,
Chandrajit Banerjee, Director General

,QWHUQDWLRQDO&KDPEHURI&RPPHUFH ,&&
Philippe Varin, Chair

12
Academic Network

Established in 2011, the GII Academic Network facilitates collaboration between leading global
universities, their students and faculty members to conduct research and disseminate findings
related to the Global Innovation Index (GII). Hosted by the Portulans Institute, this network
currently comprises 12 institutions which play a crucial role in advancing academic discourse
and knowledge exchange within the innovation domain. We express our sincere gratitude to all
partners in the GII Academic Network for their invaluable contribution and support.

%UD]LO8QLYHUVLW\RI6¥R3DXOR 863 , School of Economics, Management, Accounting

and Actuarial Sciences; Moacir de Miranda Oliveira Júnior, Full Professor, Business
Administration Department

&KLQD3HNLQJ8QLYHUVLW\, Office of Science and Technology Development; Weihao Yao, Director

&RORPELD8QLYHUVLGDGGHORV$QGHV, School of Management; Veneta Stefanova Andonova

Zuleta, Associate Professor, and Carolina Dávila Aranda, International Office Director

(J\SW7KH$PHULFDQ8QLYHUVLW\LQ&DLUR $8& , School of Business; Sherif Kamel, Dean, and

Nagla Rizk, Professor and Director, Access to Knowledge for Development Center

)UDQFH,QVWLWXW(XURS«HQGȆ$GPLQLVWUDWLRQGHV$IIDLUHV ,16($' , Bruno Lanvin,

Distinguished Fellow

0H[LFR(*$'(%XVLQHVV6FKRRODW7HFQROµJLFRGH0RQWHUUH\,Horacio Arredondo, Dean, and

José Ernesto Amorós, Professor and Research Group Leader, Entrepreneurship & Innovation

1LJHULD/DJRV%XVLQHVV6FKRRO /%6 3DQ$WODQWLF8QLYHUVLW\, Chris Ogbechie, Dean, and

Olayinka David-West, Associate Dean

5XVVLDQ)HGHUDWLRQ1DWLRQDO5HVHDUFK8QLYHUVLW\+LJKHU6FKRRORI(FRQRPLFV +6(
8QLYHUVLW\ ,Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge; Leonid Gokhberg, First
Vice-Rector and Director

6RXWK$IULFD8QLYHUVLW\RI-RKDQQHVEXUJ&ROOHJHRI%XVLQHVVDQG(FRQRPLFV, Erika Kraemer-

Mbula, Professor of Economics

8QLWHG.LQJGRP8QLYHUVLW\RI2[IRUG6D±G%XVLQHVV6FKRRO, Soumitra Dutta, Dean

8QLWHG6WDWHVRI$PHULFD&RUQHOO6&-RKQVRQ&ROOHJHRI%XVLQHVV, Ravi Kanbur, Professor,

Charles H. Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management

9LHW1DP9LQ8QLYHUVLW\, Phan Thi Thuc Anh, Associate Vice Provost

13
The GII Partners

Preface

The goal of the Global Innovation Index (GII) is to be a holistic and flexible measure of the
innovation happening all around the world today. To achieve this goal, the GII needs to go
beyond capturing technological breakthroughs. It has also to account for the pioneering
business models and social innovations driving positive change.

The 2024 edition of the GII focuses on social entrepreneurship, a model gaining prominence
for its role in spearheading innovation aimed at addressing critical societal challenges. In
recent years, an increasing cohort of entrepreneurs has embarked upon ventures that not only
strive to achieve meaningful social impact, but also to be sustainable through market-based
mechanisms. This innovative paradigm presents novel solutions in domains where traditional
commercial enterprises have failed.

When executed aptly, social entrepreneurship promises shared value across communities
and nations, facilitating the type of multidimensional value creation able to harmonize
societal advancement with financial sustainability. Yet, despite its burgeoning significance,
social entrepreneurship remains relatively unexplored within the traditional spheres of
innovation research.

With this in mind, this 2024 edition of the GII sets out to provide an evidence-based foundation
for advancing our understanding of social entrepreneurship as a significant driver of innovation.
Rigorous research is now needed into how to cultivate an environment able to unleash the full
innovation potential of social entrepreneurship. As co-editors of the GII, we remain committed
to precise data and analytical rigor – principles with immense value that have been the
cornerstone of the GII since its inception – and are proud to mobilize in order to cast additional
light on the promising linkages between social entrepreneurship and innovation.

Developing comprehensive insights into the socioeconomic implications of social

entrepreneurship empowers stakeholders to make informed decisions and implement
strategic initiatives with a long-term impact, rather than resorting to sporadic actions
yielding only anecdotal and short-lived effects. Within this context, the GII has a pivotal role
to play as a catalyst for progress within both the public and private sectors. By objectively
evaluating policies, initiatives, and the ecosystems that foster innovation, the GII can be
instrumental in helping shape an informed landscape of global innovation practices, including
social entrepreneurship.

Published annually by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the GII has
consolidated its position as the world's leading benchmark study of innovation. This
authoritative report is enriched by valuable insights drawn from Academic Network
partners across 13 countries that further contribute to the GII’s status as the world’s leading
innovation study.

With steadfast support from the leadership at WIPO, including Director General Daren Tang and
Assistant Director General Marco Alemán, the dedicated team behind the GII continues in its
14 effort to advance the quantification of innovation's crucial role as an engine for sustainable and
 15

inclusive development. It is our hope that the 2024 edition of the GII will prove to be a seminal
contribution in highlighting the significant potential of social entrepreneurship as a powerful
catalyst for innovation and for global good.

Soumitra Dutta
Founder and co-editor of the Global Innovation Index
Co-founder of the Portulans Institute

%UXQR/DQYLQ
Co-editor of the Global Innovation Index
Co-founder of the Portulans Institute

The GII Partners

GII 2024 at a glance
The Global Innovation Index
2024 captures the innovation
ecosystem performance of
133 economies and tracks the
most recent global innovation
trends.

16
Global leaders in innovation, 2024 17

Top three innovation economies E\ reJion

Latin America SuESaharan Africa* 1orthern Africa and South (ast Asia,
and the CariEEean Western Asia† (ast Asia, and 2ceania
1 %ra]il 1 South Africa 1 Israel 1 SinJapore
2 Chile 2 %otsZana 2 United AraE (PLrates 2 5epuElic of .orea
3 0e[ico 3 SeneJal 3 TürNi\e 3 China

1orthern America (urope Central and

Southern Asia
1 United States 1 SZit]erland 1 India
2 Canada 2 SZeden 2 Iran (Islamic
3 United .inJdom 5epuElic of)
3 .a]aNhstan

Top three innovation economies E\ income Jroup

HiJhincome Upper middleincome LoZer middleincome LoZincome ^

1 SZit]erland 1 China 1 India 1 5Zanda

2 SZeden 2 0ala\sia 2 Viet 1am 2 ToJo
3 United States 3 TürNi\e 3 Philippines 3 UJanda

Indicates a new entrant into the top three in 2024.

* Top three in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) – excluding island economies. The top ࢂve in the region, including all economies, comprise Mauritius (1st),
South Africa (2nd), Botswana (3rd), Cabo Verde (4th) and Senegal (5th).
† Top three in Northern Africa and Western Asia (NAWA) – excluding island economies. The top four in the region, including all economies, are as
follows: Israel (1st), Cyprus (2nd), United Arab Emirates (3rd) and Türkiye (4th).
^ Top three in the Low-income group – excluding island economies. The top four in the low-income group, including all economies are as follows:
Rwanda (1st), Madagascar (2nd), Togo (3rd) and Uganda (4th).
GII 2024 at a glance

Notes: World Bank Income Group Classification (July 2023). Year-on-year changes in GII rank are influenced by
performance and methodological considerations (see Appendix I).
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.
 18 Global Innovation Index 2024 rankings

Income Income
GII group Region GII group Region
rank Economy Score rank rank rank Economy Score rank rank
1 Switzerland 67.5 1 1 68 Republic of Moldova 28.7 17 36
2 Sweden 64.5 2 2 69 South Africa 28.3 18 2
3 United States of America 62.4 3 1 70 Costa Rica 28.3 18 6
4 Singapore 61.2 4 1 71 Kuwait 28.1 45 10
5 United Kingdom 61.0 5 3 72 Bahrain 27.6 46 11
6 Republic of Korea 60.9 6 2 73 Jordan 27.5 8 12
7 Finland 59.4 7 4 74 Oman 27.1 47 13
8 Netherlands (Kingdom of the) 58.8 8 5 75 Peru 26.7 20 7
9 Germany 58.1 9 6 76 Argentina 26.4 21 8
10 Denmark 57.1 10 7 77 Barbados 26.1 48 9
11 China 56.3 1 3 78 Kazakhstan 25.7 22 3
12 France 55.4 11 8 79 Jamaica 25.7 22 10
13 Japan 54.1 12 4 80 Bosnia and Herzegovina 25.5 24 37
14 Canada 52.9 13 2 81 Tunisia 25.4 9 14
15 Israel 52.7 14 1 82 Panama 24.7 49 11
16 Estonia 52.3 15 9 83 Uzbekistan 24.7 10 4
17 Austria 50.3 16 10 84 Albania 24.5 25 38
18 Hong Kong, China 50.1 17 5 85 Belarus 24.2 26 39
19 Ireland 50.0 18 11 86 Egypt 23.7 11 15
20 Luxembourg 49.1 19 12 87 Botswana 23.1 27 3
21 Norway 49.1 19 12 88 Brunei Darussalam 22.8 50 14
22 Iceland 48.5 21 14 89 Sri Lanka 22.6 12 5
23 Australia 48.1 22 6 90 Cabo Verde 22.3 13 4
24 Belgium 47.7 23 15 91 Pakistan 22.0 14 6
25 New Zealand 45.9 24 7 92 Senegal 22.0 14 5
26 Italy 45.3 25 16 93 Paraguay 21.9 28 12
27 Cyprus 45.1 26 2 94 Lebanon 21.5 16 16
28 Spain 44.9 27 17 95 Azerbaijan 21.3 29 17
29 Malta 44.8 28 18 96 Kenya 21.0 17 6
30 Czech Republic 44.0 29 19 97 Dominican Republic 20.8 30 13
31 Portugal 43.7 30 20 98 El Salvador 20.6 31 14
32 United Arab Emirates 42.8 31 3 99 Kyrgyzstan 20.4 18 7
33 Malaysia 40.5 2 8 100 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 20.2 19 15
34 Slovenia 40.2 32 21 101 Ghana 20.0 20 7
35 Lithuania 40.1 33 22 102 Namibia 20.0 32 7
36 Hungary 39.6 34 23 103 Cambodia 19.9 21 15
37 Türkiye 39.0 3 4 104 Rwanda 19.7 1 9
38 Bulgaria 38.5 4 24 105 Ecuador 19.3 33 16
39 India 38.3 1 1 106 Bangladesh 19.1 22 8
40 Poland 37.0 35 25 107 Tajikistan 18.6 23 9
41 Thailand 36.9 5 9 108 Trinidad and Tobago 18.4 51 17
42 Latvia 36.4 36 26 109 Nepal 18.1 24 10
43 Croatia 36.3 37 27 110 Madagascar 17.9 2 10
44 Viet Nam 36.2 2 10 111 Lao People's Democratic Republic 17.8 25 16
45 Greece 36.2 38 28 112 Côte d'Ivoire 17.5 26 11
46 Slovakia 34.3 39 29 113 Nigeria 17.1 27 12
47 Saudi Arabia 33.9 40 5 114 Honduras 16.7 28 18
48 Romania 33.4 41 30 115 Algeria 16.2 29 18
49 Qatar 32.9 42 6 116 Zambia 15.7 30 13
50 Brazil 32.7 6 1 117 Togo 15.6 3 14
51 Chile 32.6 43 2 118 Zimbabwe 15.6 31 14
52 Serbia 32.3 7 31 119 Benin 15.4 32 16
53 Philippines 31.1 3 11 120 United Republic of Tanzania 15.3 33 17
54 Indonesia 30.6 8 12 121 Uganda 14.9 4 18
55 Mauritius 30.6 8 1 122 Guatemala 14.6 34 19
56 Mexico 30.4 10 3 123 Cameroon 14.4 34 19
57 Georgia 30.4 10 7 124 Nicaragua 14.0 35 20
58 North Macedonia 29.9 12 32 125 Myanmar 13.8 36 17
59 Russian Federation 29.7 13 33 126 Mauritania 13.2 37 20
60 Ukraine 29.5 4 34 127 Burundi 13.2 5 20
61 Colombia 29.2 14 4 128 Mozambique 13.1 6 22
62 Uruguay 29.1 44 5 129 Burkina Faso 12.8 7 23
63 Armenia 29.0 15 8 130 Ethiopia 12.3 8 24
64 Iran (Islamic Republic of) 28.9 5 2 131 Mali 11.8 9 25
65 Montenegro 28.9 16 35 132 Niger 11.2 10 26
66 Morocco 28.8 6 9 133 Angola 10.2 38 27
67 Mongolia 28.7 7 13
Global Innovation Index 2024

High-income Lower middle-income Europe South East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania Sub-Saharan Africa
Upper middle-income Low-income Northern America Northern Africa and Western Asia Central and Southern Asia
Latin America and the Caribbean

Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.

Innovation performance at different income levels, 2024 19

HiJhincome Jroup Upper middleincome Jroup LoZer middleincome Jroup LoZincome Jroup

Performance aEove Switzerland China India Rwanda

H[pectation for level of
development Sweden Thailand Viet Nam Madagascar
United States of America Brazil Philippines Burundi
Singapore Indonesia Ukraine
United Kingdom Republic of Moldova Morocco
Republic of Korea South Africa Mongolia
Finland Jamaica Jordan
Netherlands (Kingdom of the) Uzbekistan
Germany Pakistan
Denmark Senegal
France
Japan
Canada
Israel
Estonia

Performance in line Zith Austria Malaysia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Togo
level of development Hong Kong, China Türkiye Tunisia Uganda
Norway Bulgaria Egypt Mozambique
Iceland Serbia Sri Lanka
Australia Mauritius Cabo Verde
Belgium Mexico Lebanon
New Zealand Georgia Kenya
Italy North Macedonia Kyrgyzstan
Cyprus Colombia Bolivia (Plurinational State of)
Spain Armenia Ghana
Malta Peru Cambodia
Czech Republic Bosnia and Herzegovina Bangladesh
Portugal Albania Tajikistan
Slovenia El Salvador Nepal
Lithuania Nigeria
Hungary Zambia
Latvia Zimbabwe
Greece United Republic of Tanzania
Chile
Barbados

All other economies Ireland Russian Federation Lao People's Democratic Republic Burkina Faso
Luxembourg Montenegro Côte d'Ivoire Ethiopia
United Arab Emirates Costa Rica Honduras Mali
Poland Argentina Algeria Niger
Croatia Kazakhstan Benin
Slovakia Belarus Cameroon
Saudi Arabia Botswana Nicaragua
Romania Paraguay Myanmar
Qatar Azerbaijan Mauritania
Uruguay Dominican Republic Angola
Kuwait Namibia
Bahrain Ecuador
Oman Guatemala
Panama
Brunei Darussalam
Trinidad and Tobago
GII 2024 at a glance

Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.

 20 Key takeaways

What is the current state of global innovation? Is innovation accelerating or slowing down? How
is innovation coping in the face of higher interest rates and geopolitical conflicts?

5HVXOWVRIWKH*OREDO,QQRYDWLRQ7UDFNHU

The Global Innovation Tracker 2024 provides a comprehensive analysis of the current state of
global innovation. Findings highlight progress as well as challenges across four key stages of
the innovation cycle: science and innovation investment, technological progress, technology
adoption, and the socioeconomic impact of innovation.

,QQRYDWLRQLQYHVWPHQWVZLWQHVVHGDPDMRUGRZQWXUQLQDUHYHUVDORIWKHȁ
ERRP

Following a boom between 2020 and 2022, science and innovation investment experienced a
VLJQLILFDQWGRZQWXUQLQ VHHWKH*OREDO,QQRYDWLRQ7UDFNHU'DVKERDUG b

*OREDO,QQRYDWLRQ7UDFNHU'DVKERDUG

Science and innovation investment

Scientiࢂc R&D investments Venture capital International
publications patent ࢂlings
Top corporate Deal Deal
Global total R&D spenders numbers values
5%
Short term
5.3% 2021 ֑ 2022

2.9%*
6.1%* 9.5% 39.7% 1.8%
2022 2023 2022 ֑ 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023

Technological progress
Computing power Costs of renewable energy Electric battery Cost of genome Drug approvals
price sequencing
Green Solar
Moore’s Law supercomputers photovoltaic Wind

Short term
60.0% 13.6% 3.9% 3.5% 13.7% 8.1%* 9.5%
2021 2023 2022 2023 2021 2022 2021 2022 2022 2023 2021 2023 2022 2023

Technology adoption
Safe sanitation Connectivity Robots Electric Cancer
vehicles radiotherapy
Fixed
broadband 5G

Short term
1.4% 4.5% 22.6% 12.2% 53.8% 2.7%
2021 2022 2022 2023 2022 2023 2021 2022 2022 2023 2022 2023

Socioeconomic impact
Labor productivity Poverty Life expectancy Global warming

Short term
1% 5% 0.9% +1.17°C
2022 2023 2021 2022 2021 2022 2023
Global Innovation Index 2024

Notes: See the Data notes at the end of this section for a definition of the indicators and their data sources. Long-term
annual growth refers to the compound annual growth rate(CAGR) over the indicated period. Historic data may have been
updated and might differ from last year’s Global Innovation Tracker. Figures are rounded. Estimates or incomplete data
are indicated by an asterisk (*). n.a. indicates not available. Short-term rates for Moore's Law and the Cost of genome
sequencing refer to the CAGR between 2021 and 2023.
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.
– Scientific publications dropped by 5 percent in 2023, following growth rates above 8 percent 21
annually in 2020 and 2021, and a slowdown in 2022.
– Global R&D grew at a rate of 5 percent in 2022 – slightly down from 2021 – but is projected to
slow to about 3 percent in 2023 (all in real terms).
– Worldwide, R&D expenditure by the highest R&D-spending corporations grew by around 6
percent in real terms in 2023, below the long-term growth rate for the last 6 years (around
8 percent) and down strongly from peaks of 10 to 13 percent between 2019–2021, and also
from pre-pandemic growth rates (all in real terms).
– Venture capital (VC) and scientific publications have declined sharply back to pre-pandemic
levels, with a pronounced impact on emerging regions such as Latin America and Africa.
Reflecting a deteriorating climate for risk finance, the value of VC investments has been
falling from the exceptionally high levels of 2021, with a 36 percent drop in 2022 followed by
a further 39 percent drop in 2023. The number of VC deals has also decreased, experiencing
a downturn of 9.5 percent in 2023.
– International patent filings – which had stagnated since 2021 – saw a decline of 1.8 percent
in 2023, marking the first such decline since 2009.

Looking forward, while some central banks have started cutting interest rates, tighter
conditions for innovation finance might continue to weigh on innovation investment in the
near term.

7HFKQRORJ\FRQWLQXHVWRSURJUHVVUDSLGO\WHFKQRORJ\DGRSWLRQLVJURZLQJDQGWKH
VRFLRHFRQRPLFLPSDFWRILQQRYDWLRQKDVPRVWO\WXUQHGSRVLWLYHDJDLQ+RZHYHUJUHHQ
WHFKQRORJ\DQGHQYLURQPHQWDOLQGLFDWRUVKDYHHLWKHUEHHQSURJUHVVLQJPRUHVORZO\WKDQ
EHIRUHRUKDYHGHFOLQHG

– 7HFKQRORJLFDOSURJUHVV remained strong in 2023, particularly in health-related fields such as

genome sequencing, as well as computing power and electric batteries. However, the rate of
progress in green technologies lagged behind average growth for the decade, highlighting
the challenge in reducing supercomputers' energy consumption and a slower reduction in
renewable energy prices.
– 7HFKQRORJ\DGRSWLRQ increased across all indicators in 2023, especially in 5G, robotics,
and electric vehicles. Overall penetration levels have increased compared to a decade
ago, but there are exceptions, for example, the rate of adoption of safe sanitation has also
significantly slowed.
– In terms of the socioeconomic impact of innovation, the situation is starting to look more
positive again. Many indicators have returned to growth relative to what was reported in the
2023 GII edition, but some have yet to return to pre-pandemic levels.

– Labor productivity has seen an increase, albeit at a rate below the average for the
past decade.
– Significant progress has been made in reducing poverty, with the number of people in
extreme poverty in 2022 being half what is was in 2005. However, levels of poverty are
still higher than those recorded in 2018.
– Life expectancy saw a rise in 2022, but nonetheless remains at 2015 levels.
– On environmental impact, though, the world is falling behind. Carbon emissions are
growing once again after a temporary COVID-19 hiatus. 2023 was the hottest year on
record, underlining the need for urgent and effective climate action.

5HVXOWVRIWKH*OREDO,QQRYDWLRQ,QGH[UDQNLQJV

6ZLW]HUODQG6ZHGHQWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV6LQJDSRUHDQGWKH8QLWHG.LQJGRPOHDGWKH*,,
&KLQD7¾UNL\H,QGLD9LHW1DPWKH3KLOLSSLQHV,QGRQHVLDWKH,VODPLF5HSXEOLFRI
,UDQDQG0RURFFRDUHWKHPLGGOHLQFRPHHFRQRPLHVWKDWKDYHFOLPEHGWKHIDVWHVWLQWKH*,,
UDQNLQJVLQFH
GII 2024 at a glance

– Switzerland ranks first in the GII for the 14th consecutive year. Sweden and the United States
(US) maintain 2nd and 3rd positions, respectively. Singapore (4th) moves further into the top 5,
followed by the United Kingdom (UK) (5th).
– China – still the only middle-income economy within the GII top 30 – moves up the ranking to
edge closer to the top 10, reaching 11thSRVLWLRQb
 22 – Japan remains firm in 13thȁDSRVLWLRQLWKDVKHOGVLQFHb
– Canada rises up the rankings to 14th position, its best rank since 2014, and representing
a comeback.
– Ireland (19th) and Luxembourg (20th) enter the top 20, climbing three ranks and one rank,
respectively.
– Australia (23rd) and New Zealand (25th) continue moving ahead within and, respectively,
towards the top 25.
– European Union (EU) economies the Czech Republic (30th) enters, and Cyprus (27th) and Spain
(28th) move up within the top 30, while Poland (40th) enters the top 40.
– There are only four other middle-income economies, apart from China, among the top 40
economies, namely, Malaysia (33rd), Türkiye (37th), Bulgaria (38th), and India (39th). However,
Thailand (41st) and Viet Nam (44th) move closer too.
– Brazil (50th) remains in the top 50 in 2024.
– Saudi Arabia (47th) and Qatar (49th) continue climbing up in the top 50; the two economies in
the Middle East that have moved up the rankings this year.
– The Philippines (53rd) and Indonesia (54th) move closer to the top 50, with Indonesia making
one of the strongest GII upward spurts recorded over the last three years.
– Morocco (66th) in Northern Africa and Western Asia moves ahead in the top 70.
– Beyond the top 100, Tajikistan (107th), Algeria (115th) and Burundi (127th) have progressed the
most in the rankings.
– In the last five years, Indonesia, Mauritius (55th), Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Brazil and Pakistan
(91st) have climbed most in the GII, in terms of rank progression.
– China, India, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran (64th), the Philippines, Türkiye, Viet Nam
and Morocco are the middle-income economies within the GII top 70 that have climbed the
most in the GII ranking since 2013.

6LQJDSRUHWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVDQG&KLQDVFRUHEHVWLQSDUWLFXODULQQRYDWLRQLQGLFDWRUV

– Singapore takes the lead in 2024 in terms of number of GII innovation indicators for which it
ranks top globally, ranking 1st in the world on 14 out of 78 indicators.
– 7KH8QLWHG6WDWHV RXWRILQGLFDWRUV DQG&KLQD RXWRI IROORZb
– Select middle- and low-income economies excelled in various domains. Relative to GDP,
trade or population, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Cambodia and Nepal, for example,
rank 1st in Loans from microfinance institutions, Malaysia in Graduates in science
and engineering, and Mexico in Creative goods exports. Relatively, Morocco leads in
Industrial designs, the Islamic Republic of Iran in Trademarks, and Namibia in Expenditure
on education.

7KHUHJLRQDO*,,OHDGHUVLQLQQRYDWLRQDUH6ZLW]HUODQGWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV%UD]LO,QGLD
6LQJDSRUH,VUDHODQG0DXULWLXV,QGLDDQG5ZDQGDFRQWLQXHWROHDGWKHLULQFRPHJURXSV
7¾UNL\HDQGWKH3KLOLSSLQHVDUHQHZFRPHUVWRWKHWRSIRUWKHLULQFRPHJURXS

– In the South East Asia, East Asia and Oceania (SEAO) regions, Singapore, the Republic of
Korea (6th) and China (11th) lead. Four additional SEAO economies are world innovation
leaders ranking in the top 25, namely, Japan (13th), Hong Kong, China (18th), Australia (23rd)
and New Zealand (25th).
– In Northern Africa and Western Asia, Israel (15th) leads the region and is followed by Cyprus
(27th), the United Arab Emirates (32nd) and Türkiye (37th). Eight economies within the region
move up the ranking. Saudi Arabia (47th) and Qatar (49th) each move ahead one spot to
consolidate themselves in the top 50. Georgia moves up to 57th place, entering the top 60,
while Armenia (63rd) enters and Morocco (66th) consolidates its position in the top 70.
– In Latin America and the Caribbean, the regional top three remains unchanged: Brazil (50th)
maintains top position, followed by Chile (51st, up by one rank) and Mexico (56th, up by two
ranks).
Global Innovation Index 2024

– Seven additional economies within the region also improved their ranking: Colombia (61st)
– one of the largest jumps in the region, matched only by Paraguay (93rd), Uruguay (62nd),
Costa Rica (70th), Peru (75th), Panama (82nd) and Honduras (114th).
– In Central and Southern Asia, India continues to lead, moving one place forward to
39thbSRVLWLRQWKH,VODPLF5HSXEOLFRI,UDQ th), Kazakhstan (78th) and Uzbekistan (83rd) come
next. In addition to India and Kazakhstan, three additional economies within the region go
up in the ranking: Sri Lanka (89th), Kyrgyzstan (99th) and Tajikistan (107th).
– In Sub-Saharan Africa, Mauritius (55th) is followed by South Africa (69th), Botswana 23
(87th), Cabo Verde (90th) and Senegal (92nd). Kenya (96th) gains four places in the ranking,
consolidating its position within the top 100. Zambia (116th), Benin (119th), Mauritania (126th),
and Burundi (127th) also move up the GII ranking.
– In the GII 2024, Türkiye enters the top 3 for the upper middle-income group, behind China
and Malaysia (33rd).
– India leads the lower middle-income group, followed by Viet Nam (44th) and the Philippines
(53rd) – a newcomer to this income group’s top 3.
– Rwanda (104th) leads the low-income group, followed by Madagascar (110th), Togo (117th) and
Uganda (121st).

6HYHUDOGHYHORSLQJHFRQRPLHVDUHSHUIRUPLQJDERYHH[SHFWDWLRQRQLQQRYDWLRQUHODWLYHWR
their level of economic development.

– In the GII 2024, 19 economies outperform on innovation relative to their level of

development, the majority still located in Sub-Saharan Africa and South East Asia, East Asia,
and Oceania.
– India, the Republic of Moldova (68th), and Viet Nam continue to lead as the longest-standing
innovation overperformers, for a 14thconsecutive year.
– Indonesia, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan maintain their overperformer status for a third
consecutive year, and Brazil for a fourth.
– Conversely, 41 economies are performing below expectation on innovation, the majority
from Latin America and the Caribbean and Sub-Saharan Africa.

5HVXOWVRIWKHJOREDOWRS6 7FOXVWHUUDQNLQJV

7KHZRUOGȆVILYHELJJHVWVFLHQFHDQGWHFKQRORJ\FOXVWHUVDUHDOOORFDWHGLQ(DVW$VLD7RN\Rȁ
<RNRKDPDLVWKHELJJHVW6 7FOXVWHUJOREDOO\&DPEULGJHWKHPRVW6 7LQWHQVLYH

– Tokyo–Yokohama (Japan) continues to lead, followed by Shenzhen–Hong Kong–Guangzhou

(China and Hong Kong, China), Beijing (China), Seoul (Republic of Korea) and Shanghai–
Suzhou (China).
– China, for a second consecutive year, leads with the most clusters (26) in the top 100. The
United States follows, with 20 clusters, then Germany with eight.
– São Paulo (Brazil); newcomer Cairo (Egypt); Bengaluru, Delhi, Chennai and Mumbai (India);
Tehran (Islamic Republic of Iran); Kuala Lumpur and Singapore; Istanbul and Ankara
(Türkiye); and Moscow (Russian Federation) are the only middle-income economy clusters
outside of China.
– Cambridge in the United Kingdom and San Jose–San Francisco, CA, in the United States are
the two most S&T-intensive clusters relative to population density. Eindhoven (Kingdom
of the Netherlands), Oxford (United Kingdom) and Boston–Cambridge, MA (United States)
follow. In the Republic of Korea, Daejeon ranks the seventh most S&T-intensive cluster and is
the only Asian cluster in the top 10 by intensity. Munich (Germany) maintains its rank as the
10th most S&T-intensive cluster globally.
– The GII 2024 identifies the top African S&T clusters within Africa beyond the global top 100.
Egypt has the most clusters (11), followed by South Africa (8), Morocco (5), Nigeria (4), Tunisia
(4), Ethiopia (2), Ghana (2) and Kenya (1) , with others following. These clusters are strong in
scientific publications but weaker in international patenting, thus they continue to be more
science rather than full-blown S&T clusters.
GII 2024 at a glance
 24 7RS6 7FOXVWHUE\HFRQRP\RUFURVVERDUGHUUHJLRQUDQNHGDPRQJWKHWRS

en
ag

m
ol
nh

kh
pe

oc
Co

w
St
CA

co
40

on

os
o,

nd
N

M
sc

h
31

ic
,O
ci

Lo
57

un
an

to

21

em
M
on
Fr

50 22
an

al
r
To

us
–S

54

er
se

l
ou

a
–J
ch
Jo

m
ha –
59

n
iv

Se

ko yo
48

ri

ra
n

Av
4
Sa

Zü

Yo ok
h
6

Te
l

T
Te
1

ul
38

d
30

nb
ri
ad

ta
M

Is
95
2 25

gz o n n –
ir

u
Ca

ho g –
ur

an K he

ch i –
u
al

in pe
u
Gu on en
ng

H Tai
H h
g
Be

S
56

s
e
or
ap
93

ng
da

Si
71 33

r
e r te

r
pu
w ot

m
nt – R

i
p

nk

Lu
–A m

si
l s da

a
el

al
se er

w
H

Ku
sa
us s t

ar
Br A m

W
26 90
o
ul

53
Pa

l
se
o
Sã

Ba

73 12 74
96
na
s

52
ri

en
Pa

Vi

44
n
ila
M

ey
dn
Sy
ou
zh
ng
ua

A
,C
–G

m
co
ng

s a da
is

co e r u t e r
Ko

ng ON erp
an
i ji n – ma

le
t
ng

Fr

M i v – – Ro
Te erd hu

B e to, t w
a

r
ng Ho
zh oh

pu
n

nb en
c

n
l A am
ri –S a

s t sin

ro – A
dn m
en ok

m
pe ru
e

t a ag

en o
J

Te por

Sy h o l
Am –H

Ca Lu
To els

ul

V i aul
e

Co a l u
Pa s e
–Y

Sã ki
w

Ku w
nh
M n

Ta h

Zü id
M y

W a
St n

ch

sa
o

ic
Jo

e
yo

ei

n
n
a

a
s
n
a
l

l
P

o
r

si
s
nd
ou

se
us
un

hr

al
ad
ng

ila
oc
os
ip

ar

ir
ri
n

o
k

el

Ba
Be
Sh

Lo
Sa
Se
To

Br
M

Is
Si

1 2 3 4 6 12 21 22 25 26 30 31 33 38 40 44 48 50 52 53 54 56 57 59 71 73 74 90 93 95 96

Note: Circles with dotted borders indicate the number of total clusters in that economy, for economies with three or more
top 100 S&T clusters.
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.

5HVXOWVRIWKH6SHFLDOWKHPHȁ8QORFNLQJWKHSURPLVHRIVRFLDO
entrepreneurship

7KLV\HDUȆVVSHFLDO*,,WKHPHORRNVWRWKHIXWXUHRIVRFLDOHQWUHSUHQHXUVKLSDQGDVNV
:KDWZLOOLWWDNHIRUVRFLDOHQWUHSUHQHXUVKLSWRFDWDO\]HWUDQVIRUPDWLYHLQQRYDWLRQDQG
societal impact?

– The special theme "Unlocking the promise of social entrepreneurship" emphasizes the rise
and significance of social entrepreneurship as a global phenomenon aimed at addressing
Global Innovation Index 2024

critical social and environmental issues through innovative business models. Social
entrepreneurs aim to develop and fund solutions that address societal challenges while
generating revenue within the confines of a market economy.
– This approach has gained momentum among young inventors and innovators seeking to
align their work with positive social change, especially in areas overlooked by traditional
businesses and governments.
– Current estimates suggest there are between 10 and 11 million social enterprises and up to 25
30 million social entrepreneurs globally, contributing roughly USD 2 trillion to global GDP.
– Social enterprises tackle various issues that include poverty, environmental sustainability
and social injustice. For instance, Bandhu Tech in India provides housing for migrant
workers using an AI-enhanced platform; Green Bio Energy in Uganda produces eco-friendly
briquettes; Peek Vision offers mobile eye-health services in low-resource settings; Thaki
refurbishes laptops for refugee education; and in India the Community Design Agency
involves low-income communities in housing projects.
– Despite their impact made by these enterprises, traditional innovation models and policies
have largely ignored such community-based ventures.
– Social entrepreneurship operates within diverse definitions and legal frameworks, reflecting
the regional histories and policy environments in which they exist. These enterprises
often face competing demands between social impact and financial success, beneficiaries
and investors, and long-term systemic change versus short-term survival. However, such
tensions also serve to drive their innovation potential, by combining aspects of the social
sector and the market.
– Social enterprises create impact through various pathways, including customer-focused
models that provide essential services to underserved populations, employee-focused
models that hire and train marginalized individuals, product/service-focused models
that develop sustainable products, and ecosystem-focused models that mobilize diverse
stakeholders in order to effect systemic change. Examples include SOIL in Haiti, which
provides sanitation services; iKure in India, offering primary health care through a hub-and-
spoke model; Eco Femme in India, producing reusable menstrual pads; and WeRobotics in
Switzerland, which connects local drone and AI experts with global organizations.
– Innovation in social entrepreneurship often involves process and product innovations
tailored to fit local contexts, emphasizing collaboration and open-source strategies.
Intellectual property (IP) activity varies, with some enterprises securing patents
and trademarks.
– The report identifies several barriers to social entrepreneurship, including limited legal
frameworks, financing challenges, and inadequate impact measurement.
– Policy recommendations include developing supportive legal and regulatory environments,
investing in education and training programs, promoting data collection, assisting
social entrepreneurs in reaching underserved communities, incubating social enterprise
networks, and creating incentives for private investment. Public and private sector
collaboration is crucial for addressing these barriers and unlocking the full potential of
social entrepreneurship.
– At the same time, the onus for action and change is not only on the actors that surround
social entrepreneurs. There is also scope for social entrepreneurs themselves to more
actively drive innovation in their ventures. To some extent, this is a matter of social
entrepreneurs recognizing the critical role that innovation plays and directing their attention
toward key activities such as R&D, process innovation, and patenting and trademarking.
But it also involves social entrepreneurs taking concrete actions to embed their enterprises
in existing innovation ecosystems. They can do this, by tapping existing sources of
scientific and technological knowledge, as well as venture capital, R&D tax credits, and
other innovation finance tools, and by collaborating with universities, public research
organizations and other entrepreneurs.
– Ultimately, social entrepreneurship offers a transformative approach to tackling global
challenges, by merging business innovation with social goals. By investing in supportive
policies, infrastructure and financing, it is possible to create an environment where social
enterprises thrive, driving sustainable development and creating lasting positive impacts on
a global scale.
– Innovation policy needs to be better designed to support social entrepreneurship, which
requires a focus on institutional frameworks, human capital, infrastructure, networks,
financing, and measurement. The 2024 edition of the GII addresses these gaps by
highlighting the state of social entrepreneurship globally and the role of innovation
in creating positive impacts, and offers policy recommendations for unlocking the
GII 2024 at a glance

sector's potential.
Global Innovation Tracker
What is the current state of
innovation? How rapidly is
technology progressing and
being embraced? What are the
resulting societal impacts?

26
Global Innovation Tracker Dashboard 27

Science and innovation investment

Scientiࢂc R&D investments Venture capital International
publications patent ࢂlings
Top corporate Deal Deal
Global total R&D spenders numbers values
5%
Short term
Ѿ5.3% 2021 ֑ 2022

2.9%* 6.1%* Ѿ9.5% Ѿ39.7% Ѿ1.8%

2022 ֑ 2023 2022 ֑ 2023 2022 ֑ 2023 2022 ֑ 2023 2022 ֑ 2023 2022 ֑ 2023

Long term
(annual growth) 3.9%
2013 ֑ 2023
5.1% 9.7%*
2012 ֑ 2022 2017 ֑ 2023
9.7%
2013 ֑ 2023
13.8%
2013 ֑ 2023
2.9%
2013 ֑ 2023

Technological progress
Computing power Costs of renewable energy Electric battery Cost of genome Drug approvals
price sequencing
Green Solar
Moore’s Law supercomputers photovoltaic Wind

Short term
60.0% 13.6% Ѿ3.9% Ѿ3.5% Ѿ13.7% Ѿ8.1%* 9.5%
2021 ֑ 2023 2022 ֑ 2023 2021 ֑ 2022 2021 ֑ 2022 2022 ֑ 2023 2021 ֑ 2023 2022 ֑ 2023

Long term
(annual growth) 42.3% 30.6% Ѿ15.0% Ѿ9.1% Ѿ15.8% Ѿ20.1%*
2013 ֑ 2023 2013 ֑ 2023 2012 ֑ 2022 2012 ֑ 2022 2013 ֑ 2023 2013 ֑ 2023
3.7%
2013 ֑ 2023

Technology adoption
Safe sanitation Connectivity Robots Electric Cancer
vehicles radiotherapy
Fixed
broadband 5G

Short term
1.4% 4.5% 22.6% 12.2% 53.8% 2.7%
2021 ֑ 2022 2022 ֑ 2023 2022 ֑ 2023 2021 ֑ 2022 2022 ֑ 2023 2022 ֑ 2023

Long term
(annual growth) 2.4% 6.7% 45.3% 12.2% 58.9% 1.6%
2012 ֑ 2022 2013 ֑ 2023 2021 ֑ 2023 2012 ֑ 2022 2013 ֑ 2023 2013 ֑ 2023

57 of 100 19 per 100 38% of global n.a. 3 out of 100 21 out of 100
Penetration inhabitants inhabitants population cars countries met
in 2022 in 2023 in 2023 in 2023 requirements
(45 in 2012) (10 in 2013) (18% in 2021) (0.04 in 2013) in 2023

Socioeconomic impact
Labor productivity Poverty Life expectancy Global warming

Short term
1% Ѿ5% 0.9% +1.17°C
2022 ֑ 2023 2020 ֑ 2021 2020 ֑ 2021 2023

Long term
(annual growth) 2.2% Ѿ2.7% 0.1% +0.68°C
2013 ֑ 2023 2012 ֑ 2022 2012 ֑ 2022 2013

USD 51,450 712 million 72 years n.a.

Level in 2023 in 2022 in 2022
(43,260 in 2013) (934 in 2012) (71 in 2012)
Global Innovation Tracker

Notes: See the Data notes at the end of this section for a definition of the indicators and their data sources. Long-term
annual growth refers to the compound annual growth rate(CAGR) over the indicated period. Historic data may have been
updated and might differ from last year’s Global Innovation Tracker. Figures are rounded. Estimates or incomplete data
are indicated by an asterisk (*). n.a. indicates not available. Short-term rates for Moore's Law and the Cost of genome
sequencing refer to the CAGR between 2021 and 2023.
 28 What is the current state of global innovation? Is innovation accelerating or slowing down? How
is innovation coping in the face of higher interest rates and geopolitical conflicts?

The Global Innovation Tracker 2024 addresses these crucial questions. It takes the pulse of
four key stages in the innovation cycle: (1) science and innovation investment; (2) technological
progress; (3) technology adoption; and (4) the socioeconomic impact of innovation. The main
findings are as follows:

1. 6FLHQFHDQGLQQRYDWLRQLQYHVWPHQW Following a boom between 2020 and 2022, investment

in science and innovation experienced a significant downturn in 2023, marking a notable
reversal from previous years. Venture capital and scientific publications declined sharply
back to pre-pandemic levels, the impact being most pronounced in emerging regions such
as Latin America and Africa. Corporate R&D spending also slowed, mirroring stagnant
revenue growth and resembling the post-2009 crisis deceleration. Despite high R&D levels
and stable intensities, international patenting has decreased. Looking forward, while some
central banks have started cut interest rates, the tighter conditions for innovation finance,
might continue to weigh negatively on innovation investments in the near term. The outlook
for 2024 and 2025 is unusually uncertain.
2. 7HFKQRORJLFDOSURJUHVV Technological advancements remained strong in 2023, particularly
in health-related fields such as genome sequencing, as well as computing power and electric
batteries. However, progress in green technologies lagged behind average growth for the
decade, highlighting the difficulty in reducing the energy consumed by supercomputers and
a slower than previously common declines in renewable energy prices’.
3. 7HFKQRORJ\DGRSWLRQ The adoption of technology saw positive growth across all
indicators in 2023, especially in 5G, robotics, and electric vehicles. While overall penetration
levels increased compared to a decade earlier, there are exceptions, such as the slower
penetration rate of cancer radiotherapy equipment. The adoption of safe sanitation has also
slowed significantly.
4. 6RFLRHFRQRPLFLPSDFW Many socioeconomic indicators have returned to positive growth,
representing a return to normalcy post-COVID-19. However, several metrics, such as poverty
rates and life expectancy, have not yet returned to pre-pandemic levels. Productivity
has increased but still lags, in terms of overcoming the structural slowdown identified
in the Special theme of the GII 2022 – the effective deployment of a new Digital Age and
a Deep Science innovation wave is still work in progress, it would seem. Environmental
impact indicators, including carbon emissions and global temperatures, continue to
rise, underscoring the need for further action to combat climate change. Technological
innovation plays a crucial role in addressing environmental challenges; yet, it is clear that
technology is only one part of the solution.

Science and innovation investment

Innovation investment remained resilient throughout the 2020–2021 COVID-19 period and
the associated downturn. Indeed, many innovation investment variables – including scientific
publications, R&D and venture capital – boomed. However, the first signs of weakness in
innovation investment appeared in 2022, although returning from a historic high. This
slowdown intensified in 2023, making the outlook for 2024 and 2025 uncertain.

6FLHQWLILFSXEOLFDWLRQV

The scientific landscape experienced a significant shift, a 5 percent decrease in publications

between 2022 and 2023 deviating from the decade-long average increase of around 4 percent.

However, this represents nothing other than a return to the pre-pandemic growth trend (Figure
Global Innovation Index 2024

1). Indeed, the period between 2019 and 2021, just prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic,
witnessed an acceleration in new publications, with exceptional growth in 2020 (8.7 percent) and
2021 (8.4 percent). This period was followed by a deceleration in 2022 (3.4 percent), linked to a
decrease in research output in environmental sciences and COVID-19-related fields. Yet, despite
this decline, the number of publications in 2023 remained above the 2013–2019 trend.
)LJXUH1XPEHURIVFLHQWLILFSXEOLFDWLRQV PLOOLRQV ȁ 29

1.9 million
Number of
1.8 publications
Trend
2013–2019
1.7

1.6

1.5

1.4

1.3

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Source: WIPO, based on data published by Clarivate, Web of Science, accessed April 2024.

5HVHDUFKDQGGHYHORSPHQW 5 '

Total R&D expenditure

The most recently available data show that global R&D investment growth in 2022 slowed to
5 percent (in real terms). This is down from 6.6 percent in 2021,1 and slightly below the pre-
pandemic growth rate of 6.2 percent in 2019. The growth of business R&D expenditure – the
most significant component of total global R&D, representing 70 percent of total global R&D
– likewise slowed to 6 percent in 2022 (compared to 8.5 percent growth in 2021), yet is still
comparable to the pre-pandemic rate of 6.6 percent in 2019 (Figure 2).2

Estimates for 2023, based on projected GDP growth, paint a potentially unhappier scenario,
with global R&D growth expected to slow again to less than 3 percent in 2023, and business
R&D to 2.8 percent (1.7 percent and 1.4 percent, respectively, excluding the United States and
China). 3 If estimates prove correct, these would be the lowest growth rates on record since
2010. Moreover, this would mean that the growth rate for business R&D growth would be at the
same level as the growth rate for total gross domestic R&D expenditure (business plus private);
a situation that has been observed before, but never at such comparatively low rates (see
Figure 2).

Global Innovation Tracker

1 Estimates of growth in 2021 were also revised up to 6.6 percent, compared to 5.2 percent reported in the GII 2023, as
several economies subsequently reported more complete and up-to-date estimates.
2 The top 5 economies in R&D spending all saw growth in 2022, though it was slower than in 2021 for most, except
for Japan and the Republic of Korea. The United States spent 4.9 percent (down from 7.7 percent), China 7.7 percent
(down from 9.6 percent), Japan 4.9 percent (up from 2.9 percent), Germany 1.9 percent (down from 3 percent), and the
Republic of Korea 8.9 percent (up from 6.8 percent).
3 The OECD has found similar slowdown scenarios for 2023 for the OECD area (OECD, 2024).
 30 )LJXUH*'3JURZWKDQGWRWDODQGEXVLQHVV5 'JURZWKUDWHVȁ

8%


2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024

Total R&D Total R&D (estimates) Business R&D Business R&D (estimates) GDP growth GDP growth
(estimates)

Source: WIPO estimates, based on the UNESCO Institute for Statistics database, Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD) Main Science and Technology Indicators (March 2024); Eurostat; Ibero-American and Inter-
American Network of Science and Technology Indicators (RICYT); and the International Monetary Fund World Economic
Outlook Update, April 2024.

Top corporate R&D spenders

On the corporate side, 2023–2024 R&D data is available for around 1,700 of the top 2,500 biggest
corporate R&D spenders globally (Nindl et al., 2023).4 In 2023, corporate R&D expenditure stood
at around USD 1.2 trillion, up by around 8.3 percent in nominal terms and around 6.1 percent
in real terms5 – these figures, derived from the weighted averages of national growth rates,
represent a decline from the 2022 real growth of 7.5 percent and a decline form the long-term
real growth rate.

Compared to the pre-pandemic 2019 and pandemic period, there has been up to a halving of
real top corporate R&D growth in 2020 and 2021 (see Table 1).

Interestingly, however, R&D intensity – that is, R&D expenditure as a percentage of total
revenue of the top corporate R&D spenders, has remained constant.
Global Innovation Index 2024

4 It is important to acknowledge that the data presented focuses on top R&D performers, often referred to as “R&D
superfirms.” A comprehensive evaluation of corporate R&D performance for 2023 would require additional data,
including information from small and medium-sized enterprises that may have found obtaining innovation finance
challenging in an environment where R&D is becoming both costlier and riskier.
5 Converting the R&D figures to constant 2015 PPP prices helps to isolate the changes in R&D spending by eliminating
the effects of price fluctuations and exchange rate variations, assuming all other conditions remain constant. Setting
the PPP constant to a specific year, such as 2015, indicates the amount of R&D that one could purchase for 1 USD in
the US in 2015.
7DEOH5 'JURZWKUDWHVRIWRSJOREDOFRUSRUDWH5 'VSHQGHUVȁ 31



         


        

    


 

  


   

 



    



   

Notes: Real growth refers to the growth of variables in USD PPP 2015. R&D intensity refers to the ratio of the level of real
R&D PPP 2015 expenditure to real revenue PPP 2015.
Source: WIPO, based on Bureau van Dijk (BvD) Orbis database.

In terms of unweighted nominal growth (Figure 3), the ICT hardware and electrical equipment,
and the software and ICT services sector, saw their growth rates divided by two between 2022
and 2023. In contrast, the pharmaceutical sector experienced a significant rebound in R&D
expenditure, with growth increasing more than threefold, from 3 percent in 2022 to 10 percent
in 2023. In 2023, the pharmaceutical sector led in R&D intensity at 19 percent, followed by
Software and ICT services with 14 percent.

)LJXUHD1RPLQDO5 'H[SHQGLWXUHRIWRS5 'VSHQGHUVE\LQGXVWU\DQG\HDUȁ

USD 300 billion

ICT hardware and electrical
equipment

250 Pharmaceuticals and

biotechnology
Software and ICT services

200

Automobiles

150

100

50 Construction and industrial

metals
Travel, leisure and personal
goods
Health care equipment and
services
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Source: WIPO, based on Bureau van Dijk (BvD) Orbis database.

Global Innovation Tracker
 32 )LJXUHE,QWHQVLW\RIWRS5 'VSHQGHUVE\LQGXVWU\DQG\HDUȁ

20%

Pharmaceuticals and
biotechnology

15
Software and ICT services

10

ICT hardware and electrical

equipment

Automobiles
5 4%
Travel, leisure and personal
goods
Health care equipment and
services
Construction and industrial
metals
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Source: WIPO, based on Bureau van Dijk (BvD) Orbis database.

Figure 4 shows the nominal percentage change in R&D expenditure for 2023 among the top
15 firms in the top seven industries. In 2023, most of the top 15 R&D spenders across various
industries increased investment, continuing a positive trend. However, 25 firms did the opposite
and reduced investment.

Notably, four of the top R&D investors in ICT hardware reduced expenditure, in contrast to the
year before, when all ICT top R&D investors increased R&D expenditure. In software, two firms
decreased spending, while in pharmaceuticals, four firms did so. A few highlights:

– In the ICT hardware sector, a slowdown was evident, with Nvidia’s R&D growth rate
decelerating from around 35 percent in 2022 to 18 percent in 2023.
– Meta's and Uber's R&D – which jointly recorded the highest growth rate last year at 30
percent – fell substantially to around 10 and 13 percentage points, respectively.
– In contrast, the pharmaceuticals sector experienced an accelerated growth, with Eli Lilly,
Novartis, and Merck US all recording an R&D growth rate exceeding 20 percent.
– The automotive industry reported a substantial rise in R&D expenditure, particularly by
Tesla (by around 30 percent).
Global Innovation Index 2024
)LJXUH7RS5 'VSHQGHUVE\LQGXVWU\JURZWKUDWHȁ 33

ICT hardware and electrical equipment

Industry mean
Nvidia 18.2%

Advanced Micro Devices 17.3%

Samsung Electronics 14.4%

Apple 14.0%

Taiwan Semiconductor 11.8%

Cisco Systems 11.7%

Siemens 10.6%

Qualcomm 7.6%

Ericsson 7.1%

Huawei Investment & Holding 7.0%

Broadcom 6.8%

Hon Hai ຤

Nokia ຤

Mediatek ຤

Intel ຤
຤ ຤ ຤ 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Software and ICT services

Adobe 16.3%

Uber Technologies 13.1%

IBM 12.5%

Alphabet 10.7%

Meta 9.8%

Oracle 9.7%

Workday 8.5%

Tencent 5.7%

Baidu 5.1%

Intuit 5.0%

Electronic Arts 4.0%

Microsoft 3.4%

SAP 3.0%

Salesforce ຤

Alibaba Group Holding ຤

຤ ຤ ຤ 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Global Innovation Tracker
 34 )LJXUHContinued

Pharmaceuticals and biotechnology

Eli Lilly 29.5%

Novartis 24.0%

Merck US 21.7%

Takeda Pharmaceutical 15.9%

Gilead Sciences 14.5%

Boehringer Sohn 14.3%

GSK 13.4%

Astrazeneca 10.0%

AbbVie 8.5%

Johnson & Johnson 3.3%

6DQR‫ٶ‬ 0.3%

Roche ຤

Bristol-Myers Squibb ຤

3‫]ٶ‬HU ຤

Bayer ຤
຤ ຤ ຤ 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Automobiles
ZF Friedrichshafen 33.1%

Tesla 29.1%

Nissan Motor 17.5%

Mercedes-Benz 17.0%

Volkswagen 15.2%

BMW 13.8%

Stellantis 8.1%

Ford Motor 5.1%

Honda Motor 4.9%

Continental 4.8%

General Motors 1.0%

Toyota Motor 0.6%

Denso 0.6%

Robert Bosch ຤

SAIC Motor ຤

຤ ຤ ຤ 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Note: Vertical lines represent the sample average R&D growth for a specific industry.
Global Innovation Index 2024
)LJXUHContinued 35

Construction and industrial metals

Industry mean
China Energy Eng. 28.1%

Xinjiang Tianshan Cement 22.6%

China Comms. Constr. 19.4%

China National Chemical Eng. 16.9%

Power Constr. Corp. of China 13.0%

China Railway 9.3%

Shanghai Constr. 8.5%

China Railway Constr. 8.2%

Gree Electrical Appliances 8.0%

Saint-Gobain 7.7%

Nippon Steel 5.8%

China Shenhua Energy 1.3%

China State Constr. Eng. ຤

Aluminum Corp. of China ຤

Beijing Shougang ຤

຤ ຤ 0% 5% 15% 30% 45%

Travel, leisure and personal goods

Trip.com Group 45.3%

Nintendo 25.9%

Airbnb 14.7%

L'Oreal 12.2%

Zhejiang Dahua Technology 10.5%

Sega Sammy 9.1%

Garmin 8.4%

Panasonic 5.2%

LG Electronics 4.9%

Kao 3.9%

Nikon 2.1%

Sony 1.0%

Estée Lauder 0.0%

Shanda Games ຤

SF Holding ຤
຤ ຤ 0% 5% 15% 30% 45%
Global Innovation Tracker
 36 )LJXUHContinued

Health care equipment and services

Shenzhen Mindray Bio-Medical Electronics 21.4%

B. Braun 17.7%

Edwards Lifesciences 13.4%

Intuitive Surgical 12.1%

Olympus 11.0%

Zimmer Biomet 10.1%

%RVWRQ6FLHQWL‫ٶ‬F 6.9%

Dexcom 4.5%

Fresenius 1.5%

Medtronic Public Ltd. 1.5%

Essilorluxottica ຤

Becton Dickinson ຤

Stryker ຤

7KHUPR)LVKHU6FLHQWL‫ٶ‬F ຤

0LFURSRUW6FLHQWL‫ٶ‬F ຤
຤ ຤ 0% 5% 15% 30% 45%

Other
Paypal 34.5%

Petrochina 19.8%

Boeing 18.4%

Leonardo 11.4%

General Electric 10.0%

NTT 8.1%

Met. Corp. of China 7.5%

Meituan 6.8%

Philips 3.6%

Airbus 3.5%

RTX 3.5%

1HW‫ٷ‬L[ ຤

Nestlé ຤

BASF ຤
຤ ຤ 0% 5% 15% 30% 45%

Note: Vertical lines represent the sample average R&D growth for a specific industry.
Source: WIPO, based on Bureau van Dijk (BvD) Orbis database.
Source: WIPO, based on Bureau van Dijk (BvD) Orbis database.

Venture capital

After experiencing extraordinary growth in 2021, with a 47 percent increase in the number of
deals and a 127 percent increase in deal value reminiscent of the pre-dotcom bubble era, the
venture capital (VC) landscape faced significant challenges in 2022. Tighter monetary conditions
led to a sharp reduction in VC fund inflows, with a 36 percent drop in deal value, even though
Global Innovation Index 2024

the number of deals competed continued to rise by 22 percent.

This trend continued into 2023. The number of VC deals fell by around 10 percent (see
Dashboard), while the total amount of money invested in VC dropped further, by around 40
percent (Figure 5).
In 2023, Africa experienced the steepest decline in VC deals seen at the regional level, dropping 37
by around 25 percent from 471 to 349. Africa was followed by the Asia-Pacific region, which
saw an almost 20 percent decrease, from approximately 9,600 deals down to 7,700. Northern
America, although still leading with around 9,000 deals, experienced a 7 percent decline from
the 9,600 recorded in 2022. Latin America also saw a decrease, with deals falling by 7 percent,
from 539 to 500. Interestingly, Europe bucked the trend, with the number of deals increasing by
7 percent, reaching a historic record of approximately 5,400 deals.

The total amount invested in VC dropped significantly, from USD 595 billion in 2021 to USD 379
billion in 2022, and dropped further to USD 228 billion in 2023. This decline is reminiscent of the
financial crisis of 2009. Tighter monetary policy is driver behind this slowdown.

The Latin America region experienced the steepest decline in VC value, plummeting by 67
percent. This was followed by Northern America, with a 40 percent decrease, Europe at 38
percent, Asia-Pacific at 38 percent, and Africa with the smallest decline at 30 percent. Despite a
steep fall in the number of deals, Africa’s VC values remained relatively robust in 2023.

A long-term perspective reveals significant structural changes within the geographical

distribution of VC investment (Figure 6). In 1997, the United States and Canada concentrated
86 percent of VC values, while the Asia-Pacific region attracted only 3 percent. A quarter of a
century later, in 2023, the Asia-Pacific region share had increased by 25 percentage points, while
that of the United States and Canada had declined by 35 points. Meanwhile, in Latin America,
the share has remained stagnant at 1 percent, whereas Africa’s share has grown from zero in
1997 to 0.8 percent in 2023.

)LJXUHD4XDUWHUO\YDOXHRIYHQWXUHFDSLWDOGHDOVȁSRLQWPRYLQJDYHUDJH

USD 160 billion

140

120

100

80

60
Deal value
40 (billion USD)

20

0
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024

Source: WIPO, based on data published by Refinitiv Eikon (private equity screener), accessed March 2024.
Global Innovation Tracker
 38 )LJXUHE1XPEHURIYHQWXUHFDSLWDOGHDOVȁSRLQWPRYLQJDYHUDJH

7,000

6,000

5,000
Number of
VC deals
4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024

Source: WIPO, based on data published by Refinitiv Eikon (private equity screener), accessed March 2024.

)LJXUH5HJLRQDOGLVWULEXWLRQRIYHQWXUHFDSLWDOGHDOYDOXHDQG

US and Canada
Europe
Asia-Pacific 10%
Latin America 28%
Africa
51%

19%
86%

1997 2023

Source: WIPO, based on data published by Refinitiv Eikon (private equity screener), accessed March 2024.

,QWHUQDWLRQDOSDWHQWILOLQJV

In 2023, international patent filings under the WIPO-administered Patent Cooperation Treaty
(PCT) fell by almost 2 percent. This marked the first decline since the financial crisis in 2009,
which saw a more significant drop of almost 5 percent.6 The growth of patent filings has
progressively slowed since 2011 (Figure 7).

Despite a minimal reduction in number, China maintained its position as the leading origin of
PCT patent filings, in 2023. The United States and Japan followed, even though they experienced
a steeper decline of 5.3 percent and 2.9 percent, respectively. In contrast, India and Türkiye
showed substantial growth in PCT filings. India’s PCT applications surged by an impressive 44.6
percent, while Türkiye also experienced a significant increase of 8.5 percent.
Global Innovation Index 2024

6 For assessments of how IP filings fared during this and previous crises see, WIPO, 2010; WIPO, 2023; and Fink et
al., 2022.
)LJXUH3DWHQWILOLQJVJURZWKȁ 39

12%

10

 Patent filings
growth rate



2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Source: WIPO, based on the WIPO Statistics Database.

Technological progress

Indicators capturing technological progress have exhibited mostly positive and sometimes
strongly positive performance. The rapid improvement in computing power consistent with
Moore’s Law continues to profoundly shape our world. This is complemented by a swift increase
in the availability of drugs, indicating significant progress in health and a consistent reduction in
genome sequencing costs, which is critical for advancing medical research.

However, indicators relating to progress in green technologies and the environment showed
sub-par progress, as compared to average decade-long growth. Specifically, the speed of
making progress in making supercomputers more energy-efficient and renewable energy more
affordable is falling behind.

&RPSXWLQJSRZHU

The GII Global Innovation Tracker employs two metrics to monitor the balance between
technological progress and sustainability: namely, Moore’s Law (a reliable indicator for
tracking advancements in computing power) and supercomputer efficiency, which provides a
pathway for tracing progress in computing sustainability. Together, these two metrics offer a
comprehensive perspective on ongoing efforts at integrating computational advancement with
environmental sustainability.

Moore’s Law

Moore’s Law, the empirical observation that the number of transistors on an integrated circuit
doubles approximately every two years, continues to hold true. Between 2021 and 2023, the
transistor count increased by more than 150 percent, implying a compound annual growth
rate of 60 percent. This rate surpasses the long-run rate of around 40 percent annual growth
observed over the past decade.

Still, the miniaturization of transistors is becoming increasingly complex, pushing the

boundaries of science and technology. As of now, we have achieved 8-nanometer transistors.
The anticipated end of Moore’s Law is around 1.5nm to 1nm, at which point the fundamental
laws of physics begin to constrict transistor packing.
Global Innovation Tracker

Green supercomputing

Supercomputers, once confined to scientific research in fields such as climate prediction,

genomics and drug discovery, are rapidly permeating the world of business, particularly with
respect to the training of AI neural networks. The fastest supercomputers can execute more
 40 than 1 quintillion operations per second, also referred to as an exaflop, a computational
capacity equivalent to that of 100,000 laptops.

Despite undergoing an exponential increase in speed over time, these computing systems are
notoriously greedy consumers of energy (Figure 8). Efficiency, rather than simply operations per
second, is becoming a critical metric for these machines.

The GII Tracker assesses performance based on how many Gigaflops are achieved per Watt
of energy consumed. Between 2022 and 2023, the average efficiency of the top 50 “greenest”
supercomputers increased by around 14 percent, well below the decade’s compound annual
growth rate of 30 percent.

)LJXUH$YHUDJHVSHHGSRZHUDQGHIILFLHQF\RIWRSJUHHQVXSHUFRPSXWHUVȁ

Speed
2,500 (GFlops)

2,000

1,500
Efficiency
(GFlops/Watt)
1,000

500

Power (kW)
0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Notes: Average efficiency is calculated as the ratio of average speed to average power for the top 50 green
supercomputers. An increase in efficiency can occur even when both speed and power are decreasing. 2013 is the base
year and set to 100.
Source: WIPO based on data published by TOP500.

&RVWVRIUHQHZDEOHHQHUJ\

Between 2021 and 2022, the global weighted-average levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) from
newly commissioned solar photovoltaic (PV) and wind power witnessed a reduction of 3.9
percent and 3.5 percent, respectively. Yet, this rate of reduction is substantially lower than the
past decade’s compound annual rate of 15 percent for solar and 9 percent for wind.

In 2010, the global weighted-average cost of onshore wind was 95 percent higher than the
lowest cost of fossil fuel-fired power. However, by 2022, it was 52 percent lower than the
cheapest fossil fuel-fired solutions. Similarly, solar PV, which was 710 percent more expensive
than the cheapest fossil fuel-fired solution in 2010, became 29 percent less expensive by 2022,
marking a remarkable reduction in cost (IRENA, 2023).

Despite these positive trends, the renewable energy sector faces emerging challenges. The
escalating demand for natural resources and manufactured materials, coupled with a reduction
in fossil fuel prices from their 2022 peak, could potentially make renewable energy sources less
competitive relative to fossil fuels.

(OHFWULFEDWWHU\SULFH
Global Innovation Index 2024

Technological progress has persistently driven down the cost of lithium-ion batteries for over
a decade, making electric vehicles (EVs) increasingly affordable. However, 2022 marked a
key turnaround, with a first-ever increase in the price of electric batteries following upon an
increase in production costs.

This price reversal ended again in 2023, with lithium-ion battery prices hitting an unprecedented
low of USD 139 per kWh, marking a substantial 13.7 percent reduction from the 7 percent
increase seen in 2022 (Figure 9). However, the 2023 price reduction is at a lower rate than the 41
long-term price reduction observed over the past decade.

The 2023 price reduction reflects falling raw material and component prices, increased
production capacity across the battery value chain and weaker-than-expected demand growth.
The industry is also shifting toward new lithium iron phosphate cells, which are significantly
cheaper than previous technologies.

)LJXUH$YHUDJHOLWKLXPLRQEDWWHU\SULFHȁ

USD 800/kWh

700

600

500

400

300

200

100 Average battery

price (USD/kWh)
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Note: Prices a shown in real 2023 USD.

Source: WIPO, based on data published by BloombergNEF.

&RVWRIJHQRPHVHTXHQFLQJ

DNA sequencing plays a crucial role in the understanding of the human genome, and has
numerous potential applications in health care, including the rapid diagnosis of complex
diseases.

The cost of sequencing an entire genome has fallen dramatically over time. Based on estimates
valid for the United States, it has fallen from approximately USD 100 million in 2001 to just
over USD 500 in 2023. This rapid reduction in cost, driven by advancements in next-generation
DNA sequencing methods, has far outpaced the expected rate of progress predicated on
Moore’s Law.

Between 2021 and 2023, there was an annualized reduction of 8 percent in the cost of genome
sequencing, falling below the long-term trend of a –20 percent CAGR.7

Looking ahead, new metrics will be required in order to assess the cost of more advanced
DNA sequencing techniques. Emerging long-read DNA sequencing technologies allow for the
more accurate identification of complex structural variations. But they are more costly and
necessitate different metrics in order to track progress.8
Global Innovation Tracker

7 This slowdown can be partially attributed to the cessation of funding for the large-scale sequencing program funded
by the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) and a new cost estimation method, which incorporates
additional analysis costs and averages costs across a smaller number of research centers. The earlier cost estimation
method represented genome sequencing done by the research center for their own research projects. The newer
methods represent costs from those centers but made available to external customers.
8 Short-read technologies can assess differences in a person’s genome that possibly affect risk of disease. In contrast,
long-read DNA sequencing produces data that can inform more accurately how the overall structure of the genome
affects biology. Currently, long-read sequencing, costing around USD 3,000, mainly benefits research, but it may
eventually be used in health care.
 42 'UXJDSSURYDOV

In this edition of the Tracker, we assess the state of innovation in pharmaceuticals by examining
the number of novel active substances (NASs) launched globally. A NAS is defined as a new
molecular or biologic entity or combination where at least one element is new (IQVIA, 2024).

In 2023, a total of 69 NASs were introduced globally, marking a significant 9.5 percent increase
on the 63 launched in 2022. This figure surpasses the average annual growth rate of 3.7 percent
observed over the decade. Still, this is lower than during 2020 and 2021, when the number of
drugs introduced surged due to the COVID-19 pandemic before returning to the pre-pandemic
trend. In contrast to this year’s use of IQVIA data, last year’s Global Innovation Tracker relied
on Food and Drug Administration (FDA) data for the monitoring of drug approvals. FDA data
confirms the positive trend in 2023, with a notable rise of 49 percent in drug approvals after a
steep decline in 2022.

Figure 10 shows annual NAS launches between 2013 and 2023 disaggregated by therapeutic
area. Around 30 percent of the drugs introduced relate to oncology, 11 percent to neurology and
around 10 percent to infectious diseases, together accounting for half of total launches during
the period.

)LJXUH1XPEHURI\HDUO\GUXJODXQFKHVE\WKHUDSHXWLFDUHDȁ

93

81

69
All others
62 63
Cardiovascular
56 COVID-19
54
Gastrointestinal
48 48
Endocrinology
41 41 Immunology
Hematology
Infectious diseases

Neurology

Oncology, incl. supportive care

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Source: WIPO, based on data published by IQVIA Institute for Human Data Science.

Technology adoption

In 2023, technology adoption was positive across all the indicators considered. Growth was
evident in areas such as robotics and EVs. Connectivity is also expanding rapidly with the rise of
5G networks, promising faster data transmission speeds and a more reliable service. However,
despite long-term growth in safe sanitation, the pace of expansion is currently insufficient to
meet the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal of universal coverage by 2030. There
has been a decline of countries meeting the minimum cancer equipment needs too. The growth
Global Innovation Index 2024

rate for the adoption of safe sanitation has also significantly slowed.

Safe sanitation

Safe sanitation, that is, the use of improved sanitation facilities, increased by 1.4 percent
between 2021 and 2022, representing 57 per 100 inhabitants. This rate of growth is below
the decade’s average annual increase of 2.4 percent from 2012 to 2022. A decade ago, under
half of the world’s population (45 percent) had access to safe sanitation. This implies that 43
approximately 1.3 billion people have gained access to safe sanitation since 2012.

The most significant progress in safe sanitation access since 2012 has been observed in Central
and Southern Asia (+6.6 percent), particularly in India, and East and South East Asia (+4.6
percent), with China leading the way.

However, current rates of international adoption indicate that only 65 percent of the world’s
population will have access to safe sanitation by 2030. This falls short by 35 points of the
Sustainable Development Goal of universal coverage (UNICEF and WHO, 2023).

&RQQHFWLYLW\

This year the Global Innovation Tracker includes for the first time data on the proportion of the
world’s population covered by 5G networks. This is part of the GII’s effort to monitor the spread
of cutting-edge communication technologies. In 2023, 5G coverage extended to approximately
38 percent of the global population; a notable achievement considering commercial deployment
only began in 2019. This represents a close to 25 percent increase on the coverage in 2022 and
an annual compound growth rate of 45 percent since 2021. Furthermore, today, 95 percent of
the world’s population is covered by at least a 3G network (Figure 11).9

Coverage varies according to region. Europe leads in 5G deployment, with 68 percent of the
population covered, followed by the Americas at 59 percent and the Asia-Pacific region at 42
percent. The Arab States have 12 percent coverage, while the Commonwealth of Independent
States (CIS) region and Africa have 8 percent and 6 percent coverage, respectively (ITU, 2023).

The fixed broadband subscription rate rose to around 19 per 100 inhabitants, in 2023, a 4
percent increase on the previous year. This is, however, below the compound annual growth
rate of 7 percent over the past decade. Europe leads with 36 per 100 inhabitants, followed by
the Americas at 26, the CIS region at 23, Asia-Pacific at 19, the Arab States at 11. Africa has the
lowest coverage of all at just 0.8 per 100 inhabitants.

)LJXUH3RSXODWLRQFRYHUDJHE\W\SHRIPRELOHQHWZRUNȁ

100% 2G
3G
90
4G
80

70

60

50

40
5G

30

20

10

0
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Notes: The values for 2G, 3G and 4G represents that proportion of the population that has access to each respective
network or a superior one. Data pertaining to 5G coverage is unavailable for years prior to 2021.
Source: WIPO, based on data published by the International Telecommunication Union.
Global Innovation Tracker

9 Since 2G does not support internet access, we consider 3G coverage.

 44 5RERWVDQGDXWRPDWL]DWLRQ

In 2022, the operational stock of robots increased significantly by 12 percent, mirroring

the compound growth rate over the past decade. Growth occurred despite supply chain
disruptions, with robot adoption reaching new heights. Over 550,000 new installations were
recorded, marking a 5 percent increase on the previous record set in 2021. The electronics
industry emerged as the leading consumer of robots in 2022, accounting for 28 percent of all
new installations. The automotive industry closely followed, with a 25 percent share of new
installations (Müller, 2023).

Geographically, the industrial robot market was dominated by five countries: China, Japan, the
United States, the Republic of Korea and Germany. Together, these five countries accounted for
74 percent of the operational stock of robots in 2022.

Over time, there has been a noticeable shift in robot adoption. Japan, the United States and
Germany have seen a decrease in their share, whereas China’s share has increased significantly.

(OHFWULFYHKLFOHV

The global EV market experienced substantial growth in 2022. The stock of EVs increased by 54
percent that year, slightly below the 10-year average growth rate of 59 percent. The share of
EVs rose to 3 percent, in 2022, up from 2 percent in 2021 and a mere 0.07 percent a decade ago
(IEA, 2024).

Electric vehicles accounted for 18 percent of global car sales in 2022. The market was dominated
by China, Europe and the United States, which together constituted around 95 percent of total
EV sales.

Emerging markets and developing economies outside China constituted only a small proportion
of the global market. Affordability remains a significant barrier, particularly in low- and lower
middle-income economies. Challenges such as limited access to charging infrastructure and
EV servicing further impede adoption not only in these economies but also in high-income
regions, too.

Nonetheless, 2022 saw a significant surge in electromobility within India, Thailand and
Indonesia. Electric car sales in these countries tripled compared to 2021, largely driven by
Tata’s dominance within the Indian market and government incentives aimed at bolstering
EV manufacturing.

&DQFHUUDGLRWKHUDS\

To better capture the adoption of health-related innovations, the Global Innovation Tracker
provides information on the availability of cancer therapy equipment, specifically the number of
linear accelerators (LINACs) – devices for delivering high-energy x-rays or electrons to cancers
for therapeutic or palliative purposes – per inhabitant.

Data for 2023 shows an around 3 percent rise in the availability of LINACs per capita compared
to the previous year, exceeding the average annual global increase in LINAC availability of 1.6
percent over the past decade.

In 2023, 21 out of 100 countries met the minimum radiotherapy requirements set out by the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) DIrectory of RAdiotherapy Centres (DIRAC) (see
Data note). Among upper middle-income economies, there has been a notable increase in the
percentage of countries meeting radiotherapy requirements. However, the number of lower
Global Innovation Index 2024

middle- and low-income economies meeting radiotherapy technology minimum requirements

remains low, indicating a persistent divide in access to adequate radiotherapy services.
Socioeconomic impact 45

In terms of the socioeconomic impact of innovation, many indicators have returned to some
growth relative to the results of last year’s 2023 edition of the GII. Labor productivity has seen
an increase, albeit at a rate below the average for the past decade, with levels slightly above
those of 2021. Significant long-term progress has been made in reducing poverty, with the
number of people in extreme poverty in 2022 being half of what it was in 2005. However, levels
remain above those recorded in 2018, and thus pre-pandemic levels, indicating that more effort
is needed if progress is to be sustained or even accelerated.

Life expectancy saw a rapid rise in 2022, but remains at levels last seen in 2015. Also, the
disparity between healthy life expectancy and total life expectancy is still to be addressed. On
environmental issues, the world is falling further behind. After a temporary reduction in 2020,
carbon emissions are growing once. The year 2023 was the hottest on record, highlighting an
urgent need for effective climate action.

/DERUSURGXFWLYLW\

Labor productivity showed an increase of around 1 percent between 2022 and 2023, an
improvement from the sluggish growth of around 0.2 percent observed between 2021 and
2022. In terms of output per worker, there has been a notable increase, from around USD 43,000
in 2012 to USD 51,000 in 2023.

Despite this positive trend, the current growth rate still lags behind the decade average of 2.2
percent productivity growth; a trend further discussed in the context of two possibly new Digital
Age and deep Science Innovation waves in the GII 2022 special theme What is the future of
innovation-driven growth?

3RYHUW\

This year, the Global Innovation Tracker incorporates data on poverty. In 2022, approximately
712 million people were living in extreme poverty, defined as subsisting on less than USD
2.15 a day (2017 PPP) – a 5 percent decrease on the previous year. Comparatively, in 2012, the
number of people living in poverty was 936 million, representing a reduction of over 200 million
individuals over the decade (Figure 12).

Since the 2000s, the share of the global population living below the lower middle-income (USD
3.65) and the upper middle-income (USD 6.85) poverty line also shrank. Currently, nearly 2
billion people live on under USD 3.65 a day, and more than 3.5 billion people (around half of the
world’s population) live below the USD 6.85 threshold. Despite the 2022 improvement, poverty is
still greater today than it was before the pandemic struck.

)LJXUH3RSXODWLRQOLYLQJLQSRYHUW\E\LQFRPHWKUHVKROGȁ86'333

4.0 billion people

3.5 6.85
USD/day
3.0

2.5

2.0

3.65
1.5
USD/day
1.0
Global Innovation Tracker

0.5 2.15
USD/day
0.0
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Source: WIPO, based on data published by World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform.
 46 /LIHH[SHFWDQF\

Globally, average life expectancy at birth is now around 20 years longer than it was back in 1960,
when it stood at 51 years. However, COVID-19 caused a marked decline in life expectancy, and
recovery has been gradual.

Following two consecutive periods of unprecedented decline – a 1 percent decrease between

2019 and 2020, and a further 1.3 percent decrease between 2020 and 2021 – life expectancy rose
by around 1 percent in 2022. As of 2022, the life expectancy of a representative individual is 72
years, the same as in 2015. A decade earlier, in 2012, life expectancy was slightly lower, at 71
years (Figure 13).

Despite improvements, significant disparities in life expectancy persist. There remains a striking
gap of approximately 30 years between the highest and lowest life expectancies. For instance, in
Japan, life expectancy is slightly below 84 years, whereas in some other countries it is around 55
years. This gap has narrowed over time since 1960, when it was 45 years. Additionally, a notable
disparity exists between life expectancy at birth and healthy life expectancy at birth (HALE). This
gap has remained fairly constant since the start of the millennium, at around 9.5 years.

)LJXUH/LIHH[SHFWDQF\DQGKHDOWK\OLIHH[SHFWDQF\DWELUWK \HDUV ȁ

74 years

72
Life
70 expectancy

68

66

64

62
Healthy
60 life
expectancy
58

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022

Source: WIPO, based on data published by World Bank (LE) and World Health Organization (HALE).

*OREDOZDUPLQJ
In an effort to understand both the impact of economic activity on the climate and the potential
mitigation strategies through innovation, this year’s Global Innovation Tracker includes data on
global warming. This approach aligns with the global commitment made in 2015 under the Paris
Agreement, when countries worldwide agreed to a long-term goal of limiting the rise in global
surface temperature to no more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels, with a preferred limit
of 1.5°C.10

Notably, 2023 marked a significant milestone in being the hottest year on record, with the global
temperature 1.17°C above the baseline period (1951–1980).1 Problematically, the average
temperature in 2023 was only 0.13°C below the preferred 1.5°C target and 0.63°C below the
maximum 2°C target, thresholds that are quite likely to be surpassed in the coming decades
(Figure 14).
Global Innovation Index 2024

10 SeeKWWSVXQIFFFLQWGRFXPHQWV
1 Temperature variations occur within the context of an overall upward trend driven by human activity, with
fluctuations due to natural phenomena such as El Niño and La Niña events or volcanic eruptions.
Furthermore, carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are on the rise. In 2022, CO2emissions returned to 47
pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels, increasing by 0.9 percent compared to 2021. Fossil CO2emissions
are expected to have risen further in 2023, to 1.4 percent above 2019 levels (Figure 15).

)LJXUH*OREDOWHPSHUDWXUHDQRPDO\ȁODQGȁRFHDQJOREDOPHDQWHPSHUDWXUH

COP 15
1.4°C
1.3°C
1.2
Mean
temperature
1.0
1.17°C

0.8 Lowess
smoothing
0.6 1.01°C

0.4

0.2

0.0


1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Notes: COP 15 (lower threshold) indicates the lower limit of 1.5°C global warming relative to the pre-industrial
temperature. This corresponds to a temperature increase of 1.3°C with respect to the average temperature from 1951 to
1980. Lowess smoothing denotes Locally Weighted Scatterplot Smoothing with a fifth-degree polynomial.
Source: WIPO, based on data published by NASA GISS GISTEM.

)LJXUH&DUERQGLR[LGHHPLVVLRQVȁ JLJDWRQQHVRIFDUERQ

Fossil
10.0 CO2 emissions (GtC/yr) emissions
excluding
9.8 carbonation
(GtC/yr)
9.6

9.4

9.2

9.0

8.8

8.6
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022

Source: WIPO, based on data published by Global Carbon Budget 2023.

Conclusion

The Global Innovation Tracker 2024 provides a comprehensive analysis of the current state
of global innovation, revealing a complex landscape subject to economic, geopolitical and
technological factors. Findings serve to highlight progress, as well as challenges across four
key stages of the innovation cycle: science and innovation investment, technological progress,
technology adoption, and the socioeconomic impact of innovation.

In conclusion, while global innovation has remained resilient over the past few years, it faces
Global Innovation Tracker

significant economic and geopolitical headwinds. Despite continued technological progress and
growing technology adoption, achieving socioeconomic progress remains a challenge. The path
forward requires sustained investment, the enhanced adoption of breakthrough technologies,
and comprehensive strategies to harness innovation for socioeconomic and environmental
benefit. The outlook for 2024 and 2025 remains uncertain, necessitating vigilant monitoring and
adaptive strategies to navigate the evolving global landscape.
 48 At this point, an important reminder is in order: the GII Global Innovation Tracker makes a
significant effort to capture innovation investment and technological progress, adoption and
impact through a limited set of indicators and to provide high-level trends via the Dashboard.
While the indicators for investment impact are quite standard and comprehensive, the other
indicators on technological progress, adoption and impact are more selective and experimental,
and might not exhaustively capture today’s broad range of innovative activity. Nonetheless,
we hope this evolving tool will trigger a sound debate on better innovation measurement
and policy, which will in turn improve both the innovation metrics and the Tracker itself, as
a consequence.

Data notes

6FLHQWLILFSXEOLFDWLRQVcaptures the number of peer-reviewed articles published in the Social

Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE). Source: Web of
Science (Clarivate), https://apps.webofknowledge.com.

5 'LQYHVWPHQWVcaptures R&D expenditures worldwide in PPP-adjusted constant 2015 prices.

The 2022 values were calculated using available real data of gross expenditure on R&D (GERD)
and business enterprise expenditure on R&D (BERD) at the country level from the UNESCO
Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database; the OECD’s Main Science and Technology Indicators
(MSTI) database (March 2024 update); Eurostat and the Ibero-American and Inter-American
Network of Science and Technology Indicators (RICYT). For those countries for which data were
unavailable for 2022, the 2022 data were estimated using the last observation carried forward
(LOCF) method for R&D intensities (R&D expenditures as a percentage of GDP) and applied to
GDP PPP for the same year. R&D expenditures for 2023 were estimated for all countries, using
the latest available R&D intensity and estimations of GDP growth at constant prices from the
International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2024.

7RSFRUSRUDWH5 'VSHQGHUV’ data is sourced from the European Commission’s 2023 EU

Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard and further analyzed using WIPO calculations and
the Bureau van Dijk (BvD) Orbis database, with all figures reported in current US dollars. The
choice of the US dollar as the currency was arbitrary; however, its recent appreciation affects
the valuation of R&D spending in foreign currencies, potentially skewing the perceived trends
in R&D expenditure across different regions. To address these fluctuations and provide a
more balanced view, the approach considers the contribution of each country to global R&D,
weighting it according to their share of total R&D expenditure. The PPP-adjusted constant
2015-dollar measure is utilized to calculate each country's share in a given year. The R&D figures
are then aggregated using a weighted average method, where these proportional shares serve
as weights to compute the annual growth rates. This method helps mitigate the impact of
currency valuation changes, offering a clearer picture of actual spending trends in R&D across
various regions.

Venture capital (VC) deals refers to the absolute number of VC deals received by companies
located within a region. VC value refers to the total amount of current US dollars invested –
via venture capital – into companies located within a region. Source: Refinitiv Eikon data on
private equity and venture capital, www.refinitiv.com/en/products/eikon-trading-software/
private-equity-data.

,QWHUQDWLRQDOSDWHQWILOLQJVrefers to the total number of patent applications filed through the

WIPO-administered Patent Cooperation Treaty. Source: WIPO IP Statistics Data Center, www.
wipo.int/ipstats. See also WIPO (2024).

0LFURFKLSWUDQVLVWRUFRXQW(Moore’s Law) refers to the number of transistors to be found on the

Global Innovation Index 2024

most advanced, commercially available microchips in a given year. Source: Karl Rupp, https://
github.com/karlrupp/microprocessor-trend-data.

Green supercomputersaverage efficiency of top 50 systems on the Green500 list. The Green500
ranks the most energy-efficient computer systems, by measuring computational capacity per
unit of energy consumed (Gflops/Watts). Source: TOP500 (November 2023), www.top500.org/
lists/green500.
&RVWRIUHQHZDEOHHQHUJ\captures the global weighted average levelized cost of electricity 49
(LCOE) generation of solar photovoltaics and onshore and offshore wind. Source: International
Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), www.irena.org/Publications/2023/Aug/Renewable-Power-
Generation-Costs-in-2022. See IEA (2023).

(OHFWULFEDWWHU\SULFHrefers to the average lithium-ion battery price (in 2023

USD, including the cell, module and pack), weighted by power capacity (MWh),
across all sectors. Source: BloombergNEF (BNEF), https://about.bnef.com/blog/
lithium-ion-battery-pack-prices-hit-record-low-of-139-kwh.

&RVWRIJHQRPHVHTXHQFLQJrefers to the cost of sequencing the DNA of one human genome

(in USD). Source: National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), US National Institute of
Health, Wetterstrand KA. DNA sequencing costs: Data from the NHGRI Genome Sequencing
Program (GSP), www.genome.gov/sequencingcostsdata.

'UXJDSSURYDOVrefers to the number of novel active substances (NASs). A NAS is a new

molecular or biologic entity or combination, where at least one element is new. Includes NASs
launched anywhere in the world by year of first global launch. Launch is determined using IQVIA
DXGLWVRIVDOHVDFWLYLW\DVZHOODVFRPSDQLHVȆSXEOLFVWDWHPHQWVb

Source: IQVIA Institute for Human Data Science, Global Trends in R&D 2024: Activity, Productivity,
DQG(QDEOHUVbwww.iqvia.com/insights/the-iqvia-institute/reports-and-publications/reports/
global-trends-in-r-and-d-2024-activity-productivity-and-enablers.

Safe sanitationrefers to that portion of the population that uses an improved sanitation facility
not shared with other households and where excreta are safely disposed of in situ or removed
and treated off-site. Improved sanitation facilities include flush/pour toilets connected to piped
sewerage systems; septic tanks or pit latrines; pit latrines with slabs; and composting toilets.
Source: WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene
(JMP), https://washdata.org.

%URDGEDQGSHQHWUDWLRQis equivalent to the number of fixed and (active) mobile broadband

subscriptions, respectively, per 100 inhabitants. Source: International Telecommunication Union
(ITU) World Telecommunication/ICT Indicators database, www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/
Pages/publications/wtid.aspx.

*FRYHUDJHrefers to the percentage of the population covered by 5G mobile network

technology. Source: International Telecommunication Union (ITU), www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/
Statistics/Pages/facts.

5RERWVis a measure of the number of robots currently deployed in industrial automation

applications (also known as the operational stock of industrial robots). The stock is calculated
assuming an average service life of 12 years with immediate withdrawal from service at the
end of the period. Source: International Federation of Robotics (IFR), https://ifr.org/img/
worldrobotics/Executive_Summary_WR_Industrial_Robots_2023.pdf.

(OHFWULFYHKLFOH (9 stock is the number of passenger cars worldwide that are battery electric
vehicles (BEVs) or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). EV share is the percentage of the
total passenger car stock that is electric. Source: International Energy Agency, Global EV Outlook
2024. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/global-ev-data-explorer.

&DQFHUUDGLRWKHUDS\brefers to the total number of linear accelerators per inhabitant. Linear

accelerators (LINACs) are devices for delivering high-energy x-rays or electrons to cancers for a
therapeutic purpose. A higher ratio indicates a better-equipped health care system. Penetration
rate refers to the number of countries that meet minimal radiotherapy resource requirements
Global Innovation Tracker

worldwide, based on a rough assumption that one in every two cancer cases requires
radiotherapy and that one machine is needed for every 500 patients requiring radiotherapy.
Source: Special tabulations by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) DIrectory of
RAdiotherapy Centres (DIRAC) for the GII based on IAEA DIRAC (https://dirac.iaea.org) and IARC
GLOBOCAN (https://gco.iarc.fr) databases.
 50 /DERUSURGXFWLYLW\(rates) refers to the world total of output per hour worked; (levels) refers
to the world total of output per employee. Both indicators were estimated by The Conference
Board. Source: The Conference Board Total Economy Database™, May 2024, https://conference-
board.org/data/economydatabase.

3RYHUW\refers to that part of the population living below the poverty line of USD 2.15 a day
(2017 PPP). Source: World Bank Poverty and Inequality Platform, https://pip.worldbank.org.

/LIHH[SHFWDQF\refers to the number of years a newborn infant could be expected to live,

if patterns of mortality prevailing at the time of birth were to stay the same throughout
its life. Source: World Development Indicators, https://databank.worldbank.org/source/
world-development-indicators.

Air temperature refers to the global mean estimate temperature anomaly with respect to the
base period 1951–1980 based on land and ocean data. Source: NASA GISS, https://data.giss.nasa.
gov/gistemp.
Global Innovation Index 2024
GII 2024 results
The GII unveils the world’s
innovation leaders, gauging
the innovation performance
of 133 economies.

51
 52 This section presents the highlights of the Global Innovation Index 2024 (GII), including
a discussion on the top ranked economies by income group and world region, as well as
identifying those economies that are overperforming on innovation relative to their level
of development.

The GII 2024 rankings are mainly derived from 2022 and 2023 data points (about 80 percent of
all data). Appendix I provides details on how to interpret the results, cautioning against simple
year-on-year comparison of the GII rankings.

Innovation leaders in 2024

$VLDQPLGGOHLQFRPHHFRQRPLHV&KLQD,QGLD,QGRQHVLDDQG7¾UNL\HVXUJHDKHDG7KDLODQG
DQG9LHW1DPPRYHFORVHUWRWKHWRS0RURFFRMRLQVWKHJURXSRIPLGGOHLQFRPH
HFRQRPLHVZLWKLQWKH*,,WRSWKDWKDYHFOLPEHGIDVWHVWLQWKH*,,UDQNLQJVLQFH

Switzerland ranks 1st in the GII for the 14th consecutive year (Figure 16). It is still the global leader
in innovation outputs, ranking 1st in both Knowledge and technology outputs and Creative
outputs. It also ranks in the top 5 of all the other GII pillars, with the exception of Infrastructure
(7th). Sweden and the United States (US) maintain their respective 2nd and 3rd positions for the
second consecutive year. Sweden leads in Infrastructure (1st), Business sophistication (1st),
Knowledge and technology outputs (2nd) and Human capital and research (3rd). It holds top
positions for its Researchers (1st), Intellectual property (IP) payments and receipts (both 1st),
its Knowledge-intensive employment (3rd), its Global brand value (3rd) and its Low-carbon
energy use (4th). The United States scores best in the world in nine of the 78 GII 2024 innovation
indicators – behind Singapore. It ranks 1st in the world in indicators that include the quality of its
universities, the impact of its scientific publications (H-index), software spending and IP receipts
(Box 1).

Singapore (4th) moves further into the top 5 and is the economy with the greatest number of
GII indicators ranking 1st in the world for the first time (with 14 out of 78 indicators – Box 1),
overtaking the United States. However, even if Singapore moves closer to the top 3, breaking
into that group remains challenging. The top 3 economies share the characteristics of both
excelling across all GII pillars and successfully balancing their innovation inputs and outputs
(Table 4). Even though Singapore has already surpassed Switzerland, Sweden and the United
States in terms of innovation inputs, the gaps between Singapore and the top 3 still remain large
in innovation outputs, and especially in Creative outputs.

The Republic of Korea moves up to 6th position and ranks in the top 3 worldwide in key indicators
including Researchers (2nd), R&D expenditures (2nd), R&D performed by business (1st) and
Production and export complexity (3rd).

Box 1 GII innovation indicators – 2024 trailblazers

Singapore takes the lead in 2024 in terms of the number of GII innovation indicators in which it
ranks top globally, ranking 1st in the world in 14 out of 78 indicators and overtaking the United
States. It leads in Regulatory quality, Policy stability for doing business, ICT access, Logistics
performance, Venture capital received, Venture capital investors, High-tech manufacturing and
GitHub commits.

The United States follows Singapore globally, ranking 1st worldwide in nine indicators (four
less than in 2023), including holding the top spot in Global corporate R&D investors, Unicorn
valuation and Intangible asset intensity. China follows in 3rd place, leading in eight innovation
Global Innovation Index 2024

indicators (two more than in 2023), including Utility models, Trademarks and Industrial
designs. Switzerland comes next, in 4th place, attaining the top ranking in University–industry
R&D collaboration, Intellectual property payments and receipts and PCT patents. Japan, Israel,
Hong Kong, China and Luxembourg, tie in 5th place, ranking 1st in six indicators, including
Public research–industry co-publications, GERD performed by business, High-tech imports and
Knowledge-intensive employment, respectively. They are followed by Sweden, the Republic of
Korea and Iceland, tying in 9 th place, leading in Researchers, Researchers working in the private
sector (Research talent) and Low-carbon energy use, respectively. 53

In addition, certain middle- and low-income economies are excelling in various domains.
Relative to other countries and to their own GDP or population, the Plurinational State of
Bolivia, Cambodia and Nepal rank 1st in Loans from microfinance institutions, Malaysia in
Graduates in science and engineering and Mexico in Creative goods exports. Correspondingly,
Morocco leads in Industrial designs, the Islamic Republic of Iran in Trademarks and Namibia in
Expenditure on education.

%R[7DEOH(FRQRPLHVZLWKWKHPRVW*,,LQGLFDWRUVUDQNHGWRS

Economy Inputs Outputs Total

Singapore 9 5 14

United States 3 6 9

China 3 5 8

Switzerland 3 4 7

Japan 3 3 6

Israel 4 2 6

Hong Kong, China 4 2 6

Luxembourg 5 1 6

Sweden 2 3 5

Republic of Korea 2 3 5

Iceland 3 2 5

Note: The GII methodology allows multiple economies to rank 1st on any one indicator; see Economy profiles and
Appendix I.
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.

China moves up the ranking to 11th position, edging closer to the top 10 again. It maintains its
1st position among the upper middle-income group and 3rd position among economies in South
East Asia, East Asia and Oceania, behind Singapore and the Republic of Korea. China is also the
third economy with the greatest number of indicators ranked 1st, two more than in 2023, behind
Singapore and the United States (Box 1). It ranks in the top 3 globally in indicators such as High-
tech exports (1st), Global corporate R&D investors (2nd), Labor productivity growth (2nd) and GERD
financed by business (3rd).

Japan remains firmly at the 13th rank – a position it has held since 2021. Canada makes a
comeback, rising to 14th position, its best rank since 2014. It holds the highest rank globally in
Venture capital (VC) recipients (1st), and Joint venture/strategic alliance deals (1st). It also holds
tops ranks for the quality of its universities (4th) and the impact of its scientific publications
(H-index – 4th).

Ireland (19th) and Luxembourg (20th) enter the top 20, climbing three ranks and one rank,
respectively (Figure 17). In part influenced by the strong presence of foreign multinationals in
the field of ICT, Ireland ranks top globally in ICT services exports (1st) and Intellectual property
payments (1st) and ranks in the top 3 for its Intangible asset intensity (2nd).

Australia (23rd) and New Zealand (25th) also continue to move upward within the top 25. Australia
GII 2024 results

excels in the quality of its universities (3rd), the impact of its scientific publications (6th) and its
Knowledge-intensive employment (9 th). New Zealand enters the top 25 with high rankings in
Regulatory environment (5th), Firms offering formal training (5th) and Domestic credit to private
sector (9 th).
 54 )LJXUH7KH*,,G\QDPR7KHWRSLQQRYDWRUVȁ

24
22

23
20

21

20
20

20

20

20
Switzerland 1 Switzerland

Sweden 2 Sweden

United States 3 United States

United Kingdom 4 Singapore

Netherlands
(Kingdom of the)
5 United Kingdom

Denmark 6 Republic of Korea

Finland 7 Finland

Singapore 8 Netherlands
(Kingdom of the)

Germany 9 Germany

Republic of Korea 10 Denmark

Top 10

Hong Kong,
China
11 China

France 12 France

Israel 13 Japan

China 1
14 Canada

Ireland 15 Israel
in ,
d

Ch ong
lan

a
Ire

K
ng
Ho

Note: Year-on-year comparisons of GII rankings need to take into account changes to the GII model that have occurred
over time, as well as data availability.
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.

European Union (EU) economies Cyprus (27th), Spain (28th) and the Czech Republic (30th) move
up within the top 30, while Poland (40th) makes it into the top 40 (Figure 17). Beyond the EU,
European economies Serbia (52nd) and Montenegro (65th) continue to improve their ranking, with
Montenegro entering the top 70.

Apart from China, there are only four other middle-income economies among the top 40
economies this year: namely, Malaysia (33th), Türkiye (37th), Bulgaria (38th) and India (39th).
However, Thailand (41st) and Viet Nam (44th) move ahead, consolidating their positions in the
top 45 and moving towards the top 40. With its best rank since 2009, Thailand is sustaining its
Global Innovation Index 2024

long-term progression. Türkiye is also moving ahead, claiming 3rd position among the upper
middle-income economies and overtaking Bulgaria. All these middle-income economies, with
the exception of Bulgaria, moved up in the rankings this year.

The United Arab Emirates remains in 32nd place. Saudi Arabia (47th) and Qatar (49th) continue to
climb upward into the top 50 and are the only two economies in the Middle East region to move
up the ranking this year (Figure 17). Taking a broader view, among the Middle East economies,
only the United Arab Emirates (32nd), the Islamic Republic of Iran (64th) and Oman (74th) have 55
improved their position since 2013.

Georgia (57th) and Armenia (63rd) make important improvements, entering the top 60 and top
70, respectively. However, the position of both economies in the ranking has fluctuated over the
years.

Northern African economies Morocco (66th) and Algeria (115th) experience notable improvements
in their innovation ranking. Together with China, India, Indonesia (54th), the Islamic Republic
of Iran (64th), the Philippines (53rd), Türkiye and Viet Nam, Morocco joins the group of middle-
income economies within the GII top 70 that have made the biggest advances in the GII ranking
since 2013 (Figure 17). Algeria ranks in the top 10 in Expenditure on education (10th), and in
the top 20 globally for its Graduates in science and engineering (20th). It also made important
progress in IP-related indicators including Patents (65th, up by 15 with its number of resident
patent applications almost doubling in 2022), Trademarks (87th) and Industrial designs (46th).

Egypt holds the 86th position, with Cairo also entering the GII top 100 science and technology
clusters ranking for the first time in 2024 (see Cluster ranking).

Brazil (50th) remains in the top 50 in 2024, keeping its leading position in Latin America and
the Caribbean, ahead of Chile (51st) and Mexico (56th), both of which also move up the ranking.
Moreover, Colombia (61st), Costa Rica (70th) and Paraguay (93rd) make the greatest headway in the
region, with Costa Rica entering the top 70. Caribbean economy Barbados enters the GII in 2024
at the 77th position, after taking active steps to improve its innovation indicators (see Box 2).

The Philippines (53rd) and Indonesia (54th) continue to improve their GII ranking, with both
entering the top 55. The Philippines claims 3rd position in the lower middle-income group.
Indonesia enters the top 60 and is the economy in South East Asia, East Asia and Oceania
that makes the greatest advancement in ranks in 2024. It makes notable improvements in
Policy stability for doing business (13th) and key IP indicators, such as Industrial designs (64th),
Trademarks (72nd) and PCT patents (82nd), even if these are still at moderate levels.

Ukraine (60th) drops by five positions and is now 4th among the lower middle-income group
(Table 2). Its position is mostly affected by falls in indicators related to its Institutions (107th) and
its Human capital and research (54th), including Tertiary enrolment (44th), School life expectancy
(76th), Government effectiveness (99th) and Rule of law (115th). Foreign direct investment (FDI)
inflows (88th) also dropped considerably.

In the last five years, Indonesia, Mauritius (55th), Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Brazil and Pakistan (91st)
made the greatest advances in the GII, in order of their rank progression (Figure 17). Saudi
Arabia performs relatively better in innovation inputs (36th) and excels in Market capitalization
(1st), State of cluster development (2nd) and Global corporate R&D investors (16th). In contrast,
Pakistan performs relatively well in innovation outputs, excelling in Mobile app creation (14th),
ICT services exports (22nd) and Software spending (24th).

In Central and Southern Asia, Kazakhstan (78th) enters the top 80 (Figure 17). Kazakhstan
performs better in innovation inputs (72nd), excelling in Government’s online service (8th), Utility
models (10th), E-participation (15th) and Entrepreneurship policies and culture (25th). Uzbekistan
(83rd) remains in the top 85 and is the 10th ranking economy among the lower middle-income
group (Table 2) – a significant improvement since 2013, when it held the 133rd spot. Sri Lanka
(89th) consolidates its place in the top 90, while Kyrgyzstan (99th) takes a big stride into the top
100. Taking a longer term view, all economies in the region have made sustained progress in
their rankings over the past decade. Uzbekistan, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan and India
have made the largest advancements, in that order.

Eight out of the 27 economies from Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) covered this year improve their
ranking. Mauritius (55th) moves forward into the top 55, Cabo Verde (90th) consolidates its place
GII 2024 results

in the top 90 while Senegal (92nd) moves closer to it. Kenya (96th) makes the largest improvement
in the region, advancing four ranks into the top 100. Kenya improves notably in innovation
outputs (87th, up by four positions), and in particular in Knowledge and technology outputs.
Its most notable improvements are in the IP-related indicators Utility models (15th), Patents by
 56 origin (49th) and PCT patents (69th), all of which go up by around 20 ranks. It also makes notable
improvements in ICT services exports (17th).

Beyond the top 100, Tajikistan (107th), Algeria (115th) and Burundi (127th) have progressed the
most in the rankings. Bangladesh (106th) and Madagascar (110th), despite setbacks in 2024, have
demonstrated GII rank improvements over the long run.

Burundi is the only low-income economy that moved up the ranking this year, while Uganda’s
ranking remains unchanged, in 121st position globally and 4th among its income group (Table 2).

)LJXUHD%UHDNLQJEDUULHUV(FRQRPLHVVRDULQJWRQHZKHLJKWVLQLQQRYDWLRQ

20
Top
Ireland (19th) and Lu[emEourJ (20th) make it into the top 20 in 2024

30
Top
The C]ech 5epuElic (30th) joins the top 30

40
Top
Poland (40th) makes it into the top 40

50
Top
Saudi AraEia (47th) and Qatar (49th) continue to climb within the top 50

60
Top
Indonesia (54th) and GeorJia (57th) join the top 60

70
Top
Armenia (63rd), 0onteneJro (65th) and Costa 5ica (70th)
join the top 70, while 0orocco (66th) continues moving up

80
Top
.a]aNhstan (78th) joins the top 80 and %arEados joins
the GII 2024 at the 77th position

Note: Year-on-year comparisons of GII rankings must take into account changes to the GII model that have occurred over
time, as well as data availability.
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.
Global Innovation Index 2024
)LJXUHE(FRQRPLHVFOLPELQJWKHODGGHU 57

Top climEHrs since 2013 Top climEHrs since 201

Top 10
11

Top 20

Top 30

35
37
39 Top 40

a
in
Ch
44
47
50 49 Top 50

54 53 54
55
Top 60

64 65
66 66 66
68 68 Top 70

r
ta
a

il

Qa
a]
di
In

%r
e

ia
L\

aE
rN

76

Ar
Tü

i
ud
Sa
m

82
1a
et

85 85
Vi

2024 position
s
iu
rit

2013 position
au

90
sia

sia

91
0

92 2019 position
ne

ne
do

do
In

In
es
in
co

pp
oc

ili
or

Ph
0

105
an
st
Ni

113
Pa
ic ic
El am
)
of
pu Isl
5e n (
a
Ir

Note: Year-on-year comparisons of GII rankings must take into account changes to the GII model that have occurred over
time, as well as data availability.
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.
GII 2024 results
 58 7DEOH7RS(FRQRPLHVE\LQFRPHJURXS

Income GII Income GII

JURXS UDQN High-income economies JURXS UDQN Upper middle-income
UDQN (51 in total) UDQN economies (34 in total)
1 1 Switzerland 1 11 China
2 2 Sweden 2 33 Malaysia
3 3 United States 3 37 Türkiye
4 4 Singapore 4 38 Bulgaria
5 5 United Kingdom 5 41 Thailand
6 6 Republic of Korea 6 50 Brazil
7 7 Finland 7 52 Serbia
8 8 Netherlands (Kingdom of the) 8 54 Indonesia
9 9 Germany 9 55 Mauritius
10 10 Denmark 10 56 Mexico

Income GII Income GII

JURXS UDQN Lower middle-income JURXS UDQN Low-income economies
UDQN economies (38 in total) UDQN (10 in total)
1 39 India 1 104 Rwanda
2 44 Viet Nam 2 110 Madagascar
3 53 Philippines 3 117 Togo
4 60 Ukraine 4 121 Uganda
5 64 Iran (Islamic Republic of) 5 127 Burundi
6 66 Morocco 6 128 Mozambique
7 67 Mongolia 7 129 Burkina Faso
8 73 Jordan 8 130 Ethiopia
9 81 Tunisia 9 131 Mali
10 83 Uzbekistan 10 132 Niger

Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.

Box 2 outlines important “dos and don’ts” to bear in mind when using the GII to improve an
economy’s innovation performance.

Box 2 How to best use the Global Innovation Index and what not to do

For many years, governments around the world have successfully used the GII to improve their
economies’ innovation performance and shape evidence-based innovation policies. A survey
carried out by WIPO in 2024 showed that 77 percent of WIPO member states were using the
GII to improve innovation ecosystems and metrics (up by roughly 20 percent in comparison
to 2022, with 91 out of 118 responding member states using the GII), as well as it being a
benchmark for national innovation policies or economic strategies across all world regions.

One major benefit of the GII is that it puts evidence and metrics at the core of conceiving,
deploying and evaluating innovation policies. A first step brings together statisticians,
innovation actors and policymakers to develop a clear understanding of a country’s innovation
performance. In a second step, the policy discussion turns to leveraging domestic innovation
opportunities, while at the same time overcoming country-specific weaknesses. Both steps are
an exercise in coordination among different public and private innovation actors, as well as
between government entities. In a number of countries, the GII has facilitated such a dialogue
between these actors.

6RPHGRV
– Ensure that innovation is embedded as a key priority in a country’s pathway to national
development and progress, possibly formulated within a clear innovation policy.
– Establish a cross-ministerial task force to pursue innovation policy matters through a “whole
Global Innovation Index 2024

of government approach,” ideally reporting to the top tier of government (for instance, the
prime minister’s office).
– Ensure that any innovation policy task force consults with innovation actors from both the
private and public sectors, including startups, research universities and innovation clusters.
– Ensure that any national intellectual property (IP) policy is aligned with or integrated into the
innovation law or strategy.
– Ensure that the targets of an innovation policy are clear, quantifiable and can be evaluated.
6RPHGRQȆWV 59
– Avoid nominating a single government entity to oversee the GII data and policy work, such
as the intellectual property office or one ministry. This is a team effort involving different
government entities, not the responsibility of one body working alone.
– Do not set overly ambitious, and therefore unrealistic, GII ranking targets. GII rankings rarely
increase in leaps and bounds from one year to the next, particularly within the top 50.
– Do not expect policy changes to result in immediate improvement in GII indicator
performance. There are significant lags between the formulation of innovation policy, its
execution and its impact. The latest available innovation data is also rarely current, often
lagging by a few years.
– Do not treat the GII as a mathematical exercise – that is, by attempting to collect or focus
on specific indicators simply to climb the ranking. A country’s GII rank alone is only a
partial reflection of a national innovation ecosystem and related progress. Moreover, the
GII framework changes regularly. Note also that the year-on-year changes within the GII
are influenced by relative performance in relation to other countries, together with other
methodological considerations (see Appendix I). Setting objectives over a period of years (for
example, three to five years) and then reviewing combined progress over several years is a
more appropriate way of using the GII.

With these caveats in mind, the GII has become a catalyst for the national collection of
innovation indicators. As detailed in Appendix III, the vast majority of GII data is not collected
by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) itself directly from its member states.
Instead, WIPO uses data submitted by economies to those organizations that are globally
responsible for collection of specific data (for example, the UNESCO Institute for Statistics
for data relating to R&D).1 For all other data sets, the GII team can help countries identify
missing and outdated data (marked clearly in the economy profiles and briefs) and advise
data collectors on how to remedy the situation. This system has proven remarkably effective
in building more global and inclusive innovation and related data sets in WIPO’s partner
organizations, with better data coverage across all United Nations member states, effectively
FRQWULEXWLQJWRDXVHIXOSXEOLFJRRGWKDWIDFLOLWDWHVEHWWHULQQRYDWLRQSROLF\PDNLQJb

Finally, a new trend is the interest being expressed by countries in building sub-national
innovation indices at the regional or city level that mirror the GII framework or comprise
selected GII indicators.2 WIPO is supporting this work in two ways: (i) by organizing workshops
on the exchange of best practice, and (ii) by providing a background study on sub-national
innovation indices. Member states are welcome to participate in these events and efforts, and
to provide additional information on their sub-national innovation index plans and needs.
b

Innovation overperformers

,QGLDWKH5HSXEOLFRI0ROGRYDDQG9LHW1DPFRQWLQXHWROHDGDVWKHORQJHVWVWDQGLQJ
LQQRYDWLRQRYHUSHUIRUPHUV,QGRQHVLD3DNLVWDQDQG8]EHNLVWDQPDLQWDLQWKHLUVWDWXVDV
RYHUSHUIRUPHUVIRUDWKLUGFRQVHFXWLYH\HDU

In the GII 2024, 19 economies are performing above expectation relative to their level of
development – these are the GII innovation overperformers (Figure 18 and Table 3).

India, the Republic of Moldova and Viet Nam continue to be record holders by being innovation
overperformers since 2011, for a 14th consecutive year. Viet Nam (44th) scores above its income
level in all GII pillars, and even above the upper middle-income group, with the exception of
Human capital and research. The Philippines (53rd) and Morocco (66th) keep their innovation

1 The sole exception is the intellectual property data that WIPO collects annually from member states. See https://
GII 2024 results

www.wipo.int/web/ip-statistics.
2 The recent WIPO study reviews the applicability of the GII framework to the development of sub-national innovation
metrics. It analyses the existing sub-national innovation indices of WIPO member states who are pioneers in this
field. It also determines which future innovation metrics are applicable to the measurement of innovation at the
sub-national level, particularly those exploiting “big data” and new computational methods. See WIPO (2024a).
 60 overperformer status for a sixth time, and both move up in the rankings this year. Senegal (92nd)
retains its overperformer status again this year, after regaining its place in the prestigious list in
2023. In addition, Indonesia (54th), Uzbekistan (83rd) and Pakistan (91st) keep their overperformer
status for a third consecutive year.

From a regional perspective, South East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania and Sub-Saharan Africa still
have the same number of overperformers, with five each. Central and Southern Asia holds 3rd
place, while Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean and Northern Africa and Western Asia tie
in 4th place, with two overperforming economies each (Table 3).

Conversely, 41 economies are performing below expectation on innovation, the majority from
Latin America and the Caribbean and Sub-Saharan Africa (both with 11 economies each). Among
the high-income group, six are economies from Northern Africa and Western Asia: namely, the
United Arab Emirates (32nd), Saudi Arabia (47th), Qatar (49th), Kuwait (71st), Bahrain (72nd) and
Oman (74th), driven in large part by their natural-resource-driven high GDP per capita – a key
factor for this analysis. In the upper middle-income group, three economies which perform
below expectation are European economies, notably the Russian Federation (59 th), Montenegro
(65th) and Belarus (85th). In the lower middle-income group, 10 economies are performing below
expectation for their level of development.

)LJXUH,QQRYDWLRQRYHUSHUIRUPHUVUHODWLYHWRWKHLUHFRQRPLFGHYHORSPHQW

GII score Population

70 100,000 400,000 1,000,000

60

50

40
India Viet Nam
Thailand
Indonesia
Brazil
Philippines
30 Morocco Ukraine
Mongolia Republic of Moldova
Jordan South Africa
Uzbekistan Jamaica
Senegal Pakistan
Kenya
20 Rwanda
Madagascar

Burundi

10
GDP per capita
(PPP$
logarithmic
scale)
0
7 8 9 10 11 12

Performing above expectation for level of development

Note: Bubbles sized according to population. The cubic spline trendline shows the expected level of innovation
performance at different levels of GDP per capita for all economies covered in the GII 2024.
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.
Global Innovation Index 2024
7DEOH,QQRYDWLRQRYHUSHUIRUPHUVLQ,QFRPHJURXSUHJLRQDQG\HDUVDVDQ 61
innovation overperformer.

    

         

  

         


   ! $  
%   
" # 

    % ( % ( 

&  '  
 ) 

    % ( % ( 

"*  +( , 
 ) 

     !  (  

  
$-  %  (  


$    % ( % (  ( +( ,
. 
 )   

  
/  '   !   0    +(  ,


"*     !  1,(  ,

   +( 2( 3

  *    ! 
  2

$  
 !     !  , 2


  
"  '   !   0    +(  1


    % ( % ( 

4   5(  1
 ) 

6      !  2( 5(  +

$  
6 7          


$  
/          (  


$    % ( % ( 

   3
 ) 

  
4-         3


  
$7 -         3


Note: Income group classification follows the World Bank Income Group Classification (July 2023). Geographical regions
correspond to the United Nations publication on standard country or areas codes for statistical use (M49).
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.
GII 2024 results
 62 Efficiency champions: Converting innovation investment into
tangible innovation output

0LGGOHLQFRPHHFRQRPLHVVXFKDV&KLQDDQG7¾UNL\HRXWGRWKHLUKLJKLQFRPHSHHUVLQ
innovation outputs

Among high-income economies, Switzerland (1st) leads in producing higher levels of outputs
compared to Sweden (2nd), the United States (3rd) and Finland (7th), while the United Kingdom (5th)
and the Republic of Korea (6th) produce higher levels of outputs than the United States, but with
lower input levels (Figure 19).

Among the upper middle-income group economies, China (11th) also shines, producing levels of
outputs that are higher than those of high-income economies, such as Singapore (4th), Finland
(7th), the Kingdom of the Netherlands (8th), Denmark (10th) and France (12th), but with fewer
inputs. Türkiye (37th) does likewise relative to Iceland (22nd) and Australia (23rd); while Bulgaria
(38th) also surpasses the level of outputs of New Zealand (25th) with lower input levels.

Among the lower middle-income group economies, the Islamic Republic of Iran (64th), Morocco
(66th) and Pakistan (91st) are efficient innovators, while Madagascar (110th) stands out among the
low-income group for its innovation efficiency.

However, certain economies, including Australia (23rd), the United Arab Emirates (32nd), Saudi
Arabia (47th), Botswana (87th), Cabo Verde (90th) and Rwanda (104th), find it harder to translate
inputs into outputs. This year, Serbia (52nd), Montenegro (65th), Peru (75th), Kazakhstan (78th),
Azerbaijan (95th) and Kyrgyzstan (99th) have improved their performance in converting inputs
into outputs.

Innovation leaders (top 25) demonstrate balanced and strong performance across all seven
pillars. Beyond the top 10, which all have balanced ecosystems, this group includes France (12th),
Japan (13th), Canada (14th), Estonia (16th), Austria (17th), Norway (21st) and Australia (23rd) (Table
4). Some lower ranked economies excel in specific innovation pillars, such as Botswana and
Rwanda in Institutions (36th and 38th, respectively), Kyrgyzstan in Human capital and research
(42nd), Albania (84th) in Infrastructure (31st) and the Islamic Republic of Iran and Cambodia in
Market sophistication (17th and 39th, respectively). Barbados and Costa Rica rank relatively
highly in Business sophistication (49th and 50th, respectively). India and Hungary excel in
Knowledge and technology outputs (22nd and 25th, respectively), while Türkiye and Mongolia
shine in Creative outputs (16th and 32nd, respectively). These examples showcase the diverse
strengths of economies that are vibrant in innovation, which can be nurtured to enhance their
overall rankings.
Global Innovation Index 2024
)LJXUH Innovation input to output performance, 2024 63

Output score
70

Switzerland

60 United Kingdom
Republic of Korea
Germany
China Netherlands
(Kingdom of the)

50

Cyprus Italy

40
Türkiye Iceland
Bulgaria Australia Hong Kong, China

New Zealand

30 Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Morocco Ukraine
Mongolia United Arab Emirates
Armenia
Republic of Moldova
Argentina
Saudi Arabia
Pakistan
GeorgiaQatar
20 Mauritius
Madagascar
Oman
Zimbabwe Bahrain
Albania
Cabo
Namibia Verde Botswana
10 Rwanda
Trinidad and Tobago
Lao People's Brunei Darussalam
Democratic
Zambia Republic

0 Input Score

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

Not labeled

Note: Line corresponds to the fitted line between the input score and output score of all economies included in the
GII 2024.
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.

Innovation across the world’s regions

&HQWUDODQG6RXWKHUQ$VLDIXUWKHUQDUURZVWKHJDSZLWK/DWLQ$PHULFDDQGWKH&DULEEHDQ
and outpaces it in innovation outputs

For yet another year, there are no changes in the rankings of the world’s regions, based on an
unweighted average GII score of all economies within a region. Northern America and Europe
continue to lead, followed by South East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania (SEAO). Northern Africa
and Western Asia follow, while Latin America and the Caribbean, Central and Southern Asia
(CSA) and Sub-Saharan Africa follow at a greater distance. However, this year the distance
dividing economies in Latin America and the Caribbean and CSA is very small – on average no
more than 0.10 GII score points. In fact, on average, economies in CSA have already surpassed
Latin American and Caribbean economies in innovation outputs (by an average of 1.3 GII score
points) but remain behind in innovation inputs (by an average of 1.5 score points).

1RUWKHUQ$PHULFD
GII 2024 results

Largely driven by the United States, Northern America, which comprises the United States and
Canada, is still the most innovative world region, maintaining a comfortable performance gap in
relation to Europe. The United States holds stable in 3rd position, while Canada moves up to 14th
place. Canada performs well in Market sophistication (4th), Business sophistication (13th), Human
 64 capital and research (11th) and Institutions (14th), ranking ahead of the United States in the latter
two pillars. It continues to rank in the top 10 for its University–industry R&D collaboration (5th),
its Researchers working in the private sector (Research talent, 8th) and its Intellectual property
payments (9th).

(XURSH

Europe still hosts the highest number of innovation leaders among the top 25 – 15 in total, with
seven among the top 10. Malta (29th) exits the group of innovation leaders this year. Out of the
39 European economies covered, only nine move up the ranking this year (10 fewer than last
year): namely, Austria (17th), Ireland (19th) and Luxembourg (20th) (the latter two both entering
the top 20), Spain (28th), the Czech Republic (30 th) (entering the top 30), Poland (40 th) (entering the
top 40), Croatia (43rd), Serbia (52nd), and Montenegro (65th) (reaching the top 70).

Among economies that are improving, Austria excels in Domestic industry diversification (3rd),
Production and export complexity (7th), R&D expenditures (8th), which reached 3.2 percent of
GDP in 2022, and Public research–industry co-publications (8th). Spain is performing well in
Software spending (12th), Industrial designs (13th) and Global corporate R&D investors (15th).

Serbia gets closer to the top 50 with a strong performance in Domestic industry diversification
(11th), ICT services exports (12th), Scientific and technical articles (13th) and Cultural and creative
services exports (14th).

6RXWK(DVW$VLD(DVW$VLDDQG2FHDQLD

Seven South East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania (SEAO) economies are world innovation leaders
– one more than in 2023 – namely, Singapore (4th), the Republic of Korea (6th), China (11th), Japan
(13th), Hong Kong, China (18th), Australia (23rd) and New Zealand (25th). New Zealand goes up
by two ranks and joins the innovation leaders. These seven economies continue to lead in key
innovation indicators. Singapore leads globally (1st) in 14 indicators (Box 1) including Venture
capital received, the Republic of Korea in Patents China in High-tech exports, Japan in PCT
patents, Hong Kong, China in Market capitalization and Australia in School life expectancy.

Eleven economies within the SEAO region (out of 17 covered) improve their rankings this year,
with Indonesia (54th) again making the greatest advance and entering the top 60. Indonesia
excels in University–industry R&D collaboration (6th), Policy stability for doing business (13th) and
Intangible asset intensity (13th).

7DEOH +HDWPDS*,,UDQNLQJVRYHUDOODQGE\LQQRYDWLRQSLOODU

Knowledge
Human Market Business and
Insti- capital and Infra- sophist- sophist- technology Creative
Economy Overall GII tutions research structure ication ication outputs outputs
Switzerland 1 3 4 7 5 4 1 1
Sweden 2 16 3 1 9 1 2 6
United States 3 17 12 30 1 2 4 8
Singapore 4 1 2 11 7 3 9 19
United Kingdom 5 26 7 18 3 14 5 3
Republic of Korea 6 24 1 9 15 5 10 2
Finland 7 4 6 2 11 8 6 17
Netherlands (Kingdom of the) 8 9 14 25 14 7 8 7
Germany 9 19 5 27 13 18 11 5
Denmark 10 2 9 8 21 12 13 10
China 11 44 22 5 16 11 3 14
France 12 29 16 19 10 17 16 4
Global Innovation Index 2024

Japan 13 23 19 13 8 6 12 22
Canada 14 14 11 21 4 13 20 25
Israel 15 34 18 41 12 9 7 30
Estonia 16 12 31 6 6 27 21 15
Austria 17 18 8 10 32 23 18 24
Hong Kong, China 18 8 15 16 2 25 58 12
Ireland 19 11 25 20 48 16 14 28
Luxembourg 20 5 28 53 30 10 36 9
Norway 21 6 20 4 31 22 26 26
Notes: Dark green = 4th quartile (best performers, ranks 1st to 33rd). Light green = 3rd quartile (ranks 34th to 66th). Light orange = 2nd quartile (ranks
67th to 99 th). Dark orange = 1st quartile (ranks 100 th to 133rd).
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.
7DEOHContinued 65
Knowledge
Human Market Business and
Insti- capital and Infra- sophist- sophist- technology Creative
Economy Overall GII tutions research structure ication ication outputs outputs
Norway 21 6 20 4 31 22 26 26
Iceland 22 13 26 3 22 21 37 21
Australia 23 15 10 15 20 26 28 29
Belgium 24 21 13 44 46 15 15 36
New Zealand 25 7 23 12 34 20 45 31
Italy 26 55 30 28 38 34 19 18
Cyprus 27 46 46 45 41 29 23 13
Spain 28 49 27 14 33 31 24 23
Malta 29 39 35 37 42 19 48 11
Czech Republic 30 30 32 24 75 30 17 33
Portugal 31 37 21 46 36 33 33 20
United Arab Emirates 32 10 17 17 26 24 56 40
Malaysia 33 27 38 52 18 36 35 49
Slovenia 34 41 24 26 62 32 27 48
Lithuania 35 22 44 38 28 38 29 55
Hungary 36 53 34 35 60 28 25 44
Türkiye 37 100 40 40 37 48 43 16
Bulgaria 38 83 62 22 50 44 30 27
India 39 54 51 72 23 58 22 43
Poland 40 73 36 51 61 35 47 35
Thailand 41 74 71 50 25 41 39 38
Latvia 42 42 45 33 53 40 51 39
Croatia 43 68 41 23 54 54 32 50
Viet Nam 44 58 73 56 43 46 44 34
Greece 45 57 29 42 66 65 40 41
Slovakia 46 63 52 47 68 43 31 58
Saudi Arabia 47 35 33 49 27 79 68 67
Romania 48 81 70 32 67 47 38 56
Qatar 49 20 48 39 59 68 82 61
Brazil 50 103 57 55 47 39 50 42
Chile 51 48 58 54 44 51 65 59
Serbia 52 67 50 29 40 63 41 85
Philippines 53 65 84 85 77 37 42 60
Indonesia 54 40 90 67 35 78 73 65
Mauritius 55 33 69 87 24 69 91 62
Mexico 56 106 63 71 56 56 55 47
Georgia 57 32 60 74 64 55 72 77
North Macedonia 58 75 77 43 69 52 53 72
Russian Federation 59 126 39 76 57 53 52 53
Ukraine 60 107 54 82 85 45 34 68
Colombia 61 80 87 64 70 42 61 66
Uruguay 62 31 83 48 94 70 69 81
Armenia 63 77 89 79 83 85 60 46
Iran (Islamic Republic of) 64 133 64 95 17 110 49 52
Montenegro 65 86 61 57 52 59 74 70
Morocco 66 78 81 88 82 125 70 37
Mongolia 67 93 86 73 106 61 86 32
Republic of Moldova 68 90 68 89 63 105 64 51
South Africa 69 91 79 75 49 57 63 63
Costa Rica 70 47 82 59 87 50 59 86
Kuwait 71 66 53 60 76 120 67 69
Bahrain 72 28 75 36 80 83 83 95
Jordan 73 52 85 90 55 72 76 76
Oman 74 43 66 63 73 86 87 82
Peru 75 85 49 62 51 77 95 74
Argentina 76 123 55 77 97 60 77 54
Barbados 77 50 80 108 107 49 57 89
Kazakhstan 78 76 65 68 86 66 85 83
Jamaica 79 59 98 104 110 75 94 45
Bosnia and Herzegovina 80 110 72 69 29 104 71 94
Tunisia 81 102 47 107 84 119 54 73
Panama 82 82 99 58 95 112 90 64
Uzbekistan 83 62 93 70 78 71 78 103
Albania 84 60 101 31 91 64 89 99
GII 2024 results

Belarus 85 132 43 84 98 81 46 92
Egypt 86 94 96 92 74 103 81 78
Botswana 87 36 74 97 79 62 112 108
Brunei Darussalam 88 25 56 65 105 82 115 124
 66 7DEOHContinued
Knowledge
Human Market Business and
Insti- capital and Infra- sophist- sophist- technology Creative
Economy Overall GII tutions research structure ication ication outputs outputs
Sri Lanka 89 101 110 66 109 87 79 84
Cabo Verde 90 45 102 34 103 89 100 111
Pakistan 91 118 119 125 90 73 66 71
Senegal 92 70 106 81 72 123 62 112
Paraguay 93 96 115 61 88 102 113 75
Lebanon 94 128 59 116 45 80 80 93
Azerbaijan 95 51 94 102 114 67 103 96
Kenya 96 87 118 106 101 93 75 101
Dominican Republic 97 61 104 83 116 97 106 91
El Salvador 98 99 109 101 89 90 101 80
Kyrgyzstan 99 119 42 78 81 117 107 104
Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 100 127 67 124 19 84 120 102
Ghana 101 71 113 105 129 76 116 79
Namibia 102 56 91 113 93 92 122 105
Cambodia 103 89 111 103 39 124 98 106
Rwanda 104 38 95 93 117 113 105 114
Ecuador 105 109 100 80 113 94 96 98
Bangladesh 106 108 128 86 92 126 92 88
Tajikistan 107 104 92 109 96 101 84 115
Trinidad and Tobago 108 72 37 110 128 111 104 121
Nepal 109 111 130 100 65 116 110 97
Madagascar 110 124 108 133 99 130 124 57
Lao People's Democratic Republic 111 88 121 96 58 106 108 123
Côte d'Ivoire 112 69 129 98 126 98 128 100
Nigeria 113 125 78 127 121 107 121 87
Honduras 114 122 88 112 100 100 99 110
Algeria 115 95 76 94 132 114 125 109
Zambia 116 92 97 91 112 95 131 131
Togo 117 112 116 126 108 121 111 107
Zimbabwe 118 130 127 128 119 91 97 90
Benin 119 64 112 118 123 108 117 129
United Republic of Tanzania 120 79 132 111 120 118 129 113
Uganda 121 84 123 120 124 129 102 116
Guatemala 122 114 126 117 111 88 109 125
Cameroon 123 98 114 129 130 74 119 117
Nicaragua 124 129 117 114 71 99 118 130
Myanmar 125 131 107 115 102 132 93 118
Mauritania 126 97 120 122 131 109 127 127
Burundi 127 115 105 119 118 122 132 120
Mozambique 128 121 122 99 104 127 130 128
Burkina Faso 129 105 103 132 115 131 114 126
Ethiopia 130 117 133 123 133 128 88 122
Mali 131 113 124 131 122 96 123 133
Niger 132 116 131 130 125 115 126 132
Angola 133 120 125 121 127 133 133 119

< 34 34–67 67–100 Մ

Notes: Dark green = 4th quartile (best performers, ranks 1st to 33rd). Light green = 3rd quartile (ranks 34th to 66th). Light
orange = 2nd quartile (ranks 67th to 99 th). Dark orange = 1st quartile (ranks 100 th to 133rd).
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2024.

The Philippines goes up three ranks to reach the 53rd position. This year it has also attained 3rd
position in the lower middle-income group (Table 2). Notable areas in which it excels are trade-
related indicators, including High-tech exports (1st globally), High-tech imports (4th), Creative
goods exports (14th) and ICT services exports (19th). It has also made advances, albeit at lower
levels, in intangible assets, thanks to its strong Global brand value (34th) – and the intangible
asset intensity of its companies (35th).
Global Innovation Index 2024

Thailand (41st) and Viet Nam (44th) continue to make advances towards the top 40. Both
economies also excel in trade-related indicators. Viet Nam ranks 1st globally in High-tech
exports, High-tech imports and Creative goods exports, while Thailand ranks 7th in Creative
goods exports and 8th in High-tech exports. Thailand also excels in Utility models (5th) and
Domestic credit to private sector (8th), while Viet Nam stands out for its Labor productivity
growth (3rd) and Mobile app creation (7th). Both economies also rank in the top 30 for their global 67
brands, with Viet Nam reaching the 22nd position globally and Thailand the 26th position.

Australia (23rd), Malaysia (33rd) and Mongolia (67th) also move up the ranking.

Central and Southern Asia

Within Central and Southern Asia, India continues to lead, moving one spot forward to the 39 th
position. India leads the lower middle-income group (Table 2). It holds top ranking within the
Central and Southern Asia region for Knowledge and technology outputs (22nd), Creative outputs
(43rd), Institutions (54th) and Business sophistication (58th). India’s strengths lie in key indicators
such as ICT services exports (1st), Venture capital received (6th) and Intangible asset intensity
(7th). India’s unicorn companies also secure the country the 8th rank globally.

In addition to India, four other economies within the region move up the ranking: Kazakhstan
(78th), Sri Lanka (89th), Kyrgyzstan (99th) and Tajikistan (107th). Kazakhstan retains the 3rd place
in the region, behind the Islamic Republic of Iran (64th, down by two places). Kyrgyzstan excels
in Expenditure on education (3rd), Loans from microfinance institutions (10 th) and Low-carbon
energy use (13th).

Uzbekistan (83rd) retains its 4th position within the region, with its top performance in Labor
productivity growth (7th) and Graduates in science and engineering (12th).

1RUWKHUQ$IULFDDQG:HVWHUQ$VLDb

In Northern Africa and Western Asia, Israel (15th) leads the region, despite moving down
one rank this year. It leads in several key innovation indicators, ranking 1st globally in R&D
expenditure, Venture capital received, R&D performed by business, ICT services exports and
Unicorn valuation.

Türkiye continues to forge ahead, gaining two ranks to reach 37th place. It also takes the 3rd
position among the upper middle-income group (Table 2). Türkiye stands out in various areas,
notably in Intangible assets (4th), where it ranks 1st globally in Trademarks and Industrial
designs, and 9th in Intangible asset intensity – all these indicators showing an improvement this
year.

Eight economies within the region move up the ranking. Saudi Arabia (47th) and Qatar (49th)
move ahead one spot each, consolidating their positions in the top 50. Georgia moves up to
57th place, entering the top 60, while Armenia (63rd) enters and Morocco (66th) consolidates its
position in the top 70. Morocco ranks 1st globally in Industrial designs and ranks in the top 30 on
Expenditure on education (20th), Intangible asset intensity (22nd), Gross capital formation (27th),
High-tech manufacturing (27th) and Trademarks (30th).

Cyprus (27th) and Algeria (115th) also gain one and four ranks, respectively.

/DWLQ$PHULFDDQGWKH&DULEEHDQ

In Latin America and the Caribbean, the regional top 3 remain unchanged: Brazil (50th) retains
the top position, followed by Chile (51st) and Mexico (56th). Chile and Mexico improve their
positions by one and two ranks, respectively. Chile holds top positions in Tertiary enrolment
(7th), Market capitalization (17th) and FDI net inflows (19th). Mexico comes top in trade and
high-tech indicators, including Creative goods exports (1st), High-tech exports (11th), High-tech
imports (16th) and High-tech manufacturing (15th).

Seven additional economies within the region also improved their ranking: Colombia (61st) – one
of the largest jumps in the region, matched only by Paraguay (93rd), Uruguay (62nd), Costa Rica
(70th), Peru (75th), Panama (82nd) and Honduras (114th).
GII 2024 results

Colombia climbs five ranks this year, improving notably in the Innovation Output Sub-Index
(62nd). It ranks 18th globally for the valuation of its three unicorn companies, whose joint value
 68 represent about 2 percent of its GDP in 2024. It also leads in Intellectual property payments
(11th) and High-tech imports (15th).

Uruguay is the regional leader in Institutions (31st) and Infrastructure (48th), Trinidad and
Tobago leads in Human capital and research (37th), and Brazil is top of the region in Business
sophistication (39 th), Knowledge and technology outputs (50th) and Creative outputs (42nd).

Costa Rica leads in the top 10 in Labor productivity growth (10th) and ICT services exports (10th).
Barbados rejoins the GII 2024 at the 77th position, leading globally (1st) in Patent families and PCT
patents, and performing in the top 20 in Patents by origin (4th) and Venture capital recipients
(16th).

This year, Brazil (50th) and Jamaica (79th) continue to perform above expectation for their level of
development (Table 3).

Box 3 Innovation as the driver of the United Nations Sustainable

Development Goals

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs), has set an ambitious agenda to drive sustainable development efforts around the
world. While technology and innovation are key enablers for the delivery of sustainable and
effective solutions to achieve all the SDGs, fostering innovation is integral to SDG 9 “Industry,
innovation and infrastructure”, with specific targets that aim to promote the increase of R&D
expenditure as a proportion of GDP (9.5.1) and to increase the number of researchers per
million inhabitants (9.5.2), both of which are also important GII indicators. 3

In this context, the GII has been recognized as an authoritative benchmark for measuring
innovation within the 2019, 2021 and 2023 UN General Assembly biennial resolutions on
Science, Technology and Innovation for Sustainable Development. The resolution specifically
encourages “efforts to increase the availability of data to support the measurement of national
innovation systems (such as the existing GII) and empirical research on innovation and
development to assist policymakers in designing and implementing innovation strategies”.4
This relevance of the GII and WIPO’s work to the SDGs is further amplified by contributions to
the ninth annual Multi-stakeholder Forum on Science, Technology and Innovation for the SDGs
(STI Forum) held in New York on May 9 and 10, 2024.5
b

6XE6DKDUDQ$IULFD

In Sub-Saharan Africa, only Mauritius (55th) ranks among the top 60. Three of the region’s other
economies rank within the top 90 globally: namely, South Africa (69th), Botswana (87th) and
Cabo Verde (90th). Two additional economies – Senegal (92nd) and Kenya (96th) – rank in the top
100. Eight of the region’s economies move up the GII ranking, including Mauritius, Cabo Verde,
Senegal, Kenya, Zambia (116th), Benin (119th), Mauritania (126th) and Burundi (127th).

Burundi, Madagascar (110th), Rwanda (104th), Senegal and South Africa are also innovation
overperformers this year, with Rwanda’s period of overperformance lasting longest, at 12 years
(Table 3). Kenya gains four places and consolidates its place in the top 100. It performs well
in Venture capital recipients (13th), Utility models (15th), ICT services exports (17th) and Labor
productivity growth (29th).
Global Innovation Index 2024

3 See https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal9.
4 Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 19 December 2023, 78/160. Science, technology and innovation for
sustainable development A/RES/78/160.
5 As part of the Forum’s program, WIPO led an expert conversation on the post-pandemic state of the global
innovation system, co-sponsored and co-organized by the Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations, the
Confederation of Indian Industry and the Oxford University Saïd Business School; and co-led the organization of the
Forum’s dedicated session on gender and STI, focusing on advancing sustainable development with women-centered
science and technology solutions, delving into the gender gap in STI and the limited consideration of women’s
perspectives in STI solutions. For more on the role of intellectual property in achieving SDGs, see WIPO (2023)
and www.wipo.int/sdgs.
Mauritius ranks highest in the region in Institutions (33rd), Human capital and research (69th) 69
and Market sophistication (24th). It leads worldwide in Venture capital received (1st) and ranks
2nd in Venture capital investors. Cabo Verde leads the region in Infrastructure (34th), ranking
1st in Gross capital formation. South Africa tops the region in Business sophistication (57th) and
performs well in ICT services imports (18th) and Global brand value (24th).

Senegal leads the region in Knowledge and technology outputs (62nd). It also performs well in
Gross capital formation (4th), Unicorn valuation (7th), Loans from microfinance institutions (9 th),
FDI net inflows (12th) and Venture capital received (22nd).

Finally, Madagascar heads the region in Creative outputs (57th), performing well in Industrial
designs (14th) and Trademarks (21st), both of which show improvement this year.

Conclusion

The latest GII rankings highlight the following points:

– There have been shifts within the world’s top innovators. Within the top 10, the top 3 remain
unchanged, while Singapore and the Republic of Korea advance. China – the only middle-
income economy among the innovation leaders – bounces back to 11th position, edging
closer to the top 10 once again (after having dropped back by one place last year). Within
the top 25, Canada, Austria, Ireland, Luxembourg, Australia and New Zealand ascend, with
Ireland and Luxembourg entering the top 20, and New Zealand the top 25.

– Europe still hosts the highest number of economies in the top GII ranking echelons –
seven in the GII top 10 and 15 in the GII top 25.

– A small number of leading innovative middle-income economies are showing remarkable

progress in their innovation performance.

– China remains the frontrunner, but other key players previously identified by the
GII, such as Indonesia (54th) (entering the top 60), the Philippines (53rd), Türkiye (37th),
Viet Nam (44th) and India (39th), ordered by their rank progression in 2024, are also all
climbing the ranks. Thailand (41st) is demonstrating increased potential, nearing the
top 40 – its best rank since 2009 – and sustaining its progression over the long run.
Additionally, Morocco (66th) has emerged as one of the fastest climbers within the
top 70 since 2013. These middle-income economies, despite some of them suffering
setbacks in their performance in the GII 2021 and 2022 (e.g. Viet Nam, the Philippines
and Indonesia), exhibit resilience and strategic long-term focus on innovation, even
amid the challenges posed by the economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Moreover, these economies share common traits: they are all Asian economies; they are
emerging markets with potential for rapid growth due to industrialization, urbanization
and globalization; all have diverse economic structures; and they are heavily integrated
in global value chains and high-tech trade.
– Other economies have also demonstrated great progress over the long term, albeit
at lower rankings, sustaining their rank increases since 2013. This group, which
demonstrates high potential – despite some short-term setbacks, includes notable
long-term, climbers Uzbekistan (83rd), the Islamic Republic of Iran (64th), Pakistan (91st),
Madagascar (110 th) (the only low-income economy in this group), Bangladesh (106th) and
Egypt (86th) (ordered by their rank progression since 2013).

– With no new additions, this year 19 economies are performing above expectation relative
to their level of development. Indonesia, Pakistan and Uzbekistan have maintained their
overperformer status for the third consecutive year, indicating a potentially sustainable
positive trend.
GII 2024 results

– In contrast, 41 economies are performing below expectation in 2024, most of which are
in Latin America and the Caribbean and Sub-Saharan Africa.
– More middle- and low-income economies would benefit from a systematic and gradual
improvement of the set-up and performance of their innovation ecosystem.
 70 – Nine economies in Latin America and the Caribbean have risen in the ranking, including top
regional performers Chile and Mexico. While these advancements are undoubtedly positive,
this year’s results indicate that, on average, other world regions, such as Central and
Southern Asia, will soon overtake Latin America and the Caribbean in terms of innovation
performance. This should serve as a call to action for policymakers in Latin America and the
Caribbean to sustain and enhance their long-term innovation efforts.
– In Sub-Saharan Africa, Mauritius remains the highest ranking economy, while eight
economies, including Kenya and Senegal, have moved up the GII ranking in 2024.
Madagascar, Côte d’Ivoire (112th) and Togo (117th) have made the greatest advances in the
region since 2013. However, large economies, such as South Africa (69 th), Nigeria (113th)
and Ethiopia (130 th) have lost ground in the ranking this year, and most of them (with the
exception of Kenya) have not been able to sustain their rank progression over time.

The GII will continue to monitor the evolving innovation landscape. The dynamic ecosystems
observed in key middle-income economies showcase remarkable resilience and strategic
prioritization of innovation. The GII will persist in providing robust data and insights to inform
evidence-based policymaking, ensuring that both high-income and emerging economies can
navigate and bridge the innovation gap effectively.
Global Innovation Index 2024
Cluster ranking
The GII reveals the world’s top
100 science and technology
(S&T) clusters and identifies
the most S&T- intensive top
global clusters.

71
 72 The GII 2024 top 100 science and technology clusters

The Global Innovation Index (GII) ranks the world's leading economies according to their
innovation capabilities. A common thread among top-performing nations is the presence of
thriving science and technology (S&T) clusters. Since 2016, the GII has employed a bottom-up
approach to identifying such clusters. This methodology disregards administrative or political
borders and instead pinpoints those geographical areas with a high density of inventors and
scientific authors. The resulting clusters identified in this way often span several municipal
districts, sub-federal states, and sometimes even two or more countries.

Two innovation metrics are used to compile the top 100 GII S&T clusters worldwide (see
methodological Appendix IV for details). The first metric focuses on the location of inventors
listed in published patent applications under the WIPO Patent Cooperation Treat (PCT).1 The
second metric considers the authors listed on published scientific articles.

S&T clusters – which can be entire regions or cities – serve as the backbone of a robust
national innovation ecosystem. Situated in areas such as San Francisco's Silicon Valley,
Cambridge, Munich and Paris in Europe, or Bengaluru, Seoul, Shenzhen and Tokyo in Asia,
these S&T clusters are home to renowned universities, brilliant scientists, R&D-intensive
companies, and prolific inventors. It is the collaboration among these entities that results in
the groundbreaking scientific advancements and inventions that propel national, regional and
global innovation forward.

The GII recognizes the significance of these regional hubs and charts annually the world's
top 100 S&T clusters (Map 1). These areas boast the highest density of inventors and scientific
authors globally.

The GII 2024 also presents S&T clusters beyond the top 100 in order to shed light on other areas
around the world with an appreciably high level of science and technology. In addition, the GII
2024 takes a first step toward highlighting S&T clusters within Africa, a region whose output is
typically not taken account of when clustering at the global level.

Lastly, to complement this section of the GII, a series of “Top Clusters Briefs” (link) provide
further details on top ranking hotspots. This complements other work undertaken by WIPO
to better measure and understand sub-national innovation activity (de Rassenfosse, G. and S.
Wunsch-Vincent , 2024).2

7RN\Rȁ<RNRKDPDSOXVVL[RWKHU$VLDQDQGWKUHH86FOXVWHUVOHDGWKH
WRS6 7FOXVWHUV

Among the top 100 S&T clusters, Tokyo–Yokohama (Japan) is the top performing cluster,
followed by Shenzhen–Hong Kong–Guangzhou (China and Hong Kong, China). Both clusters
rank one and two owing to having a large output of PCT applications, thanks in great part
to patents filed by Mitsubishi Electric located in Tokyo–Yokohama and Huawei located in
Shenzhen–Hong Kong–Guangzhou, respectively. When combined, Tokyo–Yokohama and
Shenzhen–Hong Kong–Guangzhou account for almost one in every five PCT applications
filed globally.

Beijing (China), Seoul (Republic of Korea) and Shanghai–Suzhou (China) follow, ranking 3rd,
4th and 5th, respectively. Beijing (China) reclaims third spot in the rankings, overtaking Seoul
(Republic of Korea) in fourth, in 2024. Shanghai–Suzhou (China) is in the top 5, primarily owing to
Global Innovation Index 2024

1 The WIPO Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) assists applicants in seeking patent protection internationally for
inventions, helps patent offices with patent granting decisions, and facilitates public access to a wealth of technical
information relating to those inventions. By filing one international patent application under the PCT System,
applicants can simultaneously seek protection for an invention in a large number of countries (https://www.wipo.int/
SFWHQ b
2 See Box 2 in GII 2024 Results and “WIPO General Assemblies 2024 – Side Event Global Innovation Index: Measuring
and Promoting Sub-national Innovation Performance: The Role of Regional Innovation Indices,” July 12, 2024,
and “Workshop – Global Innovation Index Sharing of Experiences in the Creation & Implementation of Regional
Innovation Indices,” June 7, 2022.
a strong growth in PCT filings. San Jose–San Francisco, CA (United States of America (US)) follows 73
in 6th position.

0DS7RSFOXVWHUVZRUOGZLGH

Note: Noise refers to all inventor/author locations not classified as being within a cluster.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.

The four remaining top 10 clusters are unchanged from the previous year, with the exception
of Nanjing (China), replacing San Diego, CA (United States), which is 10 th and New York City, NY,
which is now 11th. Nanjing’s growth was spurred by its scientific article output, primarily from
authors affiliated with Southeast University and Nanjing University.

This year five clusters entered the top 100 for the first time. Nanchang (China) located in the
eastern part of Jiangxi Province secures the 94th position. Cairo (Egypt) enters the top 100 ranked
95th. This marks the first time that a Northern African cluster is represented within the top 100
S&T clusters. Following closely behind Cairo’s entrance are two Chinese clusters entering the
top 100 for the first time: Kunming, the capital of Yunan Province China (98th), and Macao Special
Administrative Region of China–Zhuhai (Macao SAR–Zhuhai) (100th).

For Nanchang (Nanchang University), Cairo (Cairo University) and Kunming (Kunming University
of Science and Technology), their total output was primarily in the form of scientific articles,
which experienced strong growth in all three clusters and is the reason for their entry into the
top 100. Macao SAR–Zhuhai’s primary output is PCT patents, thanks in large measure to the
presence of GREE Electric Appliances, which accounts for almost half of Macao SAR–Zhuhai’s
applications. Similarly to the other three newcomers to the top 100, the driver behind Macao
SAR–Zhuhai’s increased standing in the ranking is a growth in published scientific articles.

Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) ranked 93rd also appears in the top 100 S&T clusters for the first time.
Kuala Lumpur achieved this status thanks to improved geocoding accuracy assigning more
author and inventor locations to that city. 3 MIMOS (Malaysia's National Applied Research and
Development Centre) is Kuala Lumpur’s top patent applicant and active in semiconductor
research, and the Universiti Malaya the top publishing organization.

Clusters within China once again demonstrated significant increases in S&T output in 2024.
China hosts the two fastest growing clusters globally – Hefei (+22.7 percent) and Zhengzhou
(+18.9 percent).4 Hefei’s growth was driven by a strong PCT applications growth, and in
particular the growth of applications filed by ChangXin Memory Technologies headquartered
Cluster ranking

3 See the methodological Appendix IV.

4 Net S&T output refers to a change in combined output of both components (PCT filings and SCIE articles) over time.
 74 in Hefei. Zhengzhou’s rapid growth was instead driven by the number of scientific articles
published, the largest contributor being Zhengzhou University.

Clusters located in other middle-income economies besides China also experienced strong S&T
output growth. Cairo (Egypt) had the highest growth rate for this group at 10.9 percent. Chennai
(India) with 7.8 percent and Istanbul (Türkiye) with 7.5 percent also had a high rate of growth for
this group.

High-income economy clusters generally grew at a slower pace than clusters in middle-income
economies, with 37 out of the 63 high-income clusters witnessing negative net S&T output for
the period. Nevertheless, notable exceptions to this trend exist among high-income economy
clusters. Daejeon (Republic of Korea, +6.9 percent), Seoul (+4.1 percent) and San Diego, CA (+4.2
percent) once again had strong growth years. Warsaw (+3.1 percent) in Poland also experienced
strong growth.

The top S&T clusters for each economy or cross-border region are shown in Table 5. The leading
clusters per country remain unchanged from last year, except for Sydney overtaking Melbourne
to become the leading Australian S&T cluster, with the University of Sydney publishing the most
scientific articles and Cochlear, the medical device company, filing the most patent applications.
It is notable that Samsung Electronics (Republic of Korea) is also the leading patentee in
Bengaluru, Moscow and Warsaw (beyond Seoul).

7DEOH7RS6 7FOXVWHUE\HFRQRP\RUFURVVERUGHUUHJLRQUDQNHGDPRQJWKHWRS

 

          

  

 !"
 
 #" %&'!# ! (

$ " 

" 
) *+" %&
*,"


 " &  

-  #. /

 

   
0  $"  4
1 2%3



  1. /
56,7 
7

& %"

54 $* /

 4" 54

 
  8 /
*9 


&   ( 

:  ;! 9<  !(=  4


3 4 
0 &5 /
&, 
.4

3 !(
) >5 3
    

5 
 "
)
( . ( 



&  
&  
)) " ; $'

" ;
" ;

34  42 

Global Innovation Index 2024

)?   >. /)
 4  

#  
-   / 5
>


-- 4 3 % 
4

% ;
-?  44  /
5 
 44

Notes: Tables in this section use ISO alpha-2 country codes, with the following additions: TW* = Taiwan, Province of China;
IISC – Bangalore = Indian Institute of Science – Bangalore, TNO = Nederlandse Organisatie Voor Toegepast
Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek. Economy labels were assigned to a cluster, when at least 1 percent of a cluster’s
output occurred in a given economy.
7DEOHContinued 75

 

          

: @A %! /
!@A !@A

:   > /
  

*
:) * /) 3" #5
3(;

8!" 
:- 2,& %3 /
8;  

 "
:0 *"  >&
>>%* " 



:B %; " 8# / &  
%; "

>  
:C >  .
3



B
! 1>
&
!

4 44
B) D  *. / * 
D 

 4 

B- E 3

 9 E

 " 
C 9  ( 5 /

 9  (

C) #  5 ;  >,* 4   

C: %  $ ? =9   % 

C0 *  %!'8'1. /
8> 3 * 

Notes: Tables in this section use ISO alpha-2 country codes, with the following additions: TW* = Taiwan, Province of
China; IISC – Bangalore = Indian Institute of Science – Bangalore, TNO = Nederlandse Organisatie Voor Toegepast
Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek. Economy labels were assigned to a cluster, when at least 1 percent of a cluster’s
output occurred in a given economy.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.

&KLQDDQGWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVKDYHWKHPRVW6 7FOXVWHUVLQWKHWRS
6 7

In 2024, as in previous years, the top 100 S&T clusters continue to be predominantly located
in three regions: North America, Europe, and Asia, with a particular concentration in two key
economies: China and the United States (see Map 1).

7DEOH(FRQRPLHVZLWKWKUHHRUPRUHWRS6 7FOXVWHUV

20
United States

India: 4

Republic of Korea: 4

Germany
8 France: 3

26
China
United Kingdom: 3

Japan: 3

Canada: 3
Cluster ranking

Australia: 3

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.

 76 China, for the second consecutive year, leads with the most clusters (26) in the top 100 (Map
2). The United States follows closely behind with 20 clusters. Germany ranks third with eight
clusters in the top 100, with Munich (22nd), Cologne (27th) and Stuttgart (29th) its top three
clusters. India, with its top cluster of Bengaluru (56th) in southern India, and the Republic of
Korea both have four clusters in the top 100. France, the United Kingdom (UK), Japan and
Canada each have three clusters in the top 100. Paris (12th) leads France's ranking, while London
(21st) represents the United Kingdom's top cluster. Canada's top cluster is Toronto, Ontario (54th).

In addition to China, seven other middle-income economies have clusters among the top 100.
They are:

– Brazil (1 cluster), with São Paulo, the sole top 100 S&T cluster within Latin America;
– Egypt (1), with Cairo, the sole top 100 S&T cluster within Africa (see Map 2);
– India (4), with Bengaluru, Delhi, Chennai and Mumbai;
– Islamic Republic of Iran (1), with Tehran;
– Malaysia (2), with Kuala Lumpur and its cross-border clusters shared with Singapore (see
Map 2);
– Russian Federation (1), with Moscow; and
– Türkiye (2), with Istanbul and Ankara.Türkiye (2), with Istanbul and Ankara.

0DSD7RS6 7FOXVWHUV(DVW$VLD

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, May 2024.

Global Innovation Index 2024
0DS E7RS6 7FOXVWHUV8QLWHG6WDWHV 77

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, May 2024.

0DSF7RS6 7FOXVWHUV 0LGGOH(DVW

Cluster ranking

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, May 2024.

 78 0DSG7RS6 7FOXVWHUV 0DOD\VLDDQG6LQJDSRUH

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, May 2024.

%H\RQGWKHWRS%DQJNRN%XHQRV$LUHV&DLUR.XDOD/XPSXUDQG
0H[LFR&LW\DUHWRSPLGGOHLQFRPHHFRQRP\6 7FOXVWHUV

Based on the same parameters applied to produce the top 100 ranking S&T clusters globally, an
additional 132 clusters were identified beyond the top 100, including 24 clusters based in the
United States, 15 in China and 11 in each of France and Germany.

Table 7 identifies top S&T clusters in economies not previously represented in the top 100,
including Portugal and Saudi Arabia, which each had two clusters.

Middle-income economies Argentina, Mexico, Pakistan, Serbia and Thailand all host a top
S&T cluster in the extended list, namely, Buenos Aires, Mexico City, Islamabad, Belgrade and
%DQJNRNUHVSHFWLYHO\b
Global Innovation Index 2024
7DEOH7RS6 7FOXVWHUVLQH[WHQGHGUDQNLQJHFRQRPLHVQRWFRYHUHGE\WKHWRS6 7 79
clusters, 2024

   


     


 


     

      

     

    


! !  

"# "    

$%   &$    

'( ')   ')  

* *+   , 

*- *+  - 

.
,   $ 

-     

     

"    ,,

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.

7RSVFLHQFHRU6 7FOXVWHUVLQ$IULFD

The GII 2024 has sought to identify the top S&T clusters within Africa that would not otherwise
have been captured by the GII methodology determining the global 100 top S&T clusters.

To begin, a similar clustering methodology used at the global level was applied to authors and
inventors located within the region of Africa. By lowering the density parameter sufficiently (see
Appendix IV for more details), the top 50 African clusters were identified (Map 3 and Table 7 for
the results).

In addition to Cairo, which has already been highlighted as a GII S&T top 100 ranking cluster,
Johannesburg (South Africa), Cape Town (South Africa), Tunis (Tunisia) and Alexandria (Egypt)
comprise the top 5 S&T clusters within Africa.

Egypt has the most clusters (11, with Cairo leading), followed by South Africa (8, with
Johannesburg leading), Morocco (5, with Rabat leading), Nigeria (4, with Ibadan leading), Tunisia
(4, Tunis leading), Ethiopia (2, with Addis Ababa leading), Ghana (2, with Accra leading), Kenya
(1, with Nairobi leading), followed by Algeria, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, the Congo, Côte
d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Malawi, Senegal, Sudan, Uganda, the United
Republic of Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe with each one cluster. Appendix Table 6 shows
the top patentees and publishing organizations for said clusters, with the majority of top
institutions active in medical technology, and civil engineering, for example.

It is noteworthy, that many, but not all, African clusters are primarily driven by scientific articles
and not PCT patenting activity. Hence in certain cases it is more appropriate to label them as
African top science clusters, rather than African S&T clusters. That said, it would be wrong to
assume that African S&T clusters do not patent at all. Firstly, the clusters in Egypt, South Africa,
Morocco, and Tunisia, but also Algeria and Kenya, show significant international patent filing
activity. Secondly, it is useful to recall that the GII methodology to determine top S&T clusters
only captures patents filed under the PCT System. PCT patents tend to be patents that seek
protection in more than one jurisdiction, and therefore does not include the more numerous
Cluster ranking

set of patents that only seek protection in a single jurisdiction, usually the applicants domestic
jurisdiction (national patents). While some clusters have modest PCT filing activity as of yet,
these same clusters often still show healthy domestic patenting activity. Future editions of the
 80 GII will unpack some such clusters in greater detail, including for other world regions in addition
to Africa.

0DS7RSVFLHQFHRU6 7FOXVWHUVZLWKLQ$IULFD

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.

Global Innovation Index 2024
7DEOH7RSVFLHQFHRU6 7FOXVWHUVZLWKLQ$IULFD 81

      

        

    
      !  
!
" # $  

'    ( ) 

  ! % &  !   *    
* %!  +  ( * 
 

 %% , - %  # ./ 01

2   3 $ 2## 4  1

   3   !    

   5    + 

+ 5 %%  

     

      

 #  .  0  

   6 7

     8 

9 :$8    1

) %  % - % ! 

   8 
 

  2 

(   

  )#

    

;  

;  - % !    )  

   4#

 (  <  

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.

6 7LQWHQVLW\RIWKHWRSFOXVWHUV(XURSHDQGWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV
RFFXS\WKHWRSVSRWVZLWK&DPEULGJH 8QLWHG.LQJGRP DQG6DQ
-RVHȁ6DQ)UDQFLVFR&$ 8QLWHG6WDWHV RXWLQWKHOHDG

Since 2020, the GII has also presented the top 100 clusters ranked by S&T intensity. This ranking
is based on the sum of patent and scientific publication shares divided by population. This
work draws on geospatial imagery in order to estimate the underlying population level (see
Appendix IV).
Cluster ranking
 82 7DEOH7RS6 7FOXVWHUVE\6 7LQWHQVLW\

    
          

    

 
      


"#   

! "#  $% &#'" 
( #)

* +,  +,   +,  

 
-  .( .(


   

/ 0   12
0 

3 0 4  5 % #  5 .(

  
6  .    # 
# 

  
7   8   
8#  

( #  

9 2# 0" 8
2#

4 $ +"( #  ( #2 

  

 :  " %"
# 2

!   #$  02;   02;  

* ;# " %" 5;.2 

- (;<;# & 2#"    (;

  

/ ' #  05 $= 
' # 

3 > ; . $;   > ;

6 ?@# > "(>?@# "(>?@#

7   >A0"A 0.&       

" #5
9 2  0"   #
  (@ 

  " 


$2   "  0"   
$2  

2   2$
  2 5
"   

1 >  

! 1  $ 1  
   

!.     

*  '$ 
&'   (B 

  
- &2 #&    &2 #
&2 #

Notes: KAIST, Korea Advanced Institute of Science & Technology; MIT, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.
Global Innovation Index 2024
Cambridge in the United Kingdom and San Jose–San Francisco, CA, in the United States were the 83
two most S&T-intensive clusters, globally, followed by Eindhoven (Kingdom of the Netherlands),
Oxford (United Kingdom), and Boston–Cambridge, MA (United States) (Table 9).

Cambridge’s position as the top cluster by S&T-intensiveness was once again thanks to the
presence of Cambridge University and central processing unit (CPU) maker ARM. Cambridge
produced the most articles per capita, at just over 35,000 per one million people (see Appendix
Table 4). San Jose–San Francisco, CA, leads on PCT filings per capita, producing roughly 7,900 per
one million people, followed by Eindhoven, with 7,536 per million.

There are three clusters among both the global top 10 and the top 10 for intensity, all in the
United States: San Jose–San Francisco, CA; Boston–Cambridge, MA, and San Diego, CA.

'DHMHRQ 5HSXEOLFRI.RUHD LVWKHKLJKHVWUDQNLQJ$VLDQ6 7FOXVWHU

E\LQWHQVLW\

When viewed with a focus on intensity, many clusters within Europe and North America display
a higher level of S&T activity compared to their Asian counterparts. Twelve of the top 25 clusters
by intensity are located within Europe. North America had eight clusters in the top 25 by
intensity and Asia had five clusters, which is markedly different than the 15 clusters in the global
top 25 that were located in Asia (Map 4 and Table 9). Asia’s top cluster by intensity was Daejeon
(Republic of Korea) ranked 7th, owing to the presence of LG Chem and LG Energy Solutions.
Daejeon was followed by the much larger metropolises of Beijing (China) ranked 11th (up from
14th last year), and Tokyo–Yokohama ranked 15th (up from 17th last year). A new entrant to the
top 25 for China was Qingdao, with Qingdao Haier Air Conditioner being the top patentee and
Qingdao University the top publishing organization.

0DSD(XURSHDQ6 7FOXVWHUVE\LQWHQVLW\b

Cluster ranking

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.

 84 0DSE8QLWHG6WDWHV6 7FOXVWHUVE\LQWHQVLW\

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.

Global Innovation Index 2024
Special Theme 2024:
Unlocking the Promise of
Social Entrepreneurship
This year’s special GII theme
looks to the future of social
entrepreneurship and asks:
What will it take for social
entrepreneurship to catalyze
transformative innovation and
societal impact?

85
 86 This chapter was written by 0DU\D%HVKDURYDQG.HYLQ0LQHU6NROO&HQWUHIRU6RFLDO
(QWUHSUHQHXUVKLS6D±G%XVLQHVV6FKRRO8QLYHUVLW\RI2[IRUGDQGb$QPRO.DXU*UHZDODQG
6DFKD:XQVFK9LQFHQW:,321.

As part of a broader trend toward innovation with more direct social impact, new social
entrepreneurial ventures and start-ups have proliferated in recent years.

Social entrepreneurs set out to develop and fund solutions that directly address social issues
with impact on communities, societies, and the world at large while trying to generate revenue
by operating within the confines of the market economy.

For many young inventors and innovators, social entrepreneurship offers a chance to align their
work with the desire to create positive change in their communities and the world at large. By
addressing issues affecting people and places often overlooked by business and government
due to misaligned incentives or priorities, social entrepreneurship holds immense potential to
generate above-average social returns through the promotion of innovation in the areas that
need it most.

Traditional innovation models and ecosystem studies have thus far turned a blind eye to these
forms of socially motivated, community-based, and localized innovation models.2 As a result,
innovation policy has not been optimally designed to support social entrepreneurship.

To address these issues, this 2024 edition of the Global Innovation Index (GII), with in-depth
case studies and contributions by experts (available online), puts the spotlight on social
entrepreneurship, addressing three critical questions for unleashing the potential of this
promising new phenomenon:

– What is the state of social entrepreneurship globally?

– How do social enterprises create positive impact, and what role does innovation play?
– How can policy help to unlock the promise of social entrepreneurship?

The state of social entrepreneurship

Today, social entrepreneurship is a major economic and social force on the global stage, as
entrepreneurs develop innovative business models to address some of the world’s most
pressing economic, social and environmental problems. Current estimates suggest there are
10-11 million social enterprises and up to 30 million social entrepreneurs around the world,
contributing roughly $2 trillion to global GDP(Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship
and World Economic Forum, 2024; British Council and Social Enterprise UK, 2022).

These organizations tackle poverty, helping millions of people globally build sustainable
livelihoods through education, training, and employment; they address environmental
devastation, developing renewable sources of energy and working with companies to reduce
emissions; and they combat racial and social injustice, working to shift cultural norms and
organizational practices to ensure previously marginalized groups have full access to economic
and social opportunities, among many other issues.
Global Innovation Index 2024

1 This report draws in part on Hanna Hottenrott’s Background study for the GII 2024 Special theme, “An economic
perspective on social entrepreneurship: Insights and policy implications,” Technical University of Munich (TUM) and
Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW), June 2024, as well as 14 cases studies of social entrepreneurs
by Cynthia Rayner and the WIPO and Skoll Centre Workshop: A Conversation on the State of Social Entrepreneurship,
held on April 12, 2024, as part of the 2024 Skoll World Forum. Jeroo Billimoria, Soumitra Dutta, Johanna Mair, Alex
Nicholls and Cynthia Rayner provided useful comments on earlier drafts. We thank Menna Clark and Jessica Jacobson
from the Skoll Centre team for design and administrative support.
2 For earlier work on innovation in the informal economy, see Kraemer-Mbula and Wunsch-Vincent (2016).
'HILQLQJVRFLDOHQWUHSUHQHXUVKLS 87

Definitions of social entrepreneurship vary widely around the world, reflecting the diversity
of legal systems, regional histories, and financing and policy environments in which social
entrepreneurs operate (GII 2024 Expert contribution from Kraemer-Mbula). 3 In this report,
we define social entrepreneurship as the process of developing and implementing innovative
organizational models to address social and/or environmental challenges, without profit as the
primary purpose (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Dey and Gupta on the nuance between
social enterprise and social business).

Because they pursue social and/or environmental purposes through organizational models that
often involve commercial activity, social enterprises are hybrids that blur traditional boundaries
between the social sector and the market (Dees, 1998; Martin and Osberg, 2003; Smith et al.,
2013). As a result, they frequently face competing demands between social impact versus
financial success, beneficiaries versus investors, and long-term systemic change versus short-
term organizational survival. If not managed effectively, these competing demands can create
internal tensions and lead to performance decline (Battilana and Dorado, 2010).

At the same time, competing demands are also the source of social entrepreneurship’s
innovation potential: that is to say, novel creative solutions emerge when aspects of different
institutional worlds – in this case the social sector and the market – are brought together (Smith
and Besharov, 2019).

To harness this innovation potential, social enterprises develop governance models,

organizational structures, leadership practices, human resources policies and stakeholder
relationships that focus attention on the social mission without sacrificing financial viability
(Pache, Battilana and Spencer 2024; Smith and Besharov, 2019 ; Mitzinneck and Besharov, 2019;
%DWWLODQDbet al., 2015; Battilana and Dorado, 2010). And they deploy this innovation potential to
address a wide range of global challenges, of which economic opportunity is the most common,
followed by issues of environment, health, education and inequality (Table 10).

Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

3 See also Bacq and Janssen, 2011; Choi and Majumdar, 2014; Mair and Noboa, 2006; Ran and Weller, 2021;
Weerawardena and Mort, 2006.
 88 7DEOH7RSLVVXHVDGGUHVVHGE\VRFLDOHQWUHSUHQHXUVKLSJOREDOO\

 
#



 

               
        
       
          

!          "

       
  
           
              
      

#"$%&"&&&     
    
 "%&"&&&      

    
  


'
( )      " *  +   
           
 "'
(           
        

   "'
( *    ,  "

    -   +  
'
(       .  " "
       +   

'
(   $"&&&   "  %&&  +  "

-  /"0%& 123   

  

4 5      "   * 67'2 8
                
                   -  
             *   
        

4 !               

           "   
        ) 4        
.      

4  4      /  "  $%

       /9&"&&&   4 
  $&&"&&&:     

   

       ; < *

           = =  
>     7'2      
              
         

? * +       "      

               +  
     @        
 -       

  "      A"/&&  $A0   "  
BB"&&&   

    !"  !"

1C             
       .   
           
    * "       + 
     

  *  "1C     

  +         1C   
Global Innovation Index 2024

    .         

      

1C         )#C$ 
              "
   3A"&&& 

Source: Authors' own representation based on data from EUCLID Network, 2022, British Council and Social Enterprise UK,
2022; Catalyst 2030 Annual Membership Survey 2023 data provided to the Authors; Social Enterprise UK, 2023.
Reflecting the diversity of issues addressed, social entrepreneurship is thriving across sectors, 89
including agriculture, education, financial services and energy (see GII 2024 Background study
from Hottenrott). Recently, social entrepreneurship has gained increased attention in the health
care sector, particularly as COVID-19 highlighted serious inequities and gaps in the services
provided by the market and public sectors (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Kraemer-
Mbula). As the global economy increasingly embraces high technology, including artificial
intelligence (AI), data analytics, fintech and more, social entrepreneurship is venturing into
these areas as well (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Kraemer-Mbula; GII 2024 Case study
contribution from Rayner on Bandhu, Fairtrasa, iKure, Peek Vision, and WeRobotics).

The origins of social entrepreneurship

Perhaps it is unsurprising that there is not yet a uniform definition of social entrepreneurship,
the term itself being relatively new. It first emerged in the late 20th century to describe the
innovative work being done by a new wave of leaders who sought to address complex social
and environmental challenges by combining aspects of business and non-profit organizations
(Nicholls 2008; Bornstein and Davis, 2010; Zahra and Wright, 2016; Stephan, Uhlaner and Stride,
2015). This “hybrid” approach to addressing social issues started to spread in the early 2000s,
with steadily increasing media mentions and a growing number of social enterprises over the
subsequent two decades (Litrico and Besharov, 2019).

While social entrepreneurs themselves played a significant role in this growth, they were not
alone; the development of the field was the product of active work undertaken by a diverse set
of actors promoting innovation and entrepreneurship as a means of addressing complex social
problems (Nicholls, 2010).

Alliances and networks formed in the early days of social entrepreneurship to share visions and
business models and advocate for legal, policy and financial change in support of these new
kinds of ventures. Ashoka, founded in 1980, is widely recognized as one of the first networks
established to support social entrepreneurs globally. It created a community where knowledge
and experience were freely shared, and collective advocacy was harnessed in order to incubate
new social entrepreneurs and scale existing work.

Another early pioneer, the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee (BRAC), a development
organization formed in 1972, has operated, resourced and advocated for social enterprises in
Asia for decades.

More recently, Catalyst 2030 was launched at the World Economic Forum in 2020 to catalyze
collaboration in the fragmented community of social enterprises, governments, corporations
and universities globally, and leverage their collective power so as to accelerate progress toward
achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (see GII 2024 Expert
contribution from Billimoria on the critical role of alliances and networks; Catalyst 2030, 2022).

Philanthropic foundations interested in sustainable and scalable social interventions and services
Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

were also pivotal to the rise of social entrepreneurship. Starting in the late 1980s and continuing
through to the present day, organizations such as Echoing Green (1987), the Schwab Foundation
for Social Entrepreneurship (1998) and the Skoll Foundation (1999) have operated award or
fellowship programmes designed to recognize and promote individual social entrepreneurs.
Through events such as the Skoll World Forum, which brings social entrepreneurs together
alongside philanthropic leaders, government leaders, academics, and other partners, these
funders have proved influential in establishing a global ecosystem of social entrepreneurs.

Government supporters also played a role, tapping into the innovative solutions presented
by social enterprises aimed at addressing persistent social and environmental problems.
The United Kingdom (UK) was one of the earliest adopters of a policy strategy on social
entrepreneurship, establishing a dedicated Social Enterprise Unit in 2001 tasked with the goal of
EXLOGLQJDQHWZRUNRIVWDNHKROGHUVDQGLGHQWLI\LQJEDUULHUVIDFLQJWKHFRPPXQLW\ 6WXPELW]bet
al., 2019, chapter 1). In 2007, the Republic of Korea passed one of the most comprehensive
pieces of legislation in Asia, the Social Enterprise Promotion Act, which established the Korea
Social Enterprise Promotion Agency (KoSEA) to support social enterprise commercialization
 90 and networks.4 More recently, international bodies like ASEAN, the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD), the African Union and the European Union (EU) have all
promoted social entrepreneurship (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Klijn and Bonnici).

Universities and professional associations have launched academic centers, dedicated journals
and conferences on which to build a research base on social entrepreneurship and disseminate
insights regarding the impact of social entrepreneurship on communities, environments and
economies. Academic centers dedicated to social entrepreneurship, innovation and impact were
formed, starting in the early 2000s, often at business schools.5 Some of these academic centers
were established with the support of philanthropic foundations.6

Why is social entrepreneurship important now?

Today, social entrepreneurship is recognized for its ability to address mounting global social
and environmental challenges threatening lives and livelihoods, especially those of the
most marginalized. Two decades of research has demonstrated the effectiveness of social
entrepreneurship in alleviating poverty and other complex challenges.7 Additionally, in an era of
globally high youth unemployment and dissatisfaction with work, social entrepreneurship offers
a unique opportunity to educate and engage young people in addressing the societal issues
they care about, while at the same time developing local and regional economies (see GII 2024
Expert contribution from Çiftçi).

These positive impacts have garnered the world’s attention. International agencies, including
the United Nations, the OECD, the International Labour Organization (ILO), the World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), as well as local and national governments and
academic institutions, have recognized the potential of and calling for greater support for social
entrepreneurship. In 2023, for example, the United Nations General Assembly passed a pivotal
resolution (United Nations General Assembly, 2023, Res. 77/281) acknowledging the importance
of social entrepreneurship and urging member states and financial institutions to bolster their
support, stating: "Social entrepreneurship, including cooperatives and social enterprises, can
help to alleviate poverty and catalyse social transformation by strengthening the productive
capacities of those in vulnerable situations and producing goods and services accessible
to them."

Critics have, however, argued that social entrepreneurship could crowd out government
activity, emboldening governments to reduce the provision of critical services and rely instead
on a patchwork of social enterprises to fill any gaps (Ganz, Kay and Spicer, 2018; Giridharadas,
2018). Indeed, there is evidence to suggest that, as some governments scaled back welfare
programmes in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, social enterprises, along with associations,
non-profit organizations and cooperatives, stepped in to fill these voids (see GII 2024 Expert
contribution from Dey and Gupta).8

But recent research has also shown that social enterprises can be effective in highlighting
deficiencies in existing public and market solutions and in catalyzing innovative public and
private activity to address long-term, systemic challenges.9 Social entrepreneurs often
collaborate with governments and private enterprises to build lasting solutions to pressing
challenges. Tebita Ambulance, for example, an Ethiopia-based social enterprise, has
collaborated with policymakers to establish and advance emergency medical service standards
in Addis Ababa. Kibret Adebe, a social entrepreneur with years of medical expertise and founder

4 See Korea Social Enterprise Promotion Agency. Available at: https://www.socialenterprise.

or.kr/_engsocial/?m_cd=0101
Global Innovation Index 2024

5 Examples include the Social Enterprise Initiative at Harvard Business School in 1993, Center for the Advancement of
Social Entrepreneurship (CASE) at Duke University in 2002, and the Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship at Saïd
Business School, University of Oxford in 2003. For instance, the Skoll Foundation supported the founding of the
Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship at Saïd Business School, University of Oxford, to help further grow the field
through education and research.
6 For instance, the Skoll Foundation supported the founding of the Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship at Saïd
Business School, University of Oxford, to help further grow the field through education and research.
7 For example, on poverty alleviation, Tobias et al., 2013; Sutter et al., 2019; Ghauri et al., 2014; on promoting gender
equity, Datta and Gailey, 2012; Haugh and Talwar, 2016; on combatting climate change, Calic and Mosakowski, 2016.
8 See also OECD, 2003; Defourny and Nyssens, 2010.
9 For examples, see Lechterman and Mair, 2024; Mair and Rathert, 2024; Savaget et al., 2024.
of Tebita Ambulance, worked closely with the Addis Ababa Health Bureau to build the country’s 91
first emergency medical service standards and licensing system in 2007. This groundbreaking
work allowed Tebita Ambulance to become the country’s first private emergency medical
services company and set a precedent for other emergency medical service organizations to
follow. Today, Tebita Ambulance continues to work with policymakers to update and enhance
emergency medical standards in Ethiopia (see GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner).

5HJLRQDOYDULDWLRQ

Social entrepreneurship is a global phenomenon. But there are significant regional differences
regarding its prevalence, the issues addressed by social entrepreneurs and their organizational
models (Mair, 2020). However, the absence of globally recognized definitions and comparable,
high-quality data has left much of this variation unexplored. This lack of clarity has also
hindered financial investment and the development of supportive policies at local, national and
international levels (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Bosma).

Evidence from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor survey – one of the few global datasets
asking questions about social entrepreneurship motivation and action, and a close data
collaborator for the GII – finds substantial variation in prevalence by country (see GII 2024
Expert contribution from Bosma). The data indicate a strong presence of early-stage social
entrepreneurs in Northern and Southern America, with Brazil and Guatemala showing some of
the highest relative rates of social entrepreneurship among the countries surveyed (Figure 20).

)LJXUH3UHYDOHQFHRIVRFLDOHQWUHSUHQHXUVKLSDPRQJHDUO\VWDJH
HQWUHSUHQHXUVȁ

100%

80

Low/no indication
of social
60 entrepreneurship

40 Moderate
indication of
social
entrepreneurship
20
Strong indication
of social
entrepreneurship
Israel
Oman
Latvia
Iran (Islamic Republic of)
Japan
Sweden
Germany
Lithuania
Indonesia
United Kingdom
Saudi Arabia
Netherlands (Kingdom of the)
Austria
Spain
Hungary
Slovenia
Uruguay
Croatia
Türkiye
Cyprus
Luxembourg
Colombia
Venezuela
India
South Africa
Dominican Republic
Switzerland
Egypt
Qatar
Chile
Ireland
Canada
Mexico
Togo
United States
United Arab Emirates
Romania
Panama
Guatemala
Brazil
Sudan

Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

Source: GII 2024 Expert contribution from Bosma based on data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, 2021–2022.

One of the few attempts to compare the number of social enterprises across countries suggests
that China has the highest absolute number, with 2,000,000 social enterprises, whereas the
United States has the highest rate of social entrepreneurship, with approximately 38 social
enterprises per 10,000 people (Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship and WEF,
2024). The United States has a healthy ecosystem for entrepreneurial activity in general
(ranking among the top 3 most innovative nations in this year’s and previous GII editions)
and its relatively high percentage of socially-minded entrepreneurs contributes to this robust
prevalence (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Bosma).
 92 However, data on social entrepreneurship are often biased toward a handful of countries,
making balanced international comparisons impossible. For instance, less than half of all
countries have any publicly available data on social entrepreneurship prevalence; and of those
that do, most are either European, South and East Asian or Northern American countries
(Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship and WEF, 2024; British Council and Social
Enterprise UK, 2022).

Global comparisons of social entrepreneurship are further complicated by differing definitions.

For instance, the UK Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) defines social
enterprises as those organizations with an explicit social mission, with at least 50 percent of
their income from trading activities, and which reinvest at least 50 percent of surplus/profit
into their social mission (UK DCMS and BEIS, 2019). In contrast, the Republic of Korea’s 2007
Social Enterprise Promotion Act defines social enterprises as having specific legal forms, paid
employees, a primary focus on social objectives, a participative decision-making structure, and
which direct two-thirds of profits toward social goals (OECD, 2022).

These small differences in definitions can lead to substantial variation in estimates of the
number of social enterprises. In the United Kingdom, for example, there are an estimated
113,000 social enterprises as defined by the DCMS; but if the definition is narrowed to
enterprises using a specific legal form, the number drops to 35,000; and if it is broadened to
include all revenue-generating activities for social purposes, the number exceeds 380,000 (UK
DCMS and BEIS, 2019).

Complicating the definition is the variety of legal forms that social enterprises can take,
including for-profit, non-profit, as well as various hybrid forms that combine aspects of business
and charity (Mair, 2020). Examples of such hybrid forms include the Benefit Corporation in the
United States and the Community Interest Corporation (CIC) in the United Kingdom. But even
in countries that have such hybrid forms, not all social enterprises use them. In the United
Kingdom, for example, while some social enterprises are registered as CICs, many others are
charities, sole proprietorships or limited liability companies (Social Enterprise UK, 2023). In
Italy, the spectrum of legal forms is so broad that social enterprises are to be found across
15 different legal forms (Euclid Network, 2022). To complicate matters further, some social
enterprises register multiple separate entities in order to manage the trade-offs between
GLIIHUHQWOHJDOIRUPVb

Recently, there has been a push for jurisdictions to adopt dedicated legal forms for social
enterprises, with the hope of increasing awareness, financial support and opportunities to
participate in social procurement (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Klijn and Bonnici).10
However, despite this effort, dedicated legal forms remain rare. In a survey of over 80
jurisdictions, only about 20 percent had dedicated legal forms for social enterprises, of which EU
countries comprising a large proportion (Morrison & Foerster, LexMundi Pro Bono Foundation
and Catalyst 2030, 2022). In most countries, social enterprises choose from among non-profit,
for-profit, and co-operative forms.

Overall, the variation in definitions and legal forms has likely had a mixed effect. On the
downside, it may have inhibited the growth of social entrepreneurship, as it is challenging
for investors and policymakers to identify and support social ventures, thus limiting their
potential to scale. On the upside, this same variation offers social entrepreneurs significant
flexibility, enabling them to choose a legal form and organizational model that best supports
their venture’s mission. Therefore, while there is value in establishing uniform definitions and
dedicated legal forms, such efforts should be undertaken carefully in order to avoid unduly
constraining choice and flexibility for social entrepreneurs.

)LQDQFLQJ
Global Innovation Index 2024

Financing is regularly cited as the most common issue faced by social entrepreneurs globally
(Euclid Network, 2022; Social Enterprise UK, 2023). Among European social enterprises, for
example, approximately 40 percent reported unmet financial needs (Euclid Network, 2022).

10 See also OECD, 2022.

While public financing is one of the most important sources of funds for social enterprises, it 93
is unevenly distributed across regions. Moreover, impact investing – widely thought to be a
promising and significant source of funding – makes up only a small proportion of the financing
received by social enterprises.

Addressing such funding challenges will require a coordinated effort to expand public financing,
with funds serving to de-risk early-stage ventures, thereby facilitating the expansion of impact
investing and other sources of capital.

The most prevalent and sought after forms of financing globally are grants from philanthropic
foundations and government agencies, as well as individual donors (Catalyst 2030 Annual
Membership Survey 2023 data provided to the Authors; Centre for Asian Philanthropy and
Society, 2019; Euclid Network, 2022). Such funds provide essential support for social enterprises,
particularly in the early stages, allowing them to cover operational costs, develop innovative
solutions and scale impact without having to worry about interest payments, principal
repayment or equity dilution. Other sources include self-financing, private donations, bank
loans and, to a lesser degree, impact investing (Table 11).

7DEOH7RSILQDQFLQJVRXUFHVIRUVRFLDOHQWUHSUHQHXUVKLS

   

 
 

  

 
    

       

   
        

      

    

              

 

      
!    " 

   

# $ 

   
%     

   

%  " 

&      

Source: Authors’ own representation based on data from European Social Entrepreneurship Monitor 2021–2022 (2022),
drawing on Mair (2020); Centre for Asian Philanthropy and Society (2019); Siemens Stiftung (2020); British Council and
Social Enterprise UK (2022).
Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

Public financing in the form of government grants and low-interest loans are among the most
prevalent forms of financing for social entrepreneurship. The availability of public financing for
social entrepreneurship varies by region, typically correlating with the level of national wealth.

In the EU, approximately 40 percent of social enterprises receive public sector funding. This
support is bolstered by various EU-wide social and environmental funds, such as the European
Social Fund Plus (ESF+), Erasmus+, and Horizon Europe (Euclid Network, 2022).

In Asia, the public financing landscape is more diverse. In the Republic of Korea, for instance,
public financing plays a crucial role, with around 60 percent of social enterprises benefiting from
government grants annually, whereas in countries such as Indonesia, Thailand and Pakistan,
social enterprises report public financing levels of 20 percent, 10 percent, and less than 10
percent, respectively (Centre for Asian Philanthropy and Society, 2019).

In the absence of formal financial services provided by either government, philanthropy or

impact investment, social entrepreneurs turn to self-financing. Particularly in developing
 94 countries, self-financing, often coupled with bootstrapping – the practice of getting by with
minimum external investment – has become a go-to strategy (see GII 2024 Expert contribution
from Afolabi on how social entrepreneurs in Nigeria resort to bootstrapping to navigate the
funding landscape, because of there being few viable external financing opportunities).

In Algeria, Indonesia and Türkiye, for instance, more than 66 percent of social enterprises
reported resorting to self-financing through family, friends and personal savings as a source of
funding (British Council and Social Enterprise UK, 2022).

In the EU, self-financing is less common, with 40 percent of social enterprises reporting using
savings and only 16 percent reporting having requested funding from family and friends (Euclid
Network, 2022). The UK has one of the lowest rates of self-financing, with less than 10 percent
requesting finance from family and friends, likely owing to the presence of a relatively robust
governmental, philanthropic and impact investing ecosystem (Social Enterprise UK, 2023).

Private philanthropy was key to the emergence of social entrepreneurship in the early 2000s
and continues to be a key source of capital with few conditions attached. Today, international
philanthropic organizations and high-net-worth individuals and families give millions of dollars
globally to social enterprises at all scales, often in the form of grants, but also through equity
investment, loans and other financing tools.

Among European social enterprises, roughly 20 percent received funding from foundations
between 2021 and 2022 (Euclid Network, 2022). While international philanthropic organizations
have received much attention, domestic philanthropies are also a key source of financing,
often in the form of grants. In Japan, more than half of all funding for social enterprises came
from domestic foundation grants between 2018 and 2019 (Centre for Asian Philanthropy and
Society, 2019).

Debt financing through loans is a less common form of financing for social enterprises, with
the highest concentration in regions where public and philanthropic grants are less available.
India and Sri Lanka have reported some of the highest rates of social enterprise debt financing
at roughly 40 percent (British Council and Social Enterprise UK, 2022). In many parts of Africa,
including Côte d’Ivoire, Egypt, Ethiopia and Rwanda, loans from commercial banks and
microfinance organizations are a dominant financing source (Siemens Stiftung, 2020). However,
loans in these countries often come with high and occasionally predatory interest rates, as well
as significant collateral requirements (Siemens Stiftung, 2020). In response, new approaches to
debt financing that offer concessionary interest rates have started to emerge, but these are not
yet widespread (see, e.g., GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner on Grupo Mamut).

The impact investing market has grown substantially over recent years. Several estimates put
the size of the global impact investing market in the low trillions of dollars (Hand, Ringel and
Daniel, 2022; Volk, 2021). Yet impact investing still represents only a tiny fraction of the global
pool of investable capital; and it is not a significant source of funding for most social enterprises.
Notably, financing through impact investing is rare, even when access to advanced financial
markets is available. Under 10 percent of social enterprises in regions with advanced capital
markets request funding from incubators, business angels, impact investment, venture capital
or venture debt (Social Enterprise UK, 2023; Euclid Network, 2022). One reason for such low
rates of impact investing is that many social enterprises are too small to attract interest from
investors – small ticket sizes create prohibitively high search and transaction costs for direct
investment (Nicholls, 2021c).

Impact investing capital is also unevenly distributed globally, with funds concentrated in Europe
and Northern America (Hand, Ringel and Daniel, 2022). Although current impact investors
plan to step-up funding to social enterprises in developing economies, they are often not well
Global Innovation Index 2024

connected to the ventures that are most in need of funding, creating a matching problem.
Additionally, regional disparities in capital can inadvertently elevate certain issues over others.
For example, the Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN) data suggest that today’s impact
investors tend to prioritize climate change mitigation and adaptation, while other issues like
education and housing receive less attention in comparison (Hand, Ringel and Daniel, 2022).
Innovation and impact in social entrepreneurship 95

The global impact of social entrepreneurship is vast and varied, spanning issues such as access
to education, sustainable clothing, peace promotion in conflict zones and the preservation of
indigenous cultures. Across this wide range of issues, social enterprises share a common trait:
they use innovation to create and scale impact, not just to drive financial performance (Seelos
and Mair, 2017).

Innovation occurs first and foremost in the organizational models social enterprises adopt. And
it is also evident in how they develop product and process improvements and use intellectual
property (IP). Innovation in social entrepreneurship is often decentralized and deeply embedded
within local contexts, with active participation from community members. Additionally, because
many social enterprises operate in areas with limited public infrastructure and investment, they
often assume roles that commercial innovators typically avoid, involving shifting the political,
economic, social and cultural systems that perpetuate social and environmental problems.

2UJDQL]DWLRQDOPRGHOLQQRYDWLRQ

Social enterprises innovate within organizational models by embedding their social or

environmental mission into one or more aspects of the business – namely, the customers
they serve, the people they employ, the products or services they produce, or the broader
ecosystems in which they operate (Table 12). Each of these approaches offers a distinct
pathway to impact and is associated with distinct types of innovation activity.11 While some
social enterprises focus on a single pathway, many adopt multiple pathways, innovating across
multiple dimensions of their organizational models.

Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

11 Delivering impact from innovation activities requires that social enterprises translate these activities into outputs,
outcomes and, ultimately, impact. See Nicholls, 2021a.
 96 7DEOH2UJDQL]DWLRQDOSDWKZD\VWRLPSDFWLQVRFLDOHQWUHSUHQHXUVKLS


     


               

          
  


       

    
   
  

          
   
   

             !  

 
   "   

        

    
  
     

  # 
  $   
 
  

    !

  %  
 
 

     & 
   

        
    
!        
 $

 '  (  

   
   
   
      

 )   (   

    
   


    *     +  ! 

  !

     *  

  ,  

 '      

 

Source: Authors’ own representation, adapted from Besharov et al., 2019.

Social enterprises adopting the customer pathway achieve impact by providing essential
products or services to specific populations or market segments that would otherwise have
no or limited access (Box 4). The focus is often on reaching those populations that have been
marginalized or stigmatized on the basis of income, race, gender or other characteristics,
or have simply gone unnoticed by business and government. For example, microfinance
organizations offer small loans and other financial products to the ultra-poor, often women,
who could not otherwise access capital for starting a business.
Global Innovation Index 2024

The most important innovation activities associated with the customer pathway tend to
involve process innovation, particularly to develop delivery systems to reach the target market,
although there may also be innovation activities tailoring existing products or services so
that they align with the particular needs of the target customer segment. Process innovation
often involves education of consumers leading to an awareness of benefits that may, in turn,
lead to changes in household or individual behavior. A core innovation within microfinance
organizations, for example, is to develop processes for reaching the ultra-poor, while a 97
secondary innovation involves adapting loan products and other financial services to meet the
needs of this same demographic (for example, through group lending).

Box 4 The customer pathway in action

2UJDQL]DWLRQ: Sustainable Organic Integrated Livelihoods (SOIL)

*HRJUDSK\: Haiti

<HDUIRXQGHG: 2006

5HYHQXHV: Approximately EUR 2–3 million

)LQDQFLQJ: Government and multilateral agencies (71 percent); donations (25 percent); earned
income (4 percent)

/HJDOVWUXFWXUH: Non-profit organization

%DFNJURXQG: In Haiti, only 17 percent of the population has access to improved sanitation
facilities – the lowest level in the Americas. To address this critical issue, SOIL was co-founded
by Dr. Sasha Kramer and Sarah Brownell to provide a full-cycle sanitation service that treats
human waste in order to limit the spread of disease.

%XVLQHVVPRGHO: SOIL targets Haitian households without access to centralized sanitation

systems, offering low-cost container-based toilets and collection services. The collected waste
is processed into organic compost and marketed under the Konpòs Lakay brand for agricultural
use in farming and reforestation efforts.

Innovation activities:

Process research: SOIL has a dedicated research team focused on understanding sanitation
issues in Haiti and improving services to meet customer needs.

Product/service adaptations: To better reach key populations, SOIL has developed portable
household toilet models which do not require built infrastructure.

,QQRYDWLRQOLQNDJHV:

Innovative financing tools: SOIL collaborates with the Haitian government, international
development banks, and private funders to explore how blended finance can ensure the
sustainability of public service provision through a combination of public and private financing.

,PSDFW SOIL’s impact is evident in the more than 3,200 households and 19,000 individuals
Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

for whom they have provided toilets, collection services, and composting waste treatment
which has helped limit disease, improve living standards and personal dignity, and expand
healthy forests.

Source: Authors’ own representation based on the GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner.

6RFLDOHQWHUSULVHVDGRSWLQJWKHbemployee pathway (also known as work integration social

enterprises) (Box 5) generate impact by hiring under-employed or marginalized populations
to work in the organization and supporting them with the training and skills development that
ZLOOHQDEOHWKHPWRUHPDLQZLWKLQHPSOR\PHQW -R\FHbet al., 2022). Often, such individuals face
challenges in finding jobs due to societal biases and stigma, limited skills and education, or
disabilities. In addition to providing a direct source of income and offering meaningful work
to individuals from these populations, social enterprises engaging the employee model often
invest significantly in enhancing their employees’ skills and supporting them in securing new job
 98 opportunities that offer higher wages, thereby helping to break the cycles of poverty and bias
(see, e.g., Smith and Besharov, 2019).

The most important innovation activities within the employee pathway often involve process
innovations. Examples are redesigning hiring processes so as to identify candidates with
potential for upskilling and restructuring workflows so that they align with the abilities rather
than the limitations of the target employee population. Employee education and training are
also crucial innovation activities. Social enterprises adopting the employee pathway frequently
invest heavily in their human capital so as to overcome challenges related to poverty, stigma or
disability, thereby fostering future innovation potential.

Box 5 The employee pathway in action

2UJDQL]DWLRQ: iKure

*HRJUDSK\: India

<HDUIRXQGHG: 2010

5HYHQXHV: Approximately EUR 2 million

)LQDQFLQJ: Earned income (95 percent); grants and other sources (5 percent)

/HJDOVWUXFWXUH: For-profit company

%DFNJURXQG: Access to primary health care services in rural India often requires patients travel
long distances at significant cost. Sujay Santra, an IBM and Oracle IT engineer from West
Bengal, founded iKure to bring quality primary services to rural communities via a hub-and-
spoke model after watching his father go through the challenges of rural health care.

%XVLQHVVPRGHO: The iKure model is based around 10 health care hubs and 160 peripheral
clinics serving rural patients. Central to the model are the community health workers that
iKure selects, contracts and trains from within the communities in which it works. These health
workers visit homes, collect and capture diagnostic data, and return to peripheral clinics to
access services for patients.

Innovation activities:

Employee training: iKure invests heavily in training its community health workers, who often
have minimal prior expertise and may lack those basic skills, such as using a smart phone, that
are often essential for securing employment.

Process adaptations: Given that many of iKure’s community health care workers operate within
rural settings where internet connectivity is either low or non-existent, iKure has invested in
and developed a remote data collection system using point-of-care devices powered by GPS.

,QQRYDWLRQOLQNDJHV:

New technology training: To efficiently and accurately capture health data, iKure trains their
FRPPXQLW\KHDOWKZRUNHUVLQXVLQJWKHODWHVWDYDLODEOHSRUWDEOHGLDJQRVWLFWRROVb

Impact: iKure’s impact can be seen in the more than 120 woman community members
contracted to provide health services in “last-mile” communities. In addition, iKure operates
Global Innovation Index 2024

10 health care hubs and 160 peripheral clinics, providing treatment to more than 3 million
individuals across over 6,400 villages.

Source: Authors’ own representation based on the GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner.

b
6RFLDOHQWHUSULVHVDGRSWLQJWKHbproduct/service pathway generate impact by developing and 99
selling socially- and environmentally-friendly products or services (Box 6). In some cases, these
offerings address significant social or environmental challenges directly, as is the case with
social enterprises that provide critical health services such as primary eye care or diarrheal
medication. In other cases, the product/service pathway entails offering more socially or
environmentally sustainable versions of existing products or services that have negative
externalities, as is the case with social enterprises that sell products made from recycled
or renewable materials. And in some cases, the offering may be a mix of both, for example,
illustrated by Eco Femme, an Indian producer of reusable, low-cost menstruation pads.

The most important innovation activities associated with the product/service pathway tend
to involve product innovation, including research and development (R&D) and engineering
innovations to design more sustainable or socially beneficial products or services. Product/
service innovations often require significant “action research,” in which social entrepreneurs
engage deeply with community members so as to understand their needs and desires. These
organizations may also pursue IP to protect and legitimize their investments, although many
social entrepreneurs find the patent process to be costly, time-intensive and, ultimately, difficult
to enforce within the contexts in which they operate. Additionally, some social entrepreneurs
use open-sourcing of their product/service innovations as a means of generating further
impact, rather than focusing on IP protection in order to capture market share, as is common in
much commercial innovation.

Box 6 The product/service pathway in action

2UJDQL]DWLRQ: Eco Femme

*HRJUDSK\: India, with international sales

<HDUIRXQGHG: 2010

5HYHQXHV: Approximately EUR 250,000

)LQDQFLQJ: Earned income (75 percent); grants (25 percent)

/HJDOVWUXFWXUH: Unique legal entity that allows for commercial and non-commercial activities

%DFNJURXQG: More than one-quarter of the world’s population is of reproductive age. Yet many
do not have access to products or education on maintaining healthy, dignified menstruation.
Such a circumstance is especially acute in areas where basic sanitation infrastructure is
lacking, or menstruation is stigmatized. Further, traditional menstrual products are not
sustainable, often using a substantial amount of nonrecyclable materials. To address these
issues, Eco Femme was co-founded by Kathy Walkling, Jessamijn Miedema, Anita Budhraja and
Anbu Sironmani.
Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

%XVLQHVVPRGHO: Combining commercial and non-commercial operations, Eco Femme sells low-
cost, reusable, and organic cloth menstrual pads both locally and internationally and uses the
revenues to provide menstrual health education and free or subsidized cloth pad distribution.
A sliding-scale pricing model is deployed to cater to different populations and ability to pay.

Innovation activities:

Product design innovation: Eco Femme continuously improves its product design to better meet
customer needs and environmental goals. They switched to organic cotton, for example, after
reaching a sales threshold that allowed them to source in bulk.

Pricing innovation: Recognizing differing income levels among customers, Eco Femme
developed a sliding-scale pricing model where wealthier customers help subsidize pads for
poorer women.
 100 ,QQRYDWLRQOLQNDJHV

External research consultants: Eco Femme collaborated with a research consultant to develop a
comprehensive monitoring and evaluation module for its menstrual health education.

Training non-profits: Eco Femme extends its impact and reach by training and working with a
large network of approximately 60 NGOs and individuals in menstrual health education and
distribution of its cloth pads throughout India.

Impact: Since 2010, Eco Femme has distributed nearly 1.4 million pads, impacting nearly 90,000
girls and preventing approximately 104 million disposable pads from reaching landfills.

Source: Authors’ own representation based on the GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner.

Social enterprises adopting the ecosystem pathway create impact by mobilizing diverse groups
of social actors to effect transformation within local, regional or even global ecosystems (Box 7).
Outside actors engaged within these models encompass a wide range of stakeholders, including
fellow social entrepreneurs seeking collaboration on products and services, underserved
populations, policymakers, academics, journalists and others. By advocating for policy changes,
engaging communities, supporting research, fostering networks and investing in awareness
and education, the ecosystem pathway can generate varied and lasting impacts at a significant
geographical scale.

In the ecosystem pathway, engaging in systems innovation is the core activity. This can take
several different forms, including shifting policy, engaging communities, supporting research,
building networks, and undertaking awareness and education initiatives to achieve social or
environmental change. Across all these forms, systems innovation involves engaging with
stakeholders in a collaborative rather than competitive manner. In markets where policies and
standards are unreliable, public infrastructure limited and consumers unserved, the focus is on
creating a viable sector with a healthy number of actors, rather than protecting market share.

Box 7 The ecosystem pathway in action

2UJDQL]DWLRQ: WeRobotics

*HRJUDSK\: Global

<HDUIRXQGHG: 2015

5HYHQXHV: Approximately EUR 2-3 million

)LQDQFLQJ: Donations (25-60 percent), earned income (10-40 percent), in-kind donations of
technology and services (30-35 percent)

/HJDOVWUXFWXUH: Non-profit organization

%DFNJURXQG: Drones, when combined with data and AI technologies, can significantly
enhance decision-making regarding a wide variety of issues, including climate action, disaster
management and agriculture. Local experts are often best placed to deploy these technologies.
Yet they are often disconnected from international partners and tech firms. WeRobotics
began as a collaboration between Sonja Betschart and Adam Klaptocz of Drone Adventures
Global Innovation Index 2024

and Patrick Meier and Andrew Schroeder of UAViator. The co-founders established a network
of Flying Labs in over 40 countries so as to integrate local expertise with drone, data and AI
technologies, and thereby enhance international development initiatives.

%XVLQHVVPRGHO: WeRobotics provides a platform for local drone, data and AI experts to
connect with global and local organizations and industries, deploying and improving drone and
associated technologies in this highly regulated and expertise-intense sector. The WeRobotics
network connects local “Flying Labs” (independent organizations with technological expertise) 101
in over 40 countries across Africa, Latin America, and the Asia Pacific regions.

Innovation activities:

Network-building: WeRobotics’ activities focus on validating local expertise and facilitating

a network that is fully driven by local agency, accountability and self-sustainability, with
sharing and collaboration as its core values. Additionally, the network provides opportunities
for experts to expand their knowledge and connect with potential collaborators to develop
new technologies.

Awareness and education work: Local technology experts in developing regions often struggle to
gain legitimacy with large international technology firms and policymakers. WeRobotics works
to shift such a mindset by demonstrating the value of incorporating local expertise.

Process improvements: WeRobotics developed an annual application process to license local

experts to join the Flying Labs network, ensuring a network with high standards and reliability.

,QQRYDWLRQOLQNDJHV:

Open sourcing organizational structure: WeRobotics spends significant time and energy
documenting, improving and sharing its model and structure so that other organizations can
copy their locally-led approach.

Connecting to existing drone and AI innovators: By providing pro bono drone and AI technology
to local experts and companies, WeRobotics enables them to learn and deploy these
technologies for local projects.

Impact: WeRobotics has developed 41 Flying Labs with 56 partners and 266 local and
international supporters, and it has made 498 opportunities available through its network
since 2019.

Source: Authors’ own representation based on the GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner.

Product and process innovation

Social enterprises are actively engaged in product and process innovation. A survey of European
social enterprises, for instance, found that 60 percent planned to scale in the near future
by introducing new products or services; 30 percent by implementing new processes; and
20 percent by investing in either new equipment, information technology (IT) or computer
software (Euclid Network, 2022). Globally, similar trends can be observed. More than 50 percent
of social enterprises in Morocco, Nigeria, the Philippines, Thailand and Viet Nam also plan to
scale through the development of new products and services (see British Council, 2018a, 2018b,
Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

2019, 2020, 2022; British Council and Social Enterprise UK, 2022).

We see a similar emphasis on product and process innovation among social enterprises
reported in the GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner. Grupo Mamut, for example, a
Bolivian manufacturer of rubber products recycled from tires, has recently reinvested roughly
USD 500,000 into the creation of a sustainable materials laboratory to research and develop
new products. In an example of process innovation, Community Design Agency in India has
continuously refined its participatory design processes so they better meet the needs of low-
income housing residents.

Beneath the surface, there are nuances in how social enterprises pursue innovations. In
particular, social entrepreneurs often engage local communities in the innovation process,
with R&D frequently involving those people most affected by the issues that social enterprises
seek to address, rather than occurring in labs, innovation centers or meeting rooms far way
(see GII 2024 Expert contributions from Montoya Castaño on Participatory Action Research
 102 at Universidad Nacional de Colombia; Kraemer-Mbula on R&D practices among African
social enterprises).

This proximity to the problem is what allows social enterprises to create innovative products and
processes. An example is Fairtrasa International AG, a global social enterprise that distributes
produce from organic smallholder farmer cooperatives in Latin America, Africa and Asia to
retailers and wholesalers across Europe. After years of working with smallholder farmers,
Fairtrasa realized that these farmers often lacked the resources or expertise to engage with
the latest technology or local best practices for organic, regenerative farming. This led them to
develop a three-tiered model to train and organize smallholder farmers globally (see GII 2024
Case study contribution from Rayner).

A second difference involves social enterprises’ commitment to the use of innovation for positive
social impact. This approach introduces added costs, complexities and ethical responsibilities
to the innovation process. For instance, before launching Greenhope, an Indonesian producer
of biodegradable resins, co-founder Sugianto Tandio spent 10 years developing and patenting a
fully biodegradable resin made from cassava starch (see GII 2024 Case study contribution from
Rayner). Despite having the option of stopping at a partial solution, Tandio persisted in creating
a product that was 100 percent biodegradable, driven by a commitment to ensure that the
product would do no harm.

Even seemingly simple innovation activities, like diffusing a technology from one place to
another, can come at a significant cost, when social enterprises engage in meticulous cultural
sensitivity research so as to ensure that products or processes they develop will have the
desired positive social impact. For example, Smart Start, an early childhood development
training and licensing service operating in South Africa, changed from a cost-effective
playgroup model educating kids two days a week to a more frequent programme, after research
revealed that many families lacked access to child care during off days (see GII 2024 Case study
FRQWULEXWLRQIURP5D\QHU b

The work underlying this report also found some significant spillover effects of innovation
in social enterprises. Specifically, the introduction of new products and practices in social
enterprises has often been found to stimulate private sector innovation in more formal
corporations or governmental institutions (see GII 2024 Background study from Hottenrott).

6RFLDOHQWUHSUHQHXUVKLSDQGLQWHOOHFWXDOSURSHUW\

The use of IP among social enterprises varies widely. Some organizations invest heavily in
traditional IP to secure patents and trademarks, others adopt open-source or other non-
restrictive models, and many fall somewhere in between (see GII 2024 Expert contribution
from Kraemer-Mbula).

Traditional IP activity is often concentrated in social enterprises operating in sectors that require
heavy investment in R&D, such as technology and medicine (see GII 2024 Expert contribution
from Kraemer-Mbula). Patents and trademark rights not only enable social enterprises to
develop long-term revenue from innovation investments, but also serve as powerful signals of
legitimacy for organizational models that may be regularly contested by investors, suppliers
and partners. For instance, Greenhope has invested significant resources in securing six patents
across the United States, Singapore and Indonesia. However, patenting can be costly and may
not be the most reliable vector of protection in regions where IP rights are weaker. Bandhu, for
example, considered applying for a patent, but ultimately decided against it, because of the
expense and complexity involved (see GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner).

Trademarks, in turn, offer social enterprises the opportunity to legitimize their brand and
Global Innovation Index 2024

protect their investment in brand equity, such as in community outreach and customer
and supplier education. Trademarks to protect their main brand name are fairly common
among social enterprises worldwide. In a sample of over 300 social enterprises from the Skoll
Foundation and Schwab Foundation awardee communities, 37 percent had active trademarks, 103
with a median of two trademarks per venture.12

Many social enterprises, however, do not engage in filing for formal IP protection. Since the
primary goal of social entrepreneurship is not necessarily profit but social impact, these
organizations often do not resort to formal IP but use different means to diffuse product
and process innovations so as to help scale benefits. Open-sourcing software and other
technologies for the benefit of other social enterprises, governments and even corporations
is a common scaling tactic (see GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner on Bandhu,
Community Development Agency, WeRobotics). But the potential role of formal IP is often
underappreciated or unknown. Even with a strong emphasis on collaboration, social enterprises
may benefit from learning more about and utilizing IP, and correspondingly from greater policy
support to develop this capability – a point returned to in the concluding section of this chapter
which is on policy implications.

6\VWHPVLQQRYDWLRQ

Innovation activities do not stop at the factory gates or office door. Beyond product and process
innovation and IP activity, social enterprises also engage in systems innovation. This involves
novel approaches to shaping the political, economic, social and cultural systems that perpetuate
the social problems that social enterprises seek to address (see GII 2024 Expert contribution
from Billimoria).

These activities are particularly common in social enterprises emphasizing the ecosystem
pathway to impact. This is because they allow social enterprises to shift cultural biases
regarding marginalized or stigmatized populations and issues, modernize sector practices and
norms, and help alter laws and policies, thereby developing or altering the ecosystem around a
focal problem area (Table 13).

Yet systems innovation is not limited to organizations adopting the ecosystem pathway.
Eco Femme, for instance, which primarily pursues the product/service pathway, works to
destigmatize education about menstruation and menstrual products in India. Fairtrasa,
which primarily pursues the customer pathway, has been working to deploy new technology
solutions that enable smallholder farmers in developing countries to link directly with
consumer-packaged goods firms. And Smart Start, which also focuses on the customer pathway,
co-developed first-of-its-kind policies and standards on early childhood development at the
national and provincial levels in South Africa (see GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner).

Data from Ashoka, whose work supports one of the longest-standing global networks of social
entrepreneurs, suggests that these are not just isolated examples: 66 percent of over 800 social
entrepreneurs in Ashoka’s network have advised policymakers or legislative bodies; 63 percent
have achieved legislative change or influenced policy; 62 percent have provided research and or
data to policymakers; and 57 percent have convinced government to allocate funds to specific
FDXVHV 9DOHUDbet al., 2022).
Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

12 Authors’ data on Skoll Foundation and Schwab Foundation Social Entrepreneur awardees; n=323.
 104 7DEOH)RUPVRIV\VWHPVLQQRYDWLRQLQVRFLDOHQWUHSUHQHXUVKLS

         

  
            

             
       

    
      
      
  

     

         
  

              

        
   

       
  

     

     !
 

  "        !         

   !     #$%
         

    

        

      

       !

&   

       

     '         )     
     (              
         

%  *  !  
    

Source: Authors’ own representation. For supporting empirical data, see Mair and Rathert (forthcoming 2024).

Policy opportunities to unlock the promise of social

entrepreneurship

Social entrepreneurship has had a significant impact in tackling complex social and
environmental problems. Yet, there are still formidable barriers to overcome in unlocking its
full transformative potential. Policy has a critical role to play in removing these barriers and
enabling further innovation and impact in social entrepreneurship.

Globally, governments and international bodies have started to develop solutions for some of
the innovation challenges social entrepreneurs face (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Klijn
and Bonnici). For example, the OECD has recently produced in-depth manuals for policymakers
on developing legal frameworks for social enterprises, measuring social impact, conducting
impactful public procurement, and providing training social entrepreneurs. Moreover, many
jurisdictions are pushing ahead with advanced policy support. A review of 75 jurisdictions
globally found that 20 percent have dedicated legal forms for social entrepreneurship; 30
percent offer government funding support; and 20 percent offer operational support such as
training or consulting. 13
Global Innovation Index 2024

Yet, unlocking the full innovation and impact potential of social entrepreneurship will require
more comprehensive action. Drawing on the expert contributions to the GII 2024 Special theme
(available online), we highlight the barriers to and opportunities for social entrepreneurship

13 Authors’ analysis of LexMundi Pro Bono Foundation Social Enterprise Law Surveys Database. Available at: https://
www.lexmundi.com/guides/social-enterprise-law-surveys.
across six dimensions: namely, institutional frameworks, human capital, infrastructure, 105
networks, financing, and measurement (Table 14).14

7DEOH%DUULHUVDQGRSSRUWXQLWLHVLQVRFLDOHQWUHSUHQHXUVKLS

      

             

         

        

          

            
       

    

  !   "  

 #     
         #
    #
  

           #  
     


 
   

      $


    

       %  
   %
   #

   

&   
   

'     #  
    #  #
#      

(       '    

& 
     #  

  !   )  ' * * 

 #    #   #

+   ,    #  

 #          
      

- 
    
    


. %    '     

 /          

 #  /%  
 

       0!     

 #       %

0     % 

   / 
  

    #   
    

1  
Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

      #

.        '     / 

"   # /   %  

'       

    %
%       
 
    

      

     

Source: Authors’ own representation based on GII 2024 Expert contributions.

14 The dimensions of policy barriers and opportunities correspond to the GII’s input and output pillars.
 106 ,QVWLWXWLRQDOIUDPHZRUNV

Develop supportive legal and regulatory environments

Globally, the institutional frameworks supporting social entrepreneurship innovation –

encompassing regulatory quality, rule of law and agency support – remain underdeveloped.
Many countries lack a specific legal form for social entrepreneurship and impose restrictions
that limit scaling opportunities. For instance, regulations often prevent directors of traditional
for-profit ventures from considering social or public benefits alongside shareholder returns
(Morrison & Foerster, LexMundi Pro Bono Foundation and Catalyst 2030, 2022). Such gaps
expose social enterprises to legal risks and bureaucratic hurdles. And they restrict access to
funding and partnerships, which in turn inhibits organizational growth (see GII 2024 Expert
contribution from Afolabi).

Governments have an opportunity to develop facilitative institutional frameworks and

regulatory policies that help social enterprises to flourish. Establishing legal definitions for
social entrepreneurship is a crucial first step. These definitions should align with international
peers and or transnational organizations so as to enable global collaboration, research and
funding.15 Additionally, policymakers should adopt specific legal forms that facilitate the joint
pursuit of social and financial goals, such as the Benefit Corporation in the United States and the
Community Interest Corporation in the United Kingdom.

Creating dedicated governmental units or departments to support social entrepreneurship

is also essential. In a sample of 75 jurisdictions, less than 10 percent had such specialized
support.16 These structures can help legitimize local social entrepreneurial efforts; support
nascent social ventures; facilitate collaboration between social entrepreneurs and policymakers;
and advocate for the removal of legal and policy restrictions (see GII 2024 Expert contribution
from Bilimoria on the importance of formalized government support).

There is also a need for policymakers to collaborate with social entrepreneurs to remove
restrictions associated with non-specialized legal forms. Existing regulations designed for
traditional non-profit or for-profit organizations often hinder impact and innovation in social
enterprises. For example, restrictions on foreign philanthropic investment into non-profits
limits access to essential international funding sources for social enterprises (Oelberger and
Shachter, 2021).

Human capital

Invest in education and training programmes

Social enterprises face substantial hurdles in accessing quality human capital, with many
social entrepreneurs reporting challenges in finding employees with the right skillsets (Social
Enterprise UK, 2023; Euclid Network 2022). To drive forward more innovation, social enterprises
need a workforce that has technical skills in areas such as finance, accounting and engineering
alongside relational and cultural skills in areas such as communication and community
engagement, and local language fluency, as well as historical and contextual knowledge
(Battilana and Dorado, 2010). This unique mix of skills has not been emphasized globally and is
further complicated in developing countries by substantial rates of out-migration (see GII 2024
Expert contribution from Afolabi).

Similarly to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), social enterprises may also lack skilled
human capital that has the capacity to tap global knowledge and information resources, such
as the knowledge incorporated in scientific publications or patent documents, in order to find
possible solutions to technical or process challenges.
Global Innovation Index 2024

15 See OECD guidance on designing legal frameworks for social enterprises; OECD, 2022.
16 Authors’ analysis of LexMundi Pro Bono Foundation Social Enterprise Law Surveys Database. Available at: https://
www.lexmundi.com/guides/social-enterprise-law-surveys.
Policymakers have an important role to play in ensuring social enterprises have access to 107
the human capital needed for innovation. Growing a supply of capable entrepreneurs with
relational and cultural skillsets begins with changes to school curricula so as to emphasize
entrepreneurialism with a social impact (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Çiftçi on King’s
College Nepal’s social entrepreneurship courses). Publicly-supported training programmes
can also have a major impact on the prevalence and robustness of social entrepreneurship.
For instance, social enterprises that completed the United Kingdom’s School for Social
Entrepreneurs programme reported an average 40 percent increase in earned income and had
a two-year survival rate of 81 percent, compared to 73 percent for UK SMEs (AKOU, 2023).

Infrastructure

Promote data collection

The lack of data on social entrepreneurship is a major infrastructure deficiency holding back
innovation and impact. As two recent efforts to quantify the number of social enterprises
globally reveal, large parts of the world have no data on social entrepreneurship, and in those
places that do have data the samples are small, out of date or based on competing definitions
(Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship and WEF, 2024; British Council and Social
Enterprise UK, 2022). Without access to comparable and high-quality data, policymakers will
struggle to regulate and allocate resources appropriately; impact investors will continue to
overlook the role of social entrepreneurship in building economies and changing lives; and
social entrepreneurs will miss out on valuable opportunities to catalyze impact.

In addition to developing globally recognized legal definitions, governments must align on

data standards and functional definitions for social entrepreneurship. National data registries
or regular surveys that gather information on prevalence, legal forms, organizational models,
turnover and impact can provide critical inputs for building an ecosystem capable of addressing
innovation challenges and scaling social entrepreneurship.

Assist social entrepreneurs in reaching underserved communities

Regional disparities in innovation infrastructure, including access to information and

communication technologies, stable and affordable energy, and government services, are
particularly critical for social entrepreneurship, which often targets communities with the least
access. Infrastructure gaps are increasingly extreme in both developed as well as developing
countries, creating challenges for social entrepreneurs everywhere as they seek to meet the
needs of disadvantaged communities. In India, for example, the divide between urban and rural
areas in terms of access to health care, financial literacy and gender equity makes it difficult for
social enterprises to reach the most vulnerable populations (see GII 2024 Expert contribution
from Kannan and Ramanujam on the social enterprises working in India to overcome these
barriers; GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner on iKure).

National and local governments have a role to play in helping to bridge regional disparities
by providing increased support to social entrepreneurs operating within disadvantaged
Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

communities. This support could include grants, subsidies, tax benefits and investment in
critical infrastructure projects tailored to the unique needs of such regions, thereby enabling
social entrepreneurs to operate more effectively and sustainably.

1HWZRUNV

Incubate social enterprise networks

Unlike large corporations and philanthropic organizations, social enterprises often struggle
to gain attention, because of their small size and hybrid nature. Moreover, because they
blend aspects of multiple forms of organizing, social enterprises do not fit neatly into existing
categories. Without visibility and credibility, social enterprises often miss out on impactful
partnerships and a deeper engagement with existing support structures for innovation. These
issues are particularly acute for social enterprises working with advanced technologies such
as AI, data analytics, smart logistics and fintech, where strategic partnerships are becoming
 108 essential for accessing expertise and modern technology (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from
Kraemer-Mbula; GII 2024 Case study contribution from Rayner on WeRobotics).

Governments can play a crucial role in addressing these challenges by helping to incubate
social enterprise networks and alliances. Organizations such as the Euclid Network in Europe
and Catalyst 2030, which represents social entrepreneurs globally, leverage collective strength
in order to capture media, government and business attention, and connect social enterprises
to valuable public and private partnerships (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Bilimoria).
Policymakers can help to legitimize and grow these organizations by engaging them in
meaningful discussion, providing funding and facilitating access to new partners – particularly
those with capabilities in advanced technologies who can help to upskill social enterprises.

Deepen research links between advanced and developing economies

Uneven development of the research and education ecosystem, including accelerators,

universities and public research partnerships, further impedes innovation within
social enterprises. Concentrated in a few hyper-productive regions, existing innovation
ecosystems are ill-equipped to support the local needs of social entrepreneurs, especially in
developing regions.

The presence of well-resourced local research universities can substantially benefit social
enterprises by helping to identify pressing local issues, legitimize fledging social ventures and
diffuse their innovative products, processes and services (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from
Montoya Castaño).

At the same time, social entrepreneurs could also better leverage the potential of existing know-
how, research, and research institutions and universities. Links between social entrepreneurs
and key actors in existing innovation ecosystems are often weak. Social entrepreneurs may not
routinely seek solutions within an existing body of knowledge or reach out to universities and
public research institutions to collaboratively conduct or commission R&D geared to solving
their technological or process challenges. Alongside stronger ties between social entrepreneurs
and existing innovation ecosystem actors, there is a need to increase the absorptive capacity
of social enterprises. This often due to them not having R&D departments or trained personnel
who can digest and apply existing public research results, as well as proactively request new,
targeted research for the enterprise’s venture.

)LQDQFLQJ

Raising investor awareness

Social enterprises face challenges in gaining the attention of funders, both public and private,
because funders often understand neither social enterprises’ needs nor their impact potential,
and, moreover, they struggle to verify and compare social impact across ventures. For example,
40 percent of social enterprises report that they have experienced a lack of awareness and
understanding among banks, investors and support organizations (Euclid Network, 2022).

To address these gaps, it is crucial to educate private investors, financial institutions and
policymakers about the pathways through which social enterprises generate impact.
Governments can draw inspiration from award-giving organizations such as the Skoll
Foundation and the Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship, which have positively
influenced the trajectory of social entrepreneurship and raised its visibility. Publicly-supported
awards and grants can help highlight and finance exceptional social enterprises, while also
educating private investors about the positive social impact of these ventures.
Global Innovation Index 2024

Expanding public financing

The availability of financing for social entrepreneurship remains a significant constraint,

leading to high rates of self-financing, high-interest debt and overall slow growth. While some
governments have made investments into social enterprises, more action is needed to create
a supportive financing environment. Tax and procurement incentives, as well as tailored grant
funding, are critical levers.
Tax incentives for dedicated legal forms that facilitate the joint pursuit of social and financial 109
objectives can encourage the establishment of new social enterprises and provide additional
resources for reinvestment in impact and innovation. Procurement incentives, such as those
established by the United Kingdom’s Social Value Act (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from
Klijn and Bonnici), can help local and national governments to create supply strategies that
emphasize public benefits, while enabling social enterprises to grow their trading activities.

Tailored grant funding – which involves promoting funding opportunities; offering size-
dependent funding, simplifying application processes; and providing guidance on minimally
intrusive impact measurement requirements – can address gaps in mid-range financing and
the substantial search and transaction costs associated with applying for grants. These issues
are particular challenges for small and mid-sized social enterprises. Tailored grant funding has
significant potential to help such organizations to grow and become more attractive to impact
investors.

Creating incentives for private investment

Impact investing has predominantly focused on relatively large, low-risk organizations, leaving
most social enterprises with a limited access to the transition funding required for scaling
beyond proof-of-concept (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Dey and Gupta). To mitigate
this issue, governments can play a role in reducing the perceived risk associated with investing
in social enterprises.

This can be achieved through blended financing mechanisms, concessionary capital and the
establishment of funds dedicated to social enterprises, making them more attractive to large
institutional investors. Public and philanthropic funders can provide concessional investments
so as to lower risk and attract larger sums of private impact capital. Additionally, public support
can help to create more robust financing ecosystems through social entrepreneurship funds
and funds-of-funds, which facilitate connections between public–private capital and groups of
social enterprises. This approach allows investors to customize investments so they align with
their capital goals, thereby enhancing the overall growth and impact of social enterprises.17

0HDVXUHPHQW

Investment in public–private certification and

measurement approaches

The comprehensive and accurate measurement of social impact remains a challenge for all
impact-oriented organizations (see GII 2024 Background study from Hottenrott and Expert
contribution from Garg Patel).18 Over the last 15 to 20 years, coordinated efforts by investors,
governments, researchers and impact practitioners have advanced the development of various
tools and frameworks for the purpose of systematically quantifying impact. These include
metrics taxonomies like the Impact Reporting and Investment Standards (IRIS and IRIS+) and
rating services such as the Global Impact Investing Rating System (GIIRS), as well as the 60
Decibels benchmarks (see GII 2024 Expert contribution from Kraemer-Mbula). While these
Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

efforts represent immense progress, measuring the impact of social entrepreneurship remains
challenging due to limited data, human capital and financial resources, and the localized nature
of many of the issues social enterprises address.

Existing efforts to quantify the impact of social entrepreneurship tend to take three main forms.

Person-based measures focus on the total number of lives affected. For example, the 3,200 social
enterprises in the Catalyst 2030 network have touched over one billion lives, and the Schwab
Foundation’s 470 social entrepreneurship awardees have reached over 891 million lives over the
past 25 years.19

17 For additional detail on policies to support sustainable financing of social entrepreneurship, see Nicholls, 2021b.
18 See also Zulkefly et al., 2022.
19 See Catalyst 2030 (available at: https://catalyst2030.net/) impact measurement; Schwab Foundation for Social
Entrepreneurs impact measurement, 2024.
 110 Resource-based measures focus on the amount of money raised or earned by social enterprises,
the vast majority of which is invested or reinvested back into their respective social or
environmental missions (Euclid Network, 2022). For example, the 3,200 social enterprises in
Catalyst 2030’s network have raised over USD 2.2 billion in funding, and the 64 social enterprises
in the three most recent cohorts of Schwab Foundation awardees have total revenues of over
USD 900 million.

$QGILQDOO\bissue-based measures focus on metrics tailored to the specific social or

environmental challenge being addressed. Assessing the impact of social enterprises working
on health, for example, would involve tracking the number of patients screened or receiving
medicine, or the number of health products provided; while assessing the impact of social
enterprises that tackle inequality might involve tracking metrics, such as the gender pay gap or
the political representation of marginalized groups.

Such variation in approaches to measuring impact is a double-edged sword. On the one hand,
it makes it difficult for policymakers to assess the overall impact of social entrepreneurship and
for investors to make comparisons across different ventures, when deciding where to allocate
capital. Among impact investors, for example, the challenge of impact comparison is the single
most significant issue today (Hand, Sunderjit and Pardo, 2023). On the other hand, varied
approaches to measuring impact help to capture important underlying differences in how social
enterprises create impact, which would otherwise be lost if the field converged on a single,
VWDQGDUGL]HGPHWULFb

Consider, for example, how impact measurement differs along the customer, employee,
product/service, and ecosystem pathways:

– Assessing impact from the customer pathway often involves measuring the number of
customers reached. Yet it is important to go beyond simple counts of customers and
consider what further downstream changes (both positive and negative) occur when new
customer segments have access to previously unavailable products or services. Microfinance
loans, for example, can impact recipients’ economic security and their socio-emotional well-
being, as well as that of their families and communities.
– The impact of the employee pathway is often assessed by measuring the number of
employees hired, the wages paid and the investment in employee training. Yet, as with the
customer pathway, it is important to consider downstream impacts as well; for example, the
increase in overall lifetime earnings and improvements in self-confidence, self-efficacy and
other measures of well-being.
– The impact of the product/service pathway is often assessed based on the volume of
products and services sold. However, it is also important to consider the longer-term
positive and negative consequences of these products. For organizations selling products or
services made from recyclable or renewable materials, a crucial measure of impact would be
the amount of waste, emissions or pollution saved by customers adopting these products or
services instead of conventional alternatives.
– Assessing the impact of the ecosystem pathway is particularly challenging. This goes beyond
direct measures, such as the number of actors involved or mobilized within an ecosystem.
The downstream impact created through the ecosystem pathway can also be measured
through tracking changes in legislation and the levels of new knowledge creation, as well as
shifts in social norms and attitudes. Overall, this pathway may be both the most important
source of impact and the one that is most difficult to measure.

We are still years away from any globally accepted measurement standards for gauging impact.
However, policymakers can take immediate action to help improve metrics. National and
international support for accounting research on social impact can expedite the development
of standardized measures that ensure critical considerations, such as the diversity of social
Global Innovation Index 2024

entrepreneurial issues, impact pathways and innovation strategies, are properly accounted
for. Additionally, public or state-recognized third-party certification systems can help social
enterprises connect with both public resources and impact investors. A key component of
any certification process should be supporting social enterprises in developing their impact
reporting capacity and ensuring that the certification process is as straightforward as possible.
Globally, many social enterprises lack the resources or expertise required in order to establish
impact reporting functions and apply for certifications. For instance, 40 percent of European
social enterprises report not having measured the impact they are making at all; and only 20 111
percent report using an existing certification system (Euclid Network, 2022).

Conclusion

Social entrepreneurship is more than a trend; it is a transformative approach to addressing

some of the world’s most pressing social and environmental challenges. By merging the
innovative capacity of business with the altruistic goals of the social sector, social enterprises
are uniquely positioned to generate significant positive impacts globally. They achieve impact
through serving marginalized communities, employing individuals who would not otherwise
have access to jobs, and creating socially beneficial products and services. But also by shifting
broader societal systems, often serving as catalysts for policy reform, cultural change and
economic development.

The potential of social entrepreneurship is vast. Yet, unlocking its full promise requires a
supportive ecosystem. Governments, international bodies and the private sector must
work collaboratively to create tailor-made enabling environments – including regulatory,
legal and measurement frameworks, as well as financing mechanisms, networks and
training programmes – that recognize and support social entrepreneurs and their ventures.
Incorporating and re-purposing institutions and innovation support mechansisms originally
developed for public science and corporate innovation should be part of this process.

At the same time, the onus for change is not confined to the actors that surround social
entrepreneurs. There is scope for social entrepreneurs themselves to more actively drive
innovation within their enterprises. This can be done through dedicated attention to key
activities such as R&D, process innovation, and patenting and trademarking. But it also requires
concrete action to embed social enterprises within existing innovation ecosystems; for instance,
by tapping existing sources of scientific and technological knowledge, as well as venture capital,
R&D tax credits and other innovation finance tools and by collaborating with universities, public
research organizations and other entrepreneurs.

Together, by investing in supportive policies, education, infrastructure and financing, and by

encouraging social entrepreneurs to engage with existing innovation ecosystems, we can
collectively unlock the full potential of social entrepreneurship to drive sustainable development
on a global scale.

Special Theme 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship

GII 2024 Economy profiles
The following tables
provide detailed profiles for
133 economies.

112
 Framework of the Global Innovation Index 2024 113

How to read the Economy profiles

GII 2024 Economy profiles
 114 How to read the Economy profiles

The following tables provide detailed profiles for each of the 133 economies in the Global
Innovation Index 2024. They are composed of four sections.

GII 2024 rank

1 Albania 84
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
97 66 Upper middle EUR 2.8 55.9 19,566

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 50.3 60 Business sophistication 26.8 64

1.1 Institutional environment 55.2 60 5.1 Knowledge workers 41.4 [47]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 64.7 61 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 18.4 82
1.1.2 Government eࡿectiveness* 45.7 62 5.1.2 Firms oࡿHring formal training, % Ա 46.2 23 ª

1.2 Regulatory environment 42.6 67 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 46.0 64 5.1.4 GERD ࢂnanced by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 39.1 73 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 11.8 66

1.3 Business environment 53.2 [53] 5.2 Innovation linkages 21.2 78

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 53.2 53 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.3 128 «

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 59.7 38 È
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 38.0 85
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 73
Human capital and research 21.6 101 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 82
5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.9 102 É
2.1 Education 37.4 108 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.6 63
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.7 108
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 0.2 133 «É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 9.8 87 É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.8 93
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 14.5 60
5.3.4 FDI net inࢃRws, % GDP 7.2 14 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 367.5 76
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 9.7 31
2.2 Tertiary education 27.3 83
2.2.1 Tertiary enrolment, % gross 62.7 51 Knowledge and technology outputs 14.4 89
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 20.8 72
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 1.5 82 6.1 Knowledge creation 5.6 108
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 77
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 51
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 68
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientiࢂc and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 5.9 96
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 3.0 122 «
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 20.0 101
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.6 16 ª
Infrastructure 52.3 31 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 92
3.1 Informationandcommunicationtechnologies(ICTs) 82.3 36 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 4.5 100 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.3 22 ªÈ
6.3 Knowledge diࡿXsion 17.8 65
3.1.2 ICT use* 74.5 74
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.3 40 È
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 79.9 33
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 37.2 75
3.1.4 E-participation* 75.6 22 ª
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.0 132 «
3.2 General infrastructure 20.8 95 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.0 56
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 2,521.6 72 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 9.4 30 ª
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 25.1 48
Creative outputs 13.6 99 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 53.8 1 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 19.2 12 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 7.6 105 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 69.8 5 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 4.3 25 ª
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 27.0 71
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 24.2 91 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 86
7.2 Creative goods and services 16.8 60
4.1 Credit 8.3 118 É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.0 27 È
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups † n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature ࢂlms/mn pop. 15–69 3.4 41
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 34.0 90 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microࢂnance institutions, % GDP 0.6 40 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 130 «

4.2 Investment 2.9 [100] 7.3 Online creativity 22.6 87

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 4.7 57
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 7.9 62
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 89 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 55.1 97
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP Ա 0.0 97
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3 Trade, diversiࢂcation and market scale 61.4 46

4.3.1 Applied tariࡿrate, weighted avg., % 1.0 15 ª
4.3.2 Domestic industry diversiࢂcation 90.9 32
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 55.9 108

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; É an income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.

1. At the top is the overall Global Innovation Index (GII) rank for each economy.

2. Next are the key metrics for each profile which provide the specific context for that particular
economy: namely, its Innovation Input and Output Sub-Index rankings, the income group to
which the economy belongs, its geographical region, population in millions, GDP in billion USD
purchasing power parity (PPP), and, lastly, GDP per capita in USD PPP.

Because economies may either drop in or out of the GII, and due to adjustments made to the
GII framework every year and other technical factors unrelated to actual performance (missing
data, updates of data, and so on), the GII rankings are not directly comparable between one
year and another. Appendix I provides further details.

The Innovation Input Sub-Index rank is computed based on a simple average of the scores in
the first five pillars, while the Innovation Output Sub-Index rank is computed based on a simple
average of the scores in the last two pillars. Scores are normalized values falling within the
0–100 range.

3. Pillars are identified by an illustrative icon, sub-pillars by two- digit and indicators by three-
digit numbers. For example, under the pillar Institutions is the sub-pillar 1.3, Business
environment, under which is indicator 1.3.2, Entrepreneurship policies and culture.

The GII 2024 includes 78 indicators in total and three types of data. Composite (or index)
indicators are identified with an asterisk (*), survey questions with a dagger (†). The remaining
indicators are all hard data series.

As far as possible, we have provided the (scaled/unscaled) value of the indicators rather than
the score. Indicators based on survey responses (five indicators) or an index (10 indicators)
Global Innovation Index 2024

are always reported as scores, while eight of the 63 hard data indicators are likewise reported
as scores. This means that, overall, 55 out of 78 indicators are reported as values in the
economy profiles.

When data are either unavailable or out of date, “n/a” is used, with a cutoff year of 2014. To
the right of an indicator name, a clock symbol is used when the available economy data are
older than the base year. For information on data exceptions and limitations and a detailed
 115
explanation of the GII framework, see Appendix I. For further details on indicator sources and
definitions, see Appendix III.

4. On the far right of each column, the strengths of an economy are indicated by a solid circle ň
and weaknesses by a hollow circle Ň. The strengths of an economy within its income group are
indicated by a solid diamond È and weaknesses by a hollow diamond É. The exceptions to this
are the top 25 high-income economies, whose strengths and weaknesses are instead computed
within the top 25 group.

Rankings of 1, 2 and 3 are highlighted as an economy’s strengths, except in particular instances

at the sub-pillar level, when the desired data minimum coverage (DMC) is unmet for that sub-
pillar. For the remaining indicators, the strengths and weaknesses of a specific economy are
based on the percentage of economies whose scores fall either above or below its own score
(i.e., percentile ranks) and where the data is no older than the indicator mode minus 5 years. In
practice, this means that for indicators with a data year mode of 2023, an economy’s data year
must date from 2018 or be more recent in order to classify as a strength or weakness.

For any given economy, strengths ň are those scores with percentile ranks greater than the 10th
largest percentile rank among the 78 indicators for that economy.

For that same economy, weaknesses Ň are those scores with percentile ranks lower than the
10th smallest percentile rank among the 78 indicators for that economy.

Similarly, for any given economy, income group strengths È are those scores above the income
group average plus the standard deviation within that group.

For that same economy, income group weaknesses É are those scores below the income group
average minus the standard deviation within that group.

In addition, economies with a sub-pillar that does not meet the DMC requirement will show the
score for that sub-pillar within square brackets. Those with more than one such sub-pillar also
include the ranks for that pillar within square brackets. For these pillars and sub-pillars, neither
strengths nor weaknesses are signaled.

GII 2024 Economy profiles

 GII 2024 rank

116 Albania 84
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
97 66 Upper middle EUR 2.8 55.9 19,566

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 50.3 60 Business sophistication 26.8 64

1.1 Institutional environment 55.2 60 5.1 Knowledge workers 41.4 [47]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 64.7 61 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 18.4 82
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 45.7 62 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 46.2 23 ª

1.2 Regulatory environment 42.6 67 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 46.0 64 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 39.1 73 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 11.8 66

1.3 Business environment 53.2 [53] 5.2 Innovation linkages 21.2 78

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 53.2 53 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.3 128 «

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 59.7 38 È
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 38.0 85
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 73
Human capital and research 21.6 101 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 82
5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.9 102 É
2.1 Education 37.4 108 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.6 63
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.7 108
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 0.2 133 «É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 9.8 87 É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.8 93
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 14.5 60
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 7.2 14 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 367.5 76
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 9.7 31
2.2 Tertiary education 27.3 83
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 62.7 51 Knowledge and technology outputs 14.4 89
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 20.8 72
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 1.5 82 6.1 Knowledge creation 5.6 108
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 77
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 51
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 68
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 5.9 96
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 3.0 122 «
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 20.0 101
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.6 16 ª
Infrastructure 52.3 31 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 92
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 82.3 36 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 4.5 100 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.3 22 ªÈ
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 17.8 65
3.1.2 ICT use* 74.5 74
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.3 40 È
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 79.9 33
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 37.2 75
3.1.4 E-participation* 75.6 22 ª
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.0 132 «
3.2 General infrastructure 20.8 95 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.0 56
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 2,521.6 72 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 9.4 30 ª
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 25.1 48
Creative outputs 13.6 99 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 53.8 1 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 19.2 12 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 7.6 105 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 69.8 5 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 4.3 25 ª
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 27.0 71
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 24.2 91 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 86
7.2 Creative goods and services 16.8 60
4.1 Credit 8.3 118 É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.0 27 È
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 3.4 41
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 34.0 90 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.6 40 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 130 «

4.2 Investment 2.9 [100] 7.3 Online creativity 22.6 87

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 4.7 57
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 7.9 62
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 89 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 55.1 97
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP Ա 0.0 97
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 61.4 46
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.0 15 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 90.9 32
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 55.9 108

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Algeria 115 117

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
115 113 Lower middle NAWA 46.2 629.0 13,682

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 34.8 95 Business sophistication 18.0 114

1.1 Institutional environment 38.6 99 5.1 Knowledge workers 15.0 113

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 46.7 100 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 17.9 86
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 30.6 100 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 16.9 121 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 77
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 13.9 124 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 6.7 82
1.2.2 Rule of law* 20.0 110 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 8.1 83

1.3 Business environment 49.0 [61] 5.2 Innovation linkages 23.0 65 ª

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 49.0 66 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.6 115
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 54.7 47 ª
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 55.0 50 ª
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 121 É
Human capital and research 28.1 76 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 100
5.3 Knowledge absorption 15.8 120
2.1 Education 46.0 [78]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.4 82
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 6.3 10 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 10.4 35 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.3 119
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 15.5 44 ªÈ
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.5 107
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science Ա 361.7 78
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 0.5 83 É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary n/a n/a
2.2 Tertiary education 33.9 65
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 53.4 67 È Knowledge and technology outputs 9.1 125
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 29.9 20 ª
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 0.5 99 6.1 Knowledge creation 10.2 82
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 65 ª
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 4.2 79 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 85
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 832.4 58 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.5 58 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 8.1 83
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 10.2 74
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 10.9 128 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬111
Infrastructure 29.9 94 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 132 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 52.8 99 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 4.1 101
3.1.1 ICT access* 84.0 80 È
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 6.2 112
3.1.2 ICT use* 75.4 73
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 106
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 30.8 121
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 27.3 94
3.1.4 E-participation* 20.9 123
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 0.0 131 «
3.2 General infrastructure 31.3 66 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.2 126
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 1,932.9 81 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 112
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 36.0 10 ª
Creative outputs 9.2 109
3.3 Ecological sustainability 5.6 128 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 7.8 95 7.1 Intangible assets 9.2 100
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.3 124 É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 108 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 20.0 87
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 5.2 132 «É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.5 46 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 0.6 124

4.1 Credit 5.0 [126] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 105
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.1 84
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 21.1 115 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 1.7 53
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 0.0 125
4.2 Investment 1.7 108 7.3 Online creativity 17.7 106
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 0.2 85 «É
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.3 117
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.4 110
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 108 «
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 51.5 103
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 66
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 8.8 132 «É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % Ա 12.7 133 «É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 14.2 108
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 629.0 41 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

118 Angola 133

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
133 132 Lower middle SSA 36.7 260.3 7,077

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 25.0 120 Business sophistication 6.8 133 «É

1.1 Institutional environment 33.7 108 5.1 Knowledge workers 5.7 [130]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 50.7 92 ª 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 7.5 114
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 16.8 127 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 20.2 114 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 25.9 105 ª 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 14.5 121 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 1.3 115

1.3 Business environment 21.0 116 É 5.2 Innovation linkages 1.4 132 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 27.7 109 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.6 114
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 14.2 72 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 0.6 129 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 0.0 130 «É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 115
Human capital and research 12.4 125 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 13.3 129 É

2.1 Education 29.7 [123]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.6 65 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.3 117
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.5 115
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.4 117
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ ܝ‬129 É
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 26.8 113
2.2 Tertiary education 7.3 116 É
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 11.1 114 Knowledge and technology outputs 3.6 133 «É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 12.0 107

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 0.4 133 «É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 126
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.1 118 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 19.0 108 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 62 ª
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.0 112 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 132 «É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 0.9 130 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 6.7 132 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬131 É
Infrastructure 22.6 121 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 89 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 34.7 116 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 3.6 103 É
3.1.1 ICT access* 36.7 118 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 3.8 124
3.1.2 ICT use* 45.4 110
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 41.6 107
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 16.9 112
3.1.4 E-participation* 15.1 129 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.2 105 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 11.5 122 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.1 132
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 486.3 111 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 127 É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 0.0 110 «É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 24.5 58 ª
Creative outputs 5.9 [119]
3.3 Ecological sustainability 21.7 60 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 12.3 48 ª
7.1 Intangible assets 4.9 [113]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 32.5 29 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 128 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 12.0 106
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 11.6 127 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 102
7.2 Creative goods and services 0.1 [133]
4.1 Credit 6.9 122 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 20.8 78 É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 8.4 130 «É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP Ա 0.0 62 «É
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 127
4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 13.5 119
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.1 130
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.4 125
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 40.1 119 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 16.3 126 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 7.1 113

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 0.0 109 «É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 260.3 64 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Argentina 76 119

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
59 92 Upper middle LCN 45.5 1,239.5 26,506

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 21.7 123 «É Business sophistication 27.7 60

1.1 Institutional environment 37.3 103 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 31.7 68

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 38.0 114 «É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 18.3 83
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 36.6 84 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 40.2 36
1.2 Regulatory environment 26.8 103 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.2 52
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 23.5 110 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 20.6 69
1.2.2 Rule of law* 30.1 93 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 15.5 49

1.3 Business environment 1.1 132 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 17.6 95

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 0.0 130 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.4 68
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 2.1 83 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 37.0 84
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 31.5 104
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 90
Human capital and research 33.9 55 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 69
5.3 Knowledge absorption 33.9 45
2.1 Education 44.6 81
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.8 13 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.6 49
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 11.5 25 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 16.2 66
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.2 26 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 19.0 9 ªÈ
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.7 82
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 394.8 66
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 11.5 61
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary n/a n/a
2.2 Tertiary education 32.7 69
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 107.1 3 ªÈ Knowledge and technology outputs 18.6 77
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 15.0 103 «É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 3.2 63 6.1 Knowledge creation 13.2 71
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 86
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 24.5 41 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 1,271.8 49 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 47
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.5 57 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 7.0 90
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 40.7 40 È
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 27.7 36 ª
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 35.9 37 ª
6.2 Knowledge impact 24.9 67
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 127 «É
Infrastructure 36.7 77 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.4 41
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 41
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 76.4 53 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 29.5 41
3.1.1 ICT access* 94.9 50
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 17.6 67
3.1.2 ICT use* 67.7 88
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.3 38 È
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 78.9 38
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 38.1 73
3.1.4 E-participation* 64.0 51
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.7 84
3.2 General infrastructure 17.9 103 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.8 46
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 3,132.7 62 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 5.6 52
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 31.8 71
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 17.2 116 «É
Creative outputs 29.9 54
3.3 Ecological sustainability 15.8 88
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 10.7 65 7.1 Intangible assets 36.0 44
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 13.3 79 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 59.0 34
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 63 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 59.6 25 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 1.4 51
Market sophistication 23.0 97 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 54
7.2 Creative goods and services 17.8 59
4.1 Credit 12.1 107 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.0 28 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 21.3 76 «
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 6.3 19 ªÈ
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 16.0 119 «É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 3.3 50 É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 113 «

4.2 Investment 3.5 94 7.3 Online creativity 29.8 53

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 8.4 77 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 4.1 60
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 78 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 17.3 47
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 92 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 68.0 59
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 64
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 53.3 74
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 5.8 102 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 81.4 60
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,239.5 29 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

120 Armenia 63
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
55 79 Upper middle NAWA 2.9 58.5 19,745

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 44.1 77 Business sophistication 22.7 85

1.1 Institutional environment 45.9 81 5.1 Knowledge workers 33.4 61

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 56.0 83 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 18.7 81
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 35.8 89 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 27.5 59
1.2 Regulatory environment 40.2 70 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 41.3 74 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 16.7 73
1.2.2 Rule of law* 39.0 75 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 16.4 44

1.3 Business environment 46.4 65 5.2 Innovation linkages 15.4 106

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 44.4 76 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.5 63
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 48.3 31 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 25.7 104
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 31.8 101
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 92
Human capital and research 25.2 89 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 81
5.3 Knowledge absorption 19.3 97 É
2.1 Education 42.8 87
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 121 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.5 114 É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.8 41 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 12.2 81
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.5 108
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 14.4 63
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.7 54
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 11.6 47
2.2 Tertiary education 29.0 75
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 59.8 56 Knowledge and technology outputs 21.9 60
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 18.4 89
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 7.3 39 È 6.1 Knowledge creation 19.4 57
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 81
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 3.9 81 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 68
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 1,219.9 50 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.5 11 ª
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.2 85 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 14.7 45
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 9.9 76
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 24.1 69
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 3.5 8 ªÈ
Infrastructure 36.2 79 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 75
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 73.8 61 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 4.8 98 É
3.1.1 ICT access* 88.3 71
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 22.2 53
3.1.2 ICT use* 80.7 50
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 69.3 63
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 30.0 89
3.1.4 E-participation* 57.0 64
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 5.0 38 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 17.8 104 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 7.2 8 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 2,823.4 67 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 121 «
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89 «É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 21.9 87
Creative outputs 32.1 46
3.3 Ecological sustainability 17.2 82
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.4 80 7.1 Intangible assets 33.5 52
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 27.1 45 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 126 «
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 108.0 7 ªÈ
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 27.0 83 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.1 40
7.2 Creative goods and services 25.5 [45]
4.1 Credit 27.8 64 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.4 61
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 32.9 61 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 52.6 63 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 3.0 13 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 3.2 16 ª

4.2 Investment 5.1 78 7.3 Online creativity 35.8 41 ª

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 0.6 84 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 4.2 59
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 70 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 30.9 36 ªÈ
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 46 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 72.4 36 ª
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 91
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 48.1 83
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 3.7 87

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 72.0 76 É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 58.5 106

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Australia 23 121

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
30 18 High SEAO 26.5 1,719.3 64,674

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 77.0 15 Business sophistication 48.2 26 É

1.1 Institutional environment 84.0 14 5.1 Knowledge workers 64.9 [18]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 84.0 12 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 51.5 9
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 83.9 14 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 89.4 6 ª 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.9 25
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 91.6 2 ª 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 87.1 16 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 28.7 6 ª

1.3 Business environment 57.5 36 5.2 Innovation linkages 50.3 21

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 70.4 26 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.1 42 É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 44.6 36 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 80.9 12
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 78.5 22
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 13
Human capital and research 58.7 10 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 29 É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 29.3 56 É

2.1 Education 61.7 31
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.1 31
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.2 37
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 11.2 30
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 19.2 55 «
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.0 78 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 20.7 1 ªÈ
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.2 71
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 497.4 10
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary n/a n/a
2.2 Tertiary education 54.1 8
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 106.2 4 ªÈ Knowledge and technology outputs 33.1 28 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 19.1 84 «É

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 23.0 6 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 46.3 17
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.5 39 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 60.3 15 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 29 É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 1.7 23 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 34.7 10
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 65.3 19 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 70.7 6 ª
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 88.2 3 ªÈ
6.2 Knowledge impact 36.9 34
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.3 78 «
Infrastructure 55.4 15 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 2.5 14
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 68 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 95.2 5 ª
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 23.9 50 É
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.8 14
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 16.2 71 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 89.1 21
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.3 35 É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 93.1 7 ª
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 29.2 91 «É
3.1.4 E-participation* 98.8 2 ªÈ
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.0 63 É
3.2 General infrastructure 47.0 24 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.2 77 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 10,417.8 14 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 8.7 33
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 72.7 18
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.4 71 «
Creative outputs 42.1 29 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 24.0 52
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.7 74 «
7.1 Intangible assets 42.4 30
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 14.4 75 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 68.6 20
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 4.4 24 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 50.2 35
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 7.8 28
Market sophistication 53.8 20 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 49
7.2 Creative goods and services 24.4 47 É
4.1 Credit 54.9 16 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.3 67 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 60.6 28 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 2.8 46
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 133.9 11 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 65.0 5
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.5 64
4.2 Investment 33.1 24 7.3 Online creativity 59.0 18
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 116.5 12 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 55.7 10
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 21 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 49.0 23 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 19 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 72.2 38
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 30
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 73.3 17
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.6 7 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 90.9 33
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,719.3 20

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

122 Austria 17
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
19 20 High EUR 9.1 626.5 69,069

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 74.7 18 Business sophistication 51.0 23 É

1.1 Institutional environment 80.5 18 5.1 Knowledge workers 57.2 25 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 78.7 25 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 45.6 21
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 82.3 15 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 42.6 31 É

1.2 Regulatory environment 84.1 15 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 2.2 8 ª

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 75.5 22 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 49.9 31

1.2.2 Rule of law* 92.8 8 ª 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 14.0 56 «É

1.3 Business environment 59.6 34 5.2 Innovation linkages 52.1 17

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 70.9 25 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 5.6 8 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 48.2 32 « 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 69.4 25
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 78.6 21
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 36 É
Human capital and research 59.4 8 ª 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 3.8 11 ª

5.3 Knowledge absorption 43.6 23

2.1 Education 62.8 24
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.7 58 «
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.8 46
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.6 60 «
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 26.7 13
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 3.3 8 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 16.4 31
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ ܝ‬122 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 486.3 19
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 63.7 7 ª
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 9.3 24
2.2 Tertiary education 59.7 4 ªÈ
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 93.9 12 Knowledge and technology outputs 41.8 18
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 30.6 17 È
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 18.7 11 6.1 Knowledge creation 43.2 19
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 6.8 12
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 55.6 18 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.5 12
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 6,669.2 9 ª
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 35 «
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 3.2 8 ª
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 27.9 22
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 57.7 25 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 44.1 18
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 44.5 27
6.2 Knowledge impact 45.7 20
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 107 «
Infrastructure 56.8 10 ª 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.4 27
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 10 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 87.6 17 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 44.5 19
3.1.1 ICT access* 97.2 33
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 36.5 31
3.1.2 ICT use* 89.5 19
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.6 25
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 87.0 19
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 85.2 7 ª
3.1.4 E-participation* 76.7 21
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 8.1 23
3.2 General infrastructure 50.6 14 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.5 31
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 7,147.9 23 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 6.5 42
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 86.4 7
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 26.4 40
Creative outputs 44.5 24
3.3 Ecological sustainability 32.1 37
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 15.4 27 7.1 Intangible assets 43.9 28
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 35.4 24 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 46.9 52 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.6 40 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 42.2 43
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 7.6 29
Market sophistication 45.2 32 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.0 22
7.2 Creative goods and services 31.8 32
4.1 Credit 46.6 29 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.0 29
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 61.3 27 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 5.3 21
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 89.6 32 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 55.6 9
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.9 49
4.2 Investment 21.5 39 É
7.3 Online creativity 58.3 20
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 30.2 47 «É
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 46.7 13
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 22 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 58.2 19
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 31 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 70.1 51 «
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 35
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 67.5 24
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 99.2 3 ªÈ
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 626.5 42

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Azerbaijan 95 123

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
101 82 Upper middle NAWA 10.3 192.1 18,694

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 53.8 51 ª Business sophistication 25.9 67

1.1 Institutional environment 55.1 61 5.1 Knowledge workers 31.8 67

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 67.3 48 ª 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 23.1 64
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 42.9 73 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 33.9 51
1.2 Regulatory environment 32.5 91 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 90 «

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 39.1 78 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 30.8 60

1.2.2 Rule of law* 25.9 105 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 13.7 57

1.3 Business environment 73.9 [15] 5.2 Innovation linkages 32.6 39 ªÈ

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 73.9 19 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.9 46 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 66.8 30 ªÈ
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 73.6 29 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 104
Human capital and research 24.9 94 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 91
5.3 Knowledge absorption 13.2 130 «É
2.1 Education 41.2 91
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.5 68
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.9 105
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 3.4 126 «É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 19.6 53
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.3 125 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 12.7 88
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ ܝ‬128 «É
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 380.7 70
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 8.8 20 ª

2.2 Tertiary education 28.0 82

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 41.8 79 Knowledge and technology outputs 11.1 103
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 25.3 45 ª
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 2.4 76 6.1 Knowledge creation 7.5 97
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 50 ª
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 5.4 73 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 72
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 1,690.7 45 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 49
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.2 95 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 4.5 107
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 5.6 95
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 2.5 74
6.2 Knowledge impact 20.6 94
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.9 28 ª
Infrastructure 27.7 102 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 102
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 62.3 84 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 15.3 74
3.1.1 ICT access* 89.2 69
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 5.2 119 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 65.6 92 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 84
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 57.1 81
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 17.0 111 «É
3.1.4 E-participation* 37.2 92 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.2 114
3.2 General infrastructure 11.7 121 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.4 108
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 2,854.1 65 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 98
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 18.0 112
Creative outputs 14.2 96
3.3 Ecological sustainability 9.0 111 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.6 77 7.1 Intangible assets 16.5 [85]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 2.5 115 É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 83 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 39.9 49 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 17.5 114 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 81
7.2 Creative goods and services 1.7 112 É
4.1 Credit 3.9 [127] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 92
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.0 85 «É
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 18.3 117 É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 3.5 47 É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 107
4.2 Investment 1.0 110 «
7.3 Online creativity 21.9 90
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 2.7 83 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.1 95
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 89 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.6 80
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 60.0 85
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 106 «

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 47.5 84

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 5.3 97 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 80.4 63
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 192.1 75

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

124 Bahrain 72
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
93 49 High NAWA 1.6 96.0 60,715

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 68.1 28 ª Business sophistication 22.8 83 É

1.1 Institutional environment 61.0 50 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 19.5 [105]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 61.3 68 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 21.9 70
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 60.7 40 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 61.9 39 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 81
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 67.3 33 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 21.8 67
1.2.2 Rule of law* 56.4 43 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % n/a n/a

1.3 Business environment 81.4 [4] 5.2 Innovation linkages 29.8 46

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 81.4 7 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.5 123 É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 39.4 76 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 70.6 32
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 19 ª
Human capital and research 28.6 75 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 75 É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 19.0 99 É

2.1 Education 46.7 76 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade n/a n/a
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.0 122 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 3.2 128 «É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 17.4 60 É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.5 54
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 16.3 33
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 4.0 32 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 0.4 84
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 12.7 57
2.2 Tertiary education 33.7 66
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 77.2 28 ª Knowledge and technology outputs 16.8 83 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 16.4 95 É

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 10.6 25 ª 6.1 Knowledge creation 4.5 115 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 121 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 5.2 75 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 64
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 384.0 81 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.1 102 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 5.7 99 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.2 110 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 15.8 59
6.2 Knowledge impact 24.0 70 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.4 43
Infrastructure 51.0 36 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 36
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 77.1 50 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 9.8 88 É
3.1.1 ICT access* 100.0 1 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 21.8 54
3.1.2 ICT use* 92.7 7 ª
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 72.6 54
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 54.3 43
3.1.4 E-participation* 43.0 86 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.0 79
3.2 General infrastructure 67.6 3 ªÈ
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.9 28 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 23,164.7 3 ªÈ
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 6.8 38
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 63.6 33
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 30.9 21 ªÈ
Creative outputs 14.3 95 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 8.3 114 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 4.3 123 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 12.4 95 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.0 131 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % ‫ܝ‬ 72 É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.5 42 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.6 120 «É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 28.3 80 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 121 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 9.1 77 É

4.1 Credit 25.7 [68] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.8 70 É
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 73.9 38 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 9.8 37 É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.0 46
4.2 Investment 18.3 43 7.3 Online creativity 23.1 82 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 70.8 25 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.6 74 É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 38 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 7.5 64 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 48 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 59.3 86 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 34
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 41.1 98 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 3.9 89 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 52.2 99 É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 96.0 91

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Bangladesh 106 125

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
92 114 Lower middle CSA 171.5 1,476.9 8,673

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 30.4 108 Business sophistication 13.5 126 «É

1.1 Institutional environment 30.7 114 5.1 Knowledge workers 9.8 [121]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 37.3 115 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 11.7 102
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 24.1 115 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 22.0 109 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 17.5 119 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 26.6 100 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 1.7 114

1.3 Business environment 38.6 [82] 5.2 Innovation linkages 14.7 109
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 38.6 90 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.3 77
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 21.2 117
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 38.2 84
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 118 «
Human capital and research 11.4 128 «É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 16.0 117

2.1 Education 22.3 129 «É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 107
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.1 120 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 8.5 61
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 6.5 92 «
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.2 128 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 11.9 93
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.4 112
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 29.0 118 É

2.2 Tertiary education 6.6 120 É

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 22.8 98 Knowledge and technology outputs 13.3 92
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 11.1 109 «É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 0.1 112 « 6.1 Knowledge creation 7.3 [98]
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 117
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 5.3 [74] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 3.9 112
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 13.6 60 ª
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 10.6 65 ª
6.2 Knowledge impact 25.9 64 ª
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 4.2 6 ªÈ
Infrastructure 34.1 86 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 76
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 60.3 86 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 6.5 96
3.1.1 ICT access* 58.7 102
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 6.9 108
3.1.2 ICT use* 69.7 86
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 100
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 61.5 74
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 23.8 99
3.1.4 E-participation* 51.2 74 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 0.2 104
3.2 General infrastructure 26.4 83 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.0 84
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 595.8 107 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 119
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 22.7 82
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 31.4 19 ª
Creative outputs 17.7 88
3.3 Ecological sustainability 15.7 89
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 19.7 10 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 23.1 76
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.8 122 É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 49.9 49
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 116 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 6.6 114
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.4 66
Market sophistication 23.9 92 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 63 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 2.1 [110]

4.1 Credit 23.1 76 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 86
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 39.0 82 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 3.1 11 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 0.1 108
4.2 Investment 3.1 99 7.3 Online creativity 22.7 86
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 19.8 63 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.2 120
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 96 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 2.9 97
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 94 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 65.0 69 ª
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 78
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 45.6 89
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % Ա 7.5 116

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 66.6 84
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,476.9 24 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

126 Barbados 77
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
77 77 High LCN 0.2 5.4 18,738

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 55.1 50 Business sophistication 31.1 49

1.1 Institutional environment 64.3 42 5.1 Knowledge workers 28.1 [78]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 73.3 38 ª 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 28.6 50 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 55.2 51 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 9.0 95 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 54.2 49 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 54.4 49 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 54.1 51 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 10.7 70 É

1.3 Business environment 46.8 [64] 5.2 Innovation linkages 40.0 30 ª

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 46.8 70 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.1 83 É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 22.5 114 «É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 29.6 107 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.1 18 ª
Human capital and research 26.8 [80] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 58.1 1 ªÈ

5.3 Knowledge absorption 25.1 72

2.1 Education 53.6 [62]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.4 77
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.1 40
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.2 93
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 21.7 40
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.7 43
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 4.6 26 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 15.3 80 É

2.2 Tertiary education n/a [n/a]

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV n/a n/a Knowledge and technology outputs 23.0 57
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 50.4 13 ª
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 17.1 4 ªÈ
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 14.9 1 ªÈ
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 14.2 47
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 3.4 117 «É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 10.3 [130]
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % n/a n/a
Infrastructure 26.5 108 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 71
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 60.1 88 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 90.3 63 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 8.5 101 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 62.5 95 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.6 26 ª
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 49.0 93 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 38.4 90 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.3 71
3.2 General infrastructure 12.5 [120] 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.4 106
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.6 82 É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 17.9 113 «É
Creative outputs 17.1 89 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 6.9 119 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use n/a n/a 7.1 Intangible assets 8.9 [101]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 3.7 110 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 66 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 21.9 82
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 20.7 107 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.2 99
7.2 Creative goods and services 30.6 38 ª
4.1 Credit 25.6 [69] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.5 54
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 11.3 3 ªÈ
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 73.8 39 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.7 55
4.2 Investment 21.6 38 7.3 Online creativity 20.1 96 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 63.9 30 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 7.8 46
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.2 30 ª
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 5.9 71 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 16 ª
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 46.6 108 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 107 «É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 15.0 127 «É

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 8.9 123 «É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 5.4 133 «É

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Belarus 85 127

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
69 102 Upper middle EUR 9.1 221.2 24,017

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 12.7 132 «É Business sophistication 23.6 81

1.1 Institutional environment 25.5 123 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 47.7 38 È

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 29.3 119 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 42.1 26 ªÈ
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 21.8 117 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 31.5 54
1.2 Regulatory environment 7.8 130 «É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.4 44
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 6.9 131 «É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 45.0 38
1.2.2 Rule of law* 8.8 127 «É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 21.1 29 ªÈ

1.3 Business environment 4.9 [129] 5.2 Innovation linkages 4.2 [130]
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† n/a n/a 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.8 100
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 4.9 82 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† n/a n/a
5.2.3 State of cluster development † n/a n/a
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 85
Human capital and research 39.2 43 È 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 74
5.3 Knowledge absorption 18.8 100 É
2.1 Education 62.3 27 ªÈ
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.5 72
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.2 39
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 5.4 106
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.7 100
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 14.0 68
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.1 74
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science Ա 472.3 35 È
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 9.7 30 ª

2.2 Tertiary education 46.4 20 ªÈ

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 70.9 42 Knowledge and technology outputs 28.4 46
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 32.0 13 ªÈ
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 7.7 37 È 6.1 Knowledge creation 16.9 62
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.7 37 ª
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 9.0 61 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 67
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 1,381.8 48 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 12 ª
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.5 59 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 4.4 108
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 9.8 78
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 14.3 61
6.2 Knowledge impact 22.3 81
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.1 52
Infrastructure 34.4 84 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 113 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 66.6 78 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 27.6 44
3.1.1 ICT access* 96.7 38
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 46.0 17 ªÈ
3.1.2 ICT use* 79.9 55
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.3 43 È
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 48.1 95 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 65.9 29 ªÈ
3.1.4 E-participation* 41.9 87
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 2.0 60
3.2 General infrastructure 24.4 88 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 5.9 16 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 4,433.0 52 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 35.2 1 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 27.3 76
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.4 70
Creative outputs 15.3 92
3.3 Ecological sustainability 12.2 104
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 6.7 102 É
7.1 Intangible assets 7.4 106 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 4.9 105 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.4 43 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 17.1 95 É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 22.8 98 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 56
7.2 Creative goods and services 9.1 [78]
4.1 Credit 8.0 120 É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.3 72
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 15.9 80 É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 29.2 98 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.0 59 «
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 0.9 48
4.2 Investment 0.7 113 «
7.3 Online creativity 37.3 37 ªÈ
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 3.7 81 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 Ա 3.5 65
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 101 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 23.3 41 È
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 103 «
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 85.1 4 ªÈ
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP Ա 0.0 100
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 59.7 53
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.0 67

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 90.8 35
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 221.2 70

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

128 Belgium 24
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
22 26 High EUR 11.7 769.7 65,813

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 72.4 21 Business sophistication 56.3 15

1.1 Institutional environment 76.0 24 5.1 Knowledge workers 77.1 5 ªÈ

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 76.0 34 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 49.2 12 ª
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 76.0 25 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 57.8 9 ª

1.2 Regulatory environment 78.6 21 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 2.5 5 ª

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 74.7 23 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 64.4 8 ª

1.2.2 Rule of law* 82.5 20 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 28.0 11 ª

1.3 Business environment 62.4 [30] 5.2 Innovation linkages 49.5 22

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 62.4 38 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 4.5 16
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 78.2 16
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 69.0 35
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 26
Human capital and research 56.3 13 ª 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 2.7 17
5.3 Knowledge absorption 42.4 25
2.1 Education 70.2 4 ªÈ
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.7 55
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 6.2 13 È
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 10.1 38
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 26.1 17
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.8 16
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 18.9 10 ª
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.4 115 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 486.3 20
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 62.0 9
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 8.7 19 È

2.2 Tertiary education 36.7 53

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 82.7 19 Knowledge and technology outputs 44.2 15
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 18.6 87 «É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 9.8 27 6.1 Knowledge creation 48.2 14
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.5 17
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 61.9 12 ª
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.7 17
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 6,963.9 7 ª
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 3.4 4 ª
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 28.5 19
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 63.7 20 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 54.2 14
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 56.8 16
6.2 Knowledge impact 47.4 17
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.3 79 «
Infrastructure 48.9 44 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.5 25
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 9 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 72.0 68 «É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 42.1 23
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.6 18
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 37.0 30
3.1.2 ICT use* 78.6 63 «É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.8 22
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 65.7 67 «É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 72.8 20
3.1.4 E-participation* 44.2 83 «É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 12.7 14
3.2 General infrastructure 52.4 13 ª
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.3 33
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 8,032.5 19 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.3 67 «
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 86.4 7
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 27.1 35
Creative outputs 37.9 36 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 22.4 59
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 11.4 58 7.1 Intangible assets 33.7 50 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 25.4 50 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 51.5 46 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.7 60 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 26.5 73 «
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 4.5 33 É

Market sophistication 38.2 46 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.9 41
7.2 Creative goods and services 29.1 40 É
4.1 Credit 25.5 [70] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.1 24
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 5.0 24
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 73.6 40 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 45.1 17
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.8 51
4.2 Investment 23.8 34 É
7.3 Online creativity 55.1 23
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 75.2 24 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 38.2 18
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 16 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 64.6 13 ª
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 37 É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 62.5 78 «É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 39 É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 65.3 28

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 89.8 40
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 769.7 36

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Benin 119 129

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
125 109 Lower middle SSA 14.1 59.2 4,305

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 47.3 64 ªÈ Business sophistication 19.2 108

1.1 Institutional environment 45.8 82 5.1 Knowledge workers 10.7 [118]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 52.0 89 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 6.1 117 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 39.7 80 ª 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 20.0 80
1.2 Regulatory environment 29.6 95 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 32.7 91 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 26.6 101 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 1.2 116

1.3 Business environment 66.4 [24] 5.2 Innovation linkages 20.9 80 ª

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 66.4 33 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.3 131 «É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 38.6 78 ª
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 42.8 75 ª
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
Human capital and research 16.7 112 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 83
5.3 Knowledge absorption 25.9 68 ª
2.1 Education 32.5 115
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 119 É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.2 101
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.1 121
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 8.2 91
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.9 15 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 10.4 101
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.5 85
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 16.2 85
2.2 Tertiary education 17.7 103
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 10.2 116 É Knowledge and technology outputs 9.7 117
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 21.8 66 ª
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 3.1 64 ª 6.1 Knowledge creation 4.5 116
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 112
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 74 «É
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 8.4 80
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.1 113
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 23.7 72 ª
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.8 12 ªÈ
Infrastructure 23.7 118 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 109
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 33.9 117 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 33.4 121 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 1.0 133 «É
3.1.2 ICT use* 22.2 118 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 93
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 47.4 97
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 32.6 101
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 127
3.2 General infrastructure 31.3 65 ª
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.2 119
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 84.6 124 «É
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 118
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 36.4 65
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 32.4 16 ª
Creative outputs 3.8 129 «É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 5.9 127 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 8.6 86 7.1 Intangible assets 0.6 130 «É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.1 129 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 118 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.9 126 «
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 13.7 123 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 117
7.2 Creative goods and services 1.6 [114]
4.1 Credit 14.7 97 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 89
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 17.1 118 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 2.4 18 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 128
4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 12.5 122
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.3 116
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.8 118
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 36.5 122 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 12.7 128 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 9.6 125 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 59.2 105

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

130 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 100

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
106 88 Lower middle LCN 12.2 125.4 10,340

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 15.5 127 «É Business sophistication 22.7 84

1.1 Institutional environment 34.0 107 5.1 Knowledge workers 42.7 [42]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 38.7 112 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 14.4 93
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 29.3 101 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 49.9 18
1.2 Regulatory environment 8.3 129 «É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 10.0 129 «É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 6.5 131 «É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 13.3 59 ªÈ

1.3 Business environment 4.2 [130] 5.2 Innovation linkages 9.7 125 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 4.2 128 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.3 75 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 14.0 124 «É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 19.8 120 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 108
Human capital and research 31.5 [67] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 15.7 123

2.1 Education 62.9 [23]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.3 86
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 7.7 4 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.2 83
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 22.9 34 ª
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.8 98
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ ܝ‬124
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 4.0 75
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 18.3 94
2.2 Tertiary education n/a [n/a]
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV n/a n/a Knowledge and technology outputs 9.5 120
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 3.3 117
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 110
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.2 116 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 62.4 97 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 59
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 2.0 123
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 6.4 91
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 19.5 105
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬109
Infrastructure 21.5 124 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 48 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 45.0 108 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 10.4 84
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 57.8 104
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 5.7 115
3.1.2 ICT use* n/a n/a
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 81
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 46.9 98
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 18.3 108
3.1.4 E-participation* 30.2 105
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.4 97
3.2 General infrastructure 7.5 129 «
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.4 111
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 941.6 99 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.9 93
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 13.6 102
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 15.7 122 «É
Creative outputs 13.1 102
3.3 Ecological sustainability 11.9 105
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.6 75 7.1 Intangible assets 15.9 [90]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 11.4 82 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 96 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 40.1 48 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 54.8 19 ªÈ 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 95
7.2 Creative goods and services 4.5 101
4.1 Credit 62.3 10 ªÈ
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 107 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.9 68
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 71.2 45 ª
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 17.2 1 ªÈ
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.6 58 ª

4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 16.0 111

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.9 98
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.2 86
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 43.0 115 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 47.4 85
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 4.8 94

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 77.6 69
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 125.4 86

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Bosnia and Herzegovina 80 131

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
84 74 Upper middle EUR 3.2 68.0 19,634

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 30.0 110 Business sophistication 19.7 104 É

1.1 Institutional environment 33.4 109 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 29.7 73

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 50.7 92 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 25.9 56
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 16.2 128 «É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 24.6 67
1.2 Regulatory environment 36.4 80 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 63
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 37.7 81 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 38.7 46
1.2.2 Rule of law* 35.0 83 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 9.7 77

1.3 Business environment 20.1 118 « 5.2 Innovation linkages 13.7 111
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 13.0 124 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.6 58
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 27.2 58 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 10.3 127 «É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 32.4 100
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 60
Human capital and research 30.4 72 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 66
5.3 Knowledge absorption 15.8 121 «É
2.1 Education 57.2 51
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 100 É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP n/a n/a
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.1 96
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 33.0 4 ªÈ
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.4 112 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 13.3 77
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.5 66
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science Ա 402.6 61
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 11.5 60
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 8.2 13 ª

2.2 Tertiary education 32.0 71

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 44.6 74 Knowledge and technology outputs 20.3 71
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 24.5 49
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 7.2 40 È 6.1 Knowledge creation 9.5 85
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 71
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 2.1 90 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 89
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 535.0 70 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.2 88 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 10.9 68
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 5.1 96
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 20.1 100
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.4 42 ª
Infrastructure 40.6 69 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 101
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 63.8 83 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 16.6 70
3.1.1 ICT access* 89.4 68
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 31.3 39 ª
3.1.2 ICT use* 69.9 85
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 65
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 43.6 103 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 62.3 32 ªÈ
3.1.4 E-participation* 52.3 71
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.9 50
3.2 General infrastructure 33.1 58 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.1 40 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 5,040.2 42 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 19.6 9 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 40.9 60
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 26.7 37 ª
Creative outputs 14.7 94
3.3 Ecological sustainability 24.7 50
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 7.1 99 É
7.1 Intangible assets 13.5 94
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 17.6 65 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % Ա ‫ ܝ‬76 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 5.0 22 ª
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 13.0 104 É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 46.5 29 ªÈ 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 60
7.2 Creative goods and services 11.7 68
4.1 Credit 31.5 54 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.2 73
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 52.7 36 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 3.9 34
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 48.2 71 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 2.4 17 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.3 71
4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 19.9 98
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.9 70
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 9.7 57
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 47.2 107 «É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 61.6 43
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.5 54

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 94.9 17 ª
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 68.0 101

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

132 Botswana 87
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
110 64 Upper middle SSA 2.5 51.9 19,394

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 64.3 36 ªÈ Business sophistication 27.4 62

1.1 Institutional environment 65.4 41 ªÈ 5.1 Knowledge workers 44.0 [41]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 74.7 35 ªÈ 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 21.8 72
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 56.1 47 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 34.6 50
1.2 Regulatory environment 57.7 44 È 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 58.1 44 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 57.2 42 ªÈ 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 17.5 40 ªÈ

1.3 Business environment 69.8 [21] 5.2 Innovation linkages 15.6 104
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 69.8 28 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.7 105
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 13.3 125 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 49.6 60
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 61
Human capital and research 29.0 [74] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 70
5.3 Knowledge absorption 22.6 80
2.1 Education 69.0 [6]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.5 24 ª
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 8.1 2 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.2 117 É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.8 95
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 11.4 97 É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ ܝ‬123 É
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 11.5 45
2.2 Tertiary education 17.9 99 É
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 22.9 97 É Knowledge and technology outputs 10.6 112 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 19.7 76

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 2.5 74 6.1 Knowledge creation 6.4 104
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 90
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 56
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 9.1 77
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 5.1 96
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 20.4 97
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.0 93
Infrastructure 29.3 97 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 91
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 45.3 106 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 22.2 53
3.1.1 ICT access* 83.2 81
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 4.9 122 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 63.1 94 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 98
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 19.8 130 «É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 20.0 107 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 15.1 129 «É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.5 91
3.2 General infrastructure 30.2 70 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.3 117
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 962.1 98 É
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 129 «
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 45.5 56
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 27.4 33 ª
Creative outputs 10.3 108 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 12.3 102
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 15.3 29 ª
7.1 Intangible assets 16.5 87
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.1 130 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % Ա 1.8 70
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 94 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 18.2 93 É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 28.7 79 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 110
7.2 Creative goods and services 2.7 [106]
4.1 Credit 18.8 89 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 87
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 29.8 96 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP Ա 2.7 15 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 84
4.2 Investment 9.4 62 7.3 Online creativity 5.5 125 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 63.8 31 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.3 90
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.9 106
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 85 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 13.3 125 «É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP Ա 0.0 94
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 58.0 59
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 17 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 81.3 61
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 51.9 112

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Brazil 50 133

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
49 58 Upper middle LCN 211.1 4,101.0 20,079

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 31.8 103 « Business sophistication 36.2 39 È

1.1 Institutional environment 42.3 92 5.1 Knowledge workers 45.7 [40]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 56.0 83 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 24.6 60
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 28.6 103 «É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 36.3 81 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 36.0 85 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 43.2 41
1.2.2 Rule of law* 36.5 79 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 14.8 52

1.3 Business environment 16.7 125 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 22.6 69

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 23.5 115 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.7 56
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 9.9 77 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 41.0 75
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 46.8 65
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 74
Human capital and research 33.9 57 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 49
5.3 Knowledge absorption 40.1 29 È
2.1 Education 50.6 69
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.8 15 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.8 19 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 13.4 19 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 20.9 44
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.4 23 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 15.6 42
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.4 45
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 397.3 64 «
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 26.1 51
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 16.3 86
2.2 Tertiary education 20.4 93
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 60.4 55 Knowledge and technology outputs 24.5 50
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 15.9 97 «
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 0.2 107 «É 6.1 Knowledge creation 20.2 56
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 53
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 30.6 36 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 58
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 888.5 54 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 27
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 1.1 35 È
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 11.4 63
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 48.9 33 È
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 39.4 24 È
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 45.7 26 È
6.2 Knowledge impact 37.6 30 È
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.2 86
Infrastructure 45.5 55 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.7 22 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 42
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 84.5 29 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 35.7 33
3.1.1 ICT access* 85.8 78
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 15.5 75
3.1.2 ICT use* 74.3 75
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.2 44
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 88.5 14 ªÈ
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 38.9 69
3.1.4 E-participation* 89.5 11 ªÈ
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.1 58
3.2 General infrastructure 25.2 86 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.2 76
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 3,145.0 61 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.9 59
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 50.0 50
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 18.4 108 «
Creative outputs 32.3 42
3.3 Ecological sustainability 26.6 46
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 10.6 66 7.1 Intangible assets 45.8 26
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 43.2 17 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 65.6 26
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 75 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 92.7 9 ªÈ
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 3.5 39
Market sophistication 38.2 47 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 48
7.2 Creative goods and services 7.4 85
4.1 Credit 20.8 81 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.5 52
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 37.6 57 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 1.1 65 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 71.8 43 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 6.2 44
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.0 60 «
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 85
4.2 Investment 16.8 45 7.3 Online creativity 30.2 52
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 52.6 36 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 5.3 53
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 53 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 13.5 50
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 50 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 71.9 39
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 27
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 77.0 15 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 5.4 100 «É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 92.1 27
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 4,101.0 8 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

134 Brunei Darussalam 88

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
123 55 High SEAO 0.5 32.0 72,610

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 70.0 25 ª Business sophistication 23.5 82 É

1.1 Institutional environment 89.6 5 ªÈ 5.1 Knowledge workers 31.9 [66]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 98.0 2 ªÈ 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 35.5 41
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 81.1 16 ª 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 70.2 28 ª 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 69.9 29 ª 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 0.0 98 «É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 70.6 29 ª 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 13.0 61 É

1.3 Business environment 50.1 [57] 5.2 Innovation linkages 26.1 56

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 50.1 61 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.3 36
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 51.7 51
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 46.3 66
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 59
Human capital and research 33.9 56 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 12.5 132 «É

2.1 Education 54.1 61
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 103
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.4 58
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 3.0 129 É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 24.0 28
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.3 121 É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 13.7 72 É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.5 87
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 439.1 44
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 7.2 3 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 41.0 36

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 32.7 89 É Knowledge and technology outputs 9.8 115 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 38.4 3 ªÈ

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 3.7 58 6.1 Knowledge creation 8.2 91 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 128 «É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 6.6 71 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 513.6 73 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.3 76 É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 13.8 49
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.3 108 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 17.1 54
6.2 Knowledge impact 19.0 107 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬120 É
Infrastructure 41.8 65 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 67
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 72.6 65 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 96.9 34
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 2.3 129 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 92.7 6 ª
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 54.4 86 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 46.5 80 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.2 103 É
3.2 General infrastructure 47.4 23 ª
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.0 133 «É
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 12,809.0 11 ª
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 3.0 78
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 29.1 30 ªÈ
Creative outputs 5.1 [124]
3.3 Ecological sustainability 5.4 129 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 6.6 104 7.1 Intangible assets 1.7 [122]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.0 132 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 85 É
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 5.7 115 É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 21.2 [105] 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 126 «É

7.2 Creative goods and services 0.3 [128]

4.1 Credit 9.1 [113] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 106 É
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 31.6 92 É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 114
4.2 Investment 4.5 [86] 7.3 Online creativity 16.5 109 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 3.2 66 É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 49 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 2.5 99 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 43.8 113 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 50.2 80
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.0 3 ªÈ

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 32.0 126

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Bulgaria 38 135

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
32 50 Upper middle EUR 6.8 216.5 33,780

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 41.8 83 Business sophistication 32.1 44

1.1 Institutional environment 50.5 77 5.1 Knowledge workers 37.1 56

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 64.0 63 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 32.6 45 È
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 36.9 82 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 15.5 89 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 45.5 62 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.5 38
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 50.3 56 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 32.9 57
1.2.2 Rule of law* 40.8 69 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 20.5 31 È

1.3 Business environment 29.6 98 « 5.2 Innovation linkages 26.3 55

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 33.1 99 « 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.0 43
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 26.1 60 « 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 47.3 58
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 51.7 57
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 76
Human capital and research 32.3 62 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 42
5.3 Knowledge absorption 33.0 49
2.1 Education 50.6 68
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.6 66
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.3 60
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.8 57
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 25.9 18 ªÈ
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.2 68
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 13.9 70
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.9 34
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 414.2 52
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 51.9 24 È
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 11.4 43
2.2 Tertiary education 35.0 58
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 74.0 32 Knowledge and technology outputs 31.7 30 È

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 20.4 74 «

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 8.0 35 È 6.1 Knowledge creation 19.1 58
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 58
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 11.3 57 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 48
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 2,704.8 33 È
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 19
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.8 46 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 13.3 52
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 15.9 53
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 5.3 71
6.2 Knowledge impact 30.2 51
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.9 11 ª
Infrastructure 54.4 22 ªÈ 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 78
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 79.9 45 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 29.5 40
3.1.1 ICT access* 94.3 51
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 45.8 18 ªÈ
3.1.2 ICT use* 84.2 37 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.4 29 È
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 67.9 64
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 58.6 39
3.1.4 E-participation* 73.3 29
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 4.6 40
3.2 General infrastructure 33.5 57 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 5.2 20 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 7,763.3 22 ªÈ
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 33.9 2 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 50.0 50
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 20.8 94 «
Creative outputs 42.9 27 È
3.3 Ecological sustainability 49.9 3 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 8.1 89 «
7.1 Intangible assets 49.7 22 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 29.0 39 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 62.1 31
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 12.3 1 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 68.3 20 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 37.7 50 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 6.8 12 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 33.3 23 ªÈ

4.1 Credit 38.0 37 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 2.0 12 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 61.8 24 È
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 5.2 22 È
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 44.9 75 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.0 45
4.2 Investment 11.5 56 7.3 Online creativity 38.9 35 È
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 20.9 60 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 12.5 39
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 36 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 33.2 34 È
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 40 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 70.9 44
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 69
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 63.5 34
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 95.3 14 ªÈ
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 216.5 71

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

136 Burkina Faso 129

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
124 127 Low SSA 23.0 62.8 2,683

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 31.2 105 Business sophistication 11.6 131 «É

1.1 Institutional environment 22.9 125 5.1 Knowledge workers 8.4 [124]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 23.3 126 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 11.4 105
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 22.4 116 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 28.0 99 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 29.5 98 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 26.4 102 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 1.0 118

1.3 Business environment 42.8 75 ª 5.2 Innovation linkages 5.0 129 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 44.7 74 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.3 126 É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 40.9 41 ªÈ 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 16.1 122 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 1.3 129 «É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
Human capital and research 19.8 103 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 21.4 87

2.1 Education 37.7 107
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 115
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.3 35 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 5.5 105
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 16.2 65
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.9 34 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 8.1 109
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ ܝ‬121
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 18.9 95 È

2.2 Tertiary education 20.2 94 È

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 9.7 118 Knowledge and technology outputs 9.9 114
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 25.3 43 ª
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 1.8 80 6.1 Knowledge creation 5.1 111
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 109
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 1.3 97 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 87 È
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 74 «É
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.3 81 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 8.9 78 ª
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 5.0 99
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 18.0 112
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.9 56 ª
Infrastructure 12.0 132 «É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 118
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 18.5 130 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 12.0 127
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 6.7 110
3.1.2 ICT use* 10.2 123 «
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 96
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 30.7 122
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 24.2 98
3.1.4 E-participation* 20.9 123
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 125
3.2 General infrastructure 15.7 113 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.9 86 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 126
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 9.1 105 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 21.1 92
Creative outputs 4.7 126
3.3 Ecological sustainability 1.7 132 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use n/a n/a 7.1 Intangible assets 1.0 127
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 2.6 113 É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 129 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.3 124
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 16.6 115 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 106
7.2 Creative goods and services 2.3 [108]
4.1 Credit 20.4 85 ªÈ
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.2 80
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 21.8 75 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 31.3 94 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 2.8 14 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 123
4.2 Investment 4.6 [83] 7.3 Online creativity 14.5 117
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 Ա 0.0 131 «
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.1 130 «
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 65 ª
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 43.5 114
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 103
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 24.6 118
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 6.6 109

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 62.8 102

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Burundi 127 137

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
128 124 Low SSA 13.7 11.6 890

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 27.1 115 Business sophistication 15.2 122

1.1 Institutional environment 21.2 126 5.1 Knowledge workers 10.7 117
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 31.3 118 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 2.7 127 «É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 11.0 131 «É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 32.0 52
1.2 Regulatory environment 12.1 125 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 82
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 16.9 120 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 8.8 78 È

1.2.2 Rule of law* 7.2 130 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 0.7 122

1.3 Business environment 48.1 [62] 5.2 Innovation linkages 17.8 92

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 48.1 68 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.2 81
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 30.4 97
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 29.4 108
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
Human capital and research 18.7 105 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.1 108

2.1 Education 39.2 [101]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 117
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.8 45 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.5 76 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.5 55 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 10.2 103
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.4 113
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 1.5 81
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 26.4 112
2.2 Tertiary education 16.0 106
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 6.5 122 Knowledge and technology outputs 7.1 132 «É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 19.7 77

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 4.8 52 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 6.9 101
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.2 95
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.9 101 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 23.2 105 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.3 36 ª
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.2 84 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 6.1 94
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 0.9 130 «É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 12.5 126 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬125 É
Infrastructure 23.6 119 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 98 È
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 20.5 129 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 1.2 131 «
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 1.8 130 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 21.5 119
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 92
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 26.8 127
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 32.6 101
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.0 128 É
3.2 General infrastructure 30.9 [68] 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.3 114
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.6 100
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.9 62 ª
Creative outputs 5.8 120
3.3 Ecological sustainability 19.4 69 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use n/a n/a 7.1 Intangible assets 1.6 124
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 29.2 38 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 92 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 4.6 121
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 15.3 118 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.2 98
7.2 Creative goods and services 4.7 [98]
4.1 Credit 8.5 116 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.3 66 ª
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 42.2 77 È
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP Ա 0.3 47 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 119
4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 15.2 114
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.1 129
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.2 128
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 45.3 111
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 22.1 123
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 7.1 112

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 11.6 131 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

138 Cabo Verde 90

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
113 68 Lower middle SSA 0.5 5.7 9,909

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 56.7 45 ªÈ Business sophistication 22.2 89

1.1 Institutional environment 56.6 56 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 23.9 [94]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 70.0 40 ªÈ 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 17.1 87
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 43.3 71 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 51.5 54 ªÈ 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 48.8 57 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 54.3 50 ªÈ 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 7.6 87

1.3 Business environment 61.8 [31] 5.2 Innovation linkages 19.8 86

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 61.8 39 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.8 102
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 34.3 91
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 37.8 88
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
Human capital and research 20.3 102 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 23.0 78

2.1 Education 48.1 72
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.3 89
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 6.0 15 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 3.7 125 «
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 14.1 73
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.8 36 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 11.9 94
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 4.6 27 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 15.3 79
2.2 Tertiary education 12.5 109
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 20.2 103 Knowledge and technology outputs 12.0 100
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 16.1 96 É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 1.4 85 6.1 Knowledge creation 10.1 [83]
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 85
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.3 112 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 117.9 91 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 11.2 67
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 0.0 133 «É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 19.9 102
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬99
Infrastructure 51.1 34 ªÈ 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 51 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 47.2 104 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 10.3 85
3.1.1 ICT access* 72.7 91
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 5.9 113
3.1.2 ICT use* 48.7 108
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 102
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 44.4 100
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 23.3 116
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.0 133 «É
3.2 General infrastructure 100.0 [1] 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.0 83
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 5.7 51 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 46.2 1 ªÈ
Creative outputs 8.3 [111]
3.3 Ecological sustainability 6.2 124 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use n/a n/a 7.1 Intangible assets 12.0 [96]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 8.1 91 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 101 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 19.9 88
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 21.9 [103] 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 1.1 57
7.2 Creative goods and services 5.9 [90]
4.1 Credit 19.5 [88] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.4 60
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 58.1 54 ª
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 132 «

4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 3.2 127 «É

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.1 77 È
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.3 85
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 24.4 120
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 11.6 130 «É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 64.7 89
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 5.7 132 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Cambodia 103 139

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
103 97 Lower middle SEAO 17.4 98.3 6,087

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 37.6 89 Business sophistication 14.4 124 É

1.1 Institutional environment 50.1 78 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 9.0 122 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 65.3 55 ªÈ 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 5.9 118 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 34.8 93 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 10.0 94 É

1.2 Regulatory environment 21.1 113 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 84
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 23.2 111 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 19.4 70
1.2.2 Rule of law* 19.0 112 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 2.1 110

1.3 Business environment 41.8 [76] 5.2 Innovation linkages 17.3 96

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 41.8 83 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.8 101
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 25.3 105
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 41.7 80
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 46 ªÈ
Human capital and research 16.8 111 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 62 È

5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.0 109

2.1 Education 32.0 [117]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 108
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 1.7 124 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 3.8 124
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.6 104
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 13.0 7 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 337.4 86 «É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 4.3 74
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 9.9 34 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 17.8 100

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 15.0 108 Knowledge and technology outputs 12.3 98
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 23.2 58
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.3 106 « 6.1 Knowledge creation 2.7 120
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 128 «É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.5 109 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 30.8 102 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.1 99 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 3.4 114
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 5.0 99
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 22.0 87
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.4 19 ª
Infrastructure 27.3 103 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 117 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 49.9 103 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 65.5 97
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 12.1 85
3.1.2 ICT use* 71.7 82
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 80
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 35.7 116
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 33.3 82
3.1.4 E-participation* 26.7 108
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 4.1 45 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 16.0 112 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.4 107
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 612.5 106 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.9 79
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 13.6 102 «
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 24.3 60
Creative outputs 11.6 106
3.3 Ecological sustainability 15.9 85
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 8.1 90 7.1 Intangible assets 7.7 104
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 23.4 54 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 86 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 28.6 67
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 42.9 39 ªÈ 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.3 96
7.2 Creative goods and services 6.6 [88]
4.1 Credit 83.6 2 ªÈ
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 180.0 5 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 31.7 1 ªÈ
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.5 62
4.2 Investment 2.6 104 7.3 Online creativity 24.5 69
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.4 110
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 88 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 2.3 101
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 88 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 70.8 45 ª
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP Ա 0.0 83
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 42.6 96
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.1 68 È

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 98.3 90

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

140 Cameroon 123

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
120 120 Lower middle SSA 28.4 133.3 4,661

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 33.5 98 Business sophistication 24.6 74 ª

1.1 Institutional environment 30.8 113 5.1 Knowledge workers 31.4 [69]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 40.7 110 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 27.2 53 ªÈ
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 21.0 119 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 37.6 43
1.2 Regulatory environment 16.0 122 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 18.2 117 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 13.9 122 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 2.0 112

1.3 Business environment 53.7 51 ª 5.2 Innovation linkages 19.2 87

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 44.4 77 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.7 104
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 63.1 17 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 47.6 57 ª
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 39.9 83
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 113
Human capital and research 16.5 [114] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 95
5.3 Knowledge absorption 23.1 77 ª
2.1 Education 42.5 [89]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 101
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.6 110
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 5.0 109
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.0 31 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 12.1 91
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.9 77 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 17.2 89
2.2 Tertiary education 7.0 118 É
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 14.3 109 Knowledge and technology outputs 9.6 119
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 2.8 69 6.1 Knowledge creation 8.0 92
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 84
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 78
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 74 «É
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 11.8 60 ª
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 7.3 88
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 18.4 111
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.0 94
Infrastructure 18.5 129 «É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 90
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 29.2 124 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 39.9 116
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 2.4 127 «
3.1.2 ICT use* 17.3 122 «É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 74
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 32.8 118
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 0.0 120 «É
3.1.4 E-participation* 26.7 108
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 0.1 124
3.2 General infrastructure 4.7 131 «É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.8 91
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 291.9 116 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.6 101
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 0.0 110 «É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 18.2 110 É
Creative outputs 6.7 117
3.3 Ecological sustainability 21.5 62 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.4 81 7.1 Intangible assets 1.6 123 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 36.2 22 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 97 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 5.2 118
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 10.5 130 «É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 101
7.2 Creative goods and services 4.2 [104]
4.1 Credit 22.8 77 ª
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.3 70
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 54.5 33 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 14.7 123 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP Ա 1.0 30 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 0.0 126 «

4.2 Investment 3.1 98 7.3 Online creativity 19.2 102

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 Ա 0.5 105
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 83 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.4 111
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 82 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 55.8 95
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 82
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 5.6 133 «É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % Ա 11.6 128 «É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 133.3 84

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Canada 14 141

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
20 8 High NAC 39.3 2,379.0 59,813

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 78.2 14 Business sophistication 56.8 13

1.1 Institutional environment 84.5 13 5.1 Knowledge workers 53.8 30 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 84.0 12 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 43.7 25
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 84.9 11 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 87.3 11 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 1.0 21
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 85.9 9 ª 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 46.9 35 É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 88.8 12 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 20.3 32

1.3 Business environment 62.7 29 5.2 Innovation linkages 70.0 3 ªÈ

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 71.0 24 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 4.0 20
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 54.3 22 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 88.1 5 ª
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 91.9 6 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 1 ªÈ
Human capital and research 58.4 11 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 2.1 20
5.3 Knowledge absorption 46.7 17
2.1 Education 66.3 12
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 2.5 9 ª
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.1 66 «
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 10.8 32
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.4 56 É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 16.0 38
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.5 63 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 506.4 7
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 62.8 8
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 9.4 25
2.2 Tertiary education 50.2 13
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 77.8 27 Knowledge and technology outputs 41.4 20
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 26.2 38
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 17.4 12 6.1 Knowledge creation 46.6 16
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.0 31
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 58.6 16 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 25 É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 5,423.9 16 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.7 21 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 27.4 23
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 66.8 17 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 80.5 4 ªÈ
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 84.9 4 ª
6.2 Knowledge impact 49.0 14
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 102 «
Infrastructure 54.7 21 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 2.3 15
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.7 5 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 85.8 21 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 31.8 36
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.7 17
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 28.6 45
3.1.2 ICT use* 77.4 68 «É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 1.3 17
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 83.5 27
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 57.6 41 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 82.6 14
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 5.4 37
3.2 General infrastructure 60.0 10 È
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.2 54
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 16,850.8 6 ªÈ
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.6 83 «É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 86.4 7
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.8 63 «
Creative outputs 44.1 25
3.3 Ecological sustainability 18.4 72 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 6.1 108 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 40.2 35
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 35.5 23 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 72.0 14
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 99 «É
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 23.8 77 «
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 12.2 13
Market sophistication 67.2 4 ª 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 89 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 32.8 25

4.1 Credit 63.3 [8] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.1 22
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 63.3 21 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 4.7 30
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 61.2 7
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.8 52
4.2 Investment 60.9 11 7.3 Online creativity 63.3 13
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 149.7 8 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 51.7 11
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 13 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 66.6 11
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 1 ªÈ
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 71.5 42
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 10
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 77.5 14
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.2 50

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 95.0 15
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 2,379.0 16

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

142 Chile 51
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
58 46 High LCN 19.7 597.5 29,935

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 56.3 48 Business sophistication 30.5 51

1.1 Institutional environment 62.5 47 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 34.7 59

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 66.7 51 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 33.5 43
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 58.3 44 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 65.6 34 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 59 É

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 67.5 32 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 34.7 55

1.2.2 Rule of law* 63.6 37 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 13.2 60 É

1.3 Business environment 40.9 78 5.2 Innovation linkages 20.1 85 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 35.4 95 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.9 95 «É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 46.4 34 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 37.9 80 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 42.6 76
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 66
Human capital and research 33.5 58 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 44
5.3 Knowledge absorption 36.8 38
2.1 Education 50.3 70 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.6 18 ª
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.0 70
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.0 70
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 20.1 49
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.4 21 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 16.9 22 ª
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 5.5 19 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 434.4 46 É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 26.6 50
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 17.3 91 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 36.1 54

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 99.3 7 ªÈ Knowledge and technology outputs 21.2 65 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 21.4 70

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 1.4 86 «É 6.1 Knowledge creation 16.7 63
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 69
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 14.2 50 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 38
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 512.0 74 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 43
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.3 69 É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 16.9 41
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 24.8 38
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 46.3 25 ª
6.2 Knowledge impact 35.1 40
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.0 55
Infrastructure 45.6 54 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.7 35
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.5 23 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 82.3 37 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 21.5 56
3.1.1 ICT access* 91.7 59 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 11.7 88 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 87.9 25
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 69
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 81.0 30
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 35.4 77 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 68.6 43
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.1 73
3.2 General infrastructure 30.0 71 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.5 103 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 4,440.0 51 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.8 63
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 40.9 60 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 24.4 59
Creative outputs 27.5 59
3.3 Ecological sustainability 24.5 51
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 12.6 47 7.1 Intangible assets 36.5 43
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 28.1 42 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 43.5 55 «
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.7 58 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 75.3 17 ªÈ
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 3.4 40
Market sophistication 38.6 44 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 111 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 10.0 74 É

4.1 Credit 35.9 40 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.2 78 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 30.8 66 «É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 3.6 38
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 112.8 18 ª
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 11.8 32 É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 87
4.2 Investment 17.6 44 7.3 Online creativity 27.1 58 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 107.3 17 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 7.6 47
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 48 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 9.3 58 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 52 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 64.5 71
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 45
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 62.3 40
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.3 5 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 77.9 68
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 597.5 43

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

China 11 143

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
7 23 Upper middle SEAO 1,422.6 32,897.9 23,309

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 57.6 44 È Business sophistication 58.0 11 È

1.1 Institutional environment 61.8 49 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 70.9 [8]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 66.7 51 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % n/a n/a
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 56.9 46 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 36.7 78 « 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 1.9 13 È

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 30.8 94 « 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 78.0 3 ªÈ

1.2.2 Rule of law* 42.6 62 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % n/a n/a

1.3 Business environment 74.2 14 È 5.2 Innovation linkages 58.4 13 È

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 74.3 18 È 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 7.1 4 ªÈ

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 74.0 11 È 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 83.8 8 È
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 100.0 1 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 75 «
Human capital and research 50.3 22 È 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 23 È

5.3 Knowledge absorption 44.6 21 È

2.1 Education 69.2 [5]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.4 26
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.3 95 «
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 19.9 8 È
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.1 72
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.6 84 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science Ա 579.0 1 ªÈ
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 57.9 18 È
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 13.3 63
2.2 Tertiary education 23.6 87 «
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 72.0 36 Knowledge and technology outputs 61.7 3 ªÈ

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 0.4 103 «É 6.1 Knowledge creation 69.9 3 ªÈ
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 48.5 2 ªÈ
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 58.1 17 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.1 14 È
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 1,702.9 43 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 97.4 1 ªÈ
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 2.4 14 È
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 20.2 32 È
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 91.0 2 ªÈ
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 68.4 8 È
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 84.2 5 È
6.2 Knowledge impact 63.1 4 ªÈ
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 5.4 2 ªÈ
Infrastructure 62.4 5 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 3.5 12 È
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.4 28 È
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 87.0 19 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 48.4 11 È
3.1.1 ICT access* 89.6 66
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 52.0 14 È
3.1.2 ICT use* 84.6 33 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.4 32 È
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 87.6 15 È
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 76.4 18 È
3.1.4 E-participation* 86.0 13 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 26.3 1 ªÈ
3.2 General infrastructure 62.1 7 È
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.4 52
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 6,282.6 32 È
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 18.6 12 È
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 72.7 18 È
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 43.1 2 ªÈ
Creative outputs 50.0 14 È
3.3 Ecological sustainability 38.0 23 È
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 6.9 101 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 82.0 1 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 18.3 63 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 69.8 17
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 9.9 4 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 241.7 1 ªÈ
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 9.5 19 È

Market sophistication 55.8 16 È 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 25.7 1 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 32.4 27 È

4.1 Credit 48.9 25 È
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.6 49
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 69.3 15 È
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.5 79 «É
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 185.4 4 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 10.7 35 «È
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.8 36 «
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 10.9 1 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 25.9 32 È

7.3 Online creativity 3.6 [126]
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 76.2 23 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 Ա 3.6 63
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 43 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 36 È
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 21 È

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 92.6 4 ªÈ

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.5 73 «

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 97.8 5 È
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 32,897.9 1 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

144 Colombia 61
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
62 65 Upper middle LCN 52.3 1,016.1 19,482

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 42.5 80 Business sophistication 33.6 42

1.1 Institutional environment 50.5 76 5.1 Knowledge workers 42.3 45

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 56.7 81 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 24.4 61
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 44.4 67 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 42.1 34
1.2 Regulatory environment 38.6 76 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 64
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 45.5 66 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 53.4 23 ªÈ

1.2.2 Rule of law* 31.6 87 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 16.5 43

1.3 Business environment 38.3 83 5.2 Innovation linkages 21.6 77

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 41.2 85 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.6 59
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 35.4 48 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 48.7 56
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 38.0 86
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 97 «
Human capital and research 25.6 87 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 61
5.3 Knowledge absorption 37.0 35 È
2.1 Education 37.0 111 «É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 2.2 11 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 3.9 76
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 16.2 15 ªÈ
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 15.5 68
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.0 32 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 14.3 64
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.6 40
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 400.8 63
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 2.5 78 «É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 25.4 109 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 28.7 77

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 59.3 57 Knowledge and technology outputs 21.7 61
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 23.9 53
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 0.2 109 «É 6.1 Knowledge creation 11.6 75
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 54
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 11.0 59 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 60
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 89.9 94 «É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 41
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.2 86 «
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 6.8 92
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 19.0 46
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 40.2 32 ªÈ
6.2 Knowledge impact 34.4 42
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.6 39
Infrastructure 42.0 64 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 2.0 18 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 81
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 70.5 73 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 21.1 58
3.1.1 ICT access* 73.1 90
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 19.2 60
3.1.2 ICT use* 66.7 91 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.2 45
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 71.5 59
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 39.7 65
3.1.4 E-participation* 70.9 37
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.2 72
3.2 General infrastructure 19.6 100 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.4 68
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 1,672.0 89 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 11.8 20 ª
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 36.4 65
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 19.1 104 «
Creative outputs 24.7 66
3.3 Ecological sustainability 35.9 27 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 17.9 16 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 31.6 58
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 29.3 35 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 40.8 58
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 4.0 26 ª
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 51.9 33
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 2.4 44
Market sophistication 32.1 70 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 77
7.2 Creative goods and services 7.4 84
4.1 Credit 20.0 86 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.4 58
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 26.1 72 «
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 1.5 61
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 44.2 76 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 5.7 45
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 80
4.2 Investment 13.2 51 7.3 Online creativity 28.2 57
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 29.2 48 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 12.5 40
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 80 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 8.9 59
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 56 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 63.3 74
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 29
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 63.1 36
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.0 66

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 84.9 56
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,016.1 31 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Costa Rica 70 145

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
76 61 Upper middle LCN 5.1 141.5 26,809

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 56.4 47 Business sophistication 30.7 50

1.1 Institutional environment 55.4 59 5.1 Knowledge workers 31.1 70

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 65.3 55 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 21.9 69
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 45.4 64 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 36.8 45
1.2 Regulatory environment 56.5 45 È 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 62
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 56.7 45 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 29.3 62
1.2.2 Rule of law* 56.4 44 È 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 11.9 64

1.3 Business environment 57.2 [39] 5.2 Innovation linkages 22.9 66

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 57.2 45 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.3 76
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 43.5 68
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 55.5 48
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 112 «
Human capital and research 26.4 82 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 76
5.3 Knowledge absorption 38.2 32 È
2.1 Education 54.7 55
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 2.9 8 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 6.3 11 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.3 50
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 21.9 39
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.5 48
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 15.8 41
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 4.7 24 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 403.6 59
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 21.4 53
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 13.5 65
2.2 Tertiary education 19.7 97
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 54.7 66 Knowledge and technology outputs 22.6 59
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 15.7 100 «
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 1.2 89 6.1 Knowledge creation 4.9 112 «
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 114 «
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 4.8 77 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 80
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 397.8 79 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 64
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.3 79 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 5.8 98
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 9.9 76
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 11.0 63
6.2 Knowledge impact 32.8 45
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 3.1 10 ª
Infrastructure 43.7 59 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 46
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 72.4 66 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 30.3 39
3.1.1 ICT access* 91.2 61
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 30.1 41
3.1.2 ICT use* 79.0 61
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 82
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 64.8 70
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 51.9 47
3.1.4 E-participation* 54.7 66
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 7.9 24 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 20.8 94 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 7.0 10 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 2,444.8 74 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 3.3 75
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 36.4 65
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 19.4 103 «
Creative outputs 17.9 86
3.3 Ecological sustainability 37.8 25 È
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 20.1 9 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 16.1 88
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 49.1 14 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 67 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 64.7 22 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 24.9 87 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 122 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 13.5 66

4.1 Credit 17.3 [92] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.8 37
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 2.4 53
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 52.7 61 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.3 73
4.2 Investment 2.7 102 «
7.3 Online creativity 25.8 64
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 3.1 82 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 5.2 54
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 63 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 13.1 53
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 87 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 59.2 87
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 89 «

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 54.6 72

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.9 12 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 68.4 80 É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 141.5 82

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

146 Croatia 43
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
40 42 High EUR 3.9 164.7 42,873

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 46.1 68 É Business sophistication 29.8 54

1.1 Institutional environment 68.6 38 5.1 Knowledge workers 42.6 43

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 78.0 29 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 35.2 42
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 59.2 43 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 24.4 68 «

1.2 Regulatory environment 54.7 47 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.8 32
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 55.0 48 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 38.4 47
1.2.2 Rule of law* 54.4 49 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 19.7 34

1.3 Business environment 15.1 126 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 15.0 107 «É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 24.9 113 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 3.5 23 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 5.3 81 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 21.2 116 «É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 10.3 126 «É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 81 «
Human capital and research 39.8 41 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 58
5.3 Knowledge absorption 31.6 53
2.1 Education 67.7 11 ªÈ
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.1 34
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.2 38
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.1 69
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.6 46
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 15.6 43
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 4.7 25 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 473.8 34
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 31.3 43
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 6.1 1 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 38.0 46

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 72.3 35 Knowledge and technology outputs 31.3 32
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 27.9 31
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 2.7 71 6.1 Knowledge creation 20.8 54
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 61
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 13.7 52 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 40
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 2,566.6 36 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 44
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.4 30 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 27.9 21 ª
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 17.7 49
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 5.3 72 É
6.2 Knowledge impact 39.7 25 ª
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.0 25 È
Infrastructure 54.1 23 ª 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 3.5 11 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 114 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 83.6 31 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 20.6 60
3.1.1 ICT access* 92.9 55
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 33.5 34
3.1.2 ICT use* 89.1 22 ª
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.3 39
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 79.1 36
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 62.5 31
3.1.4 E-participation* 73.3 29
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 4.2 43
3.2 General infrastructure 34.1 53 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.4 32
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 3,835.0 58 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 18.7 11 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 54.5 42
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 24.7 56
Creative outputs 31.5 50
3.3 Ecological sustainability 44.6 9 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 14.3 34 7.1 Intangible assets 32.1 55
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 25.8 49 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 50.5 47
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 8.9 7 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 32.1 62
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.2 72 É

Market sophistication 36.5 54 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.8 31
7.2 Creative goods and services 24.1 49
4.1 Credit 31.8 50 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.5 16 ª
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 47.2 48 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 3.3 42
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 50.3 69 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.7 54
4.2 Investment 14.5 48 7.3 Online creativity 37.6 36
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 32.0 45 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 13.1 38
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 81 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 30.0 37
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 72 «É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 69.7 55
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 23
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 63.3 35
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 95.8 12 ª
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 164.7 78

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Cyprus 27 147

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
17 35 High NAWA 1.3 49.7 53,931

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 56.4 46 Business sophistication 43.3 29

1.1 Institutional environment 68.9 37 5.1 Knowledge workers 50.9 33

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 74.7 35 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 38.4 35
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 63.1 37 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 39.7 37
1.2 Regulatory environment 61.2 40 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.3 47
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 62.2 37 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 35.7 54
1.2.2 Rule of law* 60.2 39 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 28.6 7 ªÈ

1.3 Business environment 39.2 81 5.2 Innovation linkages 42.3 28

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 55.3 50 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 4.0 18
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 23.1 63 É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 43.4 70
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 50.4 58
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 12
Human capital and research 37.9 46 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 28
5.3 Knowledge absorption 36.8 37
2.1 Education 63.8 19
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.4 25
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.5 28
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 3.4 127 «É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 38.5 2 ªÈ
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 18.3 1 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 16.2 34
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ܝ‬ 131 «É
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 403.4 60 É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 34.4 38
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 7.4 4 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 42.3 30

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 96.5 10 Knowledge and technology outputs 38.6 23
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 11.2 108 «É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 21.8 7 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 36.0 26
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 59
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 7.6 65 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 21
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 1,768.5 42 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.8 46 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 39.6 4 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 13.6 61
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 22.2 82 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.8 31 È
Infrastructure 48.4 45 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 86 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 82.2 39 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 14.8 75 É
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.5 21
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 57.8 4 ªÈ
3.1.2 ICT use* 79.4 59
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 2.6 11 È
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 75.6 46
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 52.7 46
3.1.4 E-participation* 74.4 25
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.9 81
3.2 General infrastructure 30.3 69 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 28.0 1 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 5,823.2 38 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 18.7 10 È
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 50.0 50 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 20.1 101 «É
Creative outputs 50.6 13
3.3 Ecological sustainability 32.7 32
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 16.4 22 7.1 Intangible assets 53.1 16
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 7.6 92 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 47.6 51
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 6.5 14 È
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 84.4 11 È
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 41.4 41 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 7.8 9 È

7.2 Creative goods and services 38.0 15

4.1 Credit 28.0 62 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 5.5 1 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 29.7 68 «É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 2.0 56
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 75.6 37 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 92
4.2 Investment 40.6 16 7.3 Online creativity 58.4 19
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 20.0 62 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 Ա 30.1 23
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 1.6 5 ªÈ
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 45.2 25
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 12 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 100.0 1 ªÈ
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 32
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 55.7 70
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 75.1 73
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 49.7 114 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

148 Czech Republic 30

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
24 32 High EUR 10.8 539.3 49,025

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 67.5 30 Business sophistication 42.5 30

1.1 Institutional environment 75.6 27 5.1 Knowledge workers 47.9 37

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 78.7 25 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 39.8 31
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 72.6 28 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 43.6 28
1.2 Regulatory environment 76.8 22 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 1.3 19
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 78.2 19 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 37.2 52 «

1.2.2 Rule of law* 75.4 25 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 14.1 55

1.3 Business environment 49.9 [59] 5.2 Innovation linkages 33.0 38

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 49.9 63 « 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.3 37
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 72.0 22
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 54.4 51
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 78 «
Human capital and research 43.7 32 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 35
5.3 Knowledge absorption 46.6 18
2.1 Education 57.4 47
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.8 51
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.1 41
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 23.0 6 ªÈ
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 27.5 12
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.8 37
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 16.3 32
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.9 33
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 491.1 15
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 53.6 22
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary n/a n/a
2.2 Tertiary education 45.9 22
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 69.1 45 Knowledge and technology outputs 42.7 17
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 25.5 42
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 15.6 13 6.1 Knowledge creation 35.4 27
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 40
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 27.8 37 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 37
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 4,697.5 26 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.0 6 ªÈ
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 2.0 19 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 26.2 25
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 30.7 32
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 31.3 41
6.2 Knowledge impact 37.7 29
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.4 77 «
Infrastructure 54.0 24 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.3 43
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 39
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 74.9 58 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 56.4 8 ªÈ
3.1.1 ICT access* 95.2 47
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 55.0 8 ªÈ
3.1.2 ICT use* 81.6 46
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.4 30
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 63.5 72 «É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 87.1 6 ªÈ
3.1.4 E-participation* 59.3 57
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 22.0 7 ªÈ
3.2 General infrastructure 44.9 29 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.2 39
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 7,843.4 21 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 23.2 4 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 54.5 42
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 30.3 25 È
Creative outputs 38.3 33
3.3 Ecological sustainability 42.4 11 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.8 72 «
7.1 Intangible assets 20.9 78 «É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 23.3 55 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 9.9 5 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 43.2 40
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 2.0 46
Market sophistication 30.1 75 « 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.4 38
7.2 Creative goods and services 53.6 3 ªÈ
4.1 Credit 16.5 [94] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.8 38
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 11.0 4 ªÈ
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 50.5 67 «
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 24.7 26
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 9.8 1 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 9.7 60 «

7.3 Online creativity 58.0 21
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 11.3 73 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 34.0 20
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 39 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 65.4 12 ª
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 53 «
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 74.6 25
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 49
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 64.1 31
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 90.8 36
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 539.3 46

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Côte d'Ivoire 112 149

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
107 111 Lower middle SSA 31.2 202.6 6,960

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 45.8 69 ª Business sophistication 20.6 98

1.1 Institutional environment 46.8 80 5.1 Knowledge workers 14.6 [114]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 58.7 74 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 7.1 115
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 35.0 92 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 27.1 63
1.2 Regulatory environment 34.0 87 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 37.8 80 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 30.1 92 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 1.2 117

1.3 Business environment 56.6 [42] 5.2 Innovation linkages 21.7 76

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 56.6 48 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.3 129 «É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 49.1 55 ª
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 55.4 49 ª
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 106
Human capital and research 11.2 129 «É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 25.6 70 ª

2.1 Education 28.3 126 «
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 109
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.5 90
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 5.9 101
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 11.8 83
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.4 20 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 10.1 105
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.8 79
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 26.4 111 É

2.2 Tertiary education 5.0 123 «É

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 9.8 117 É Knowledge and technology outputs 8.9 128 «

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 2.4 75 6.1 Knowledge creation 2.5 122 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 101
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.3 113 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 74 «É
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.1 107 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 2.3 122
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 5.0 99
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 21.6 90
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.4 18 ª
Infrastructure 29.2 98 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 126 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 53.1 97 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 68.5 94
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 2.5 126 «
3.1.2 ICT use* 58.0 100
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 115
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 49.9 91
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 4.1 118 «É
3.1.4 E-participation* 36.0 94
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.3 100
3.2 General infrastructure 20.7 96 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.5 102
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 394.9 113 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.5 104
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 26.8 36 ª
Creative outputs 13.6 100
3.3 Ecological sustainability 13.7 99
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 13.1 41 ª
7.1 Intangible assets 20.0 79
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 9.7 87 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % Ա 35.9 63
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 110 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.7 119
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.5 62 ª

Market sophistication 11.8 126 «É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 75
7.2 Creative goods and services 1.1 [116]
4.1 Credit 9.0 114 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 97
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 21.1 114 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 1.2 27 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 118
4.2 Investment 3.7 92 7.3 Online creativity 13.3 120
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 13.2 70 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.3 114
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 75 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.4 123
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 77 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 39.2 120 «É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 87
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 22.8 122 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 7.4 115

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 202.6 72 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

150 Denmark 10
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
12 7 High EUR 5.9 441.8 74,958

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 88.7 2 ªÈ Business sophistication 56.9 12

1.1 Institutional environment 92.7 3 ªÈ 5.1 Knowledge workers 65.6 17

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 89.3 6 ª 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 48.9 13
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 96.0 3 ªÈ 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 40.6 35 É

1.2 Regulatory environment 94.3 2 ª 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 1.8 14
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 90.2 4 ª 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 59.6 13
1.2.2 Rule of law* 98.3 2 ªÈ 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 25.5 17

1.3 Business environment 79.3 [6] 5.2 Innovation linkages 61.4 10

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 79.3 9 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 5.3 12
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 80.0 14
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 81.6 19
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 16
Human capital and research 58.9 9 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 4.9 9
5.3 Knowledge absorption 43.7 22
2.1 Education 68.0 9 È
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.8 48 «
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.9 17
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.3 92 «
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 24.4 23
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 3.4 6 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 18.7 11
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.7 39
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 490.6 16
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 60.6 14
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 10.2 35
2.2 Tertiary education 43.1 29
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 84.6 17 Knowledge and technology outputs 48.3 13
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 24.0 52 «
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 10.1 26 6.1 Knowledge creation 56.4 11
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 8.9 10
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 65.5 9 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.5 8
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 8,735.6 3 ªÈ
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 50 «
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 2.9 12 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 45.5 2 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 69.8 13 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 51.4 15
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 56.3 17
6.2 Knowledge impact 47.4 16
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.4 76 «
Infrastructure 60.6 8 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.6 24
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.5 20
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 94.6 7 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 47.5 12
3.1.1 ICT access* 100.0 1 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 41.0 23
3.1.2 ICT use* 92.4 10 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 2.4 12
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 97.8 4 ªÈ
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 69.7 24
3.1.4 E-participation* 88.4 12
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 6.1 35
3.2 General infrastructure 47.5 22 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.9 43
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 5,922.8 37 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 5.8 48 «
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 90.9 3 ªÈ
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.5 69 «
Creative outputs 52.9 10
3.3 Ecological sustainability 39.8 18
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 21.1 8 7.1 Intangible assets 52.7 17
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 41.5 19 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 86.3 3 ªÈ
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.7 37 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 23.5 78 «
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 14.4 9
Market sophistication 52.9 21 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.9 23
7.2 Creative goods and services 33.8 22
4.1 Credit 52.9 [21] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.7 40
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 4.7 28
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 143.4 10 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 68.3 4
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.4 34
4.2 Investment 42.9 15 7.3 Online creativity 72.6 4 ª
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 65.5 6 ª
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 15 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 76.8 9
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 11 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 75.4 17
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 20
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 63.0 37
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 89.3 42 «
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 441.8 51 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Dominican Republic 97 151

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
99 94 Upper middle LCN 11.3 273.7 25,523

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 49.5 61 Business sophistication 20.6 97 É

1.1 Institutional environment 55.1 62 5.1 Knowledge workers 28.0 [79]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 68.0 43 ª 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 16.9 88
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 42.2 75 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 23.4 74
1.2 Regulatory environment 42.4 68 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 43.7 70 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 41.2 67 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 10.1 75

1.3 Business environment 51.0 56 5.2 Innovation linkages 17.0 97

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 66.3 34 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.4 125 «

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 35.7 46 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 29.1 100
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 52.5 54 ª
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 122 «
Human capital and research 19.1 104 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 94
5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.0 110 É
2.1 Education 38.1 105
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.5 70
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.9 74
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.6 113
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 13.4 77
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.3 118 É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 13.6 74
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.4 44 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 350.3 85 «É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 11.9 52 ª

2.2 Tertiary education 19.3 98

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 58.6 59 Knowledge and technology outputs 11.0 106
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 13.5 105 É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 2.4 77 6.1 Knowledge creation 1.0 131 «É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 124
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 92
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 61
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 131 «É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 2.4 125 «
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 21.2 92
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.3 21 ª
Infrastructure 35.2 83 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 125 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 59.3 90 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 65.0 98 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 10.7 92
3.1.2 ICT use* 70.3 84
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 109 É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 57.8 79
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 44.9 58
3.1.4 E-participation* 44.2 83
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.3 70
3.2 General infrastructure 28.9 76 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.2 120
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 1,916.7 82 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 113
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 22.7 82
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 32.3 17 ªÈ
Creative outputs 15.9 91
3.3 Ecological sustainability 17.5 77
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 19.1 13 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 10.1 99
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 7.3 93 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 124 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 39.8 50 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.1 74
Market sophistication 16.4 116 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 119
7.2 Creative goods and services 24.3 [48]
4.1 Credit 9.4 112 É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 11.1 83 «É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 2.5 52
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 27.9 102 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 2.7 22 ª

4.2 Investment 0.2 [116] 7.3 Online creativity 19.3 101

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.7 84
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 100 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 3.8 92
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 52.5 102
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 39.5 102 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 3.3 83

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 273.7 63

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

152 Ecuador 105

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
100 104 Upper middle LCN 18.0 242.6 13,285

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 30.1 109 Business sophistication 21.1 94

1.1 Institutional environment 41.6 94 5.1 Knowledge workers 30.1 72

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 47.3 98 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 12.9 100 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 35.9 88 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 73.7 1
1.2 Regulatory environment 27.9 100 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.2 55
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 29.8 96 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 0.2 96
1.2.2 Rule of law* 26.0 103 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 9.0 82

1.3 Business environment 20.8 117 5.2 Innovation linkages 12.2 117
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 23.0 119 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.5 117
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 18.5 68 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 30.8 96
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 23.7 115 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 117 «
Human capital and research 21.9 100 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 84
5.3 Knowledge absorption 21.0 88
2.1 Education 38.0 106
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.7 56 ª
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.6 86
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.3 64
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 6.1 94 «É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.5 110 É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 14.9 52 ª
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.8 102
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 20.4 98
2.2 Tertiary education 22.7 89
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 57.9 60 Knowledge and technology outputs 12.6 96
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 18.3 90
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.6 96 É 6.1 Knowledge creation 7.2 100
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 108
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 5.0 76 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 77
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 402.3 77 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 55
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.4 62 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 10.2 71
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 9.3 82
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 8.7 68
6.2 Knowledge impact 23.1 77
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 118 É
Infrastructure 36.0 80 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.2 30 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 72
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 68.6 76 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 9.9 87
3.1.1 ICT access* 64.0 100 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 7.5 104 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 66.7 90 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 79
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 74.0 50 ª
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 16.1 113 «É
3.1.4 E-participation* 69.8 41 ª
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.4 98
3.2 General infrastructure 16.5 109 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.2 121 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 1,805.3 85 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 6.3 45 ª
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 22.4 82
Creative outputs 13.7 98 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 22.8 56 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 11.9 54 ª
7.1 Intangible assets 16.5 86
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 30.1 34 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 72 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 62.2 23 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 18.3 113 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 84
7.2 Creative goods and services 0.7 [123]
4.1 Credit 13.3 101 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 99
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 14.6 81 «É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 52.9 60 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP Ա 0.7 38 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 115
4.2 Investment 2.1 107 «
7.3 Online creativity 21.2 94
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.3 88
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 92 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.6 79
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 107 «
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 57.6 91
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 65
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 39.6 101 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 6.2 107 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 63.1 91 É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 242.6 66

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Egypt 86 153

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
80 95 Lower middle NAWA 114.5 1,809.4 17,123

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 35.9 94 Business sophistication 19.8 103

1.1 Institutional environment 38.5 100 5.1 Knowledge workers 12.3 116 «
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 44.7 105 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 22.2 67
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 32.3 98 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 7.9 99 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 29.7 94 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 78
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 23.1 112 « 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 3.9 86 «

1.2.2 Rule of law* 36.3 81 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 5.8 94

1.3 Business environment 39.4 79 5.2 Innovation linkages 30.3 44 ªÈ

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 51.7 57 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.9 94
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 27.2 59 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 50.3 53
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 88.9 9 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 96
Human capital and research 23.1 96 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 98
5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.0 111
2.1 Education 39.0 103
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.5 71
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 3.9 75
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.8 110
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 9.4 88 «
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.9 83
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 12.9 84
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.7 83
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 6.3 68
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 17.9 92
2.2 Tertiary education 17.8 101
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 37.8 83 Knowledge and technology outputs 17.7 81
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 16.9 94
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 2.0 79 6.1 Knowledge creation 11.1 77
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 87
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 12.5 54 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 84
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 841.4 55 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 72 «
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.0 38 ªÈ
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 13.9 48
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 19.2 44 ªÈ
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 24.7 48 ªÈ
6.2 Knowledge impact 28.6 59
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.3 20 ª
Infrastructure 31.8 92 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.3 44 ª
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 50
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 60.7 85 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 18.5 63
3.1.1 ICT access* 88.7 70 È
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 13.2 82
3.1.2 ICT use* 67.7 89
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 68
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 52.8 87
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 39.6 66
3.1.4 E-participation* 33.7 98
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.7 85
3.2 General infrastructure 19.8 99 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.0 57
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 1,940.9 80 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.0 91
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 45.5 56 È
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 16.1 120 «É
Creative outputs 20.7 78
3.3 Ecological sustainability 14.9 93
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 14.7 33 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 27.5 67
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 5.7 104 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 52.3 44
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 78 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 22.6 81
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.9 56
Market sophistication 30.2 74 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 55
7.2 Creative goods and services 5.8 93
4.1 Credit 20.7 82 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 48.1 44 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.3 81 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 30.8 95 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 1.2 56 «
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.5 43 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.1 42 ª

4.2 Investment 8.4 66 7.3 Online creativity 21.9 91

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 10.1 75 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.4 108
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 72 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.4 84
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 58 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 61.0 82
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 42
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 61.4 44 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % Ա 5.4 99

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 90.8 34 ª
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,809.4 18 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

154 El Salvador 98
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
89 107 Upper middle LCN 6.3 74.5 11,717

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 33.3 99 Business sophistication 22.1 90

1.1 Institutional environment 43.8 88 5.1 Knowledge workers 24.0 93

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 52.0 89 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 14.8 91 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 35.6 90 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 34.9 49
1.2 Regulatory environment 26.1 105 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 70
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 29.7 97 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 31.5 59
1.2.2 Rule of law* 22.6 108 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 4.9 96 É

1.3 Business environment 30.0 97 5.2 Innovation linkages 11.7 122 «É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 23.5 116 É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.4 124 «

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 36.5 45 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 24.1 108
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 19.1 121 «É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
Human capital and research 17.6 109 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 87
5.3 Knowledge absorption 30.6 54 ª
2.1 Education 30.4 121 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.0 37 ª
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.5 56 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 11.6 24 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 15.1 71
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.4 57 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 11.8 95
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.5 89
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 360.5 79 «É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 27.6 115 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 21.8 90

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 30.8 91 É Knowledge and technology outputs 11.9 101
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 23.4 56
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.4 102 É 6.1 Knowledge creation 1.0 132 «É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 116
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.8 103 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 64.7 96 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 69
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.2 93 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 130 «É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 2.0 127 «
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 17.8 113
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.7 67
Infrastructure 27.7 101 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 111 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 44.4 109 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 39.6 117 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 17.0 68
3.1.2 ICT use* 63.3 93 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 103
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 41.1 109 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 44.3 60
3.1.4 E-participation* 33.7 98 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 3.0 49 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 17.1 106 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.8 45 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 1,147.4 94 É
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.4 86
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 27.3 76
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 20.3 98
Creative outputs 20.4 [80]
3.3 Ecological sustainability 21.6 61
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 11.8 55 ª
7.1 Intangible assets 27.9 [66]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 32.0 30 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 107 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 71.5 18 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 24.6 89 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 92
7.2 Creative goods and services 5.9 [91]
4.1 Credit 26.2 67 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.2 77
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 31.6 64 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 61.4 51 ª
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.5 60
4.2 Investment 4.1 [91] 7.3 Online creativity 19.8 99
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.3 89
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 84 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 5.0 74
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 80 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 53.0 101
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 43.5 93 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.8 62

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 74.5 99

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Estonia 16 155

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
16 14 High EUR 1.4 61.0 45,236

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 78.7 12 Business sophistication 48.1 27 É

1.1 Institutional environment 80.9 17 5.1 Knowledge workers 61.2 21

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 82.7 16 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 46.8 17
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 79.1 18 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 42.2 32 É

1.2 Regulatory environment 83.8 17 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 1.0 22
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 82.8 14 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 51.0 26
1.2.2 Rule of law* 84.7 17 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 28.1 10

1.3 Business environment 71.4 18 5.2 Innovation linkages 36.3 33 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 57.2 46 É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.8 50 É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 85.6 3 ªÈ 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 57.4 43 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 50.0 59 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 17
Human capital and research 44.5 31 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 31 É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 47.0 16

2.1 Education 64.7 15
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.2 92 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.9 18
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.9 73 «
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 19.8 52 «
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 4.6 4 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 16.0 37
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 11.8 9
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 515.6 6
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 47.5 29
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 8.9 21 È

2.2 Tertiary education 45.6 23

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 71.4 39 Knowledge and technology outputs 39.9 21
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 28.1 29
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 11.4 21 6.1 Knowledge creation 28.6 35 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 46 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 23.3 42 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 33 É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 4,695.2 27 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 26
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.8 20 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 35.7 9
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 17.8 48 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 16.5 57 É
6.2 Knowledge impact 46.3 19
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.2 90 «
Infrastructure 61.3 6 ª 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 22.2 1 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 94 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 98.4 1 ªÈ
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 25.1 48
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.5 19
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 44.6 20
3.1.2 ICT use* 96.3 2 ªÈ
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.5 28 É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 100.0 1 ªÈ
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 68.0 27
3.1.4 E-participation* 97.7 3 ªÈ
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 7.6 26
3.2 General infrastructure 47.6 21 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 7.5 7 È
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 6,659.2 28 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 16.5 16 È
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 68.2 25 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 30.0 28
Creative outputs 49.7 15
3.3 Ecological sustainability 37.8 24
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.5 79 «
7.1 Intangible assets 42.2 31
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 14.5 73 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 54.9 38 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 9.6 6 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 70.7 19
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 1.0 55 É

Market sophistication 66.5 6 ª 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.3 25
7.2 Creative goods and services 52.1 4 ªÈ
4.1 Credit 45.9 30 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 2.7 8 È
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 72.1 13 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 10.7 5 È
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 57.4 55 É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 4.2 7 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.2 40
4.2 Investment 92.7 2 ªÈ
7.3 Online creativity 62.4 15
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 28.2 25
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 1.9 3 ªÈ
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 75.1 10
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 1 ªÈ
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 83.9 6 È
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 1 ªÈ

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 60.9 48

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 90.6 37
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 61.0 104 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

156 Ethiopia 130

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
112 133 Low SSA 128.7 393.3 3,719

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 25.6 117 Business sophistication 13.3 128

1.1 Institutional environment 26.3 121 5.1 Knowledge workers 7.2 127
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 28.0 122 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 4.4 122
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 24.5 113 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 20.8 77
1.2 Regulatory environment 21.4 112 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 87
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 16.9 121 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 1.5 90
1.2.2 Rule of law* 26.0 104 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % n/a n/a

1.3 Business environment 29.0 [102] 5.2 Innovation linkages 12.2 119
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 29.0 104 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.5 118
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 32.3 93
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 21.9 117
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102
Human capital and research 7.2 [133] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 20.6 92

2.1 Education 16.2 [132]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 113
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.7 82
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 10.3 36 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.5 49 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.0 48 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 2.2 80
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 43.7 126
2.2 Tertiary education 4.2 [125]
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 10.4 115 Knowledge and technology outputs 14.7 88 È

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 14.6 65 ªÈ
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 119 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 1.3 98 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 90.2 93 È
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 25 ªÈ
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.3 78 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 13.5 51 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 9.5 80 È
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 23.9 71 ªÈ
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 3.5 9 ªÈ
Infrastructure 21.5 123 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 133 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 26.3 126 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 13.8 126
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 5.7 116
3.1.2 ICT use* 43.2 111 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 108
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 30.7 122
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 20.9 104
3.1.4 E-participation* 17.4 126
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 126
3.2 General infrastructure 17.0 108 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.9 87
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 129.0 120 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 131 «É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 24.8 54 ª
Creative outputs 5.5 122
3.3 Ecological sustainability 21.2 63 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 5.7 113 7.1 Intangible assets 1.9 121
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 45.6 15 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 133 «É
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 5.2 117
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.3 69 ªÈ

Market sophistication 5.0 133 «É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 104
7.2 Creative goods and services 0.1 [132]
4.1 Credit 5.1 [125] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 112 «É
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.5 44 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 121
4.2 Investment 0.4 115 «É
7.3 Online creativity 18.1 105
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.0 133 «É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 95 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.1 113
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 105 É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 53.2 100
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 105
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 9.5 131 «É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 11.3 127 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 393.3 54 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Finland 7 157

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
9 5 High EUR 5.6 335.8 59,869

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 85.5 4 ª Business sophistication 61.1 8

1.1 Institutional environment 85.9 10 5.1 Knowledge workers 69.5 11

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 82.0 17 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 47.4 15
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 89.8 6 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 50.2 17
1.2 Regulatory environment 94.3 3 ª 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 2.0 10
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 88.6 6 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 58.1 16
1.2.2 Rule of law* 100.0 1 ªÈ 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 26.9 13

1.3 Business environment 76.4 12 5.2 Innovation linkages 65.0 5 ª

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 84.2 6 È 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 5.9 7
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 68.7 14 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 83.4 9
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 76.5 23
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 14
Human capital and research 61.1 6 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 7.0 6 È

5.3 Knowledge absorption 48.7 13

2.1 Education 68.0 10 È
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.0 38
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.7 21
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.5 77 «
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 25.2 20
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 4.3 5 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 19.5 5 È
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.5 42
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 495.1 11
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 60.5 15
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 12.7 58 «

2.2 Tertiary education 52.1 10

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 104.9 5 ªÈ Knowledge and technology outputs 58.0 6
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 29.4 24
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 8.5 33 6.1 Knowledge creation 60.9 6
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 10.8 7
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 63.2 11 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.6 1 ªÈ
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 8,073.2 4 ªÈ
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 24
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 3.0 10 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 39.0 5 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 71.8 11 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 42.5 20
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 50.4 21
6.2 Knowledge impact 54.9 8
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 113 «
Infrastructure 65.9 2 ªÈ 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 3.9 9
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 18
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 97.2 2 ªÈ
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 37.2 29
3.1.1 ICT access* 100.0 8
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 58.1 3 ª
3.1.2 ICT use* 95.3 3 ªÈ
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 2.8 7
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 98.2 2 ªÈ
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 77.1 15
3.1.4 E-participation* 95.3 6
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 4.7 39
3.2 General infrastructure 59.4 11 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 9.9 6 È
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 12,990.8 10 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 9.4 31
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 95.5 2 ªÈ
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 25.0 53 «
Creative outputs 47.6 17
3.3 Ecological sustainability 40.9 14
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 8.2 87 «
7.1 Intangible assets 45.0 27
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 53.7 11 È
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 68.8 19
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 5.4 17 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 29.8 65 «
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 11.4 14
Market sophistication 56.9 11 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.5 36
7.2 Creative goods and services 31.4 33
4.1 Credit 58.4 13 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.5 51 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 100.0 1 ªÈ
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 9.0 8
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 95.4 25 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 48.9 14
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 3.7 8 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.5 66 «

4.2 Investment 47.9 14 7.3 Online creativity 69.0 8

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 31.8 22
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 19 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 95.5 4 ªÈ
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 9 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 79.9 9
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 15
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 64.4 29
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21 «

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 95.7 13
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 335.8 58 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

158 France 12
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
10 17 High EUR 66.4 3,868.6 58,765

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 67.5 29 É Business sophistication 55.5 17

1.1 Institutional environment 71.2 33 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 70.5 9 ª

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 68.0 43 «É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 47.7 14
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 74.4 26 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 67.9 2 ªÈ

1.2 Regulatory environment 75.4 23 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 1.4 17
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 73.1 25 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 55.4 20
1.2.2 Rule of law* 77.8 22 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 25.8 16

1.3 Business environment 55.8 43 5.2 Innovation linkages 48.4 23 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 59.4 44 É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 4.6 15
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 52.2 23 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 60.6 35 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 75.4 26
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 25
Human capital and research 54.4 16 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 2.9 14
5.3 Knowledge absorption 47.5 15
2.1 Education 60.7 34
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.5 23
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.2 36
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.9 40
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 26.5 14
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 3.0 13
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 16.1 36
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.6 60 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 478.3 26
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 61.7 10
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 13.4 64 «

2.2 Tertiary education 40.8 38

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 70.8 43 Knowledge and technology outputs 43.6 16
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 25.6 41 «
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 9.1 30 6.1 Knowledge creation 42.0 20
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 6.6 13
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 61.6 13 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.0 16
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 5,085.8 18 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 51 «
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 2.2 16 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 17.4 40 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 79.4 9 ª
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 78.0 5 ª
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 80.0 6 ª
6.2 Knowledge impact 48.5 15
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 115 «É
Infrastructure 54.9 19 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.9 19
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 8 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 84.5 30 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 46.2 14
3.1.1 ICT access* 95.7 44
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 40.4 26
3.1.2 ICT use* 84.9 32
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 1.6 15
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 86.4 20
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 76.7 17
3.1.4 E-participation* 70.9 37
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 10.4 18
3.2 General infrastructure 47.9 20 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.4 50 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 6,861.3 27 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 5.9 47 «
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 81.8 13
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 25.6 45 «
Creative outputs 60.8 4 ªÈ
3.3 Ecological sustainability 32.3 36
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 13.9 36 7.1 Intangible assets 80.0 3 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 44.5 16 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 84.5 5 ªÈ
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 56 «
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 79.2 13 È
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 17.3 6 ª

Market sophistication 60.9 10 ª 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 10.0 7 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 31.2 34

4.1 Credit 57.5 14 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.2 21
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 71.2 14 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 4.7 29
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 120.0 16 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 43.6 19
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.5 32
4.2 Investment 37.4 20 7.3 Online creativity 51.9 26
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 92.7 21 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 29.9 24
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 24 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 50.5 21 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 14 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 75.4 18
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 17
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 87.9 7 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21 «

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 96.3 10 ª
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 3,868.6 10 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Georgia 57 159

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
73 48 Upper middle NAWA 3.8 82.2 22,357

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 67.0 32 È Business sophistication 29.3 55

1.1 Institutional environment 63.2 45 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 34.1 60

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 65.3 55 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 24.7 59
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 61.0 39 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 31.4 55
1.2 Regulatory environment 58.8 42 È 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 69.0 31 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 1.7 89 «É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 48.7 57 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 18.1 38 È

1.3 Business environment 79.1 8 ªÈ 5.2 Innovation linkages 29.6 47

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 72.1 21 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.9 90
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 86.1 2 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 58.4 41
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 69.3 34 È
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 56
Human capital and research 32.6 60 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 52
5.3 Knowledge absorption 24.3 74
2.1 Education 54.6 57
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.7 61
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.8 80
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.3 82
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.9 86
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 16.7 25 È
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 6.2 18 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 382.7 69 «
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 8.1 12 ª

2.2 Tertiary education 37.6 47

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 78.5 26 ªÈ Knowledge and technology outputs 20.2 72
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 19.6 79
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 10.7 24 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 13.5 68
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 52
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 5.5 72 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 66
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 1,823.0 41 È
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 31
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.2 82 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 11.3 66
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 10.6 72
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 29.1 57
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 7.0 1 ªÈ
Infrastructure 38.3 74 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 103 «
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 71.8 69 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 9.6 89 «
3.1.1 ICT access* 95.2 48
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 18.2 63
3.1.2 ICT use* 82.8 42
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 77
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 57.0 82
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 44.4 59
3.1.4 E-participation* 52.3 71
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.0 76
3.2 General infrastructure 20.5 97 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 4.2 26 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 3,837.9 56 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.4 85
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 27.3 76
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 20.3 97
Creative outputs 21.2 77
3.3 Ecological sustainability 22.5 58
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 11.0 60 7.1 Intangible assets 18.7 82
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 36.4 21 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 115 «
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 36.9 55
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 1.5 49
Market sophistication 33.0 64 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.5 37
7.2 Creative goods and services 12.4 67
4.1 Credit 33.3 45 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.6 45
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 53.6 34 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 Ա 2.7 48
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 63.6 50 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 2.2 20 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 75
4.2 Investment 4.3 89 7.3 Online creativity 35.0 44
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 3.9 62
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 90 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 35.2 33 È
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 57 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 66.0 64
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 93 «

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 61.4 45

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.3 4 ªÈ

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 85.0 55
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 82.2 94

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

160 Germany 9
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
6 13 High EUR 84.5 5,538.0 66,038

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 73.5 19 Business sophistication 55.3 18

1.1 Institutional environment 78.5 20 5.1 Knowledge workers 61.9 20

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 79.3 24 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 46.1 20
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 77.7 21 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 44.1 26
1.2 Regulatory environment 84.8 13 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 2.1 9
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 81.8 15 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 62.8 10
1.2.2 Rule of law* 87.8 14 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 16.1 48 É

1.3 Business environment 57.3 37 5.2 Innovation linkages 58.5 12

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 67.1 31 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 6.1 6 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 47.4 33 « 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 79.1 15
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 85.0 13
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 29 É
Human capital and research 61.4 5 ª 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 5.0 8 ª

5.3 Knowledge absorption 45.5 20

2.1 Education 62.0 30
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.1 32
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.5 55 «
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 12.0 22
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 26.4 16
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.7 19
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 17.3 18
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.5 64 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 482.3 23
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 61.5 12
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 11.4 44
2.2 Tertiary education 53.9 9
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 75.7 29 Knowledge and technology outputs 53.9 11
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 35.1 7 ªÈ
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 11.2 22 6.1 Knowledge creation 57.0 9
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 11.5 6 ª
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 68.4 7 ª
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.1 11
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 5,824.6 12 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 18
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 3.1 9 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 18.9 36
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 90.5 3 ªÈ
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 87.3 3 ªÈ
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 72.4 11
6.2 Knowledge impact 50.6 11
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 97 «
Infrastructure 52.9 27 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.7 23
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.5 19
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 81.6 41 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 57.5 5 ª
3.1.1 ICT access* 97.5 32
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 54.1 10
3.1.2 ICT use* 80.2 52 «É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 2.7 10
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 76.8 44 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 91.8 4 ªÈ
3.1.4 E-participation* 72.1 32
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 12.8 13
3.2 General infrastructure 49.4 18 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.1 55 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 6,963.3 24 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 10.3 26
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 90.9 3 ªÈ
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 24.0 61 «
Creative outputs 58.6 5 ªÈ
3.3 Ecological sustainability 27.8 44
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 15.6 25 7.1 Intangible assets 68.6 5 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 22.8 56 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 70.1 16
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.7 36 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 53.9 28
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 15.1 8
Market sophistication 56.4 13 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 8.9 8 È

7.2 Creative goods and services 31.9 30

4.1 Credit 46.7 28 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.0 30
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 64.0 20 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 4.0 33 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 83.4 35 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 50.6 12
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 2.0 26
4.2 Investment 27.2 30 7.3 Online creativity 65.3 11
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 54.5 34 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 63.1 7 ª
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 26 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 62.6 15
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 24 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 70.3 48
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 26
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 95.3 2 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 94.8 19
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 5,538.0 1 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Ghana 101 161

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
94 108 Lower middle SSA 33.8 227.2 6,905

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 45.3 71 Business sophistication 24.2 76

1.1 Institutional environment 44.8 87 5.1 Knowledge workers 28.6 [76]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 47.3 98 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 8.7 112
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 42.3 74 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 49.8 20 ªÈ

1.2 Regulatory environment 39.4 73 È 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 37.1 83 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 41.6 65 È 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 3.3 101

1.3 Business environment 51.6 [54] 5.2 Innovation linkages 24.0 62

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 51.6 58 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.3 73
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 47.2 59
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 54.3 52 ª
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 79
Human capital and research 16.7 113 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 20.1 95

2.1 Education 39.8 97
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.9 41 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.9 104
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.0 123
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 19.5 54
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.7 102
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 11.4 98
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.7 58 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 16.1 84
2.2 Tertiary education 10.1 112
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 20.4 102 Knowledge and technology outputs 9.8 116
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 14.3 104 É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 0.9 91 6.1 Knowledge creation 6.7 102
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 123 «
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.2 114 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 93
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 87.0 95 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 70
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 11.3 64
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 9.3 83
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 17.3 115
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.9 58 ª
Infrastructure 27.2 105 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 130 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 51.4 100 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 53.7 106
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 5.2 118
3.1.2 ICT use* 59.1 99
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 53 ªÈ
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 48.7 94
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 13.4 115 «É
3.1.4 E-participation* 44.2 83
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 117
3.2 General infrastructure 9.6 125 «
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.8 88
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 671.6 104 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 115
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 16.6 118 É
Creative outputs 20.6 79
3.3 Ecological sustainability 20.4 66
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 15.8 24 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 17.4 83
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 18.7 60 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % Ա ‫ܝ‬ 77 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 90 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.1 125 «
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 11.1 129 «É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.0 28 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 32.5 [26]

4.1 Credit 1.5 133 «É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 2.3 10 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 12.3 127 «
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.1 54 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 116
4.2 Investment 8.3 67 7.3 Online creativity 15.1 116
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 11.7 72 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.2 118
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 65 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.7 78
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 47 ª
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 40.3 118 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 57
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 23.5 121 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 7.3 114

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 227.2 69

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

162 Greece 45
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
43 43 High EUR 10.2 417.0 39,864

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 50.5 57 É Business sophistication 26.7 65 É

1.1 Institutional environment 62.2 48 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 38.3 53

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 68.7 42 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 32.0 47
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 55.7 49 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 13.7 91 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 53.6 51 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.7 35
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 54.0 50 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 38.3 48
1.2.2 Rule of law* 53.2 52 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 19.9 33

1.3 Business environment 35.7 90 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 18.0 91 «É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 49.2 65 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.3 34
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 22.2 65 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 25.2 106 «É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 20.8 118 «É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 37
Human capital and research 46.7 29 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 37
5.3 Knowledge absorption 23.8 75 É
2.1 Education 59.8 38
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.4 81
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.1 68
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.2 85
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 20.1 50
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.8 90 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 20.0 2 ªÈ
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.6 61
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 436.5 45
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 30.3 46
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 8.2 15 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 55.5 7 ª

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 150.2 1 ªÈ Knowledge and technology outputs 29.6 40
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 27.5 33
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 2.8 68 6.1 Knowledge creation 25.0 37
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.6 38
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 24.9 40 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 42
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 4,776.4 23 ª
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 63 «
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.5 26 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 29.0 18 ª
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 33.9 29
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 26.8 47
6.2 Knowledge impact 38.6 28 ª
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.8 62
Infrastructure 49.3 42 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.3 28 ª
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 14 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 76.9 51 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 16.5 72 «
3.1.1 ICT access* 92.6 57
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 25.3 52
3.1.2 ICT use* 79.5 58
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 64
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 75.2 48
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 49.4 50
3.1.4 E-participation* 60.5 55
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.5 54
3.2 General infrastructure 36.5 47 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.1 80
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 4,690.6 47 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 19.8 8 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 72.7 18
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 20.1 100 «
Creative outputs 32.6 41
3.3 Ecological sustainability 34.6 29
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 15.4 28 7.1 Intangible assets 38.0 40
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 19.2 58 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 56.5 37
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 5.9 16 ª
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.6 60
Market sophistication 32.8 66 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.2 26 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 20.3 55

4.1 Credit 28.9 60 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.5 55
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 40.5 55 «É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 4.9 26
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 52.6 62 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 21.8 29
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.3 37
4.2 Investment 7.5 70 7.3 Online creativity 34.0 46
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 27.3 54 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 16.8 33
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 46 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 23.2 42
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 69 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 62.0 79
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 61
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 61.9 42
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 86.4 47
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 417.0 53

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Guatemala 122 163

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
122 117 Upper middle LCN 18.1 201.4 10,595

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 28.8 114 É Business sophistication 22.4 88

1.1 Institutional environment 36.1 105 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 22.7 98 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 52.0 89 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 10.9 107 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 20.3 122 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 55.7 11
1.2 Regulatory environment 22.8 108 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 91 «

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 34.2 88 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 11.1 76

1.2.2 Rule of law* 11.5 124 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 3.8 99 É

1.3 Business environment 27.4 106 5.2 Innovation linkages 18.2 90

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 42.4 81 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.9 89
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 12.4 75 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 37.9 81
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 42.3 78
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 116
Human capital and research 12.1 126 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 97
5.3 Knowledge absorption 26.5 64 ª
2.1 Education 31.7 118 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.6 20 ª
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.2 100
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 10.7 34 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 5.9 95 «É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.2 69 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 10.8 100 É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.3 69 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 363.8 77
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 3.5 77 É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 9.1 22 ª

2.2 Tertiary education 4.3 124 «É

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 18.7 105 É Knowledge and technology outputs 10.7 109 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 9.8 110

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.2 108 «É 6.1 Knowledge creation 1.4 129 «É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 120
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.2 115 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 96
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 14.5 109 «É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 66
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.1 109 «
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 129 «É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.0 114
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 16.9 118
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.7 65 ª
Infrastructure 24.0 117 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 127 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 43.1 110 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 48.6 109 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 13.8 79
3.1.2 ICT use* n/a n/a
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 62 ª
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 49.3 92
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 37.9 74
3.1.4 E-participation* 31.4 104 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.4 69 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 11.3 123 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.4 51 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 812.4 101 É
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 109
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 22.7 82
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 16.6 119 É
Creative outputs 4.8 [125]
3.3 Ecological sustainability 17.7 74
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.5 78 7.1 Intangible assets 0.8 [129]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 27.3 44 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 113 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 19.4 111 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 112
7.2 Creative goods and services 2.5 [107]
4.1 Credit 11.8 109 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 93
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 12.5 82 «É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 36.8 83 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 78
4.2 Investment 1.1 109 7.3 Online creativity 15.2 113 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.8 82
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 93 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 2.2 102
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 100 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 41.6 116 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 96
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 45.4 90
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.7 61 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 201.4 73

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

164 Honduras 114

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
111 112 Lower middle LCN 10.6 75.0 7,163

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 22.2 122 Business sophistication 20.6 100

1.1 Institutional environment 32.7 111 5.1 Knowledge workers 22.0 99

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 44.0 106 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 11.1 106
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 21.4 118 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 47.7 21
1.2 Regulatory environment 21.9 110 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 89
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 29.1 99 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 21.1 68
1.2.2 Rule of law* 14.7 119 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 2.4 108

1.3 Business environment 11.9 [127] 5.2 Innovation linkages 11.9 121
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 11.9 125 É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.6 113
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 20.6 118
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 31.7 102
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 111
Human capital and research 25.5 88 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 86
5.3 Knowledge absorption 27.8 62
2.1 Education 63.1 [22]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.8 50 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.4 57 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 9.0 53 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.5 53 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.4 67
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 11.8 50 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 12.7 108

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 25.1 95 Knowledge and technology outputs 12.1 99
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 15.7 99 É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.8 93 6.1 Knowledge creation 1.4 130 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 128 «É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.6 106 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 187.4 84 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 74 «É
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.1 108 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 2.8 118
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 2.2 126
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 26.2 62
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.7 35 ª
Infrastructure 25.3 112 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 70
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 31.4 120 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 49.4 108
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 8.6 100
3.1.2 ICT use* 52.0 106
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 16.2 131 «É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 30.0 88
3.1.4 E-participation* 8.1 131 «É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 0.2 110
3.2 General infrastructure 23.6 91 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.8 90
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 1,081.9 96 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.3 87
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 36.4 65
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.7 64
Creative outputs 8.4 110
3.3 Ecological sustainability 21.0 64
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.1 85 7.1 Intangible assets 8.3 102
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 34.3 25 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 89 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 34.1 58 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 22.8 [100] 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 124
7.2 Creative goods and services 1.0 [120]
4.1 Credit 23.9 [74] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 69.5 47 ª
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 0.1 102
4.2 Investment 1.0 [111] 7.3 Online creativity 15.9 112
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.4 111
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 86 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.8 107
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 45.5 110
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 43.3 94
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.9 63 È

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 75.0 98

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Hong Kong, China 18 165

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
31 9 High SEAO 7.4 549.0 72,861

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 82.1 8 Business sophistication 49.7 25 É

1.1 Institutional environment 87.1 8 5.1 Knowledge workers 48.7 35 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 88.7 7 ª 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 41.2 29
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 85.5 8 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 44.4 24
1.2 Regulatory environment 82.1 19 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.4 45 É

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 83.6 12 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 49.2 32

1.2.2 Rule of law* 80.5 21 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 16.1 47 É

1.3 Business environment 77.1 11 5.2 Innovation linkages 50.4 20

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 76.9 15 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.0 44 É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 77.2 7 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 74.2 19
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 80.2 20
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 8
Human capital and research 55.7 15 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 30 É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 50.1 11

2.1 Education 62.6 26
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.3 88 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.7 83 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 58.3 1 ªÈ
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 24.7 22
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.4 116 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 17.3 19
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 35.0 2 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 520.2 5
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 35.6 37 É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 10.7 38
2.2 Tertiary education 56.6 5 ªÈ
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 97.3 8 Knowledge and technology outputs 22.8 58 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 19.0 10 6.1 Knowledge creation 26.7 [36]
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 64 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 48.1 20 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 4,809.0 22 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 22
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.1 36 É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ n/a n/a 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 40.0 23
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 78.2 8
6.2 Knowledge impact 36.1 38
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.5 71
Infrastructure 55.4 16 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 2.5 13
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 30
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 95.9 [4] 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 9.4 90 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.5 20
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 5.7 114 «É
3.1.2 ICT use* 92.2 12
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 56 É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* n/a n/a
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* n/a n/a
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 120 «É
3.2 General infrastructure 37.1 44 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.5 99 «É
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 5,018.2 43 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 5.4 53
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 86.4 7
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 15.9 121 «É
Creative outputs 51.8 12
3.3 Ecological sustainability 33.2 31
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 35.2 2 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 50.3 21
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.2 126 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.0 50 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 50.9 34
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 24.2 1 ªÈ

Market sophistication 71.9 2 ªÈ 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 47
7.2 Creative goods and services 45.6 10
4.1 Credit 92.2 1 ªÈ
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 88 «É
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 84.3 5 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 4.8 27
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 263.6 1 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 49.9 13
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 12.1 1 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 66.0 7 7.3 Online creativity 60.9 17

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 1,506.5 1 ªÈ
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 36.3 19
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 7 È
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 30 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 85.6 3 ªÈ
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 11
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 57.6 62
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.0 1 ªÈ

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 62.1 94 «É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 549.0 44

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

166 Hungary 36
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
35 37 High EUR 9.7 421.7 43,601

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 52.2 53 É Business sophistication 46.3 28

1.1 Institutional environment 66.0 40 5.1 Knowledge workers 48.2 36

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 74.0 37 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 38.7 33
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 57.9 45 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 28.1 58
1.2 Regulatory environment 54.3 48 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 1.0 23
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 52.5 54 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 50.6 27
1.2.2 Rule of law* 56.0 46 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 18.7 36

1.3 Business environment 36.3 87 « 5.2 Innovation linkages 35.4 35

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 40.4 89 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 5.5 9 ªÈ

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 32.3 50 « 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 55.1 46
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 48.1 63
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 67
Human capital and research 42.9 34 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 39
5.3 Knowledge absorption 55.4 6 ªÈ
2.1 Education 57.2 50
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.0 36
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.0 43
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 15.1 17 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 18.9 56 «
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.4 58
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 15.1 48
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 38.4 1 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 477.2 29
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 60.4 16
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 9.6 28
2.2 Tertiary education 36.8 52
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 56.5 62 Knowledge and technology outputs 35.6 25
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 21.6 67 «
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 13.2 16 ª 6.1 Knowledge creation 22.5 48
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 45
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 34.9 29 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 36
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 4,726.0 25 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 30
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.4 31 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 19.9 33
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 50.8 29 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 29.3 34
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 18.1 51
6.2 Knowledge impact 37.2 33
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.6 37 È
Infrastructure 51.0 35 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 59
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 74.3 60 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 56.5 7 ªÈ
3.1.1 ICT access* 96.8 37
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 47.1 15 ª
3.1.2 ICT use* 78.2 64 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.9 19
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 72.0 56
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 81.4 11 ª
3.1.4 E-participation* 50.0 75 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 13.5 12 ªÈ
3.2 General infrastructure 37.1 45 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.9 59
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 3,686.5 59 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 20.5 7 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 50.0 50 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 29.3 29 È
Creative outputs 32.1 44
3.3 Ecological sustainability 41.8 13 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 13.0 42 7.1 Intangible assets 27.5 68
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 22.7 57 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 52.5 43
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 8.8 8 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 20.7 85 «
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 1.5 50
Market sophistication 34.1 60 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 59
7.2 Creative goods and services 32.9 24
4.1 Credit 33.1 47 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.8 35
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 55.4 31 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 3.0 43
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 36.0 85 «É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 13.2 31 É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 6.1 8 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 5.0 79 «É

7.3 Online creativity 40.6 34
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 16.2 67 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 22.0 27
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 56 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 32.6 35
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 84 «É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 67.0 61
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 67 «

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 64.0 32

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 92.9 26
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 421.7 52

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Iceland 22 167

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
29 15 High EUR 0.4 27.1 69,833

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 78.6 13 Business sophistication 52.4 21

1.1 Institutional environment 88.4 6 ª 5.1 Knowledge workers 69.7 10

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 92.0 3 ªÈ 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 52.2 6 ª
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 84.8 12 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 84.4 14 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 1.9 12
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 76.2 20 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 52.5 24
1.2.2 Rule of law* 92.7 9 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 26.5 15

1.3 Business environment 63.1 [28] 5.2 Innovation linkages 46.8 26 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 63.1 37 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 4.9 14
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 68.0 29
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 58.4 42 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 21
Human capital and research 47.5 26 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 25 É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 40.8 28

2.1 Education 68.4 7 ªÈ
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.7 57
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 7.1 5 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.3 66
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 24.0 29
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 3.2 10
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 19.1 7 ª
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ܝ‬ 119 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 447.3 41 É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 54.6 20
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 9.3 23
2.2 Tertiary education 34.2 63 É
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 86.5 16 Knowledge and technology outputs 30.3 37 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 17.0 93 «É

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 7.9 36 6.1 Knowledge creation 46.9 15
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.4 22
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 39.9 26 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.6 18
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 6,865.2 8 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 2.7 13 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 46.9 1 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 46.6 35 É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 18.4 47 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 25.1 66 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.8 59
Infrastructure 64.9 3 ªÈ 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 38
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 89.5 14 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 17.7 65 É
3.1.1 ICT access* 100.0 9
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 18.7 61 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 91.6 15
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.8 21
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 87.5 16
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 79.1 17
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.5 53
3.2 General infrastructure 65.0 5 ªÈ
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.7 30
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 52,670.2 1 ªÈ
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 3.3 74
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 68.2 25 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 22.5 81
Creative outputs 45.6 21
3.3 Ecological sustainability 40.0 17
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 3.3 126 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 31.0 60 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 83.7 1 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 54.3 40 É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.2 48 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 54.5 26
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 52.4 22 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.3 90 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 43.5 12

4.1 Credit 34.6 [42] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.0 26
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 36.9 1 ªÈ
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 96.6 24 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 97 «

4.2 Investment 71.5 4 ªÈ

7.3 Online creativity 76.8 3 ª
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 89.3 3 ªÈ
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 10 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 82.0 8 ª
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 1 ªÈ
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 59.2 88 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 8
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 51.1 78 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 20

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 61.8 96 «É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 27.1 128 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

168 India 39
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
33 44 Lower middle CSA 1,439.2 13,119.6 9,183

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 51.5 54 È Business sophistication 28.1 58 È

1.1 Institutional environment 56.2 58 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 25.1 88

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 58.7 74 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 11.7 103 «
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 53.7 53 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 35.9 48
1.2 Regulatory environment 43.8 64 È 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.2 51 È

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 40.5 75 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 40.6 43 È

1.2.2 Rule of law* 47.1 59 È 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 2.9 105 «

1.3 Business environment 54.4 47 5.2 Innovation linkages 24.6 61

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 38.5 91 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.4 33 È

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 70.2 13 È 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 36.9 86
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 37.9 87
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 27 È
Human capital and research 34.8 51 È 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 45 È

5.3 Knowledge absorption 34.6 42 È

2.1 Education 44.5 82
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.3 28 È
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.6 50
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.5 45
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 18.0 58
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.1 29 È
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 12.9 85 «
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.8 80
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 30.7 44 È
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 20.0 97 «

2.2 Tertiary education 28.4 79

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 33.1 88 Knowledge and technology outputs 38.8 22 È

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 29.3 25

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 0.1 110 « 6.1 Knowledge creation 24.9 39 È
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.2 23 È
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 31.4 34 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 41 È
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 260.4 83 «
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.6 54 È
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 8.0 84
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 65.4 18 ªÈ
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 43.1 19 ªÈ
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 47.2 24 È
6.2 Knowledge impact 53.4 9 ªÈ
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.1 50
Infrastructure 39.0 72 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 4.7 8 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 55
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 64.0 82 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 34.6 34 È
3.1.1 ICT access* 46.7 110 «
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 38.3 28 È
3.1.2 ICT use* 74.2 79
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.2 47 È
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 77.2 42 È
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 55.1 42 È
3.1.4 E-participation* 58.1 61 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 4.2 41
3.2 General infrastructure 39.2 37 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 11.9 1 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 1,259.9 92 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 5.4 54 È
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 59.1 37 È
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 31.3 20
Creative outputs 32.1 43 È
3.3 Ecological sustainability 13.9 97
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 10.0 71 7.1 Intangible assets 39.6 37 È
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 11.2 84 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 77.7 7 ªÈ
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 68 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 37.7 54
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 5.5 31 È

Market sophistication 52.3 23 È 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.6 43
7.2 Creative goods and services 23.3 50 È
4.1 Credit 33.2 46 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.9 13 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 79.2 8 ªÈ
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 2.5 51
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 50.4 68 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 1.0 61 «
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.4 46 «
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.8 28
4.2 Investment 39.5 17 È
7.3 Online creativity 26.0 63
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 105.6 18 È
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.8 101 «
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 42 È
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.7 77
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 33 È
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 72.6 34 È
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 6 ªÈ

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 84.3 10 ªÈ

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 5.4 98

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 94.9 16 ªÈ
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 13,119.6 1 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Indonesia 54 169

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
67 54 Upper middle SEAO 281.2 4,393.4 15,836

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 59.5 40 È Business sophistication 24.2 78

1.1 Institutional environment 57.7 55 5.1 Knowledge workers 10.1 120 «É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 60.0 70 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 10.9 108 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 55.4 50 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 8.4 98 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 42.8 66 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 83 «

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 47.2 60 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 8.0 80

1.2.2 Rule of law* 38.4 77 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 6.3 92 É

1.3 Business environment 78.0 10 ªÈ 5.2 Innovation linkages 36.9 32 È

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 78.0 13 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.5 121 «

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 77.9 6 ªÈ 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 86.2 6 ªÈ
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 91.8 7 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 105
Human capital and research 25.2 90 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 101
5.3 Knowledge absorption 25.6 71
2.1 Education 30.2 122 «É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.8 52
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.4 115 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.9 55
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 10.6 86 «É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.9 33 È
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 13.8 71
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.7 81
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 369.0 75 «
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 7.5 64
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 20.7 101
2.2 Tertiary education 20.0 96
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 42.6 77 Knowledge and technology outputs 19.9 73
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 19.4 81
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.1 111 «É 6.1 Knowledge creation 11.1 78
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 82
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 25.5 38 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 82
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 399.6 78 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 21
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.3 75 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 1.6 126 «É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 54.6 27 È
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 14.4 57
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 39.0 33
6.2 Knowledge impact 34.9 41
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.2 47
Infrastructure 41.2 67 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.7 36
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.4 26 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 76.7 52 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 29.4 42
3.1.1 ICT access* 80.9 85
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 13.8 80
3.1.2 ICT use* 81.2 49
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 70
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 74.0 51
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 40.7 63
3.1.4 E-participation* 70.9 37
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 3.5 46
3.2 General infrastructure 32.0 61 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.8 89
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 1,223.9 93 É
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.5 84
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 40.9 60
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 30.3 26 È
Creative outputs 24.8 65
3.3 Ecological sustainability 14.8 94
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 13.9 35 7.1 Intangible assets 32.6 54
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 6.6 99 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 74.4 13 ª
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 76 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 26.6 72
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 2.8 41
Market sophistication 44.3 35 È 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 64
7.2 Creative goods and services 9.8 75
4.1 Credit 30.3 56 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 101 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 80.4 7 ªÈ
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.6 74
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 35.3 87 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 3.4 48 É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.0 61 «
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 2.5 24 ª

4.2 Investment 13.0 53 7.3 Online creativity 24.0 74

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 47.3 39 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.2 92
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 73 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.2 89
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 63 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 66.5 62
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 33
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 89.6 6 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.6 57

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 94.3 22 ª
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 4,393.4 7 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

170 Iran (Islamic Republic of) 64

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
48 85 Lower middle CSA 90.6 1,725.9 19,942

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 10.9 133 «É Business sophistication 18.6 110

1.1 Institutional environment 20.1 127 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 19.8 [104]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 19.3 130 «É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 20.4 78
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 20.9 120 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 7.3 131 «É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.2 53
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 0.0 133 «É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 14.7 118 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 8.0 86

1.3 Business environment 5.3 128 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 12.7 114
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 10.6 126 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.1 82
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 0.0 85 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 19.2 121 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 32.5 99
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 125 «É
Human capital and research 32.1 64 È 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 88
5.3 Knowledge absorption 23.4 76
2.1 Education 40.0 93
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.2 94
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.7 109
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 13.5 18 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 16.0 67
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.7 101
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 14.1 66 È
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.4 108
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 19.2 55
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 19.0 96
2.2 Tertiary education 41.3 35 È
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 60.7 54 È Knowledge and technology outputs 25.9 49 È

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 35.0 8 ªÈ

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.8 94 6.1 Knowledge creation 30.0 32 È
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 5.1 14 ªÈ
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 15.0 48 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 46 È
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 1,597.3 47 È
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.8 45 È
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 23.3 28 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 23.5 40 È
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 31.2 42 È
6.2 Knowledge impact 39.0 26 ªÈ
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.7 68
Infrastructure 29.6 95 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.7 3 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 50.9 102 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 30.8 37 È
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 73.1 89
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 8.8 99
3.1.2 ICT use* 78.1 65 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 95
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 35.9 115
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 38.3 72
3.1.4 E-participation* 16.3 128 «É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 0.2 107
3.2 General infrastructure 34.9 50 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.2 125
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 3,914.3 54 È
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 108
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 9.1 105 «
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 40.1 5 ªÈ
Creative outputs 30.9 52 È
3.3 Ecological sustainability 3.2 130 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 4.4 122 É
7.1 Intangible assets 49.2 23 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 1.2 120 É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 104 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 218.3 1 ªÈ
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.2 71
Market sophistication 55.4 17 ªÈ 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 5.0 16 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 4.3 102

4.1 Credit 24.2 72 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.2 79
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 28.0 70 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 1.4 63
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 60.3 52 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 1.1 59
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 0.2 74
4.2 Investment 100.0 [1] 7.3 Online creativity 20.9 95
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 484.1 1 ªÈ
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 4.1 61 È
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.9 105
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 56.7 93
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 41.9 97
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 11.7 131 «É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 83.7 58
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,725.9 19 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Ireland 19 171

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
15 25 High EUR 5.2 722.9 137,638

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 79.1 11 Business sophistication 55.7 16

1.1 Institutional environment 82.6 15 5.1 Knowledge workers 67.5 15

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 80.7 22 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 47.2 16
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 84.4 13 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 59.8 8
1.2 Regulatory environment 86.3 12 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.8 34 É

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 84.9 10 ª 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 55.5 19

1.2.2 Rule of law* 87.6 15 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 29.9 4 ªÈ

1.3 Business environment 68.6 23 5.2 Innovation linkages 48.0 24 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 77.4 14 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 3.8 22
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 59.7 19 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 70.2 23
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 74.1 28
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 24
Human capital and research 48.1 25 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 2.2 18
5.3 Knowledge absorption 51.6 8 ª
2.1 Education 54.2 59 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 21.4 1 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 2.9 103 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.4 80 «
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 12.0 82 «É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.7 41
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 19.1 6 ªÈ
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 8.9 11
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 503.8 8
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 44.4 33 É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 14.5 72 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 42.0 33

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 78.8 24 Knowledge and technology outputs 47.3 14
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 24.9 46
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 9.3 29 6.1 Knowledge creation 22.7 46 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 33
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 48.0 21 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 22 É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 5,505.3 15 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 45 «
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.0 42 É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 12.8 55 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 70.7 12 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 35.3 28
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 50.0 22
6.2 Knowledge impact 52.8 10 ª
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 117 «É
Infrastructure 54.8 20 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.8 21
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 17
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 78.5 47 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 66.6 3
3.1.1 ICT access* 91.7 58 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 66.4 1 ªÈ
3.1.2 ICT use* 79.4 60 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 2.8 9 ª
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 75.6 45 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 79.3 13
3.1.4 E-participation* 67.4 47 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 14.9 9 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 40.9 35 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 33.0 1 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 6,584.6 29 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.2 68 «
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 68.2 25 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.6 65 «
Creative outputs 42.3 28 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 45.0 7 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 41.6 1 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 40.0 36
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 18.5 61 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 88.3 2 ªÈ
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.6 62 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 3.7 38 É

Market sophistication 37.9 48 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 73 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 34.2 21

4.1 Credit 34.3 43 É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.9 33
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 61.6 25 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 8.4 11
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 26.2 106 «É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 45.8 16
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.1 43
4.2 Investment 21.1 40 É
7.3 Online creativity 55.0 24
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 37.4 42 É
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 31.8 21
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 20 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 59.6 17
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 32 É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 73.5 29
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 41 É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 58.3 58

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 69.6 79
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 722.9 38

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

172 Israel 15
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
13 22 High NAWA 9.3 537.1 54,771

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 65.5 34 É Business sophistication 59.0 9

1.1 Institutional environment 70.1 35 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 79.2 4 ªÈ

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 64.0 62 «É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 52.0 7
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 76.3 24 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 72.2 26 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 5.6 1 ªÈ

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 73.5 24 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 45.0 37 É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 70.9 28 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 24.7 20

1.3 Business environment 54.0 49 É 5.2 Innovation linkages 64.3 6 ª

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 59.4 43 É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.9 26 É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 48.6 29 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 96.6 2 ªÈ
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 62.0 38 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 3 ªÈ
Human capital and research 53.1 18 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 5.3 7 ª

5.3 Knowledge absorption 33.6 47 É

2.1 Education 58.1 46 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.8 45
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 6.5 9 È
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 10.0 39
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 20.9 43 «
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.1 27
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 15.0 49 É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 5.1 20
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 465.5 37 É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 14.5 73 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 34.8 59 «É

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 59.0 58 «É Knowledge and technology outputs 56.1 7 ª

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 27.2 35

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 3.4 61 «É 6.1 Knowledge creation 53.1 12
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.0 24
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 66.3 8 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.6 7
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 6.0 1 ªÈ
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 26.5 24
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 61.3 23 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 46.1 17
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 37.6 34
6.2 Knowledge impact 59.4 5 ª
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.1 24 È
Infrastructure 50.0 41 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 10.4 1 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 65 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 84.8 28 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 45.3 17
3.1.1 ICT access* 92.7 56 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 55.9 7 ª
3.1.2 ICT use* 89.3 20
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.6 27 É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 86.1 21
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 72.4 21
3.1.4 E-participation* 70.9 37
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 10.5 17
3.2 General infrastructure 45.4 28 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 18.0 1 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 7,968.8 20 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 17.6 14 È
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 68.2 25 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 26.3 41
Creative outputs 41.1 30 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 19.8 67 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 17.2 19 7.1 Intangible assets 29.0 65 «É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 6.3 100 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 66.7 23
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.7 57 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 9.6 111 «É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 2.8 42 É

Market sophistication 56.7 12 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 53
7.2 Creative goods and services 44.8 11
4.1 Credit 43.4 32 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 3.1 7 È
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 62.6 23 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 6.4 17
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 70.2 46 É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 37.9 21
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.2 39
4.2 Investment 66.3 6 ª
7.3 Online creativity 61.4 16
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 63.0 32 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 14.8 36 É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 8 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 83.4 7
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 1 ªÈ
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 86.0 2 ªÈ
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 1 ªÈ

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 60.5 51

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.7 60 «

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 84.1 57 «
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 537.1 47

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Italy 26 173

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
18 34 High EUR 59.5 3,193.2 54,259

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 51.2 55 É Business sophistication 38.7 34

1.1 Institutional environment 60.5 51 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 39.8 48

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 65.3 55 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 35.7 40
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 55.7 48 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 12.6 92 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 53.8 50 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.8 32
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 55.3 47 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 53.9 22
1.2.2 Rule of law* 52.4 53 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 14.6 54

1.3 Business environment 39.4 80 « 5.2 Innovation linkages 42.3 27

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 53.1 55 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.8 27
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 25.7 61 « 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 68.5 28
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 75.8 25
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 48
Human capital and research 45.4 30 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 1.9 21
5.3 Knowledge absorption 34.0 44
2.1 Education 59.0 42
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.8 53
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.0 72 «
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.4 47
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 24.0 27
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.9 35
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 16.7 27
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.4 110 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 476.8 31
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 43.9 34
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 9.9 32
2.2 Tertiary education 34.2 64
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 71.3 40 Knowledge and technology outputs 41.4 19
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 23.9 54
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 3.4 60 6.1 Knowledge creation 39.0 24
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.4 18
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 43.1 24 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 27
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 2,723.8 32 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 28
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.3 32 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 23.5 27
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 69.5 14 ª
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 68.4 8 ªÈ
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 53.5 18 ª
6.2 Knowledge impact 39.7 23
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.3 80 «
Infrastructure 52.5 28 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.2 47
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 6 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 82.9 34 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 36.7 32
3.1.1 ICT access* 91.2 60 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 45.4 19
3.1.2 ICT use* 83.1 40
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.7 24
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 85.2 23
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 77.0 16 ª
3.1.4 E-participation* 72.1 32
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 7.5 27
3.2 General infrastructure 37.8 42 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.3 73 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 4,826.5 44 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 31.1 3 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 72.7 18
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 21.3 91 «
Creative outputs 47.5 18 ª
3.3 Ecological sustainability 36.8 26
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 16.6 21 7.1 Intangible assets 63.8 8 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 15.9 70 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 63.8 29
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 6.8 12 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 41.1 45
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 9.5 18
Market sophistication 43.1 38 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 13.4 1 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 26.3 44

4.1 Credit 36.8 38 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.5 57
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 48.9 41 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 6.0 20
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 71.5 44 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 27.0 23
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 2.3 25
4.2 Investment 8.0 69 «
7.3 Online creativity 36.3 40
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 27.9 52 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 21.3 28
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 61 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 20.2 45
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 60 «
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 67.4 60
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 59
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 84.4 9 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 99.1 4 ª
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 3,193.2 13 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

174 Jamaica 79
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
65 91 Upper middle LCN 2.8 35.7 12,995

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 50.3 59 Business sophistication 24.3 75

1.1 Institutional environment 62.6 46 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 32.9 [63]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 65.3 55 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 22.6 66
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 59.8 41 ªÈ 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 44.3 63 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 46.8 61 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 41.8 64 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 10.3 74

1.3 Business environment 44.2 71 5.2 Innovation linkages 18.3 89

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 52.7 56 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.6 110
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 35.6 47 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 35.5 89
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 34.2 95
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 30 ªÈ
Human capital and research 22.4 [98] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 77
5.3 Knowledge absorption 21.6 86
2.1 Education 52.0 64
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.9 42 ª
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.7 23 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.2 116
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 31.7 6 ªÈ
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.0 81
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 12.8 86
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.0 76
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 396.7 65
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 14.6 74
2.2 Tertiary education 15.2 [107]
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 26.4 93 Knowledge and technology outputs 13.1 94
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 5.5 109
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 94
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 61
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 5.2 103
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.7 104
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 22.6 79
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 119 «É
Infrastructure 27.2 104 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 31 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 55.4 95 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 89.9 65
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 11.3 90
3.1.2 ICT use* 61.3 98 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 61
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 43.8 102 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 35.2 78
3.1.4 E-participation* 26.7 108 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 122 «
3.2 General infrastructure 17.1 107 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.6 65
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 1,527.6 90 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.9 94
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89 «É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 22.8 78
Creative outputs 32.1 45
3.3 Ecological sustainability 9.1 110 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 10.1 70 7.1 Intangible assets 54.1 14 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 3.2 111 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 60.2 32
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 95 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 85.9 10 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 6.3 30 ªÈ

Market sophistication 19.6 110 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.6 17 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 1.8 111 É

4.1 Credit 23.9 73 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 98 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 31.3 65 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 Ա 0.5 77
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 50.8 66 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 100
4.2 Investment 14.8 [47] 7.3 Online creativity 18.2 104
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 81.3 22 ª
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.2 94
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 77 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 3.2 95
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 50.3 104
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 19.9 125 «É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 7.7 118 «É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 35.7 123 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Japan 13 175

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
14 12 High SEAO 124.4 6,495.2 52,120

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 71.2 23 Business sophistication 62.5 6 ª

1.1 Institutional environment 86.5 9 5.1 Knowledge workers 66.8 16

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 86.7 9 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 20.9 74 «É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 86.3 7 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 84.1 16 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 2.7 4 ª

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 79.6 17 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 78.5 2 ªÈ

1.2.2 Rule of law* 88.5 13 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 22.9 23

1.3 Business environment 42.9 74 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 61.7 9

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 63.2 36 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 9.0 1 ªÈ

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 22.7 64 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 66.8 31 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 66.4 36 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 41 É
Human capital and research 52.9 19 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 12.6 3 ªÈ

5.3 Knowledge absorption 59.1 3 ªÈ

2.1 Education 60.4 35
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 3.2 7
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 3.5 92 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 16.3 14
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 24.8 21
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.3 25
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 15.4 45 É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.0 98 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 532.7 3 ªÈ
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 75.2 5 È
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 10.6 36
2.2 Tertiary education 29.5 74 «É
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 63.2 50 É Knowledge and technology outputs 49.7 12
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 19.5 80 «É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 5.6 47 6.1 Knowledge creation 58.3 8
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 35.6 3 ªÈ
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 68.6 6 ª
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 7.5 1 ªÈ
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 5,646.8 14 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 29
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 3.4 6 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 12.0 59 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 85.5 6 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 66.6 10
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 75.7 9
6.2 Knowledge impact 36.5 36
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.0 95 «
Infrastructure 56.3 13 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.2 45 É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 33
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 93.5 8 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 54.6 9
3.1.1 ICT access* 95.8 43
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 54.3 9
3.1.2 ICT use* 88.4 23
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 5.1 1 ªÈ
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 90.0 10
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 100.0 1 ªÈ
3.1.4 E-participation* 100.0 1 ªÈ
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 11.7 15
3.2 General infrastructure 50.0 16 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.0 81 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 8,035.1 18 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 6.7 40
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 81.8 13
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 26.3 42
Creative outputs 45.1 22
3.3 Ecological sustainability 25.3 48
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 13.5 40 7.1 Intangible assets 54.7 13
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 15.0 72 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 68.3 21
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 3.6 27 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 42.6 41
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 16.1 7
Market sophistication 61.5 8 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.5 24
7.2 Creative goods and services 35.5 20
4.1 Credit 63.2 9 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.4 59 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 53.3 35 É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 7.8 13
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 194.9 3 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 59.8 8
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.7 29
4.2 Investment 27.7 29 7.3 Online creativity 35.4 42 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 129.8 10 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 9.9 41 É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 31 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 24.6 40 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 22 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 71.8 41
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 53 «É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 93.5 3 ªÈ

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.3 52

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 91.0 31
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 6,495.2 1 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

176 Jordan 73
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
74 69 Lower middle NAWA 11.4 132.1 12,809

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 52.4 52 È Business sophistication 24.9 72

1.1 Institutional environment 51.9 73 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 25.3 [85]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 54.7 85 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 22.1 68
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 49.1 56 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 16.9 87
1.2 Regulatory environment 48.0 58 È 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 46.0 65 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 50.1 56 È 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 8.0 85

1.3 Business environment 57.2 40 5.2 Innovation linkages 34.5 36 È

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 69.2 30 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.6 116 «

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 45.2 35 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 73.1 21 ªÈ
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 84.4 15 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 52 È
Human capital and research 26.1 85 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 85
5.3 Knowledge absorption 15.0 126 «
2.1 Education 33.7 113
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.2 97
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.2 98
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.0 99
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 16.6 63
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.2 127 «
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.8 78
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 359.3 81 «
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 15.1 77
2.2 Tertiary education 35.9 55 È
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 36.0 85 Knowledge and technology outputs 19.6 76
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 27.2 36
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 10.8 23 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 22.5 49 È
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 100
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 8.7 63 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 54 È
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 577.9 67 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.7 51 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 33.8 12 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 10.8 70
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 17.7 52
6.2 Knowledge impact 23.0 78
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 114
Infrastructure 32.4 90 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 34 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 71.6 71 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 20.5 61
3.1.1 ICT access* 97.8 31 ªÈ
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 13.3 81
3.1.2 ICT use* 72.8 80
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 63
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 62.4 73 È
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 45.3 57 È
3.1.4 E-participation* 53.5 67 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.0 75
3.2 General infrastructure 8.0 128 «
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.1 131 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 1,916.0 83 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 5.1 56 È
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 16.8 117 «É
Creative outputs 21.3 76
3.3 Ecological sustainability 17.6 75
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 11.5 57 7.1 Intangible assets 24.0 75
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 13.0 80 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 31.9 65
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.7 59 È
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 27.4 69
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.7 59
Market sophistication 36.4 55 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 74
7.2 Creative goods and services 10.3 72
4.1 Credit 30.1 58 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 110 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 50.2 38 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.5 75 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 84.4 34 È
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 1.4 54 «
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.9 33 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 2.9 20 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 22.5 37 7.3 Online creativity 27.0 59 È

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 47.0 40 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.8 83
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 45 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.6 81
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 45 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 74.5 26 ªÈ
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 14 ªÈ

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 56.7 66

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.9 79

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 90.5 38
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 132.1 85

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Kazakhstan 78 177

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
83 72 Upper middle CSA 20.4 654.0 32,712

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 44.2 76 Business sophistication 26.0 66

1.1 Institutional environment 52.5 70 5.1 Knowledge workers 42.4 44

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 57.3 78 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 39.0 32 ªÈ
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 47.7 58 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 21.8 75
1.2 Regulatory environment 35.9 84 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 72
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 41.5 72 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 47.4 34
1.2.2 Rule of law* 30.2 91 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 20.7 30

1.3 Business environment 44.3 68 5.2 Innovation linkages 13.5 112

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 38.2 92 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.6 61
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 50.4 25 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 23.9 109
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 24.2 114 «É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 107
Human capital and research 32.0 65 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 71
5.3 Knowledge absorption 22.0 83
2.1 Education 51.1 66
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.4 83
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.2 63
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.0 52
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 21.2 42
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.8 94
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 14.8 53
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.9 50
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 411.6 54
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 8.3 16 ª

2.2 Tertiary education 34.7 60

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 64.8 48 Knowledge and technology outputs 15.9 85
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 24.1 51
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 5.5 48 6.1 Knowledge creation 16.4 64
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 43
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 10.3 60 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 81
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 681.5 64 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 1.6 10 ª
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.1 98 «
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 3.2 115 «
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 6.1 92
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 32.5 38 ª
6.2 Knowledge impact 18.9 108
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.8 30 ª
Infrastructure 40.9 68 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 128 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 87.7 16 ªÈ
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 14.1 78
3.1.1 ICT access* 94.9 49
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 12.3 84
3.1.2 ICT use* 82.8 41
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 101
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 92.7 8 ªÈ
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 31.2 87
3.1.4 E-participation* 80.2 15 ªÈ
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 6.1 36 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 28.1 79 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.6 96
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 6,056.5 34 ªÈ
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 114 «
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 27.3 76
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 25.1 49
Creative outputs 19.5 83
3.3 Ecological sustainability 6.8 121 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 6.9 100 É
7.1 Intangible assets 19.8 80
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 4.0 108 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % Ա 13.2 68 «
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 93 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 24.6 75
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.3 67
Market sophistication 25.2 86 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 103
7.2 Creative goods and services 14.0 65
4.1 Credit 21.3 80 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 95
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 45.6 50 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 4.5 31 È
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 25.0 107 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP Ա 1.1 29 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.9 47
4.2 Investment 3.4 95 7.3 Online creativity 24.4 71
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 25.3 56 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.0 80
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 94 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 5.8 72
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 91 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 65.3 68
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 92
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 51.0 79
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.7 76

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 61.2 97 «É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 654.0 40

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

178 Kenya 96
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
87 105 Lower middle SSA 55.3 339.0 6,577

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 39.6 87 Business sophistication 21.3 93

1.1 Institutional environment 41.4 95 5.1 Knowledge workers 24.3 [91]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 46.7 100 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 13.8 97
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 36.1 86 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 37.4 44
1.2 Regulatory environment 33.2 89 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 31.8 92 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 34.6 84 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 2.2 109 «

1.3 Business environment 44.2 [70] 5.2 Innovation linkages 22.2 70

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 44.2 80 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.8 51 ªÈ

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 42.9 72
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 41.0 82
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 58
Human capital and research 16.1 118 « 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 93
5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.4 107
2.1 Education 39.2 [102]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.4 84
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.6 51
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.8 89
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.5 111
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.4 111
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 30.7 122
2.2 Tertiary education 7.2 117 «É
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 20.5 100 Knowledge and technology outputs 19.7 75
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 1.3 87 6.1 Knowledge creation 17.7 61
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 49 ª
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 2.1 89 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 69
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 169.3 87 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 15 ª
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.4 65 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 8.3 81
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 15.9 54
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 21.7 89
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.8 29 ª
Infrastructure 27.1 106 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 85
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 55.8 94 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 12.4 81
3.1.1 ICT access* 50.7 107
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 19.6 58
3.1.2 ICT use* 50.6 107 «
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.4 33 ªÈ
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 64.9 68 È
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 34.2 79
3.1.4 E-participation* 57.0 64 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.3 102
3.2 General infrastructure 8.5 127 «
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 5.7 17 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 239.9 117 «
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 99
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 19.1 105
Creative outputs 13.6 101
3.3 Ecological sustainability 17.1 83
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 8.0 94 7.1 Intangible assets 15.1 92
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 28.5 40 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % Ա ‫ܝ‬ 73 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 100 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 16.6 96
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 1.2 54
Market sophistication 22.6 101 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 91
7.2 Creative goods and services 1.1 119 «
4.1 Credit 6.1 123 «
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade Ա 0.0 102 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 31.5 93 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 1.7 52
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.3 49 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 98
4.2 Investment 26.3 31 ª
7.3 Online creativity 22.9 83
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 18.8 64 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.8 100
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 40 ªÈ
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 10.0 55 È
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 13 ªÈ
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 58.1 89
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 25 ªÈ

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 35.3 108

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 8.0 120 «

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 62.6 92
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 339.0 57

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Kuwait 71 179

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
68 70 High NAWA 4.8 256.6 51,765

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 46.8 66 É Business sophistication 16.4 120 É

1.1 Institutional environment 53.5 67 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 16.8 [111]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 60.0 70 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 22.7 65
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 46.9 60 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 49.6 55 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 47.4 58 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 1.0 92
1.2.2 Rule of law* 51.9 55 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % n/a n/a

1.3 Business environment 37.3 86 5.2 Innovation linkages 20.9 81 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 47.2 69 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.3 78
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 27.3 57 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 23.6 110 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 57.4 44 ª
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 49
Human capital and research 34.5 [53] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 11.5 133 «É

2.1 Education 59.9 [37]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 121 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP n/a n/a
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.7 111
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 17.9 59
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.1 131 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 14.7 54
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ ܝ‬120
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 7.6 6
2.2 Tertiary education 39.3 [42]
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 61.6 53 Knowledge and technology outputs 20.8 67 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 6.4 105 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.1 113 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 4.3 78 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 97
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 182.0 85 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.1 105 «É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 7.4 87 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 9.1 84 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 14.5 60
6.2 Knowledge impact 30.1 54
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.3 82
Infrastructure 43.6 60 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.5 22 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 80.0 44 ª
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 20.9 59
3.1.1 ICT access* 100.0 1 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 25.8 51
3.1.2 ICT use* 100.0 1 ªÈ
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade n/a n/a
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 66.5 66 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 46.4 55 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 53.5 67
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.2 111 É
3.2 General infrastructure 44.1 31 ª
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 5.6 18 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 19,007.1 5 ªÈ
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 3.4 73
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 50.0 50 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 17.5 115 «É
Creative outputs 23.1 69 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 6.8 120 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 4.7 120 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 31.6 57
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.1 127 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 39.7 62
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 55 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 19.4 90
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 9.6 17 ª

Market sophistication 29.8 76 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 116
7.2 Creative goods and services 5.9 92 É
4.1 Credit 41.9 35 ª
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 49.8 40 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.8 71 É
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 95.1 27 ª
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 11.2 33 É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 94
4.2 Investment 11.0 57 7.3 Online creativity 23.4 79 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 95.5 20 ª
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.7 73 É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 58 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.9 104 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 97 É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 65.5 67
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 63
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 36.6 107 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % Ա 3.4 84

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 31.6 105 «É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 256.6 65

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

180 Kyrgyzstan 99
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
105 86 Lower middle CSA 7.1 44.6 6,438

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 25.1 119 Business sophistication 17.5 117

1.1 Institutional environment 24.7 124 5.1 Knowledge workers 20.3 102
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 28.7 120 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 18.1 85
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 20.8 121 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 24.1 72
1.2 Regulatory environment 18.1 120 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 79
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 25.2 106 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 6.9 81
1.2.2 Rule of law* 10.9 125 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 11.7 67

1.3 Business environment 32.5 [95] 5.2 Innovation linkages 11.4 124
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 32.5 100 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.5 122
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 19.7 119
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 27.6 110
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 88
Human capital and research 39.6 42 ªÈ 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 54 ªÈ

5.3 Knowledge absorption 20.8 89

2.1 Education 71.1 [3]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 98
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 8.0 3 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 11.2 29 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.7 103
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 13.0 81
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.0 118
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 12.8 59
2.2 Tertiary education 47.2 19 ªÈ
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 56.0 64 È Knowledge and technology outputs 10.8 107
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 18.9 85
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 28.5 4 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 8.6 89
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 32 ªÈ
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.4 111 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 42
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.1 106 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 5.5 101
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 3.0 121
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 13.0 125 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.2 84
Infrastructure 36.3 78 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 107
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 69.0 75 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 2.1 107 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* 95.2 46 ªÈ
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 10.8 91
3.1.2 ICT use* 74.2 78
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 75
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 57.7 80
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 40.4 64
3.1.4 E-participation* 48.8 78
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.0 64
3.2 General infrastructure 15.2 114 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.6 97
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 2,035.9 79 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 130 «É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 9.1 105 «
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.2 72
Creative outputs 12.1 104
3.3 Ecological sustainability 24.9 49 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 7.6 97 7.1 Intangible assets 4.9 114
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 50.6 13 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 130 «
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 17.5 94
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 27.7 81 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 97
7.2 Creative goods and services 14.6 [64]
4.1 Credit 20.7 84 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 21.9 112 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 3.3 10 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.2 41 ª

4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 24.2 72

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.5 106
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 8.3 61 ª
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 63.8 72
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 34.8 110
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.9 78

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 26.1 106 «É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 44.6 115

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Lao People's Democratic Republic 111 181

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
121 99 Lower middle SEAO 7.7 74.2 9,787

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 38.5 88 Business sophistication 19.7 106

1.1 Institutional environment 42.9 91 5.1 Knowledge workers 18.1 [108]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 57.3 78 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 9.0 111
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 28.4 104 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 24.4 68
1.2 Regulatory environment 18.3 119 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 15.9 122 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 20.7 109 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 4.6 97

1.3 Business environment 54.3 [48] 5.2 Innovation linkages 27.6 54 È

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 54.3 51 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.5 67
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 57.9 42 ªÈ
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 61.6 39 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 93
Human capital and research 15.4 121 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 13.5 128 É

2.1 Education 28.6 125
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 121 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 1.4 126 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 4.0 122
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 12.6 80
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.2 130 É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 10.2 104
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 4.7 23 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 16.6 87
2.2 Tertiary education 17.5 104
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 12.5 112 Knowledge and technology outputs 10.8 108
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 23.1 59
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.6 97 6.1 Knowledge creation 2.0 126 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 128 «É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 54
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 2.4 119
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 3.7 115
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 20.3 99
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.1 51 ª
Infrastructure 29.5 96 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 56
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 39.6 113 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 4.8 99
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 58.7 103
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 9.9 94
3.1.2 ICT use* 52.5 104
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 22.7 129 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 32.7 83
3.1.4 E-participation* 24.4 115
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 3.2 48 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 18.1 102 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.3 116
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 6,048.5 35 ªÈ
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 111
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 13.6 102
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP n/a n/a
Creative outputs 5.4 123 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 30.8 39 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.6 76 7.1 Intangible assets 0.9 128 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 59.9 9 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 109 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 4.5 122
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 34.9 [58] 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 123
7.2 Creative goods and services 18.6 [58]
4.1 Credit 9.5 [111] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.9 35 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 1.5 33 ª

4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 1.3 129 É

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.1 78 È
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.5 122
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 60.3 52 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % Ա 0.7 9 ªÈ

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 85.3 53
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 74.2 100

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

182 Latvia 42
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
46 38 High EUR 1.9 76.5 40,892

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 57.9 42 Business sophistication 35.9 40

1.1 Institutional environment 69.7 36 5.1 Knowledge workers 54.8 29

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 77.3 32 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 44.7 24
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 62.1 38 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 52.9 15 ª

1.2 Regulatory environment 71.4 27 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.3 50
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 72.6 26 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 33.5 56
1.2.2 Rule of law* 70.3 30 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 26.6 14 ª

1.3 Business environment 32.7 94 É 5.2 Innovation linkages 22.8 67 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 23.1 118 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.0 45
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 42.3 40 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 42.9 73
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 37.4 91 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 65
Human capital and research 39.2 45 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 41
5.3 Knowledge absorption 30.0 55
2.1 Education 63.3 20
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 99 «
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.6 25
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 11.7 23
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 23.1 33
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.7 42
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 16.5 29
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 5.0 22
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 483.9 22
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 29.2 47
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 9.4 26
2.2 Tertiary education 41.9 34
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 91.3 14 ª Knowledge and technology outputs 24.2 51
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 19.4 82 «
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 12.7 17 ª 6.1 Knowledge creation 20.3 55
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.7 36
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 12.2 55 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 35
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 2,262.0 40 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.8 48 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 18.9 37
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 9.4 81 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 13.8 62
6.2 Knowledge impact 20.5 95 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.8 32 È
Infrastructure 51.3 33 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 96 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 85.4 24 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 13.1 79 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* 96.2 41
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 31.9 38
3.1.2 ICT use* 92.7 8 ª
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 72
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 79.4 35
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 61.5 36
3.1.4 E-participation* 73.3 29
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 6.9 31
3.2 General infrastructure 36.0 48 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 4.4 23
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 2,651.1 69 É
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 12.0 19 ª
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 63.6 33
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 25.0 50
Creative outputs 32.8 39
3.3 Ecological sustainability 32.5 33
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 13.5 39 7.1 Intangible assets 17.2 84 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 25.8 48 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 4.7 23 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 41.0 46
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 36.6 53 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.3 39
7.2 Creative goods and services 51.9 5 ªÈ
4.1 Credit 32.5 49 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 2.4 9 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 57.0 30 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 8.5 10 ª
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 28.8 100 «É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 2.9 19 ª

4.2 Investment 19.9 41 7.3 Online creativity 45.0 31

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 19.2 31
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 33 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 38.7 29
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 28 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 77.0 15 ª
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 55
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 57.3 63
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 79.5 65
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 76.5 97 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Lebanon 94 183

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
88 101 Lower middle NAWA 5.8 NA NA

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 14.7 128 É Business sophistication 23.6 80

1.1 Institutional environment 2.9 133 «É 5.1 Knowledge workers 37.4 [55]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 0.0 133 «É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 27.5 52 È
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 5.9 132 «É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 20.8 77
1.2 Regulatory environment 12.2 124 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 12.1 125 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 12.2 123 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 14.6 53 È

1.3 Business environment 29.2 100 5.2 Innovation linkages 15.9 103
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 9.3 127 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.3 132 «É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 49.0 28 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 34.0 92
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 31.6 103
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 45 È
Human capital and research 33.1 [59] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 63 È

5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.6 105

2.1 Education 39.4 [99]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 111
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 1.7 125 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.3 65
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.3 123
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP Ա 3.8 37 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science Ա 376.8 72
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 7.7 7
2.2 Tertiary education 46.2 21 ªÈ
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 61.6 52 È Knowledge and technology outputs 17.8 80
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 28.4 28 ª
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 14.3 14 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 30.2 [31]
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 1.1 55
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 13.7 [53] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 28.3 20 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 13.1 64
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 27.3 46 È
6.2 Knowledge impact 4.8 133 «É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬132 «É
Infrastructure 24.1 116 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 116
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 53.1 98 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 14.6 76
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 85.4 79 È
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 18.5 62
3.1.2 ICT use* 52.2 105
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 52 È
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 36.5 114
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 51.6 48 È
3.1.4 E-participation* 38.4 90
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.0 59
3.2 General infrastructure 6.8 [130] 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.3 74
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 1,841.6 84 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 6.7 41 È
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP n/a n/a
Creative outputs 14.7 93
3.3 Ecological sustainability 12.4 101
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 12.0 53 7.1 Intangible assets 4.4 [118]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 4.4 107 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 74 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 12.7 105
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 38.5 45 È 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
7.2 Creative goods and services 23.1 51 È
4.1 Credit 56.2 15 ªÈ
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.2 20 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 74.0 12 ªÈ
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 6.5 16 ªÈ
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 106.6 20 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 Ա 1.1 60 «
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.3 38
4.2 Investment 8.1 68 7.3 Online creativity 26.9 60 È
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 27.3 53 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 3.0 69 È
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.3 25 ªÈ
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 7.2 66
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 81 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 70.5 47
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP Ա 0.0 88
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 51.2 77
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.7 75

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 73.4 75
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ Ա 78.2 96

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

184 Lithuania 35
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
42 30 High EUR 2.9 137.3 49,245

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 71.9 22 Business sophistication 36.4 38

1.1 Institutional environment 75.6 25 5.1 Knowledge workers 52.4 31

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 81.3 18 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 46.6 19 ª
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 70.0 31 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 27.5 59
1.2 Regulatory environment 75.1 24 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.5 39
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 76.0 21 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 36.1 53
1.2.2 Rule of law* 74.2 26 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 30.5 1 ªÈ

1.3 Business environment 65.0 26 5.2 Innovation linkages 29.4 49

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 53.2 54 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.9 97 «É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 76.8 8 ªÈ 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 68.8 27
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 52.1 55
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 53
Human capital and research 39.2 44 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 36
5.3 Knowledge absorption 27.4 63
2.1 Education 59.1 41
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.5 73
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.8 47
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.2 84 «
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 18.8 57
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.4 63
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 16.4 30
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 4.4 29
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 477.1 30
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 31.5 40
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 8.3 17 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 39.7 41

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 71.9 37 Knowledge and technology outputs 32.7 29
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 25.8 39
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 7.3 38 6.1 Knowledge creation 21.1 53
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 56
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 18.7 46 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 39
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 4,019.4 28 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.0 37 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 22.1 31
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 13.3 63
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 17.6 53
6.2 Knowledge impact 47.0 18 ª
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.3 46
Infrastructure 50.4 38 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 8.8 1 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 104 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 81.3 43 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 23.4 51
3.1.1 ICT access* 96.4 40
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 30.2 40
3.1.2 ICT use* 93.7 4 ªÈ
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 89 «
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 81.7 28
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 65.5 30
3.1.4 E-participation* 53.5 67
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 7.1 30
3.2 General infrastructure 31.5 64 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.0 42
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 1,493.6 91 «É
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 11.7 23
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 59.1 37
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.6 67
Creative outputs 29.5 55
3.3 Ecological sustainability 38.4 21
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 15.1 31 7.1 Intangible assets 24.6 72
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 10.4 85 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % ‫ܝ‬ 71 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 8.6 9 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 38.6 52
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 47.1 28 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.5 34
7.2 Creative goods and services 21.5 52
4.1 Credit 44.0 31 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.9 34
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 77.3 10 ªÈ
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 3.5 39
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 35.7 86 «É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.4 35
4.2 Investment 35.3 22 7.3 Online creativity 47.3 28
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 21.2 29
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 29 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 38.9 28
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 20 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 81.9 8 ªÈ
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 16 ª

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 61.9 41

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 92.1 28
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 137.3 83

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Luxembourg 20 185

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
21 24 High EUR 0.7 94.2 143,304

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 83.9 5 ª Business sophistication 58.3 10

1.1 Institutional environment 88.1 7 5.1 Knowledge workers 69.2 13

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 86.0 11 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 64.1 1 ªÈ
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 90.3 5 ª 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 66.1 4 ªÈ

1.2 Regulatory environment 92.3 4 ª 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.5 40 É

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 90.0 5 ª 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 44.2 39 É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 94.6 4 ª 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 27.6 12

1.3 Business environment 71.3 20 5.2 Innovation linkages 56.7 15

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 92.2 3 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 4.0 19
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 50.4 26 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 78.0 17
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 75.2 27
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 15
Human capital and research 46.9 28 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 3.6 12
5.3 Knowledge absorption 48.8 12
2.1 Education 57.2 52 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 5.4 1 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.7 48
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 1.5 132 «É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 21.3 41
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 4.8 1 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 14.2 65 É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ܝ‬ 131 «É
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science Ա 476.7 32
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 33.2 39 É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 7.8 8 È

2.2 Tertiary education 52.0 11

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 20.7 99 «É Knowledge and technology outputs 30.5 36 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 22.9 61

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 49.3 1 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 39.3 22
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.9 15
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 31.7 33 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.2 10
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 4,881.0 21 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.0 40 É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 15.8 43 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 61.7 22 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 12.0 66 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 32.3 46 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 116 «É
Infrastructure 45.7 53 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 2.1 16
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 80 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 85.1 25 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 100.0 1 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 20.0 57 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 84.4 35
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 1.5 16
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 81.4 29
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 74.4 25
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.8 82 É
3.2 General infrastructure 29.3 73 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.2 37
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 1,771.0 86 É
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.9 96 «É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 68.2 25 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 18.2 111 «É
Creative outputs 53.6 9
3.3 Ecological sustainability 22.7 57
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 22.7 7 7.1 Intangible assets 48.2 24
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 7.0 98 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 75.0 12
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 71 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 47.6 38
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 10.4 15
Market sophistication 45.8 30 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.5 35
7.2 Creative goods and services 55.1 2 ªÈ
4.1 Credit 42.2 34 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 6.5 1 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 47.9 45 É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 10.4 6 È
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 101.5 21 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 96 «

4.2 Investment 48.8 13 7.3 Online creativity 63.0 14

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 67.9 28 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 66.8 5 ª
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 1.6 4 ªÈ
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 49.6 22 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 23 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 72.5 35
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 12
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 46.4 87 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 94.2 92 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

186 Madagascar 110

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
81 129 Low SSA 31.2 56.8 1,907

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 21.5 124 Business sophistication 12.1 130 «É

1.1 Institutional environment 28.8 118 5.1 Knowledge workers 4.1 [133]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 39.3 111 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 4.2 123
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 18.2 124 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 18.6 118 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 20.4 115 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 16.8 116 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 1.9 113

1.3 Business environment 17.2 123 É 5.2 Innovation linkages 11.5 123
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 21.0 121 É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.7 103
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 13.4 74 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 19.7 120 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 25.0 113
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 69 ª
Human capital and research 17.9 108 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 20.7 90

2.1 Education 37.3 [109]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.3 90 È
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.1 102
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.5 114
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.4 59 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 9.4 106
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.6 59 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 18.1 93 È

2.2 Tertiary education 16.4 105

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 6.2 123 Knowledge and technology outputs 9.1 124
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 23.5 55 ª
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 0.6 98 É 6.1 Knowledge creation 5.1 110
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 104
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.1 119 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 86 È
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 33.7 101 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.0 113 «É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 6.5 93
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.1 111
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 10.2 131 «É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬112
Infrastructure 11.8 133 «É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 120
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 18.4 132 «
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 1.0 108 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* 0.0 132 «É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 12.1 86 ªÈ
3.1.2 ICT use* 18.5 120
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 91
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 28.3 126
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 23.7 100
3.1.4 E-participation* 26.7 108
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 116
3.2 General infrastructure 9.6 126 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.9 29 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 87.1 123 «
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 106
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 9.1 105 «É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 20.2 99
Creative outputs 28.1 [57]
3.3 Ecological sustainability 7.5 117
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 4.7 119 7.1 Intangible assets 54.0 [15]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 12.6 81 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 120 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 65.1 21 ªÈ
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 22.8 99 È 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 6.4 14 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 4.3 [103]

4.1 Credit 12.8 104 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.2 74 ª
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 23.6 74 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 18.7 116 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 1.0 32 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 88 È

4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 0.3 131 «É

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.1 127
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.9 117
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 127 «É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 32.7 112 È
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 6.6 108

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 49.0 102
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 56.8 107

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Malaysia 33 187

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
41 28 Upper middle SEAO 35.1 1,225.9 37,083

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 69.1 27 È Business sophistication 37.0 36 È

1.1 Institutional environment 75.6 26 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 36.1 57

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 81.3 18 È 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 29.6 48
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 69.9 32 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 24.0 73 «

1.2 Regulatory environment 59.4 41 È 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.5 42
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 58.8 43 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 38.2 49
1.2.2 Rule of law* 60.0 40 È 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 15.3 50

1.3 Business environment 72.3 17 ªÈ 5.2 Innovation linkages 33.8 37 È

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 69.2 29 È 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.9 98 «

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 75.4 10 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 59.0 39
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 70.4 33 È
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 23 È
Human capital and research 41.5 38 È 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 47
5.3 Knowledge absorption 41.0 27 È
2.1 Education 44.1 85
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.0 35
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.5 91 «
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 29.0 3 ªÈ
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 20.6 45
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.4 62
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 12.9 83 «
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.4 43
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 404.4 58 «
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 15.8 57 «
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 11.3 42
2.2 Tertiary education 49.3 16 ªÈ
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 40.3 82 Knowledge and technology outputs 30.9 35 È

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 40.2 1 ªÈ

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 9.0 31 È 6.1 Knowledge creation 13.3 70
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 66
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 31.0 35 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 62
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 726.5 63 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 52
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 1.0 43 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 11.7 61
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 43.2 38 È
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 24.3 39
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 57.9 15 ªÈ
6.2 Knowledge impact 36.8 35 È
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.1 49
Infrastructure 45.8 52 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.4 42
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 32 È
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 82.3 35 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 45.4 16 È
3.1.1 ICT access* 98.6 28 È
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 42.7 22 È
3.1.2 ICT use* 89.6 18 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 54
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 73.8 53
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 66.9 28 È
3.1.4 E-participation* 67.4 47
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 45.3 1 ªÈ
3.2 General infrastructure 39.0 39 È
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.2 78
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 5,360.7 40 È
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 11.8 22
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 68.2 25 È
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.2 73
Creative outputs 31.7 49
3.3 Ecological sustainability 15.9 86
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.3 82 7.1 Intangible assets 34.9 49
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 7.1 96 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 62.8 30
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.6 38 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 16.4 97 «É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 9.6 16 ªÈ

Market sophistication 55.0 18 È 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 85 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 32.3 28 È

4.1 Credit 67.5 5 ªÈ
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.3 71
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 94.0 2 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 1.9 57 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 113.3 17 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 10.2 36 È
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 8.0 1 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 29.4 28 È

7.3 Online creativity 24.7 68
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 111.3 14 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 4.2 58
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 32 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 7.0 68
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 18 È
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 62.7 76
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 43
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 68.0 21
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.0 16 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 88.0 43
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,225.9 30

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

188 Mali 131

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
132 126 Low SSA 23.8 61.6 2,639

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 28.9 113 Business sophistication 20.9 96 È

1.1 Institutional environment 16.4 130 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 5.8 129
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 20.0 129 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 3.6 125
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 12.7 129 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 17.7 84
1.2 Regulatory environment 20.2 115 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 25.2 107 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 0.8 93
1.2.2 Rule of law* 15.2 117 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 0.5 125

1.3 Business environment 50.1 [58] 5.2 Innovation linkages 30.5 [43]
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 50.1 62 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.0 87
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 36.3 88
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 45.4 69 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
Human capital and research 12.7 124 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
5.3 Knowledge absorption 26.3 66 ª
2.1 Education 36.2 112
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 121 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.0 71 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 7.5 78
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 26.5 15 ª
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.7 40 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 7.1 112 «É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.6 62 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 31.4 41 ªÈ
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 21.2 104
2.2 Tertiary education 1.2 128 «É
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 4.7 127 « Knowledge and technology outputs 9.2 123
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.9 90 6.1 Knowledge creation 2.6 121 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 118
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.7 104 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 29.3 103 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 74 «É
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.2 90 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 4.0 111 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.8 103
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 15.6 122
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.1 91
Infrastructure 16.3 131 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 124
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 21.6 128 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 31.1 124
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 9.3 95
3.1.2 ICT use* 0.0 125 «É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 110
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 29.8 124
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 24.7 97
3.1.4 E-participation* 25.6 112
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 0.2 108
3.2 General infrastructure 17.2 105 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.4 53 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 125
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 22.7 82
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 17.7 114 É
Creative outputs 0.6 133 «
3.3 Ecological sustainability 10.2 108
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use n/a n/a 7.1 Intangible assets 1.0 126
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 15.6 71 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 112 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.6 123
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 14.8 122 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 108
7.2 Creative goods and services 0.2 [131]
4.1 Credit 12.9 103 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 109
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 29.6 97 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 1.6 23 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 0.0 120
4.2 Investment 4.4 [87] 7.3 Online creativity 0.1 133 «É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.1 123
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.1 129
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 74 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 84
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 27.1 117
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % Ա 6.0 105

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 61.6 103

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Malta 29 189

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
25 27 High EUR 0.5 33.3 63,481

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 61.8 39 Business sophistication 53.9 19

1.1 Institutional environment 71.2 34 5.1 Knowledge workers 56.1 26

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 77.3 32 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 44.9 23
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 65.0 35 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 49.9 18
1.2 Regulatory environment 63.0 37 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.5 41
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 59.5 42 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 61.3 11
1.2.2 Rule of law* 66.4 35 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 18.0 39

1.3 Business environment 51.4 [55] 5.2 Innovation linkages 47.7 25

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 51.4 59 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.5 65
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 47.0 60
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 51.8 56
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 2 ªÈ
Human capital and research 42.8 35 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 2.8 16
5.3 Knowledge absorption 57.8 4 ªÈ
2.1 Education 64.6 16
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 7.7 1 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.4 31
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.4 46
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 30.7 7 È
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.9 84
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 15.9 40
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 27.6 4 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 459.0 39
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 48.9 27
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 6.8 2 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 44.2 26

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 78.6 25 Knowledge and technology outputs 27.7 48
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 15.2 102 «É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 23.8 5 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 23.6 43
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.6 26
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 19.7 44 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 26
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 2,424.3 38 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.7 52 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 16.9 42
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 43.0 39 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 7.3 89 «É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 22.1 84 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.2 85 «
Infrastructure 51.0 37 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 35
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 87.2 18 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 11.3 83
3.1.1 ICT access* 98.8 24
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 37.2 29
3.1.2 ICT use* 87.1 26
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 4.5 1 ªÈ
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 87.3 18
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 75.6 22
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 4.2 44
3.2 General infrastructure 33.6 56 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.3 75
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 4,378.6 53 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 8.1 35
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 54.5 42
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.5 68
Creative outputs 51.8 11
3.3 Ecological sustainability 32.3 35
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 32.1 3 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 60.0 10 È
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 1.9 119 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 76.1 10
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.4 45 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 118.5 6 ªÈ
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 2.6 43
Market sophistication 40.1 42 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 5.2 15
7.2 Creative goods and services 37.1 17
4.1 Credit 24.9 [71] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 19.2 1 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 5.2 23
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 72.0 42 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 14.3 30 É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 86 «

4.2 Investment 39.1 19 7.3 Online creativity 50.1 27

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 28.0 51 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 39.3 17
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 1.5 6 ªÈ
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 35.5 32
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 41 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 75.4 19
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 13
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 56.4 68
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 77.5 70
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 33.3 125 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

190 Mauritania 126

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
127 125 Lower middle SSA 5.0 33.4 7,542

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 33.8 97 Business sophistication 18.7 109

1.1 Institutional environment 37.8 102 5.1 Knowledge workers 23.9 [95]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 50.0 94 ª 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % n/a n/a
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 25.7 111 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 52.7 16
1.2 Regulatory environment 19.4 116 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 13.9 123 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 0.0 98 «É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 24.9 106 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 0.7 123

1.3 Business environment 44.2 [69] 5.2 Innovation linkages 15.4 105
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 44.2 79 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.7 106
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 51.3 52 ª
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 15.0 125 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 80 ª
Human capital and research 15.4 120 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 16.7 114

2.1 Education 17.3 131 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 118 É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.3 118
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 1.9 131 É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 8.6 90
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.5 107
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 8.1 110 É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 11.5 10 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 28.8 117 É

2.2 Tertiary education 28.9 76 ª

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 6.0 124 É Knowledge and technology outputs 8.9 127
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 34.6 9 ªÈ
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 1.4 83 6.1 Knowledge creation 1.5 127 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 103
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 120 «É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 74 «É
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.0 114 «É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 2.3 121
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 0.5 132 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 23.5 74 ª
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬105
Infrastructure 21.9 122 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 37 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 13.5 133 «É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 6.2 129 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 1.7 131 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 47.8 109
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 0.0 132 «É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 6.4 117 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 0.0 132 «É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.0 130
3.2 General infrastructure 48.9 19 ªÈ
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.2 122
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 128 É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 9.1 105
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 42.6 3 ªÈ
Creative outputs 4.4 [127]
3.3 Ecological sustainability 3.1 131 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use n/a n/a 7.1 Intangible assets 0.5 [131]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 3.9 109 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 114 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 127
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 9.1 [131] 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 115
7.2 Creative goods and services 2.8 [105]
4.1 Credit 5.6 [124] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.2 76 ª
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 22.7 111 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 124
4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 13.7 118
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.1 125
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.3 127
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 40.7 117 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 12.6 129 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 9.6 124 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 33.4 124

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Mauritius 55 191

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
79 40 Upper middle SSA 1.3 37.0 29,349

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 66.6 33 È Business sophistication 25.6 69

1.1 Institutional environment 75.1 28 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 25.3 86

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 86.7 9 ªÈ 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 20.6 76
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 63.6 36 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 47.0 22
1.2 Regulatory environment 69.6 29 È 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 80 «

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 72.5 27 ªÈ 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 4.1 85 «É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 66.8 33 È 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 9.2 81

1.3 Business environment 55.0 46 5.2 Innovation linkages 29.6 48

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 60.9 40 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.4 31
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 49.1 27 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 37.2 83
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 52.7 53
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 38 È
Human capital and research 31.0 69 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 27 ªÈ

5.3 Knowledge absorption 22.0 82

2.1 Education 58.3 45
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.2 91 É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.6 87
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.3 91
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 31.8 5 ªÈ
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.3 24 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 14.6 55
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.0 75
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 4.4 73
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 10.7 37
2.2 Tertiary education 32.1 70
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 44.4 75 Knowledge and technology outputs 13.5 91
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 24.8 47
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 7.1 41 6.1 Knowledge creation 8.7 88
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 128 «É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 2.6 88 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 23 ªÈ
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 569.0 68 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.3 73 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 4.0 110
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.5 106
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 15.8 121 «É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.3 81
Infrastructure 33.9 87 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 87
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 66.1 79 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 3.9 102 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* 83.1 82
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 16.1 72
3.1.2 ICT use* 81.5 47
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 86
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 58.9 77
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 38.8 70
3.1.4 E-participation* 40.7 88
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.6 89
3.2 General infrastructure 15.0 116 «É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.5 49
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 2,470.3 73 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 6.4 43
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89 «É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 19.6 102
Creative outputs 25.6 62
3.3 Ecological sustainability 20.6 65
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 18.7 14 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 30.0 63
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 8.2 90 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 40.4 59
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 64 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 54.1 27
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 50.8 24 ªÈ 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 67
7.2 Creative goods and services 16.3 [62]
4.1 Credit 32.9 48 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.9 32
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 40.7 54 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 72.3 41 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.5 63
4.2 Investment 62.3 9 ªÈ
7.3 Online creativity 26.1 62
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 66.0 29 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 6.7 50
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 2.2 2 ªÈ
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 7.8 63
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 27 È
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 63.7 73
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 1 ªÈ

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 57.1 64

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.9 13 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 78.1 67
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 37.0 122 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

192 Mexico 56
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
52 73 Upper middle LCN 129.7 3,277.6 24,976

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 30.9 106 « Business sophistication 28.6 56

1.1 Institutional environment 43.0 90 5.1 Knowledge workers 27.1 80

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 49.3 95 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 21.3 73
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 36.6 83 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 37.8 42
1.2 Regulatory environment 28.5 97 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 67
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 37.9 79 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 17.0 72
1.2.2 Rule of law* 19.0 113 «É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 10.5 72

1.3 Business environment 21.3 114 « 5.2 Innovation linkages 22.0 73

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 22.3 120 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.6 108 «

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 20.3 67 « 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 42.5 74
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 57.9 43
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «
Human capital and research 32.2 63 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 80
5.3 Knowledge absorption 36.8 36 È
2.1 Education 44.4 83
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.9 44
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.6 52
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 15.5 16 ªÈ
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 14.1 72
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.8 91
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 14.5 61
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.7 57
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 406.8 55
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 50.6 26 È
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 15.2 78
2.2 Tertiary education 27.0 84
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 46.4 72 Knowledge and technology outputs 23.1 55
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 24.3 50
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 1.2 88 « 6.1 Knowledge creation 10.4 80
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 89
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 25.2 39 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 76
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 384.1 80 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 40
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.3 80 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 5.2 104 «
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 49.7 30 ªÈ
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 29.3 35 È
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 42.8 30 ªÈ
6.2 Knowledge impact 30.8 50
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬123 «É
Infrastructure 39.3 71 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.9 33
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 83
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 77.2 49 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 46.1 15 ªÈ
3.1.1 ICT access* 77.4 87
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 28.2 46
3.1.2 ICT use* 78.8 62
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.2 46
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 80.6 31
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 71.7 22 ªÈ
3.1.4 E-participation* 72.1 32
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 13.9 11 ªÈ
3.2 General infrastructure 25.1 87 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.2 124 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 3,076.4 63 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 3.2 76
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 36.4 65
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 22.8 79
Creative outputs 31.8 47
3.3 Ecological sustainability 15.5 90
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 12.7 44 7.1 Intangible assets 35.7 46
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 10.0 86 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 71.1 15 ª
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 70 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 45.0 39
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 4.0 35
Market sophistication 36.2 56 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 88
7.2 Creative goods and services 32.2 29 ªÈ
4.1 Credit 18.7 90 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade Ա 0.1 90 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 36.3 59 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 2.9 45
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 34.3 89 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 8.5 39
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.9 34 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 9.7 1 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 9.0 64 7.3 Online creativity 23.5 78

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 33.9 44 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 3.1 67
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 79 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.4 83
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 78 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 63.1 75
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 47
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 81.0 12 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 19 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 87.0 46
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 3,277.6 12 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Mongolia 67 193

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
51 84 Lower middle SEAO 3.4 53.0 15,088

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 35.9 93 Business sophistication 27.5 61 È

1.1 Institutional environment 45.8 83 5.1 Knowledge workers 42.0 46 È

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 58.7 74 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 25.7 57 È
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 32.9 96 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 66.2 3 ªÈ

1.2 Regulatory environment 36.6 79 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 86 «

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 34.7 87 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 8.1 79

1.2.2 Rule of law* 38.5 76 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 22.5 25 ªÈ

1.3 Business environment 25.3 [109] 5.2 Innovation linkages 14.5 110
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 25.3 112 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.9 47 È

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 26.6 102
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 20.6 119 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 86
Human capital and research 26.1 86 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 73
5.3 Knowledge absorption 26.0 67
2.1 Education 51.1 65
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.3 85
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.3 62
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.0 100
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.1 73
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 14.5 57 È
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 13.9 6 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 405.1 56
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 13.1 61
2.2 Tertiary education 25.5 85
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 65.3 47 È Knowledge and technology outputs 15.8 86
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 17.8 91
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 2.5 73 6.1 Knowledge creation 23.2 45 ªÈ
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.3 29 ªÈ
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 1.6 94 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 533.6 71 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.0 7 ªÈ
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.1 104 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 10.4 69
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.7 104
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 17.3 116
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.3 45 ª
Infrastructure 38.4 73 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 88
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 72.7 64 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 2.9 105 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 90.5 62 È
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 7.1 107
3.1.2 ICT use* 82.2 43 ªÈ
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 94
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 58.7 78
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 12.5 116 «É
3.1.4 E-participation* 59.3 57 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.5 92
3.2 General infrastructure 33.9 54 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.4 105
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 2,219.2 75 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 6.2 46 È
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 38.3 9 ªÈ
Creative outputs 39.4 32 ªÈ
3.3 Ecological sustainability 8.5 113
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 5.8 111 É
7.1 Intangible assets 66.7 6 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 2.5 114 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.7 61 È
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 207.3 1 ªÈ
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 21.0 106 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 21.8 1 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 2.2 [109]

4.1 Credit 8.5 115 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade Ա 0.1 84
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 41.0 79 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.4 45 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 122 «

4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 22.2 89

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.6 85
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 7.0 69
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 58.0 90
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 33.5 111
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 5.0 95

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 38.8 104 «É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 53.0 111

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

194 Montenegro 65
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
72 62 Upper middle EUR 0.6 17.4 28,002

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 39.8 86 Business sophistication 27.9 59

1.1 Institutional environment 51.3 75 5.1 Knowledge workers 39.2 50

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 59.3 73 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 38.6 34 È
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 43.3 72 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 25.6 65
1.2 Regulatory environment 48.2 57 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.2 54
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 56.1 46 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 37.8 51
1.2.2 Rule of law* 40.2 71 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 16.9 42

1.3 Business environment 20.1 [119] 5.2 Innovation linkages 16.8 98

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 20.1 122 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.0 88
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 35.2 90
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 22.5 116 «É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
Human capital and research 32.6 61 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 27.9 61

2.1 Education 57.4 [49]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.2 95 É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP n/a n/a
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.1 94
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.4 22 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 15.1 47
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 12.3 8 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 404.6 57
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 12.5 59
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 12.1 53
2.2 Tertiary education 37.0 50
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 56.1 63 Knowledge and technology outputs 19.8 74
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 21.0 71
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 18.0 60
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 79
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 3.3 85 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 30 È
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 753.6 61 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.4 67 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 22.4 30 È
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 2.5 124 «
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 23.5 73
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.2 23 ª
Infrastructure 44.5 57 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 52
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 66.8 77 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 7.3 94
3.1.1 ICT access* 88.2 72
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 18.0 64
3.1.2 ICT use* 83.2 39
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 87
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 50.6 90
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 45.3 81
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.4 96
3.2 General infrastructure 31.9 63 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 4.9 21 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 5,405.8 39 È
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 10.3 27 ª
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 31.8 71
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 28.0 32
Creative outputs 23.0 70
3.3 Ecological sustainability 34.9 28 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 10.9 62 7.1 Intangible assets 5.7 110 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 33.7 26 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % Ա ‫ ܝ‬78 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 5.2 20 ª
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 29.5 66
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 36.9 52 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 107
7.2 Creative goods and services 10.5 [69]
4.1 Credit 14.4 99 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.7 44
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 47.3 73 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 1.2 25 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 83
4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 70.1 7 ªÈ
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 100.0 1 ªÈ
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 35.7 31 È
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 74.5 27 ª
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 59.3 55
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 18 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 86.2 48
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 17.4 130 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Morocco 66 195

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
47 89 Lower middle NAWA 37.7 385.3 10,408

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 43.5 78 Business sophistication 14.2 125 «É

1.1 Institutional environment 47.6 79 5.1 Knowledge workers 8.6 [123]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 54.7 85 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 8.2 113 «
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 40.5 79 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 8.8 96 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 38.9 75 È 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 39.6 77 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 38.2 78 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 3.1 103 «

1.3 Business environment 44.1 72 5.2 Innovation linkages 16.4 100

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 66.4 32 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.5 119 «

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 21.8 66 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 30.2 98
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 42.9 74
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 94
Human capital and research 26.7 81 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 64 È

5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.6 106

2.1 Education 46.0 77
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.3 87
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.8 20 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.2 86
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.9 88
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 14.6 56 È
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.5 86
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 356.5 82 «
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 7.0 66
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 20.6 100
2.2 Tertiary education 30.5 72
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 46.2 73 Knowledge and technology outputs 20.5 70
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 27.2 34
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 1.7 81 6.1 Knowledge creation 13.5 67
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 67
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 3.6 83 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 59 È
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 1,080.7 51 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 13.5 50
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 11.3 68
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 32.2 47
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.8 33 ª
Infrastructure 33.9 88 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 62
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 59.9 89 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 39.9 27 ªÈ
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 95.4 45 È
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 15.7 73
3.1.2 ICT use* 77.1 70 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 97
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 41.7 106
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 34.2 80
3.1.4 E-participation* 25.6 112 «
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.1 57
3.2 General infrastructure 27.0 82 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.2 36 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 1,131.7 95 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 3.4 72
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 30.1 27 ª
Creative outputs 36.4 37 È
3.3 Ecological sustainability 14.6 95
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 13.6 38 7.1 Intangible assets 58.6 11 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 7.3 94 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 67.4 22 ª
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 79 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 53.0 30 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 1.7 48
Market sophistication 27.5 82 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 10.8 1 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 4.6 99

4.1 Credit 23.4 75 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.4 64
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 32.3 62 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 1.0 66
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 88.0 33 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 1.2 57 «
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.6 39 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 95
4.2 Investment 9.1 63 7.3 Online creativity 23.7 76
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 49.2 38 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.2 91
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 62 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 7.2 67
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 55 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 62.6 77
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 71
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 50.1 81
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.9 80

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 65.7 85
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 385.3 55

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

196 Mozambique 128

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
129 123 Low SSA 33.6 53.7 1,584

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 22.4 121 Business sophistication 13.3 127

1.1 Institutional environment 30.7 115 5.1 Knowledge workers 5.7 131
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 36.0 117 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 3.9 124
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 25.3 112 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 20.7 79
1.2 Regulatory environment 18.7 117 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 92
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 22.8 114 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 0.5 95
1.2.2 Rule of law* 14.5 120 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 0.7 121

1.3 Business environment 18.0 121 É 5.2 Innovation linkages 12.5 115
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 35.4 96 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.7 53 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 0.7 84 É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 22.7 113
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 15.7 124
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 70 ª
Human capital and research 14.3 122 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 21.8 85

2.1 Education 39.8 [95]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 121 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 7.0 6 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.7 112
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.1 71 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 10.4 102
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 23.0 5 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 0.3 86
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 36.5 124 É

2.2 Tertiary education 1.6 126

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 7.3 120 Knowledge and technology outputs 8.3 130
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 9.6 111 É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.4 104 É 6.1 Knowledge creation 6.7 103
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 75 ªÈ
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 1.3 96 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 44.0 100 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.1 57
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.3 72 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 8.4 79
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.9 102
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 14.5 124
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬104
Infrastructure 28.8 99 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 121
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 18.5 131 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 19.6 125
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 3.7 125
3.1.2 ICT use* 8.0 124
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 28.9 125
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 13.7 114 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 17.4 126
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 115
3.2 General infrastructure 39.9 36 ªÈ
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.1 127 É
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 588.0 108 È
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 105
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 39.0 6 ªÈ
Creative outputs 3.9 128
3.3 Ecological sustainability 27.9 42 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 3.6 124 É
7.1 Intangible assets 6.7 108
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 63.2 7 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 87 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 14.7 100
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 21.7 104 È 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 58 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 0.3 [129]

4.1 Credit 8.2 119 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 0.0 85 «É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 21.3 113 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 1.8 22 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 117
4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 1.9 128 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.1 128
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.4 124
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 5.4 126 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 35.3 109 È
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 3.9 88 È

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 53.7 109

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Myanmar 125 197

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
114 128 Lower middle SEAO 54.1 277.8 5,124

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 13.5 131 É Business sophistication 9.9 132 É

1.1 Institutional environment 11.0 132 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 7.5 126 É
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 22.0 127 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 5.2 119 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 0.0 133 «É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 5.9 101
1.2 Regulatory environment 4.7 133 «É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 9.4 130 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 0.0 98 «É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 0.0 133 «É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 7.2 91

1.3 Business environment 24.7 [111] 5.2 Innovation linkages 2.8 131 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 24.7 114 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.6 109
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 0.0 130
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 8.4 127
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 124 É
Human capital and research 18.5 107 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 19.3 96

2.1 Education 25.4 127 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.2 96
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 2.1 119
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.1 95
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 11.0 85
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.0 82
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 11.5 96
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.5 65 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 27.2 114 É

2.2 Tertiary education 30.0 73

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 20.4 101 Knowledge and technology outputs 13.3 93
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 33.7 10 ªÈ
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.0 113 «É 6.1 Knowledge creation 2.3 [125]
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.1 117 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 19.0 107 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.0 111 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 128
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 3.0 122
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 30.2 52 ª
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 110
Infrastructure 24.4 115 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 44 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 30.0 122 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 44.8 18 ªÈ
3.1.1 ICT access* n/a n/a
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 7.3 105
3.1.2 ICT use* 37.6 112 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 67
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 23.4 128 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 21.9 102
3.1.4 E-participation* 29.1 106
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.7 67 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 29.1 75 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.3 113
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 365.1 114 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.6 102
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 32.3 18 ª
Creative outputs 6.3 [118]
3.3 Ecological sustainability 14.1 96
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 10.8 64 ª
7.1 Intangible assets 1.3 [125]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 16.4 69 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 125 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.3 68
Market sophistication 22.4 102 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
7.2 Creative goods and services 4.5 [100]
4.1 Credit 12.3 105 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 96
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 29.0 99 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP Ա 1.5 24 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.5 59 ª

4.2 Investment 0.5 114 7.3 Online creativity 18.3 103

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.0 132
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.6 119
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 54.1 99
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 107 «É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 54.3 73

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.2 49 ªÈ

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 67.2 83
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 277.8 62 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

198 Namibia 102

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
109 87 Upper middle SSA 3.0 30.7 11,603

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 50.6 56 Business sophistication 21.7 92

1.1 Institutional environment 53.8 66 5.1 Knowledge workers 18.9 106 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 62.7 65 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 18.1 84
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 45.0 65 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 25.4 66
1.2 Regulatory environment 48.4 56 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 76
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 41.4 73 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 11.1 75
1.2.2 Rule of law* 55.4 47 ªÈ 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 7.4 90 É

1.3 Business environment 49.5 [60] 5.2 Innovation linkages 26.0 57

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 49.5 64 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.4 32 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 46.2 61
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 42.3 77
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 33 ªÈ
Human capital and research 25.2 91 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 55
5.3 Knowledge absorption 20.3 94
2.1 Education 65.5 [13]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 102 É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 9.0 1 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.4 81
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.5 51 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.8 38 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 6.9 67
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 32.0 123 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 8.3 114 É

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 28.4 92 É Knowledge and technology outputs 9.4 122 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 8.9 113 «É

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 3.2 62 6.1 Knowledge creation 8.9 87
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 72
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 1.8 93 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 44 ª
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 152.8 88 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 48
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.3 68 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 10.1 72
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.3 109
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 11.0 127 «É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬124 «É
Infrastructure 25.1 113 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 95
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 45.1 107 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 3.4 104 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* 64.5 99 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 8.2 102 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 55.3 102 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 76
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 37.2 113 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 28.4 93
3.1.4 E-participation* 23.3 116 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.0 78
3.2 General infrastructure 12.9 119 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.4 109
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 514.2 110 É
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 97
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 36.4 65
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 14.1 126 «É
Creative outputs 12.0 105 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 17.5 78
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 12.0 50 ª
7.1 Intangible assets 7.0 107 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 18.0 64 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 82 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 13.2 102 É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 23.5 [93] 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 50 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 8.5 [80]

4.1 Credit 20.0 [87] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.6 50
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 59.4 53 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 91
4.2 Investment 6.1 [71] 7.3 Online creativity 25.3 65
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 17.8 66 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 3.6 64
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 2.3 100
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 70.2 50 ª
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 44.6 91
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.3 69

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 51.4 101 É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 30.7 127 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Nepal 109 199

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
102 110 Lower middle CSA 29.7 150.8 4,934

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 29.9 111 Business sophistication 17.9 [116]

1.1 Institutional environment 33.0 110 5.1 Knowledge workers 13.6 [115]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 46.0 104 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 13.2 99
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 20.0 123 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 14.1 90
1.2 Regulatory environment 27.9 101 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 24.8 108 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 31.0 89 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 2.9 106

1.3 Business environment 28.7 [103] 5.2 Innovation linkages 17.8 93

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 28.7 105 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.7 54 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 31.9 95
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 33.2 96
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 71
Human capital and research 10.5 [130] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 22.4 [81]

2.1 Education 24.7 128 «É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade n/a n/a
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.6 85
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 10.7 33 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 9.4 89 «
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.1 132 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 12.6 89
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.4 114
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 37.2 125 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 6.7 [119]

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 14.0 110 Knowledge and technology outputs 10.7 [110]
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 10.4 [81]
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.2 99
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 9.3 75
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 8.2 86
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 14.8 123
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.5 73
Infrastructure 27.8 100 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 123 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 31.8 119 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 9.0 91
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 33.1 122 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 6.8 [109]
3.1.2 ICT use* n/a n/a
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade n/a n/a
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 40.2 110
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 22.1 121
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.0 129 «
3.2 General infrastructure 33.9 55 ª
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.3 72
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 322.0 115 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 3.5 71 ª
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 35.4 11 ª
Creative outputs 14.0 97
3.3 Ecological sustainability 17.7 73
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 6.6 103 7.1 Intangible assets 10.4 98
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 32.9 28 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 102 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 40.7 47 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 33.0 65 ª 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.2 105
7.2 Creative goods and services 9.7 [76]
4.1 Credit 67.0 6 ªÈ
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 Ա 2.7 47
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 95.3 26 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 9.1 1 ªÈ
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 76
4.2 Investment 0.9 [112] 7.3 Online creativity 25.3 66 ª
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.0 96
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.9 75
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 101 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 70.2 49 ª
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP Ա 0.0 99
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 31.0 113
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 12.2 132 «É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 85.9 50 ª
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 150.8 80

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

200 Netherlands (Kingdom of the) 8

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
8 11 High EUR 18.1 1,297.0 73,317

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 81.4 9 Business sophistication 62.5 7 ª

1.1 Institutional environment 81.6 16 5.1 Knowledge workers 67.7 14

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 78.0 29 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 53.6 4 ª
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 85.2 9 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 54.1 13
1.2 Regulatory environment 89.1 9 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 1.6 15
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 86.8 7 ª 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 56.5 18
1.2.2 Rule of law* 91.4 11 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 23.2 22

1.3 Business environment 73.4 16 5.2 Innovation linkages 62.0 8

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 71.2 23 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 5.4 10
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 75.6 9 È 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 90.4 4 ªÈ
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 88.8 10
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 22
Human capital and research 56.1 14 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 4.6 10
5.3 Knowledge absorption 57.7 5 ªÈ
2.1 Education 62.2 28
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 4.7 1 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.1 41
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 11.4 27
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 23.2 32
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.9 14
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 18.6 13
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ ܝ‬130 «É
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 480.1 25
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 70.2 6
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 13.8 67 «

2.2 Tertiary education 42.3 31

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 89.0 15 Knowledge and technology outputs 55.5 8
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 19.3 83 «É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 13.7 15 6.1 Knowledge creation 63.4 5 ª
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 7.0 11
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 63.8 10 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.3 9
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 6,532.6 10 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 2.3 15 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 29.5 17
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 81.1 8 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 70.5 7 ª
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 70.3 12
6.2 Knowledge impact 49.4 13
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬100 «
Infrastructure 53.7 25 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 2.1 17
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 13
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 91.5 12 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 43.6 21
3.1.1 ICT access* 95.8 42
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 53.8 11
3.1.2 ICT use* 84.6 34
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 4.8 1 ªÈ
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 89.2 11
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 68.0 26
3.1.4 E-participation* 96.5 5 ª
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 11.1 16
3.2 General infrastructure 46.5 26 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 4.2 25
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 6,870.8 26 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 8.3 34
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 90.9 3 ªÈ
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 21.3 89 «
Creative outputs 55.9 7 ª
3.3 Ecological sustainability 23.2 54 «
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 15.5 26 7.1 Intangible assets 46.6 25
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 14.4 74 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 82.0 6
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.3 46 «
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 37.8 53 «
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 8.8 23
Market sophistication 56.1 14 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.9 29
7.2 Creative goods and services 40.1 14
4.1 Credit 59.4 11 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 2.0 11
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 86.1 3 ªÈ
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 3.6 37 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 92.1 29 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 43.8 18
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 3.0 17
4.2 Investment 39.3 18 7.3 Online creativity 90.4 1 ªÈ
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 109.9 16 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 100.0 1 ªÈ
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 12 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 97.8 3 ªÈ
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 17 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 73.3 30
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 18
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 69.4 20
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21 «

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 91.5 30
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,297.0 27

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

New Zealand 25 201

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
34 21 High SEAO 5.2 279.2 53,809

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 82.9 7 ª Business sophistication 52.9 20

1.1 Institutional environment 85.2 11 ª 5.1 Knowledge workers 60.6 22

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 91.3 4 ªÈ 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % n/a n/a
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 79.0 19 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 66.0 5 ªÈ

1.2 Regulatory environment 92.2 5 ª 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.9 26
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 90.8 3 ª 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 50.1 30
1.2.2 Rule of law* 93.5 7 ª 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 21.5 28

1.3 Business environment 71.3 [19] 5.2 Innovation linkages 52.1 18

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 71.3 22 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 4.3 17
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 73.5 20
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 86.1 12
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 20
Human capital and research 49.8 23 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 26 É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 46.0 19

2.1 Education 63.1 21
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.6 19
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.5 27
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 12.1 21
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 17.2 61 «É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 3.1 12 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 19.7 4 ªÈ
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.3 70 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 494.7 12
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 46.2 31
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 14.6 75 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 42.2 32

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 79.4 22 Knowledge and technology outputs 28.5 45 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 22.7 62 «

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 12.0 18 6.1 Knowledge creation 34.9 28 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 60 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 44.0 23 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 24 É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 5,084.4 19 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 1.5 27 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 30.7 15
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 48.9 32 É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 35.5 27
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 51.8 19
6.2 Knowledge impact 22.5 80 «É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.3 83 «
Infrastructure 56.4 12 ª 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 54 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 92.3 10 ª
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 16.9 69 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* 98.6 27
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 28.1 48
3.1.2 ICT use* 79.8 57 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 1.8 13
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 95.3 6 ª
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 48.0 52 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 95.3 6 ª
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.0 61 É
3.2 General infrastructure 46.2 27 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.7 61
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 8,716.8 17 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 5.7 49
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 68.2 25 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 26.1 44
Creative outputs 40.3 31 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 30.7 40
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 11.0 59 7.1 Intangible assets 41.6 33
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 43.0 18 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 54.6 39 É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.3 47 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 75.7 16 È
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 3.7 37 É

Market sophistication 44.8 34 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.5 45
7.2 Creative goods and services 20.9 53 É
4.1 Credit 54.3 [18] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.5 56
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 2.2 54 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 146.9 9 ª
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 51.5 11
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.4 67 «

4.2 Investment 23.3 35 É

7.3 Online creativity 56.9 22
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 49.9 37 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 40.9 16
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 23 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 59.7 16
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 21 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 70.0 52
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 50 É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 56.7 65

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.7 8 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 70.2 78 «É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 279.2 61

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

202 Nicaragua 124

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
126 118 Lower middle LCN 6.8 51.0 7,642

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 13.9 129 É Business sophistication 20.6 99

1.1 Institutional environment 27.8 119 5.1 Knowledge workers 38.0 [54]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 38.7 112 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 13.8 98
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 16.9 126 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 57.3 10
1.2 Regulatory environment 12.0 126 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 17.8 118 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 6.3 132 «É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 6.1 93

1.3 Business environment 1.8 [131] 5.2 Innovation linkages 5.9 128 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 1.8 129 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.5 62 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 2.8 128 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 6.1 128 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 77
Human capital and research 16.2 [117] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.9 104

2.1 Education 37.2 [110]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 114
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.1 69 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.7 90
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.3 120
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 7.6 13 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 29.5 119 É

2.2 Tertiary education 10.7 [111]

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 19.9 104 Knowledge and technology outputs 9.7 118
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 1.4 128 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 122
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.5 108 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.1 101 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 1.5 127
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 3.2 119
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 17.6 114
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.7 66 ª
Infrastructure 24.5 114 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 108
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 40.9 111 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 14.4 77
3.1.1 ICT access* 45.0 112
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 10.1 93
3.1.2 ICT use* 52.8 103
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 42.6 105
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 20.0 106
3.1.4 E-participation* 23.3 116
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.4 93
3.2 General infrastructure 15.2 115 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.3 34 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 614.5 105 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 120
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 22.0 85
Creative outputs 3.6 [130]
3.3 Ecological sustainability 17.6 76
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.1 84 7.1 Intangible assets 0.0 [132]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 28.4 41 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 121 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 31.4 71 ª 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 126
7.2 Creative goods and services 4.9 [97]
4.1 Credit 16.9 93 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 28.6 101 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 2.4 19 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.4 69 ª

4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 9.6 124 É

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.2 93
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.7 108
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 25.8 124 É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 45.9 88
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.9 64 ªÈ

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 52.1 100
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 51.0 113

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Niger 132 203

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
130 130 Low SSA 26.2 42.7 1,579

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 26.5 116 Business sophistication 17.9 [115]

1.1 Institutional environment 26.6 120 5.1 Knowledge workers 18.2 [107]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 26.0 124 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 15.3 90 È
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 27.3 107 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 27.5 59
1.2 Regulatory environment 26.4 104 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 22.9 113 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 29.9 94 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 0.2 126 É

1.3 Business environment n/a [n/a] 5.2 Innovation linkages 1.1 [133]
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† n/a n/a 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.1 133 «É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† n/a n/a
5.2.3 State of cluster development † n/a n/a
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 91
Human capital and research 10.0 131 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 34.5 43 ªÈ

2.1 Education 21.8 130 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 121 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.1 67 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 21.9 7 ªÈ
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 11.8 84 É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.4 60 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 6.7 113 «É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.5 41 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 29.7 120
2.2 Tertiary education 8.3 113
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 4.3 128 «É Knowledge and technology outputs 9.0 126
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 12.3 106 É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 5.4 49 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 2.4 124 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 107
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 74 «É
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 3.5 113 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 3.1 120
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 19.2 106
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.5 41 ª
Infrastructure 17.9 130 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 122
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 22.2 127 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 10.7 128
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 5.5 117
3.1.2 ICT use* n/a n/a
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 111
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 32.6 119
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 23.3 116
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.2 109
3.2 General infrastructure 25.5 84 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.6 48 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 28.5 126 «É
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 133 «É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 30.4 23 ª
Creative outputs 2.2 [132]
3.3 Ecological sustainability 6.0 125
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 8.2 88 È
7.1 Intangible assets 0.0 [132]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 2.1 118 É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 131 É
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 128 «É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 11.9 125 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 126 «É

7.2 Creative goods and services 8.5 [79]

4.1 Credit 1.9 132 É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.6 47 ª
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 12.6 126 É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.2 52 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 129
4.2 Investment 5.7 [74] 7.3 Online creativity 0.2 132 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.3 112 È
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.0 131 «É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 59 ª
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 102
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 28.1 116
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 7.9 119

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 45.8 103
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 42.7 119

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

204 Nigeria 113

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
98 121 Lower middle SSA 227.9 1,365.9 6,148

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 21.1 125 É Business sophistication 19.5 107

1.1 Institutional environment 19.5 129 «É 5.1 Knowledge workers 28.6 [77]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 22.0 127 «É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 26.6 55 ªÈ
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 16.9 125 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 30.7 56
1.2 Regulatory environment 14.6 123 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 11.5 127 «É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 17.6 114 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 2.7 107

1.3 Business environment 29.3 [99] 5.2 Innovation linkages 12.2 118
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 29.3 103 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.0 86
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 15.0 123 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 32.6 98
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 89
Human capital and research 27.3 [78] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.9 103

2.1 Education 75.6 [1]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.4 75
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP n/a n/a
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 5.3 108
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.8 96
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.4 109
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 15.3 81
2.2 Tertiary education 5.2 [122]
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 11.8 113 Knowledge and technology outputs 9.5 121
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 7.3 99
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.4 83
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 1.2 99 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 98
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 22.8 106 «
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.3 74 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 4.3 109
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 13.6 61 ª
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 19.8 103
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬121
Infrastructure 19.7 127 «É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.5 38 ª
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 84
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 36.7 115 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 43.8 113
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 1.3 132 «É
3.1.2 ICT use* 26.6 115 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 47.5 96
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 2.4 119 «É
3.1.4 E-participation* 29.1 106
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 119
3.2 General infrastructure 16.5 110 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.4 110
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 168.9 118 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 122
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 22.7 82
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 22.4 83
Creative outputs 17.8 87
3.3 Ecological sustainability 5.9 126 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 6.3 106 7.1 Intangible assets 24.4 73 ª
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 5.7 102 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 51.9 45 ª
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 127 «
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 10.5 109
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.6 61 ª

Market sophistication 15.2 121 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.9 61 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 0.6 [125]

4.1 Credit 3.8 128 «
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 14.1 124 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 1.1 58
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.5 41 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 131 «

4.2 Investment 11.6 55 ª

7.3 Online creativity 21.8 92
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 22.0 58 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.4 109
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 60 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.2 88
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 42 ª
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 60.8 83
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 46 ª

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 30.3 114

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 8.4 122

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,365.9 26 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

North Macedonia 58 205

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
63 60 Upper middle EUR 1.8 44.1 21,391

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 44.4 75 Business sophistication 29.9 52

1.1 Institutional environment 54.3 65 5.1 Knowledge workers 39.5 49

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 66.7 51 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 33.3 44 È
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 41.9 76 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 44.3 25 ª

1.2 Regulatory environment 47.4 59 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.1 61
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 53.7 51 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 25.9 65
1.2.2 Rule of law* 41.1 68 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 17.1 41

1.3 Business environment 31.6 96 5.2 Innovation linkages 18.5 88

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 31.7 102 « 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.9 93
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 31.4 52 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 32.0 94
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 30.5 106 «
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
Human capital and research 27.9 77 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 51
5.3 Knowledge absorption 31.7 52
2.1 Education 52.1 [63]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.7 16 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP n/a n/a
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.6 74
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.2 65
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 13.1 79
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.8 36 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 375.7 73 «
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 27.9 48
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 8.1 10 ª

2.2 Tertiary education 28.2 80

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 41.7 80 Knowledge and technology outputs 23.7 53
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 20.6 73
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 8.4 34 È 6.1 Knowledge creation 10.5 79
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 70
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 3.4 84 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 56
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 733.8 62 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.4 66 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 10.3 70
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 6.5 90
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 31.7 49
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.6 38
Infrastructure 49.1 43 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 93
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 74.5 59 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 49.4 10 ªÈ
3.1.1 ICT access* 90.1 64
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 28.8 43
3.1.2 ICT use* 72.4 81
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 49
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 67.1 65
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 46.4 54
3.1.4 E-participation* 68.6 43
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.5 52
3.2 General infrastructure 28.0 80 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 4.3 24 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 2,828.0 66 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 17.0 15 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 45.5 56
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP n/a n/a
Creative outputs 22.5 72
3.3 Ecological sustainability 44.8 8 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 12.0 52 7.1 Intangible assets 15.6 91
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 13.7 77 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % Ա ‫ܝ‬ 75 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 11.5 3 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 31.0 64
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 32.2 69 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 87
7.2 Creative goods and services 29.3 39 È
4.1 Credit 33.5 44 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.2 19 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 48.4 42 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 8.3 12 ªÈ
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 55.7 56 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 93
4.2 Investment 4.6 [84] 7.3 Online creativity 29.5 55
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 7.0 49
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 12.8 54
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 64 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 68.7 58
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 104 «

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 58.4 57

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.4 53

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 85.2 54
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 44.1 117 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

206 Norway 21
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
26 16 High EUR 5.5 453.0 82,236

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 83.3 6 ª Business sophistication 51.2 22 É

1.1 Institutional environment 93.0 2 ªÈ 5.1 Knowledge workers 62.0 19

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 91.3 4 ªÈ 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 52.3 5 ª
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 94.7 4 ªÈ 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 88.0 10 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.9 27
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 81.7 16 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 43.4 40 É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 94.4 5 ª 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 28.3 8

1.3 Business environment 68.8 22 5.2 Innovation linkages 54.4 16

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 75.3 16 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 3.0 24 É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 62.3 18 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 70.1 24
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 83.2 16
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 9
Human capital and research 50.9 20 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 1.9 22
5.3 Knowledge absorption 37.2 33 É
2.1 Education 64.3 17
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.4 76 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.0 73 «
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 5.3 107 «É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 28.0 11
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 3.2 9
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 18.6 12
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.9 101 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 474.4 33
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 52.0 23
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 8.1 11 È

2.2 Tertiary education 39.0 43

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 93.9 13 Knowledge and technology outputs 34.7 26 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 23.0 60

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 4.2 56 6.1 Knowledge creation 46.0 18
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.6 20
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 49.6 19 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.5 19
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 7,351.5 6 ª
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.6 24 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 34.2 11
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 54.9 26 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 42.3 21
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 43.6 28
6.2 Knowledge impact 38.6 27
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.2 89 «
Infrastructure 64.6 4 ªÈ 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.8 34 É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.7 2 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 82.3 38 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 17.9 64 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* 96.9 35
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 19.6 59 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 85.6 31
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.3 36 É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 78.0 39 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 53.0 44 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 68.6 43 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.4 55 É
3.2 General infrastructure 66.6 4 ªÈ
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.5 66
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 26,694.2 1 ªÈ
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.9 58
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 72.7 18
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 22.6 80 «
Creative outputs 43.4 26
3.3 Ecological sustainability 45.0 6 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 12.7 45 7.1 Intangible assets 36.0 45
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 70.8 3 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 65.7 25
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 3.0 34 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 21.3 84 «
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 8.1 25
Market sophistication 45.2 31 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 62
7.2 Creative goods and services 30.8 37
4.1 Credit 51.6 22 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.4 62 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 63.1 22 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 6.3 18
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 110.8 19 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 69.7 3 ª
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.3 72 «

4.2 Investment 23.2 36 É

7.3 Online creativity 70.9 5 ª
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 68.2 27 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 50.7 12
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 27 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 89.2 5 ªÈ
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 29 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 73.0 31
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 38 É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 60.8 49

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.6 58

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 85.9 49
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 453.0 50

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Oman 74 207

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
86 59 High NAWA 5.0 200.3 39,336

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 57.6 43 Business sophistication 22.5 86 É

1.1 Institutional environment 56.3 57 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 15.7 112 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 68.0 43 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 14.7 92 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 44.6 66 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 55.7 46 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 65 É

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 53.2 52 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 31.8 58

1.2.2 Rule of law* 58.2 41 ª 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 0.9 120 «É

1.3 Business environment 60.9 32 ª 5.2 Innovation linkages 35.4 34 ª

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 78.1 12 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.2 79 É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 43.7 37 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 62.8 34 ª
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 87.9 11 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 34 ª
Human capital and research 32.0 66 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 92 É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 16.4 115 «É

2.1 Education 47.6 74 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.6 67
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.2 64
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.1 120 «É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 16.5 64 É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.0 80
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 13.0 82 É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.9 35 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 0.3 85 «É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 12.3 55
2.2 Tertiary education 44.2 27 ª
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 43.8 76 É Knowledge and technology outputs 14.8 87 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 39.5 2 ªÈ

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 3.1 65 6.1 Knowledge creation 7.5 96 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 98 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 4.2 80 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 88
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 381.8 82 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.3 77 É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 8.2 82 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 9.0 85 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 8.5 69 É
6.2 Knowledge impact 21.5 91 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.2 22 ªÈ
Infrastructure 42.7 63 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 106 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 79.1 46 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 16.5 71
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.3 23 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 15.5 74 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 80.7 51
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade n/a n/a
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 71.5 58
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 38.9 68 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 65.1 50
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.9 66
3.2 General infrastructure 39.0 40 ª
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.4 104
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 9,132.7 16 ª
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.6 65
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 54.5 42
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.0 75
Creative outputs 19.6 82 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 10.0 109 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 6.0 109 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 24.8 71
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 1.0 121 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 29.9 66 É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.4 44 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 32.8 60
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 1.8 47
Market sophistication 30.3 73 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 118 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 5.1 [96]

4.1 Credit 31.7 52 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 45.8 49 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 53.4 59 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 7.8 40 É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 81
4.2 Investment 3.1 97 É
7.3 Online creativity 23.9 75 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 20.9 61 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.9 97 É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 54 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.3 112 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 104 «É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 69.4 56
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 98 «É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 56.0 69

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % Ա 2.0 65

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 79.6 64
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 200.3 74

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

208 Pakistan 91
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
70 116 Lower middle CSA 247.5 1,568.4 6,774

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 25.3 118 Business sophistication 24.9 73

1.1 Institutional environment 25.8 122 5.1 Knowledge workers 20.2 [103]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 24.0 125 «É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 11.4 104
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 27.7 106 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 32.0 52
1.2 Regulatory environment 21.6 111 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 18.6 116 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 24.6 107 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 2.0 111

1.3 Business environment 28.4 104 5.2 Innovation linkages 25.1 59

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 48.2 67 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.5 120
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 8.6 79 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 52.6 50
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 57.3 45
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 43 ªÈ
Human capital and research 15.4 119 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 96
5.3 Knowledge absorption 29.3 57 È
2.1 Education 31.1 119
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.4 79
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 1.7 123 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 16.7 13 ªÈ
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 17.1 62
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade Ա 1.1 74
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 7.6 111 «É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.6 106
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 11.1 41 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 6.3 [121]

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 13.4 111 Knowledge and technology outputs 21.0 66
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 18.8 [59]
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 92
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 8.9 62 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 415.3 76 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.2 91 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 15.0 44 ª
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 20.2 42 ªÈ
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 28.8 44 ªÈ
6.2 Knowledge impact 28.9 58
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % Ա 0.7 63
Infrastructure 21.1 125 «É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.4 24 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 46.2 105 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 21.5 57
3.1.1 ICT access* 36.3 119 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 15.4 76
3.1.2 ICT use* 61.7 97
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 85
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 52.0 88
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 28.7 92
3.1.4 E-participation* 34.9 97
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.7 88
3.2 General infrastructure 2.2 133 «É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 4.7 22 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 673.4 103 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.2 88
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 14.5 124 «É
Creative outputs 22.6 71
3.3 Ecological sustainability 14.9 92
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 10.1 69 7.1 Intangible assets 31.2 59
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 16.4 68 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 39.7 61
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 84 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 25.3 74
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 24.3 90 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 93
7.2 Creative goods and services 1.5 115
4.1 Credit 13.2 102 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 85
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 28.9 69 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.2 82 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 14.8 121 «
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 0.0 62 «É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.7 37 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 105
4.2 Investment 5.1 77 7.3 Online creativity 26.5 61
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 12.3 71 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.3 113
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 82 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 2.2 103
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 75 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 77.1 14 ªÈ
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 60
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 54.8 71
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 6.9 111

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 87.3 45
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,568.4 23 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Panama 82 209

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
78 83 High LCN 4.5 190.3 42,738

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 42.0 82 É Business sophistication 18.4 112 É

1.1 Institutional environment 52.0 71 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 24.1 92 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 63.3 64 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 23.2 63 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 40.7 78 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 39.3 74 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 93 «É

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 45.2 68 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 21.9 66 É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 33.5 85 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 11.0 69 É

1.3 Business environment 34.7 91 É 5.2 Innovation linkages 16.3 101 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 41.6 84 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.2 40 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 27.9 55 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 23.5 111 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 31.1 105 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 109 É
Human capital and research 22.1 99 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 56 ª

5.3 Knowledge absorption 14.8 127 «É

2.1 Education 44.2 84 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.8 46 ª
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.9 79
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 2.8 130 «É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.4 114 É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 13.0 80
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.6 105
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 378.8 71 É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 7.4 65 É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 13.6 66
2.2 Tertiary education 20.1 95 É
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 53.0 68 É Knowledge and technology outputs 14.4 90 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 15.2 101 «É

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 2.7 72 6.1 Knowledge creation 4.5 114 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.2 93 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 1.9 92 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 79
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 142.0 90 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 67
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.2 89 É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 2.9 117 «É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 11.3 69
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 3.6 73 É
6.2 Knowledge impact 21.7 88 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.5 17 ªÈ
Infrastructure 43.9 58 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 79
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 65.1 80 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 6.0 97 «É
3.1.1 ICT access* 81.2 84 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 16.8 69 É
3.1.2 ICT use* n/a n/a
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 99
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 64.0 71 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 31.6 85 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 50.0 75 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 9.6 19 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 39.1 38 ª
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.3 71
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 2,783.3 68 É
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.0 92 É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 45.5 56 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 33.8 13 ªÈ
Creative outputs 24.8 64 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 27.4 45 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 25.2 5 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 19.6 81 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 18.5 62 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % Ա 2.5 69 É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 111 É
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 32.7 61
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.4 64 É

Market sophistication 23.2 95 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 120 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 31.0 [36]

4.1 Credit 28.6 61 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.2 75
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 21.2 77 «É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 100.1 23 ª
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 4.5 12 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 4.2 90 É

7.3 Online creativity 28.9 56 ªÉ
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 22.6 57 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 Ա 14.1 37 ª
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 76 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 3.5 93 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 96 É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 69.0 57
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 68
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 36.9 106 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.4 71

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 25.9 107 «É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 190.3 76

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

210 Paraguay 93
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
90 98 Upper middle LCN 6.8 117.3 15,533

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 34.5 96 Business sophistication 20.1 102 É

1.1 Institutional environment 42.3 93 5.1 Knowledge workers 26.8 81

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 56.7 81 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 20.9 75
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 28.0 105 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 36.5 47 ª

1.2 Regulatory environment 32.1 92 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 37.4 82 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 0.2 97 «É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 26.9 99 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 9.5 80

1.3 Business environment 29.1 101 5.2 Innovation linkages 8.8 126 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 44.4 75 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.6 111
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 13.7 73 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 11.0 126 «É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 26.5 112
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 119
Human capital and research 16.4 115 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 24.7 73 ª

2.1 Education 32.0 116 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 104 É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.4 93
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 19.6 9 ªÈ
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 12.7 79
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.0 133 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.6 104
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 359.7 80 É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 15.4 83
2.2 Tertiary education n/a [n/a]
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV n/a n/a Knowledge and technology outputs 10.3 113 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 2.5 123
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 115
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.9 100 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 142.4 89 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 58
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.1 96 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 2.0 124 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 3.6 116
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 16.2 120 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.1 92
Infrastructure 43.2 61 ª 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 110 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 60.2 87 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 65.7 96 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 12.4 83
3.1.2 ICT use* 68.5 87
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade n/a n/a
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 56.4 84
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 31.9 84
3.1.4 E-participation* 50.0 75
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.1 74 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 29.1 74 ª
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.1 128 É
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 6,469.5 30 ªÈ
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.6 66 ª
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 27.3 76
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 25.5 46 ª
Creative outputs 21.5 75
3.3 Ecological sustainability 40.2 16 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 12.0 51 ª
7.1 Intangible assets 32.7 53 ª
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 78.1 2 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 106 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 130.5 5 ªÈ
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 24.8 88 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 125 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 0.5 [127]

4.1 Credit 12.1 106 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 111 «É
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 7.5 84 «É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 51.3 65 ª
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 101
4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 20.0 97
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.5 87
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 2.9 96
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 55.5 96
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 37.4 105 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 3.5 85

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 117.3 87

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Peru 75 211

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
85 63 Upper middle LCN 33.8 548.5 15,894

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 40.2 85 Business sophistication 24.2 77

1.1 Institutional environment 45.5 84 5.1 Knowledge workers 32.1 65

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 57.3 78 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 15.5 89
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 33.6 95 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 61.4 7 ªÈ

1.2 Regulatory environment 37.7 77 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 75
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 47.3 59 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 28.0 97 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 7.4 89 É

1.3 Business environment 37.4 85 5.2 Innovation linkages 12.4 116 «

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 32.2 101 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.1 84
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 42.5 39 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 22.8 112 «É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 27.5 111 «
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 123 «
Human capital and research 35.5 49 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 78
5.3 Knowledge absorption 28.2 60
2.1 Education 43.4 86
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.9 43
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.9 78
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.5 62
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 15.2 69
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.5 50
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 14.5 59
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.7 55
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 402.4 62
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 13.9 68
2.2 Tertiary education 56.0 6 ªÈ
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 71.2 41 Knowledge and technology outputs 13.0 95
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 29.6 22 ªÈ
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 11.3 76
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 88
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 7.0 68 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 75
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 23 ª
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.2 92 «
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 4.9 106
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 14.2 59
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 18.6 50
6.2 Knowledge impact 19.5 104
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬96
Infrastructure 43.1 62 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 69
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 74.9 57 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 11.7 82
3.1.1 ICT access* 67.8 95 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 8.1 103 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 77.4 69
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 71
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 79.0 37 ª
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 21.3 103 «É
3.1.4 E-participation* 75.6 22 ª
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.4 95
3.2 General infrastructure 23.6 90 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.2 123 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 1,683.8 88 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 5.3 55
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 40.9 60
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 21.5 88
Creative outputs 21.8 74
3.3 Ecological sustainability 30.9 38
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 17.2 20 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 29.5 64
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 26.1 47 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 39.9 60
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.9 35 ª
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 53.7 29 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.8 58
Market sophistication 37.0 51 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 100
7.2 Creative goods and services 5.1 95
4.1 Credit 42.4 33 ªÈ
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 44.3 51 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.9 67
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 47.7 72 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 6.9 43
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 6.1 4 ªÈ
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 79
4.2 Investment 4.5 85 7.3 Online creativity 23.1 81
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 35.8 43 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.9 71
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 91 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 6.1 70
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 93 «
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 60.4 84
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 80
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 64.2 30 ª
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.5 6 ªÈ

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 85.5 52
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 548.5 45

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

212 Philippines 53
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
53 67 Lower middle SEAO 114.9 1,278.6 11,326

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 47.2 65 È Business sophistication 36.7 37 ªÈ

1.1 Institutional environment 51.8 74 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 33.3 62 È

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 58.0 77 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 14.2 95
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 45.7 63 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 42.2 32
1.2 Regulatory environment 36.2 82 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 68
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 43.5 71 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 38.0 50
1.2.2 Rule of law* 29.0 95 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 13.7 58 È

1.3 Business environment 53.6 [52] 5.2 Innovation linkages 29.1 50 È

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 53.6 52 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.2 38 È

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 56.4 44 È
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 56.7 46
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 57
Human capital and research 26.2 84 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 90
5.3 Knowledge absorption 47.7 14 ªÈ
2.1 Education 33.0 114 «
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.5 69
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.6 89
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 28.5 4 ªÈ
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.7 44 È
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 12.8 87
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.4 68
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 352.5 83 «
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 51.8 25
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 24.1 108 «

2.2 Tertiary education 38.2 45 È

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 34.9 87 Knowledge and technology outputs 28.7 42 È

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 26.3 37

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 13.4 69
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 78
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 7.2 67 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 94 «
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 172.0 86 «
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 13 ª
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.3 71 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 1.7 125 «
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 14.7 56
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 22.1 49 È
6.2 Knowledge impact 29.4 55
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.2 88
Infrastructure 34.3 85 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.2 46
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 61
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 56.7 92 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 37.2 30 ªÈ
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 57.7 105 «
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 43.2 21 ªÈ
3.1.2 ICT use* 62.4 96
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 88
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 59.1 76
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 62.1 33 ªÈ
3.1.4 E-participation* 47.7 79
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 33.6 1 ªÈ
3.2 General infrastructure 28.8 77 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 5.3 19 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 931.8 100 «
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 3.1 77
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 54.5 42 È
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.1 74
Creative outputs 26.2 60 È
3.3 Ecological sustainability 17.3 80
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 14.8 32 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 31.9 56
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 11.3 83 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 58.1 35
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 77 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 31.2 63
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 4.2 34 ªÈ

Market sophistication 29.7 77 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 76
7.2 Creative goods and services 16.4 61 È
4.1 Credit 8.0 121 «
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 94 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 1.4 62
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 48.9 70 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 4.4 46 È
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP Ա 0.0 58 «
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 4.0 14 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 13.1 52 7.3 Online creativity 24.9 67

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 68.9 26 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.6 104
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 57 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.0 90
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 73 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 70.0 53
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 40
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 67.9 22 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.5 55 È

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 90.4 39
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,278.6 28 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Poland 40 213

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
38 45 High EUR 38.8 1,712.6 45,538

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 44.9 73 É Business sophistication 38.0 35

1.1 Institutional environment 58.7 53 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 51.1 32

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 66.7 51 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 41.5 28
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 50.8 54 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 21.7 76 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 58.4 43 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 1.0 24
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 60.7 39 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 51.0 25
1.2.2 Rule of law* 56.2 45 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 24.7 19 ª

1.3 Business environment 17.6 122 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 23.1 64 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 18.8 123 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.8 48
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 16.4 69 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 39.1 77 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 46.1 67
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 82 «
Human capital and research 42.6 36 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 38
5.3 Knowledge absorption 39.8 30
2.1 Education 60.3 36
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.1 33
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.9 44
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.6 58
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 20.2 48
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.0 30
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 16.2 35
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 4.6 28
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 492.3 14 ª
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 55.8 19
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 9.9 33
2.2 Tertiary education 33.1 68
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 74.0 33 Knowledge and technology outputs 28.0 47
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 19.6 78 «
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 6.7 44 6.1 Knowledge creation 24.0 40
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.3 28
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 34.5 30 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 45
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 3,751.0 29 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 33
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.5 28 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 18.3 38
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 44.9 37 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 36.7 26 ª
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 31.4 40
6.2 Knowledge impact 30.1 53
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.7 34 È
Infrastructure 45.8 51 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 47
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 83.0 33 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 30.5 38
3.1.1 ICT access* 98.8 25 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 29.9 42
3.1.2 ICT use* 92.2 11 ª
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.3 34
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 77.1 43
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 68.6 25
3.1.4 E-participation* 64.0 51
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 6.9 32
3.2 General infrastructure 36.9 46 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.2 38
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 4,684.7 48 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 6.3 44
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 68.2 25
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 22.0 84 «
Creative outputs 38.1 35
3.3 Ecological sustainability 17.4 79
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 12.9 43 7.1 Intangible assets 40.7 34
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 8.3 89 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 65.3 27
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.9 53 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 27.4 70
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 3.9 36
Market sophistication 33.6 61 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.3 18 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 27.9 42

4.1 Credit 20.7 83 É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.9 31
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 47.9 47 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 2.6 49
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 39.7 81 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 10.9 34 É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.2 53 «É
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 4.7 11 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 5.7 73 É

7.3 Online creativity 42.9 33
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 26.7 55 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 15.6 35
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 67 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 40.9 26 ª
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 70 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 72.3 37
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 76 «É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 74.2 16 ª

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 97.7 6 ª
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,712.6 21 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

214 Portugal 31
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
27 31 High EUR 10.4 465.1 45,227

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 62.8 37 Business sophistication 38.9 33

1.1 Institutional environment 74.4 31 5.1 Knowledge workers 54.9 28

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 78.7 25 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 41.9 27
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 70.1 30 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 39.5 38
1.2 Regulatory environment 68.8 30 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 1.1 20
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 61.9 38 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 56.6 17
1.2.2 Rule of law* 75.8 24 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 19.6 35

1.3 Business environment 45.3 66 « 5.2 Innovation linkages 28.7 52

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 42.0 82 « 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.6 57 «

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 48.5 30 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 55.3 45
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 48.3 62 «
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 47
Human capital and research 50.7 21 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 32
5.3 Knowledge absorption 33.0 50
2.1 Education 64.2 18 ª
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.8 47
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.6 53
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.6 44
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 29.7 9 ªÈ
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.3 64 «
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 16.8 24
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.8 52
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 477.6 27
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 44.9 32
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 8.2 14 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 45.5 25

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 71.9 38 Knowledge and technology outputs 31.1 33
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 27.7 32
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 11.7 20 6.1 Knowledge creation 30.5 30
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.3 30
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 42.3 25 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 34
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 5,744.3 13 ª
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 53 «
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.7 22 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 36.1 8 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 46.7 34 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 33.9 29
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 36.5 35
6.2 Knowledge impact 36.3 37
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.1 48
Infrastructure 48.1 46 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 11 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 81.5 42 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 27.6 45
3.1.1 ICT access* 96.6 39
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 26.4 49
3.1.2 ICT use* 80.0 54 «
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 48
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 77.4 40
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 61.7 35
3.1.4 E-participation* 72.1 32
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 3.4 47
3.2 General infrastructure 32.0 62 «
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.0 41
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 4,497.5 49 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 9.7 29
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 59.1 37
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 20.4 96 «
Creative outputs 45.9 20
3.3 Ecological sustainability 30.7 41
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 17.3 18 ª
7.1 Intangible assets 51.2 20
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 27.7 43 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 69.5 18
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.6 39 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 76.4 15 ªÈ
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 5.1 32
Market sophistication 43.7 36 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.1 19 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 28.5 41

4.1 Credit 49.8 23 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.7 42
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 67.5 17 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 7.7 14
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 90.1 30 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 30.2 22
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.4 36
4.2 Investment 14.5 49 7.3 Online creativity 52.8 25
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 29.1 49 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 42.0 15 ª
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 35 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 45.6 24
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 39 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 70.7 46
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 54 «

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 66.7 27

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 100.0 1 ªÈ
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 465.1 49

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Qatar 49 215

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
71 39 High NAWA 3.0 328.1 114,210

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 73.4 20 ª Business sophistication 25.7 68 É

1.1 Institutional environment 77.5 23 5.1 Knowledge workers 17.2 110 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 81.3 18 ª 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 26.6 54 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 73.7 27 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 67.5 32 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 66 É

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 64.7 34 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 9.3 77 É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 70.2 31 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 5.3 95 É

1.3 Business environment 75.2 13 ªÈ 5.2 Innovation linkages 41.3 29

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 78.6 11 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.5 64
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 71.8 12 ªÈ 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 82.8 10 ª
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 89.6 8 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 28
Human capital and research 36.6 48 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 79 É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 18.5 101 É

2.1 Education 47.6 73 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 121 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 3.2 99 É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.2 118 É
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.6 45
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 13.3 78 É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ ܝ‬126 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 421.9 51 É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 16.1 56 É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 12.6 56
2.2 Tertiary education 49.9 15 ª
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 35.1 86 É Knowledge and technology outputs 17.5 82 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 17.8 92 É

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 38.5 1 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 9.2 86 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.2 102 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 12.2 56 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 71
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 982.5 53 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.7 53 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 9.3 74 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 13.1 64
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 27.8 45
6.2 Knowledge impact 31.8 48
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 98
Infrastructure 50.2 39 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 29
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 71.6 70 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 40.9 25
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.9 12 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 11.3 89 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 93.6 5 ªÈ
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 56.8 83 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 33.5 81 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 36.0 94 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.3 101 É
3.2 General infrastructure 67.8 2 ªÈ
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.0 82
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 19,211.3 4 ªÈ
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 5.0 57
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 63.6 33
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP n/a n/a
Creative outputs 25.9 61
3.3 Ecological sustainability 11.3 107 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 5.6 114 É
7.1 Intangible assets 36.5 42
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.3 125 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 34.1 64
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 3.1 31 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 5.4 116 «É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 8.9 21
Market sophistication 34.7 59 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
7.2 Creative goods and services 7.6 83 É
4.1 Credit 47.8 26 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.2 83
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 59.5 29 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.0 85 «É
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 100.8 22 ª
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 26.0 25
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 133 «É

4.2 Investment 9.5 61 7.3 Online creativity 22.8 85 É

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 96.1 19 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.8 72 É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 51 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 3.9 91 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 106 «É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 61.9 80
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 95 É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 46.7 86

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 3.6 86 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 61.8 95 É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 328.1 59

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

216 Republic of Korea 6

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
4 6 High SEAO 51.7 2,924.2 56,709

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 71.0 24 Business sophistication 63.7 5

1.1 Institutional environment 80.3 19 5.1 Knowledge workers 82.2 1 ªÈ

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 81.3 18 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 40.7 30 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 79.2 17 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 74.5 25 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 4.1 1 ªÈ

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 71.9 28 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 76.3 4 È

1.2.2 Rule of law* 77.1 23 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 22.3 26

1.3 Business environment 58.2 35 5.2 Innovation linkages 58.4 14

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 51.2 60 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 6.6 5
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 65.1 15 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 69.0 26
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 70.8 31
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 32 É
Human capital and research 68.6 1 ªÈ 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 13.3 2 ªÈ

5.3 Knowledge absorption 50.4 9

2.1 Education 71.2 2 ªÈ
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.6 21
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.4 32
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 18.2 11 È
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 36.8 3 ªÈ
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.2 67 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 16.6 28
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.9 100 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 523.5 4
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 82.6 1 ªÈ
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 11.5 46
2.2 Tertiary education 49.2 17
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 103.3 6 È Knowledge and technology outputs 54.1 10
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 30.4 18 È
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 4.4 55 « 6.1 Knowledge creation 65.1 4 ªÈ
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 66.1 1 ªÈ
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 85.5 1 ªÈ
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 7.6 1 ªÈ
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 9,467.2 2 ªÈ
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.0 20
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 5.2 2 ªÈ
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 22.7 29
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 87.1 5 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 47.1 16
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 72.8 10
6.2 Knowledge impact 45.1 21
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.8 60
Infrastructure 60.5 9 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.8 20
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 64 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 95.0 6 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 58.2 4 ª
3.1.1 ICT access* 100.0 11
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 52.3 13
3.1.2 ICT use* 87.9 24
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 1.1 18
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 98.1 3 ªÈ
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 94.3 3 ªÈ
3.1.4 E-participation* 94.2 9
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 24.3 6 È
3.2 General infrastructure 60.7 8 È
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.4 67 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 12,290.0 12 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 10.5 25
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 77.3 16
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 32.9 15 È
Creative outputs 61.7 2 ªÈ
3.3 Ecological sustainability 25.7 47
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 8.0 93 «
7.1 Intangible assets 81.5 2 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 16.5 67 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 50.1 48 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 5.3 18 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 96.5 8 È
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 18.3 5 È

Market sophistication 55.8 15 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 19.0 1 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 37.8 16

4.1 Credit 65.9 7 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.8 39
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 66.5 18 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 4.9 25
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 175.0 6 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 46.9 15
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 4.2 13 È

4.2 Investment 30.1 26 7.3 Online creativity 46.2 30

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 117.5 11 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 7.2 48 É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 28 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 56.1 20
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 25 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 75.4 20
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 31
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 71.5 18
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 4.7 93 «É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 93.4 24
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 2,924.2 14

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Republic of Moldova 68 217

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
57 80 Upper middle EUR 3.1 42.2 16,916

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 37.6 90 Business sophistication 19.7 105 É

1.1 Institutional environment 45.0 86 5.1 Knowledge workers 26.8 82

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 54.0 88 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 19.0 80
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 36.0 87 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 38.1 40
1.2 Regulatory environment 40.1 71 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 74
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 44.5 69 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 15.5 74
1.2.2 Rule of law* 35.6 82 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 11.8 65

1.3 Business environment 27.8 [105] 5.2 Innovation linkages 11.9 120 «

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 27.8 108 « 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.6 112 «

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 25.0 107
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 16.9 123 «É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 44 ª
Human capital and research 31.1 68 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 65
5.3 Knowledge absorption 20.4 93
2.1 Education 55.4 54
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.7 60
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 6.1 14 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.4 79
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 22.3 37
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.0 77
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 14.9 51
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.8 53
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 414.0 53
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 6.2 69
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 10.9 39 ª

2.2 Tertiary education 35.0 57

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 64.4 49 Knowledge and technology outputs 21.2 64
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 23.3 57
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 7.0 43 6.1 Knowledge creation 23.4 44 ª
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 47
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 2.8 87 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 55
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 768.0 60 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.5 4 ªÈ
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.2 83 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 6.1 95
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 5.1 96
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 18.5 110
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.5 72
Infrastructure 33.4 89 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 97
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 73.7 62 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 16.0 73
3.1.1 ICT access* 79.4 86
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 21.7 55
3.1.2 ICT use* 77.0 71
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 78
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 71.0 60
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 43.6 62
3.1.4 E-participation* 67.4 47
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.7 86
3.2 General infrastructure 19.6 101 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 6.4 13 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 2,048.6 77 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.6 81
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89 «É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 24.5 57
Creative outputs 31.5 51
3.3 Ecological sustainability 7.0 118 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 8.0 91 7.1 Intangible assets 41.9 32 ª
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 3.0 112 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 105 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 80.8 12 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 33.3 63 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 7.0 11 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 10.3 [70]

4.1 Credit 30.3 55 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.7 43
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 27.5 104 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 4.8 6 ªÈ
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 89
4.2 Investment 11.7 [54] 7.3 Online creativity 31.9 50
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 3.1 68
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 14.5 49
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 54 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 78.1 12 ªÈ
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 56
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 58.0 60
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.9 14 ª

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 80.6 62
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 42.2 121 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

218 Romania 48
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
45 57 High EUR 19.1 780.8 41,029

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 42.2 81 É Business sophistication 31.1 47

1.1 Institutional environment 52.0 72 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 35.6 58

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 60.0 70 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 28.2 51 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 44.0 68 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 17.6 85 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 53.4 52 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.3 48
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 51.4 55 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 55.2 21
1.2.2 Rule of law* 55.4 48 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 12.8 62 É

1.3 Business environment 21.2 115 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 20.6 83 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 28.2 107 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.3 35
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 14.2 71 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 37.0 85 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 37.5 89 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 100 «É
Human capital and research 30.8 70 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 72 É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 37.2 34

2.1 Education 47.2 75 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.8 49
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 3.3 97 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 11.3 28
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 19.9 51
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.8 17 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 14.5 58 É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.2 46
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 427.9 47 É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 31.4 42
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 11.6 48
2.2 Tertiary education 38.5 44
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 55.3 65 Knowledge and technology outputs 29.9 38
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 29.3 26
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 6.0 45 6.1 Knowledge creation 13.2 72 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 51
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 6.7 70 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 73
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 1,005.1 52 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 60
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.5 61 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 12.4 57
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 19.7 43
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 9.2 67 É
6.2 Knowledge impact 35.8 39
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.8 13 ªÈ
Infrastructure 51.4 32 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 49
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 75.8 55 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 41.7 24
3.1.1 ICT access* 96.9 36
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 40.8 24 ª
3.1.2 ICT use* 79.8 56
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 59
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 64.8 69 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 73.9 19 ª
3.1.4 E-participation* 61.6 54
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 6.4 34
3.2 General infrastructure 33.0 59 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 7.0 9 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 2,909.2 64 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 15.6 17 ª
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 50.0 50 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 26.2 43
Creative outputs 28.5 56
3.3 Ecological sustainability 45.6 5 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 17.8 17 ª
7.1 Intangible assets 30.6 61
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 24.6 51 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 52.8 42
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 8.4 11 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 36.3 56
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 1.3 53
Market sophistication 32.4 67 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 52
7.2 Creative goods and services 20.3 54
4.1 Credit 26.8 65 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.9 15 ª
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 39.7 56 É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 2.1 55
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 24.8 108 «É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 7.0 42 É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 3.1 12 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.7 53
4.2 Investment 3.4 96 «É
7.3 Online creativity 32.4 48
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 10.4 74 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 8.0 44
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 69 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 19.1 46
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 86 «É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 69.9 54
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 79 É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 67.0 26

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 94.7 20 ª
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 780.8 35

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Russian Federation 59 219

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
56 76 Upper middle EUR 145.8 5,056.5 35,310

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 19.1 126 «É Business sophistication 29.8 53

1.1 Institutional environment 19.6 128 «É 5.1 Knowledge workers 32.6 64

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 13.3 131 «É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 45.2 22 ªÈ
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 25.8 110 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 11.8 93 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 10.7 127 «É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.6 36
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 11.8 126 «É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 29.2 63
1.2.2 Rule of law* 9.6 126 «É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 9.7 79

1.3 Business environment 27.0 107 5.2 Innovation linkages 22.8 68

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 37.9 94 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.6 60
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 16.2 70 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 44.1 66
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 47.8 64
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 103
Human capital and research 41.1 39 È 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 48
5.3 Knowledge absorption 33.9 46
2.1 Education 58.7 44
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.5 22 ª
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 3.7 84
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 9.6 43
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.9 87
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 13.4 75
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.3 116 «É
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science Ա 481.3 24 È
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 46.5 30 È
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 8.0 9 ª

2.2 Tertiary education 43.2 28 ªÈ

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 56.6 61 Knowledge and technology outputs 23.7 52
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 31.4 15 ªÈ
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 8.5 32 È 6.1 Knowledge creation 29.6 33 È
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.1 19 ªÈ
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 21.5 43 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 57
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 2,697.9 34 È
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 8 ªÈ
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.9 44 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 7.6 86
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 37.5 25 ªÈ
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 43.5 29 ªÈ
6.2 Knowledge impact 26.1 63
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.7 64
Infrastructure 36.9 76 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 60
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 77.4 48 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 26.8 46
3.1.1 ICT access* 93.2 54
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 15.3 77
3.1.2 ICT use* 86.1 28 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.3 41 È
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 70.9 61
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 47.9 53
3.1.4 E-participation* 59.3 57
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 2.4 56
3.2 General infrastructure 25.4 85 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.2 79
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 116 «
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 22.7 82
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.0 76
Creative outputs 30.1 53
3.3 Ecological sustainability 7.9 116 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 4.7 121 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 39.0 39
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 13.6 78 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 47.9 50
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 122 «
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 78.8 14 ª
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 2.2 45
Market sophistication 36.1 57 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 51
7.2 Creative goods and services 10.3 71
4.1 Credit 17.4 91 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.6 46
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 30.6 67 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 1.4 64
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 54.4 58 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP Ա 0.3 48 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 0.4 70
4.2 Investment 4.4 88 7.3 Online creativity 32.0 49
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 38.7 41 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 8.5 43
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 85 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 14.8 48
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 109 «É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 72.8 32
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 74
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 86.6 8 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 4.0 91

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 91.6 29
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 5,056.5 1 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

220 Rwanda 104

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
116 81 Low SSA 14.0 42.3 3,137

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 62.1 38 ªÈ Business sophistication 18.2 113 È

1.1 Institutional environment 58.7 54 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 10.3 119

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 67.3 48 È 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 6.8 116
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 50.1 55 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 27.4 62
1.2 Regulatory environment 47.1 60 È 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 73
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 46.1 63 È 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 0.6 94 «

1.2.2 Rule of law* 48.0 58 È 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 3.1 104 È

1.3 Business environment 80.5 [5] 5.2 Innovation linkages 28.6 53 È

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 80.5 8 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.5 30 ªÈ

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 49.7 54 È
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 55.8 47 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 40 ªÈ
Human capital and research 24.4 95 È 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 15.5 125 «

2.1 Education 42.0 90
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 116
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.1 65
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.0 71
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 30.3 8 ªÈ
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.6 105 É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 11.4 99
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.1 73
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 5.6 71
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 27.6 116
2.2 Tertiary education 28.1 81 È
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 7.0 121 « Knowledge and technology outputs 11.0 105
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 31.0 16 ªÈ
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 4.5 54 6.1 Knowledge creation 7.6 95
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 97
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 3.2 86 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 58.5 98 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 39
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.8 49 È
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 11.3 65
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 3.4 117
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 23.2 76 È
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 4.5 5 ªÈ
Infrastructure 30.6 93 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 112
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 54.5 96 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 8.3 92 È
3.1.1 ICT access* 43.0 114 È
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 2.3 128 «É
3.1.2 ICT use* 35.2 113 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 90
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 77.2 41 ªÈ
6.3.2 Production and export complexity n/a n/a
3.1.4 E-participation* 62.8 53 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.5 90 È
3.2 General infrastructure 22.1 93 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.7 94
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 72.8 125 «
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 123
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 31.8 71 È
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 25.0 52
Creative outputs 7.2 114
3.3 Ecological sustainability 15.3 91
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 5.9 110 7.1 Intangible assets 5.1 112
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 29.2 37 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 117 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 20.0 86
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 16.0 117 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 109
7.2 Creative goods and services 1.6 [113]
4.1 Credit 8.3 117 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 103
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 22.9 110 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 1.0 31 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 77 È

4.2 Investment 15.3 46 È

7.3 Online creativity 17.0 108
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 30.8 46 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.2 122
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 74 È
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.8 76 È
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 26 ªÈ
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 45.9 109
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 58 È

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 24.4 119

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 11.6 129 «É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 64.0 90 È
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 42.3 120

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Saudi Arabia 47 221

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
66 36 High NAWA 32.3 2,246.5 68,453

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 64.9 35 Business sophistication 23.7 79 É

1.1 Institutional environment 63.3 44 5.1 Knowledge workers 17.7 [109]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 67.3 48 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % n/a n/a
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 59.2 42 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 3.9 102 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 52.5 53 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.2 56
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 52.8 53 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 39.4 45
1.2.2 Rule of law* 52.2 54 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % n/a n/a

1.3 Business environment 78.8 9 ªÈ 5.2 Innovation linkages 37.4 31

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 78.8 10 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.8 99 É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 78.9 5 ªÈ 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 60.3 36
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 99.7 2 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 55
Human capital and research 43.4 33 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 34
5.3 Knowledge absorption 16.0 118 «É
2.1 Education 57.4 [48]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 121 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP n/a n/a
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 8.2 68
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.7 99 É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 16.9 21
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.2 96
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 387.2 68 «É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 6.0 70 «É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 14.4 70 É

2.2 Tertiary education 39.8 40

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 73.7 34 Knowledge and technology outputs 20.6 68 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 28.1 30

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 4.1 57 6.1 Knowledge creation 22.1 52
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 48
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 33.2 31 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 52
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 834.8 57 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.5 60 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 18.3 39
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 67.9 16 ª
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 27.7 36
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 49.0 23
6.2 Knowledge impact 22.1 85 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 128 «É
Infrastructure 46.1 49 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.1 48
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 40
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 85.0 26 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 26.3 47
3.1.1 ICT access* 100.0 1 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 17.6 66 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 91.2 17 ª
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade n/a n/a
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 80.3 32
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 58.6 38
3.1.4 E-participation* 68.6 43
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 0.8 83 É
3.2 General infrastructure 47.0 25 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.5 100
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 11,373.9 13 ª
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.9 95 É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 59.1 37
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 26.6 38
Creative outputs 24.4 67 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 6.3 123 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 7.2 98 7.1 Intangible assets 33.5 51
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.1 128 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 59.1 33
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 80 É
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 11.8 107 «É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 9.4 20
Market sophistication 48.7 27 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 79
7.2 Creative goods and services 7.9 82 É
4.1 Credit 49.4 24 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 104 «É
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 81.8 6 ªÈ
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.4 80 «É
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 52.0 64 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 23.6 27
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 0.4 68
4.2 Investment 37.2 21 7.3 Online creativity 22.9 84 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 291.5 1 ªÈ
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 1.5 86 É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 55 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 2.6 98 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 76 É
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 64.5 70
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 24
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 59.4 54
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 3.9 90 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 64.8 87 «É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 2,246.5 17 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

222 Senegal 92
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
95 90 Lower middle SSA 18.1 78.5 4,325

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 45.5 70 Business sophistication 14.7 123 «É

1.1 Institutional environment 53.3 68 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 6.9 128 «É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 62.7 65 È 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 4.6 120 «É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 44.0 69 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 17.4 86
1.2 Regulatory environment 35.2 85 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 34.0 89 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 2.1 88
1.2.2 Rule of law* 36.3 80 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 1.0 119 «

1.3 Business environment 47.9 63 5.2 Innovation linkages 16.7 99

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 45.3 73 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.3 127 «É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 50.6 24 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 44.3 65
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 33.1 97
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 87
Human capital and research 18.6 106 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 20.6 91

2.1 Education 39.9 94
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 105
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.6 24 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 4.1 119
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 20.2 47
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.1 75
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 9.1 107 «É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 8.8 12 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 23.5 106
2.2 Tertiary education 12.1 110
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 16.8 106 Knowledge and technology outputs 21.5 62
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 6.0 46 ª 6.1 Knowledge creation 5.9 106
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 76
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 3.8 82 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 83
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 581.0 65 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 74 «É
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.6 56 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 7.2 89
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 5.9 94
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 49.6 12 ªÈ
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.0 54
Infrastructure 35.7 81 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 4.8 7 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 66
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 51.3 101 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 22.1 54
3.1.1 ICT access* 72.4 92
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 8.9 96
3.1.2 ICT use* 56.1 101
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 66
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 44.0 101
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 26.5 95
3.1.4 E-participation* 32.6 101
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.4 94
3.2 General infrastructure 44.2 30 ªÈ
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.3 70
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 432.5 112 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 107
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 42.0 4 ªÈ
Creative outputs 8.2 112
3.3 Ecological sustainability 11.8 106
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 11.7 56 7.1 Intangible assets 4.9 115
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 7.1 95 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 98 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 7.7 113
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 1.4 52
Market sophistication 31.0 72 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 83
7.2 Creative goods and services 10.1 [73]
4.1 Credit 30.3 57 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.7 41 ª
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 42.9 53 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 32.3 91 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 3.5 9 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 109
4.2 Investment 24.5 33 ª
7.3 Online creativity 13.0 121 «
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 Ա 0.5 107
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 64 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.0 114
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 35 ªÈ
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 37.6 121 «É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 22 ªÈ

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 38.1 104

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 8.1 121 «

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 76.6 71
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 78.5 95

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Serbia 52 223

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
60 47 Upper middle EUR 6.8 173.1 26,074

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 46.5 67 Business sophistication 27.2 63

1.1 Institutional environment 53.2 69 5.1 Knowledge workers 30.6 71

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 60.7 69 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 28.9 49
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 45.7 61 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 38.3 39
1.2 Regulatory environment 43.0 65 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.4 43
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 45.4 67 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 1.2 91 «É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 40.6 70 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 15.1 51

1.3 Business environment 43.2 73 5.2 Innovation linkages 22.1 72

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 46.5 71 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.1 85
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 40.0 43 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 45.0 64
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 48.9 61
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 83
Human capital and research 35.4 50 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 59
5.3 Knowledge absorption 29.0 58
2.1 Education 54.6 56
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.4 27
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 3.3 94 «
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.1 87
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.8 38
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 13.9 69
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 7.0 15 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 442.6 42
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 10.9 63 «
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 7.5 5 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 40.4 39 È

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 66.3 46 Knowledge and technology outputs 29.6 41
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 29.8 21 È
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 4.6 53 6.1 Knowledge creation 23.9 41
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 63
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 11.2 58 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 47
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 2,349.7 39 È
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 32
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.0 41 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 33.3 13 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 16.1 52
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 5.5 70
6.2 Knowledge impact 24.5 68
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.8 15 ª
Infrastructure 52.3 29 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 115 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 84.9 27 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 24.3 49
3.1.1 ICT access* 93.8 52
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 40.4 25 È
3.1.2 ICT use* 82.0 45
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.4 31 È
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 83.6 26 È
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 61.3 37 È
3.1.4 E-participation* 80.2 15 ªÈ
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.6 51
3.2 General infrastructure 28.2 78 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 6.5 12 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 5,230.8 41 È
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 22.7 5 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 31.8 71
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 24.7 55
Creative outputs 17.9 85
3.3 Ecological sustainability 43.9 10 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 8.0 92 «
7.1 Intangible assets 5.7 109 «É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 14.3 76 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % ‫ ܝ‬78 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 12.3 2 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 23.4 79
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 42.2 40 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 70
7.2 Creative goods and services 24.8 46
4.1 Credit 22.1 79 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.9 14 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 31.6 63 «
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 2.5 50
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 40.3 80 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.5 61
4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 35.4 43
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 4.7 55
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 27.6 38 È
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 73.7 28
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 62.4 39
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.5 56

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 95.9 11 ªÈ
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 173.1 77

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

224 Singapore 4
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
11 1 High SEAO 5.8 753.3 133,108

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 99.1 1 ªÈ Business sophistication 68.7 3 ªÈ

1.1 Institutional environment 100.0 1 ªÈ 5.1 Knowledge workers 71.1 7

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 100.0 1 ªÈ 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 61.7 2 ªÈ
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 100.0 1 ªÈ 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 42.9 30 É

1.2 Regulatory environment 97.4 1 ªÈ 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 1.4 18
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 100.0 1 ªÈ 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 58.3 15
1.2.2 Rule of law* 94.9 3 ª 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 30.0 3 ªÈ

1.3 Business environment 100.0 [1] 5.2 Innovation linkages 63.5 7

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 100.0 1 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 3.8 21
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 84.9 7
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 84.5 14
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 5 È
Human capital and research 65.0 2 ªÈ 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 2.9 15
5.3 Knowledge absorption 71.4 2 ªÈ
2.1 Education 59.6 39
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 2.4 10
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.4 116 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 25.1 5 È
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 20.5 46 «
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 3.3 7
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 16.9 23
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 28.5 3 ªÈ
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 559.6 2 ªÈ
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 54.2 21
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 11.6 49
2.2 Tertiary education 75.0 2 ªÈ
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 97.1 9 Knowledge and technology outputs 55.4 9
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 35.9 5 È
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 39.9 21
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.4 27
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 60.6 14 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.3 13
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 7,488.4 5 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 2.2 17 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 19.2 34
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 62.4 21 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 40.3 22
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 68.7 13
6.2 Knowledge impact 68.9 2 ªÈ
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.0 53
Infrastructure 56.7 11 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 18.2 1 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 58 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 96.2 3 ªÈ
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 82.0 1 ªÈ
3.1.1 ICT access* 100.0 1 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 57.5 5
3.1.2 ICT use* 91.5 16
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 1.7 14
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 95.8 5
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 89.2 5
3.1.4 E-participation* 97.7 3 ªÈ
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 28.8 1 ªÈ
3.2 General infrastructure 55.3 12 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 3.3 35
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 10,234.2 15 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 7.0 37
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 100.0 1 ªÈ
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 22.8 77 «
Creative outputs 47.4 19
3.3 Ecological sustainability 18.7 70 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 16.2 23 7.1 Intangible assets 37.0 41
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.6 123 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 44.9 54 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.5 41 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 19.0 92 «É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 13.3 11
Market sophistication 65.0 7 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 78 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 48.6 9

4.1 Credit 47.4 [27] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 5.7 1 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 1.8 59 «É
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 129.5 14 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 41.5 20
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 3.3 15
4.2 Investment 88.6 3 ªÈ
7.3 Online creativity 67.1 9
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 158.8 7 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 16.3 34 É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 2.7 1 ªÈ
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 100.0 1 ªÈ
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 1 ªÈ
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 85.1 5 È
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 1 ªÈ

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 59.0 56

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.0 2 ªÈ

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 62.2 93 «É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 753.3 37

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Slovakia 46 225

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
44 52 High EUR 5.5 229.6 42,228

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 47.8 63 É Business sophistication 32.5 43

1.1 Institutional environment 63.6 43 5.1 Knowledge workers 48.8 34

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 73.3 38 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 38.3 36
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 53.9 52 É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 43.3 29
1.2 Regulatory environment 62.9 38 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.6 37
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 64.2 35 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 45.7 36
1.2.2 Rule of law* 61.7 38 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 18.2 37

1.3 Business environment 17.0 124 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 20.3 84 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 26.6 110 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.2 41
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 7.4 80 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 27.2 101 «É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 43.0 73
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 98 «É
Human capital and research 34.6 52 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 43
5.3 Knowledge absorption 28.5 59
2.1 Education 54.5 58
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.7 59
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.3 61
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 11.5 26 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 24.4 24
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.0 76
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 14.9 50
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.1 97 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 457.7 40
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 30.6 45
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 12.3 54
2.2 Tertiary education 34.6 61
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 52.5 70 É Knowledge and technology outputs 31.4 31
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 21.4 69
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 11.9 19 ª 6.1 Knowledge creation 22.4 50
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 57
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 14.9 49 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 43
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 3,384.4 31 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 16 ªÈ
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.0 39 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 19.0 35
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 16.3 51
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 9.3 66 É
6.2 Knowledge impact 37.3 32
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.4 44
Infrastructure 47.9 47 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 53
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 70.3 74 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 57.3 6 ªÈ
3.1.1 ICT access* 88.1 73 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 34.5 33
3.1.2 ICT use* 78.0 66 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 73
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 69.7 62
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 79.9 12 ª
3.1.4 E-participation* 45.3 81 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 7.1 29 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 31.2 67 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.7 62
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 4,802.3 45 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 17.8 13 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 54.5 42
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 20.8 95 «
Creative outputs 27.8 58
3.3 Ecological sustainability 42.3 12 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 10.9 63 7.1 Intangible assets 16.0 89 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 30.1 33 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 8.5 10 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 42.5 42
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.2 73 É

Market sophistication 32.2 68 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.7 42
7.2 Creative goods and services 41.9 13 ª
4.1 Credit 35.6 41 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.4 63
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 48.2 43 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 7.0 15 ª
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 66.9 48 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 5.8 9 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 4.7 82 É

7.3 Online creativity 37.2 38
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 5.5 79 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 17.7 32
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 44 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 22.8 44
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 67 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 71.3 43
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 77 «É

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 56.5 67

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 74.1 74
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 229.6 67

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

226 Slovenia 34
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
37 33 High EUR 2.1 108.7 51,407

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 58.9 41 Business sophistication 41.6 32

1.1 Institutional environment 75.0 29 5.1 Knowledge workers 59.9 23

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 78.0 29 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 46.7 18 ª
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 71.9 29 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 44.0 27
1.2 Regulatory environment 65.9 33 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 1.5 16
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 60.1 41 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 48.7 33
1.2.2 Rule of law* 71.7 27 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 22.7 24

1.3 Business environment 35.7 89 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 30.2 45

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 40.5 88 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 3.0 25
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 31.0 53 « 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 53.3 49
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 37.1 92 «É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 64
Human capital and research 49.3 24 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 24
5.3 Knowledge absorption 34.9 41
2.1 Education 62.7 25
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.6 64
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.7 22
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.6 59
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 24.0 30
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.4 61
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 17.5 16 ª
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.7 56
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 484.3 21
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 58.1 17
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 14.2 69 É

2.2 Tertiary education 47.9 18 ª

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 82.4 21 Knowledge and technology outputs 34.4 27
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 29.5 23
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 9.5 28 6.1 Knowledge creation 39.2 23
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.4 21
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 37.4 27 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 28
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 5,414.3 17 ª
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 2.1 18 ª
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 39.0 6 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 49.5 31 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 19.2 44
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 10.9 64
6.2 Knowledge impact 25.3 65
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.9 57
Infrastructure 53.2 26 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 100 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 86.0 20 ª
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 36.8 31
3.1.1 ICT access* 98.7 26
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 38.7 27
3.1.2 ICT use* 85.7 30
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.3 42
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 85.3 22
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 83.1 9 ª
3.1.4 E-participation* 74.4 25
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 7.2 28
3.2 General infrastructure 34.4 52 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.8 60
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 6,339.5 31 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 21.4 6 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 54.5 42
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 21.9 86 «
Creative outputs 31.7 48
3.3 Ecological sustainability 39.3 20 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 12.7 46 7.1 Intangible assets 24.1 74
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 33.6 27 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % ‫ܝ‬ 74 «É
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 6.3 15 ª
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 42.2 44
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.4 63 É

Market sophistication 33.4 62 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.8 30
7.2 Creative goods and services 31.8 31
4.1 Credit 31.7 51 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.8 36
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 50.7 37 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 8.7 9 ª
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 41.1 78 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.6 31
4.2 Investment 5.8 72 É
7.3 Online creativity 46.7 29
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 15.6 69 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 23.0 26
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 52 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 39.6 27
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 62 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 77.5 13 ª
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 72 «

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 62.6 38

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 94.7 21
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 108.7 88 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

South Africa 69 227

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
61 75 Upper middle SSA 63.2 997.4 16,211

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 36.5 91 Business sophistication 28.6 57

1.1 Institutional environment 43.7 89 5.1 Knowledge workers 21.8 101 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 46.7 100 « 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 21.8 71
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 40.7 77 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 7.9 99 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 40.7 69 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.2 57
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 37.0 84 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 26.9 64
1.2.2 Rule of law* 44.4 61 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 10.7 71

1.3 Business environment 25.2 110 « 5.2 Innovation linkages 31.0 42

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 40.6 87 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.4 72
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 9.8 78 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 63.1 33 È
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 58.9 40
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 31 È
Human capital and research 26.8 79 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 46
5.3 Knowledge absorption 32.9 51
2.1 Education 48.7 71
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.2 29 ª
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 6.6 8 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.4 48
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 22.0 38
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.7 18 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 14.1 67
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 4.3 31 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 11.1 62
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 29.8 121 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 17.7 102 «É

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 25.4 94 É Knowledge and technology outputs 21.4 63
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 18.7 86 «
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 2.9 66 6.1 Knowledge creation 22.4 51
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.7 35
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 14.0 51 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 49
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 475.9 75 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.6 55 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 14.2 46
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 32.1 31 ªÈ
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 41.5 31 ªÈ
6.2 Knowledge impact 27.6 61
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.2 87
Infrastructure 37.1 75 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.4 40
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.4 27 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 72.4 67 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 17.5 66
3.1.1 ICT access* 81.6 83
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 14.1 78
3.1.2 ICT use* 77.7 67
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 50
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 72.2 55
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 39.3 67
3.1.4 E-participation* 58.1 61
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 2.0 62
3.2 General infrastructure 30.0 72 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.7 92
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 3,851.3 55 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.9 60
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 72.7 18 ªÈ
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 14.8 123 «É
Creative outputs 25.3 63
3.3 Ecological sustainability 8.9 112 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 6.2 107 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 34.9 48
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 5.7 103 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 56.9 36
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 65 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 23.4 80
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 8.3 24 ªÈ

Market sophistication 37.8 49 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 68
7.2 Creative goods and services 7.2 86
4.1 Credit 27.9 63 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.4 65
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 37.5 58 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.5 78 «É
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 92.2 28 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 7.3 41
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 1.2 26 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.7 56
4.2 Investment 33.9 23 ªÈ
7.3 Online creativity 24.1 73
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 290.7 4 ªÈ
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 5.3 52
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 41 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 5.0 73
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 49 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 61.8 81
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 52
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 51.7 76
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 5.2 96 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 76.2 72
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 997.4 32

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

228 Spain 28
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
23 29 High EUR 47.9 2,413.1 50,472

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 56.2 49 Business sophistication 41.8 31

1.1 Institutional environment 68.0 39 5.1 Knowledge workers 58.0 24

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 68.0 43 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 35.7 39
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 68.0 33 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 55.2 12 ª

1.2 Regulatory environment 64.8 35 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.8 29
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 62.8 36 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 50.2 28
1.2.2 Rule of law* 66.8 34 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 24.7 18

1.3 Business environment 35.8 88 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 32.5 40

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 38.1 93 «É 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.7 28
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 33.4 49 « 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 43.5 69 «
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 66.2 37
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 35
Human capital and research 47.3 27 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 33
5.3 Knowledge absorption 35.0 40
2.1 Education 60.8 33
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.2 30
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 4.6 54 «
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.8 56 «
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 22.4 36
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.7 39
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 17.8 14
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.0 49
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 477.3 28
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 40.1 36
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 11.0 40
2.2 Tertiary education 37.0 51
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 94.6 11 ª Knowledge and technology outputs 36.4 24
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 21.5 68 «
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 3.6 59 « 6.1 Knowledge creation 36.6 25
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 41
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 44.2 22 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 31
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 3,410.1 30 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 17 È
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.4 29 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 25.7 26
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 68.2 15 ª
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 62.1 12 ª
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 50.7 20
6.2 Knowledge impact 37.5 31
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬103 «
Infrastructure 56.3 14 ª 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.4 39
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 12 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 85.6 22 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 33.9 35
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.8 16 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 35.0 32
3.1.2 ICT use* 84.1 38
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.8 23
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 84.1 25
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 62.1 34
3.1.4 E-participation* 74.4 25
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 6.5 33
3.2 General infrastructure 42.4 32 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.8 44
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 6,024.6 36 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 14.5 18
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 81.8 13
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 21.3 90 «
Creative outputs 44.8 23
3.3 Ecological sustainability 40.9 15 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 15.2 30 7.1 Intangible assets 52.2 19
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 29.2 36 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 66.2 24
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 6.8 13 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 39.7 51
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 7.8 27
Market sophistication 44.8 33 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 6.5 13 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 31.1 35

4.1 Credit 38.1 36 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.1 25
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 44.2 52 «
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 9.4 7 ªÈ
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 90.0 31 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 26.6 24
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.8 50
4.2 Investment 18.6 42 7.3 Online creativity 43.6 32
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 53.3 35 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 19.8 30
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 37 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 38.4 30
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 38 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 72.7 33
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 37
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 77.9 13 ª
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 94.9 18
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 2,413.1 15 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Sri Lanka 89 229

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
82 100 Lower middle CSA 23.0 NA NA

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 32.7 101 Business sophistication 22.5 87

1.1 Institutional environment 31.2 112 5.1 Knowledge workers 23.1 96

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 28.7 120 « 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 20.0 79
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 33.8 94 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 33.4 88 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 71
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 24.7 109 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 40.3 44 È

1.2.2 Rule of law* 42.2 63 È 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 4.2 98

1.3 Business environment 33.3 [93] 5.2 Innovation linkages 21.7 75

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 33.3 98 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.9 96
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 45.6 63
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 41.8 79
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 39 ªÈ
Human capital and research 17.5 110 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 68
5.3 Knowledge absorption 22.7 79
2.1 Education 30.5 120
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade n/a n/a
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 1.2 127 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 5.6 104
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 6.3 93 «É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.9 85
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 13.6 73
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.8 103
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 20.0 54
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 16.7 88
2.2 Tertiary education 21.3 91
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 23.0 96 Knowledge and technology outputs 18.2 79
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 24.7 48 ª
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 0.4 101 6.1 Knowledge creation 7.9 94
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 73
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.7 105 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.1 70
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 104.6 92 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.1 100 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 5.0 105
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 10.8 70
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 20.3 98
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 129 «É
Infrastructure 41.7 66 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.5 21 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 58.3 91 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 7.9 93
3.1.1 ICT access* 73.4 88
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 26.3 50 ªÈ
3.1.2 ICT use* 74.2 76
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade n/a n/a
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 51.9 89
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 36.9 76
3.1.4 E-participation* 33.7 98
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.7 87
3.2 General infrastructure 32.9 60 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 6.2 14 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 742.5 102 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.8 61 È
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 31.8 71
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP Ա 34.7 12 ª
Creative outputs 18.4 84
3.3 Ecological sustainability 34.0 30 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 24.9 6 ªÈ
7.1 Intangible assets 21.0 77
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 24.0 53 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 27.6 67
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.0 52 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 19.5 89
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 20.2 109 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 80
7.2 Creative goods and services 8.0 [81]
4.1 Credit 15.1 [96] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 47.0 74 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.6 57 ª

4.2 Investment 2.5 105 7.3 Online creativity 23.6 77

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 21.2 59 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.7 103
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 97 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 13.4 51 ªÈ
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 98 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 56.6 94
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP Ա 0.0 101 «

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 42.9 95

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 6.1 106

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 70.5 77
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ Ա 319.5 60

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

230 Sweden 2
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
2 3 High EUR 10.6 716.0 66,209

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 76.3 16 Business sophistication 74.1 1 ªÈ

1.1 Institutional environment 84.5 12 5.1 Knowledge workers 80.4 3 ªÈ

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 84.0 12 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 57.1 3 ªÈ
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 85.1 10 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 61.9 6
1.2 Regulatory environment 89.2 8 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 2.5 6
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 86.0 8 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 60.7 12
1.2.2 Rule of law* 92.3 10 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 28.9 5 ª

1.3 Business environment 55.3 45 5.2 Innovation linkages 69.0 4 ªÈ

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 70.4 27 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 5.4 11
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 40.3 42 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 80.1 13
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 81.8 17
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 7 È
Human capital and research 62.7 3 ªÈ 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 7.2 5 ªÈ

5.3 Knowledge absorption 72.8 1 ªÈ

2.1 Education 68.3 8 È
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 4.4 1 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 6.7 7 È
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.9 54 «
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 24.2 25
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 4.8 3 ªÈ
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 19.0 8
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 6.7 17
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 487.4 18
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 77.4 4 ªÈ
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 13.1 60 «

2.2 Tertiary education 45.6 24

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 83.9 18 Knowledge and technology outputs 63.7 2 ªÈ

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 29.0 27

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 7.0 42 « 6.1 Knowledge creation 74.6 2 ªÈ
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 9.8 9
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 74.2 3 ªÈ
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 6.0 1 ªÈ
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 9,929.2 1 ªÈ
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 3.4 5 ª
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 38.9 7 È
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 76.7 10 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 59.1 13
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 63.6 14
6.2 Knowledge impact 58.9 6
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.8 61 «
Infrastructure 67.2 1 ªÈ 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 3.5 10
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 16
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 87.8 15 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 47.1 13
3.1.1 ICT access* 98.3 29
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 57.5 6
3.1.2 ICT use* 91.9 14
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 3.3 1 ªÈ
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 89.0 13
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 81.7 10
3.1.4 E-participation* 72.1 32
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 8.4 22
3.2 General infrastructure 63.2 6 È
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 6.9 11
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 16,506.2 7 È
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 5.7 50 «
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 86.4 7
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 27.3 34
Creative outputs 57.8 6
3.3 Ecological sustainability 50.6 2 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 12.2 49 «
7.1 Intangible assets 55.4 12
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 70.4 4 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 75.2 11
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 5.3 19 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 34.0 59 «
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 19.4 3 ªÈ

Market sophistication 61.3 9 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.7 32
7.2 Creative goods and services 49.9 7 È
4.1 Credit 58.9 12 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 3.6 1 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 69.3 16 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 4.2 32 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 132.3 12 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 53.7 10
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.6 30
4.2 Investment 57.7 12 7.3 Online creativity 70.4 6
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 46.0 14
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 14 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 85.7 6
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 10 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 79.4 10
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 7 È

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 67.3 25

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.1 21 «

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 96.9 8
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 716.0 39

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Switzerland 1 231

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
1 2 High EUR 8.9 788.3 89,537

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 87.7 3 ªÈ Business sophistication 67.2 4 È

1.1 Institutional environment 92.4 4 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 71.2 6

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 87.3 8 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 50.7 10
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 97.5 2 ªÈ 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 89.2 7 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 2.3 7
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 84.4 11 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 65.9 7
1.2.2 Rule of law* 94.1 6 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 21.6 27

1.3 Business environment 81.5 3 ªÈ 5.2 Innovation linkages 80.4 1 ªÈ

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 98.2 2 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 8.0 2 ªÈ

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 64.7 16 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 100.0 1 ªÈ
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 97.3 4 È
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 10
Human capital and research 61.8 4 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 9.4 4 È

5.3 Knowledge absorption 50.1 10

2.1 Education 65.1 14
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 6.3 1 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.6 26
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.0 72 «
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 24.2 26
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 3.2 11
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 16.7 26
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ܝ‬ 131 «É
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 497.9 9
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 48.7 28 «
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 9.5 27
2.2 Tertiary education 50.0 14
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 74.2 31 Knowledge and technology outputs 65.1 1 ªÈ

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 25.3 44 «

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 19.1 9 6.1 Knowledge creation 78.7 1 ªÈ
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 13.6 5
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 70.4 4 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 6.8 1 ªÈ
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 5,999.4 11 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 3.3 7 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 40.0 3 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 87.2 4 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 66.1 11
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 79.4 7
6.2 Knowledge impact 55.9 7
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.6 69 «
Infrastructure 60.8 7 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.3 29
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 7
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 82.1 40 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 71.5 2 ªÈ
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 100.0 1 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 60.7 2 ªÈ
3.1.2 ICT use* 84.3 36
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 5.5 1 ªÈ
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 74.3 49 «É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 96.9 2 ªÈ
3.1.4 E-participation* 69.8 41
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 14.7 10
3.2 General infrastructure 50.4 15 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 2.7 47 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 6,957.4 25 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 9.9 28
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 90.9 3 ªÈ
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 25.0 51 «
Creative outputs 67.1 1 ªÈ
3.3 Ecological sustainability 49.9 4 È
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 26.7 4 È
7.1 Intangible assets 61.7 9
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 52.3 12 È
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 77.2 8
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 3.1 30 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 52.4 31
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 18.9 4 È

Market sophistication 66.5 5 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.0 21
7.2 Creative goods and services 59.7 1 ªÈ
4.1 Credit 70.8 4 È
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.6 48 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 78.1 9 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 16.2 1 ªÈ
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 170.4 7 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 85.6 2 ªÈ
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 2.9 18
4.2 Investment 64.9 8 7.3 Online creativity 85.4 2 ªÈ
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 259.9 5 È
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 81.0 4 È
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 9 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 100.0 1 ªÈ
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 8 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 75.3 21
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 19
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 63.9 33
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.7 10

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 82.2 59 «
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 788.3 34

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

232 Tajikistan 107

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
104 106 Lower middle CSA 10.4 53.7 5,361

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 31.7 104 Business sophistication 20.4 101

1.1 Institutional environment 30.5 116 5.1 Knowledge workers 29.2 [75]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 36.7 116 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % n/a n/a
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 24.2 114 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 24.3 70
1.2 Regulatory environment 9.1 128 É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 10.4 128 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 7.8 129 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % n/a n/a

1.3 Business environment 55.5 [44] 5.2 Innovation linkages 14.9 108
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 55.5 49 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.8 49 ªÈ

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 29.9 99
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 18.9 122 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 63 ª
Human capital and research 25.1 92 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 16.9 113

2.1 Education 54.1 [60]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 120 É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.4 29 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.3 51 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.3 124
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.3 95
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary n/a n/a
2.2 Tertiary education 20.8 92
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 31.1 90 Knowledge and technology outputs 16.6 84
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 22.0 65
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.8 92 6.1 Knowledge creation 22.6 47 ªÈ
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.4 80
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.4 110 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.3 1 ªÈ
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.1 103 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 2.4 120
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 1.3 128 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 22.1 83
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 4.7 4 ªÈ
Infrastructure 26.3 109 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 105
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 33.1 118 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 2.6 106 É
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 42.7 115
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 5.1 120
3.1.2 ICT use* n/a n/a
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 112
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 33.3 117
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 24.8 96
3.1.4 E-participation* 23.3 116
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 123
3.2 General infrastructure 13.3 118 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.1 130
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 2,125.1 76 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 132 «É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 18.4 109
Creative outputs 7.1 115
3.3 Ecological sustainability 32.4 34 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 10.4 67 7.1 Intangible assets 3.0 119
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 63.7 6 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 132 «
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 13.2 103
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 23.2 96 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 126
7.2 Creative goods and services 0.3 [130]
4.1 Credit 14.7 98 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 108
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 10.6 128 «
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 2.6 16 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 110
4.2 Investment 4.9 [80] 7.3 Online creativity 22.2 88
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 Ա 0.2 119
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.6 121
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 79 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 65.8 65 ª
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 75
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 49.9 82
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.4 70

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 67.8 82
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 53.7 110

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Thailand 41 233

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
39 41 Upper middle SEAO 71.7 1,578.5 22,491

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 44.8 74 Business sophistication 35.4 41 È

1.1 Institutional environment 55.0 63 5.1 Knowledge workers 39.0 51

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 62.7 65 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 14.2 94 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 47.3 59 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 18.0 83
1.2 Regulatory environment 46.0 61 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.8 30 È

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 46.2 62 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 80.8 1 ªÈ

1.2.2 Rule of law* 45.8 60 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 11.3 68

1.3 Business environment 33.5 92 5.2 Innovation linkages 24.7 60

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 34.9 97 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.2 80
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 32.0 51 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 54.2 48
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 45.9 68
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 50
Human capital and research 30.7 71 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 57
5.3 Knowledge absorption 42.4 26 È
2.1 Education 39.3 100
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.8 14 ªÈ
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.6 112 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 17.8 12 ªÈ
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.3 122 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 15.4 46
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.3 94
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 394.0 67 «
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 60.8 13 ªÈ
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 23.6 107 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 35.7 56

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 48.8 71 Knowledge and technology outputs 29.8 39
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 31.7 14 ªÈ
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 1.4 84 6.1 Knowledge creation 23.6 42
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 74
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 17.2 47 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 63
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 1,699.1 44 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.2 5 ªÈ
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 1.2 34 È
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 8.0 85
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 21.5 41
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 31.7 39
6.2 Knowledge impact 33.2 44
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬108 «
Infrastructure 45.8 50 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.6 37
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 45
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 83.2 32 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 43.8 20 È
3.1.1 ICT access* 93.7 53
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 32.5 36
3.1.2 ICT use* 85.9 29 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 60
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 75.3 47
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 71.2 23 È
3.1.4 E-participation* 77.9 18 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 16.3 8 ªÈ
3.2 General infrastructure 37.4 43 È
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.1 129 «É
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 2,537.6 71 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 9.2 32
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 63.6 33 È
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 26.5 39
Creative outputs 34.9 38 È
3.3 Ecological sustainability 16.8 84
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.2 83 7.1 Intangible assets 39.6 38
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 5.8 101 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 65.1 28
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 3.2 29 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 21.3 83
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 7.9 26 È

Market sophistication 50.6 25 È 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.6 33
7.2 Creative goods and services 35.8 19 ªÈ
4.1 Credit 54.0 19 ªÈ
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 50.1 39 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.8 69 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 156.4 8 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 8.7 38
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 7.5 7 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 30.0 27 È

7.3 Online creativity 24.4 70
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 116.3 13 È
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.4 75
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 34 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.5 82
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 15 ªÈ
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 66.3 63
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 44
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 67.8 23
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.6 74

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 93.0 25
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,578.5 22

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

234 Togo 117

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
108 122 Low SSA 9.3 25.1 2,768

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 29.8 112 Business sophistication 15.5 [121]

1.1 Institutional environment 38.3 101 5.1 Knowledge workers 22.9 [97]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 49.3 95 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 14.1 96 È
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 27.2 108 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 37.9 41 ªÈ

1.2 Regulatory environment 27.4 102 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 27.1 103 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 27.8 98 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 0.6 124 «

1.3 Business environment 23.8 [112] 5.2 Innovation linkages 8.0 [127]
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† n/a n/a 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.8 52 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 23.8 62 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† n/a n/a
5.2.3 State of cluster development † n/a n/a
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 72 ª
Human capital and research 16.4 [116] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 15.7 124

2.1 Education 40.8 [92]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 121 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.8 81 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.1 98
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.8 89
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 12.6 90 È
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ ܝ‬127
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 25.9 110
2.2 Tertiary education 7.4 [115]
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 15.1 107 È Knowledge and technology outputs 10.6 111
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 3.3 118
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 96
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.8 102 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 44.4 99 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 74 «É
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.2 87 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 5.5 100
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 1.3 128 «É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 22.0 86 ªÈ
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.0 27 ª
Infrastructure 20.4 126 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.1 99 È
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 38.6 114 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 61.3 101 È
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 6.6 111
3.1.2 ICT use* 18.4 121
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 114
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 37.4 112
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 17.1 110
3.1.4 E-participation* 37.2 92
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.2 112
3.2 General infrastructure 16.1 111 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.4 69 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 98.3 122 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.5 103
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 23.6 66 ª
Creative outputs 10.7 107
3.3 Ecological sustainability 6.6 122
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 4.8 118 7.1 Intangible assets 2.1 120
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 7.1 97 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 88 ª
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 8.6 112
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 20.6 108 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 113
7.2 Creative goods and services 19.1 [56]
4.1 Credit 29.2 59 ªÈ
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.3 18 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 17.8 79 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 27.5 103 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 5.7 5 ªÈ
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 111
4.2 Investment n/a [n/a] 7.3 Online creativity 19.6 100 È
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.3 115 È
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.9 116
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 57.5 92
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 12.0 130 «É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 9.7 126

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 25.1 129 «

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Trinidad and Tobago 108 235

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
119 93 High LCN 1.5 43.7 30,719

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 45.0 72 ªÉ Business sophistication 18.6 111 É

1.1 Institutional environment 54.3 64 ªÉ 5.1 Knowledge workers 26.7 83 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 65.3 55 ªÉ 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 32.3 46 ª
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 43.3 70 ªÉ 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 39.5 72 ªÉ 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 85 É

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 39.9 76 É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 4.6 83 É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 39.0 74 ªÉ 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 16.1 45 ª

1.3 Business environment 41.1 [77] 5.2 Innovation linkages 16.0 102 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 41.1 86 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.3 74 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 22.0 115 É
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 35.5 93 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 51 ª
Human capital and research 41.9 37 ª 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 13.1 131 «É

2.1 Education 39.8 96 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.4 78
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.9 107 É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 5.9 102
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 13.9 74 É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.4 113 É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP ‫ ܝ‬125
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science Ա 423.0 50
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 1.4 82 É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 11.8 51 ª

2.2 Tertiary education 84.4 [1]

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV n/a n/a Knowledge and technology outputs 11.0 104 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 35.4 6 ªÈ

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 3.2 119 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 125 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 1.5 95 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 525.5 72 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 65
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.1 110 «É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 5.3 102 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.4 107 É
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 21.1 93 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ܝ‬ 101
Infrastructure 25.9 110 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 74 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 56.0 93 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 86.9 77 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 8.8 97 É
3.1.2 ICT use* 71.4 83 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 83
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 43.5 104 É
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 31.3 86 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 22.1 121 É
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 1.0 77
3.2 General infrastructure 20.4 98 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.3 112 É
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 6,068.2 33 ª
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.1 89 É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP n/a n/a
Creative outputs 5.6 121 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 1.4 133 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 2.1 127 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 4.6 117 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 0.0 133 «É
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.6 91 É
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 16.0 98 É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 11.2 [128] 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 94
7.2 Creative goods and services 0.9 [122]
4.1 Credit 10.4 [110] 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 35.0 88 É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 104
4.2 Investment 2.8 [101] 7.3 Online creativity 12.3 123 É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.0 81 É
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 68 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 4.2 87 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 30.6 123 «É
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP n/a n/a
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 20.5 124 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 7.6 117 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 43.7 118

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

236 Tunisia 81
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
64 96 Lower middle NAWA 12.2 162.1 13,249

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 31.9 102 Business sophistication 16.8 119 «

1.1 Institutional environment 40.1 98 5.1 Knowledge workers 21.9 100

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 44.0 106 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 20.5 77
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 36.2 85 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 19.1 82
1.2 Regulatory environment 36.2 83 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 58
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 31.0 93 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 18.9 71
1.2.2 Rule of law* 41.4 66 È 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 10.0 76

1.3 Business environment 19.6 120 «É 5.2 Innovation linkages 12.9 113
1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 28.7 106 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.3 130 «É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 10.5 76 «É 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 26.4 103
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 29.2 109
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 68
Human capital and research 36.8 47 È 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 89
5.3 Knowledge absorption 15.7 122 «
2.1 Education 62.1 29 ªÈ
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 106
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 6.2 12
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.4 63
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 51.1 1 ªÈ
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.6 106
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 14.4 62
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.4 92
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science Ա 371.4 74
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 5.2 72
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 14.6 76
2.2 Tertiary education 41.0 37 ªÈ
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 37.8 84 Knowledge and technology outputs 23.2 54 È

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 37.9 4 ªÈ

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 2.9 67 6.1 Knowledge creation 24.9 38 ªÈ
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 44
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 7.2 66 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 74
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 1,672.0 46 È
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.7 50 È
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 31.7 14 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 11.9 67
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 23.3 75
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬106
Infrastructure 27.0 107 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.3 43 ª
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 64.3 81 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 21.9 55
3.1.1 ICT access* 71.6 93
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 21.4 56
3.1.2 ICT use* 75.9 72
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 57
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 56.1 85
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 52.9 45 È
3.1.4 E-participation* 53.5 67 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 4.2 42 ª
3.2 General infrastructure 3.2 132 «É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.7 64
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 1,734.4 87 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 7.6 36 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 13.9 127 «É
Creative outputs 22.4 73
3.3 Ecological sustainability 13.7 100
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 11.0 61 7.1 Intangible assets 30.6 62
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 2.3 117 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 41.6 56
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.0 51 È
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 27.4 68
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 26.9 84 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 3.1 27 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 6.8 87

4.1 Credit 22.8 78 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.3 69
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 27.3 71 É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.7 72
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 81.7 36 ª
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 1.3 55 «
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 1.1 28 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.1 44 ª

4.2 Investment 5.3 76 7.3 Online creativity 21.7 93

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 18.1 65 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.1 79 È
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 59 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 8.7 60
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 61 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 54.3 98
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 86
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 52.7 75
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 3.1 82

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 79.5 66
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 162.1 79

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Türkiye 37 237

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
28 51 Upper middle NAWA 87.3 3,613.5 41,888

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 33.3 100 « Business sophistication 31.1 48

1.1 Institutional environment 40.4 97 « 5.1 Knowledge workers 38.9 52

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 42.0 109 «É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 24.1 62
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 38.8 81 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 30.7 56
1.2 Regulatory environment 33.1 90 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 0.8 28 È

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 35.4 86 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 50.2 29 È

1.2.2 Rule of law* 30.7 90 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 12.3 63

1.3 Business environment 26.5 108 « 5.2 Innovation linkages 20.9 79

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 25.6 111 « 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.4 70
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 27.3 56 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 36.6 87
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 45.4 70
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 110 «
Human capital and research 40.0 40 È 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 40
5.3 Knowledge absorption 33.5 48
2.1 Education 50.7 67
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.9 40
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.6 111 «É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.5 75
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 12.9 78 «
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.8 97 «
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 19.7 3 ªÈ
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.4 91
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 461.7 38 È
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses 61.6 11 È
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 15.3 82
2.2 Tertiary education 37.4 48
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 125.8 2 ªÈ Knowledge and technology outputs 28.6 43
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 15.8 98 «
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 2.7 70 6.1 Knowledge creation 29.5 34 È
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.8 25 È
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 31.8 32 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 32
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 2,536.1 37 È
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.6 9 ª
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 1.3 33 È
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 12.0 58
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 51.0 28 È
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 29.4 33 È
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 29.0 43
6.2 Knowledge impact 39.7 24 È
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.8 14 ª
Infrastructure 50.2 40 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.0 32
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.4 25 È
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 85.6 23 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 27.8 43
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.8 15 ªÈ
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 16.5 70
3.1.2 ICT use* 80.1 53
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 55
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 84.5 24 È
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 58.5 40
3.1.4 E-participation* 77.9 18 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.9 65
3.2 General infrastructure 41.4 33 È
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.7 93 «
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 3,836.3 57 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.8 80
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 59.1 37 È
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 30.3 24 È
Creative outputs 48.3 16 È
3.3 Ecological sustainability 23.7 53
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 18.2 15 È
7.1 Intangible assets 74.0 4 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 18.8 59 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 76.4 9 ª
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.1 69 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 133.2 1 ªÈ
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.8 57
Market sophistication 43.4 37 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 23.4 1 ªÈ

7.2 Creative goods and services 15.4 63

4.1 Credit 36.7 39 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.2 82 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 55.3 32 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 3.0 44
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 54.5 57 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 2.3 51 «É
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 2.9 21
4.2 Investment 10.7 58 7.3 Online creativity 29.6 54
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 28.7 50 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 6.7 51
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 71 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 7.3 65
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 66 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 74.8 24
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 36
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 82.7 11 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.5 72

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 96.4 9 ªÈ
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 3,613.5 11 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

238 Uganda 121

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
117 119 Low SSA 48.7 145.2 3,222

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 41.1 84 Business sophistication 12.7 129 «

1.1 Institutional environment 35.7 106 5.1 Knowledge workers 4.4 132 «
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 42.7 108 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 4.5 121
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 28.7 102 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 30.9 93 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.0 88
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 29.0 100 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 3.4 87
1.2.2 Rule of law* 32.8 86 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 3.3 102 È

1.3 Business environment 56.8 [41] 5.2 Innovation linkages 17.6 94

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 56.8 47 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.4 71 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 38.2 79
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 34.6 94
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 114 É
Human capital and research 13.5 [123] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 16.1 116

2.1 Education 39.5 [98]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 121 «É
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.6 113 É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade Ա 10.2 37 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.4 115 É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.8 51 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 4.0 76
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 20.5 99
2.2 Tertiary education 0.3 [129]
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 4.8 126 Knowledge and technology outputs 11.2 102
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 8.5 90
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 111
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.6 107 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 90 È
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 28.7 104 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 46
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.1 97 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 12.8 53 ªÈ
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 10.0 75 È
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 16.2 119
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.5 74
Infrastructure 23.5 120 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 129 «
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 28.7 125 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % n/a n/a
3.1.1 ICT access* 5.0 130 «
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 8.8 98
3.1.2 ICT use* 23.7 117
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 51 ªÈ
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 46.6 99
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 29.7 90 È
3.1.4 E-participation* 39.5 89
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade Ա 0.2 106
3.2 General infrastructure 22.2 92 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.5 101
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 113.0 121 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 2.1 90 È
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 28.2 31 ª
Creative outputs 6.9 116
3.3 Ecological sustainability 19.7 68 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 4.9 117 7.1 Intangible assets 4.8 116
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 37.6 20 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 73 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 15.3 99
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 13.3 124 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 82
7.2 Creative goods and services 0.9 [121]
4.1 Credit 2.8 129 «É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.0 100
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 14.8 122 É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.3 50 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade Ա 0.1 103
4.2 Investment 8.6 65 7.3 Online creativity 17.2 107
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.1 124
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 98 «
7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.6 109
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 43 ª
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 49.8 105
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 62
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 28.4 115
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % Ա 5.8 103

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification n/a n/a
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 145.2 81

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Ukraine 60 239

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
54 78 Lower middle EUR 37.7 474.8 14,304

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 30.8 107 Business sophistication 31.8 45 È

1.1 Institutional environment 28.8 117 « 5.1 Knowledge workers 45.8 39 È

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 26.7 123 «É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 37.9 37 È
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 31.0 99 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 24.3 70
1.2 Regulatory environment 25.3 106 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.3 49 È

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 33.1 90 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 30.5 61

1.2.2 Rule of law* 17.5 115 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 30.0 2 ªÈ

1.3 Business environment 38.2 84 5.2 Innovation linkages 23.7 63

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 46.0 72 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.5 29 ªÈ

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 30.3 54 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 43.9 67
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 44.0 71
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 120 «É
Human capital and research 34.3 54 È 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 50 È

5.3 Knowledge absorption 25.8 69

2.1 Education 58.9 43 È
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.7 54 È
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.9 16 ªÈ
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 8.3 67
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 28.5 10 ªÈ
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.0 79
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 13.3 76
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.5 88
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 439.5 43 È
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 27.3 49
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 8.3 18 ªÈ

2.2 Tertiary education 37.2 49 È

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 70.7 44 È Knowledge and technology outputs 31.1 34 È

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 25.7 40

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 4.9 50 6.1 Knowledge creation 32.8 29 ªÈ
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.8 34 È
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 7.0 69 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 50 È
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 580.8 66 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 5.2 1 ªÈ
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.3 70 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 9.6 73
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 16.5 50
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 16.9 56
6.2 Knowledge impact 27.8 60
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬130 «É
Infrastructure 35.5 82 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.7 4 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 75.6 56 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 17.4 67
3.1.1 ICT access* Ա 87.9 74 È
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 32.5 35 È
3.1.2 ICT use* n/a n/a
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.1 58
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 79.5 34 È
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 51.2 49 È
3.1.4 E-participation* 59.3 57 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 1.6 68
3.2 General infrastructure 13.8 117 «
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 11.0 5 ªÈ
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 3,605.8 60 È
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 3.6 70
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 27.3 76
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 14.1 125 «É
Creative outputs 23.7 68
3.3 Ecological sustainability 17.3 81
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 5.5 115 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 25.8 69
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 31.3 32 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 81 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 52.3 32
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.4 65
Market sophistication 25.7 85 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.0 20 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 6.6 89

4.1 Credit 13.8 100 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.5 53
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 34.8 60 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.7 73
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 23.5 109 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.1 57 «
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.2 82
4.2 Investment 2.6 103 «
7.3 Online creativity 36.4 39 È
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 4.3 80 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 4.7 56 È
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 47 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 26.2 39 È
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 95 «
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 78.4 11 ªÈ
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 81
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 60.7 50 È
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.6 59 È

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 85.6 51
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 474.8 48

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

240 United Arab Emirates 32

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
50 19 High NAWA 10.7 895.2 88,962

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 79.9 10 ª Business sophistication 49.9 24

1.1 Institutional environment 78.3 22 5.1 Knowledge workers 55.2 27

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 78.7 25 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 37.8 38
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 77.9 20 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 68.4 31 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.8 31
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 69.0 30 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 74.3 5
1.2.2 Rule of law* 67.8 32 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 16.1 46

1.3 Business environment 92.9 2 ªÈ 5.2 Innovation linkages 51.9 19

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 85.8 5 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.4 69
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 100.0 1 ªÈ 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 74.6 18
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 94.8 5 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 4 ªÈ
Human capital and research 54.4 17 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 53
5.3 Knowledge absorption 42.5 24
2.1 Education 56.2 53
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.6 62
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 3.9 77 «
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 12.8 20
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 25.6 19
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.1 70
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 17.2 20
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 5.1 21
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 426.8 48 É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 77.9 3 ªÈ
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 9.6 29
2.2 Tertiary education 70.2 3 ªÈ
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 52.7 69 É Knowledge and technology outputs 23.1 56
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 33.1 11 È
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 73.0 1 ªÈ 6.1 Knowledge creation 7.9 93 «É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 105 «É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 36.7 28 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 53
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 2,666.0 35 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 73 «
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 1.5 25 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 9.1 76 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 58.8 24 6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 14.9 55
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 36.4 36
6.2 Knowledge impact 33.2 43
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.6 36 È
Infrastructure 55.3 17 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.4 26
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 57
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 89.8 13 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 20.0 62
3.1.1 ICT access* 100.0 10 ª
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 28.2 47
3.1.2 ICT use* 92.2 13
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.9 20
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 89.1 12
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 46.2 56 É
3.1.4 E-participation* 77.9 18
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 9.4 21
3.2 General infrastructure 60.3 9 ªÈ
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.7 63
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 15,915.6 8 ªÈ
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 6.8 39
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 86.4 7 È
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 25.2 47
Creative outputs 32.8 40
3.3 Ecological sustainability 15.9 87 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 7.8 96 «
7.1 Intangible assets 35.5 47
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 4.9 106 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 53.5 41
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 3.4 28 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 9.8 110 «É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 13.2 12
Market sophistication 48.9 26 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 114 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 27.4 43

4.1 Credit 53.5 20 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.3 68 «
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 84.4 4 ªÈ
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 1.8 58 «É
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 66.0 49 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 22.4 28
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 5.4 10 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 32.2 25 7.3 Online creativity 32.7 47

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 130.1 9 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 7.9 45
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 18 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 13.2 52 É
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 34 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 76.9 16
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 28
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 61.0 47
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 3.0 81 «

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 89.4 41
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 895.2 33

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

United Kingdom 5 241

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
3 10 High EUR 68.7 3,871.8 56,836

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 69.9 26 Business sophistication 56.4 14

1.1 Institutional environment 72.2 32 É 5.1 Knowledge workers 69.4 12

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 68.0 43 É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 50.6 11
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 76.3 23 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 83.7 18 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 2.0 11
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 83.0 13 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 58.5 14
1.2.2 Rule of law* 84.4 18 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 24.1 21

1.3 Business environment 53.8 50 É 5.2 Innovation linkages 61.3 11

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 64.0 35 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 5.2 13
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 43.5 38 « 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 82.4 11
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 81.8 18
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 11
Human capital and research 60.6 7 ª 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 2.1 19
5.3 Knowledge absorption 38.6 31
2.1 Education 61.3 32
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.9 12
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 5.4 32
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 11.1 31
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 23.9 31
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.5 52 «
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 17.6 15
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 2.2 72 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 494.3 13
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 41.8 35 «É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 17.3 90 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 50.8 12

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 82.7 20 Knowledge and technology outputs 58.7 5 ª

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 22.3 64 «

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 21.6 8 È 6.1 Knowledge creation 59.1 7 ª
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 4.5 16
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 69.8 5 ª
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.4 20
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 4,763.5 24 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 2.9 11 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 30.4 16
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 83.5 7 ª
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 100.0 1 ªÈ
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 99.8 2 ªÈ
6.2 Knowledge impact 63.5 3 ªÈ
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.5 75 «
Infrastructure 55.0 18 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 4.9 1 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.6 15
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 92.2 11 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 40.0 26
3.1.1 ICT access* 99.9 13
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 53.4 12
3.1.2 ICT use* 86.3 27
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 2.8 8 ª
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 87.4 17
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 83.6 8
3.1.4 E-participation* 95.3 6 ª
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 7.8 25
3.2 General infrastructure 34.8 51 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 4.2 27
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 4,748.7 46 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 11.8 21
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 72.7 18
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 18.5 107 «É
Creative outputs 61.3 3 ªÈ
3.3 Ecological sustainability 38.0 22
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 19.5 11 7.1 Intangible assets 65.7 7 ªÈ
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 24.2 52 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 86.0 4 ªÈ
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 5.1 21 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 50.0 36
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 13.8 10
Market sophistication 68.7 3 ªÈ 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 7.7 10 È

7.2 Creative goods and services 50.4 6 ªÈ

4.1 Credit 54.6 17 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 3.2 6 ªÈ
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 61.5 26 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 3.8 35 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 129.9 13 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 64.5 6
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 1.9 27
4.2 Investment 61.5 10 7.3 Online creativity 63.3 12
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 110.6 15 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 56.3 9
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 11 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 58.8 18
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 6 ªÈ
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 74.8 23
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 9
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 90.0 5 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 0.8 11

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 99.6 2 ªÈ
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 3,871.8 9 È

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

242 United Republic of Tanzania 120

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
118 115 Lower middle SSA 66.6 227.7 3,595

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 43.3 79 ª Business sophistication 16.9 118

1.1 Institutional environment 41.1 96 5.1 Knowledge workers 7.9 [125]

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 49.3 95 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % Ա 3.2 126 «É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 32.8 97 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 20.0 80
1.2 Regulatory environment 29.1 96 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 27.0 104 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 31.1 88 ª 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 0.2 127 «É

1.3 Business environment 59.8 [33] 5.2 Innovation linkages 25.7 58 ª

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 59.8 41 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.9 92
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 58.4 40 ªÈ
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 58.6 41 ª
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 101
Human capital and research 10.0 132 «É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 17.0 112

2.1 Education 28.6 124
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.0 112
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.3 96
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.3 49 ª
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap Ա 15.2 70
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.3 126
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 8.6 108 É
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.3 93
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 23.3 105
2.2 Tertiary education 1.3 127 «É
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 5.4 125 «É Knowledge and technology outputs 8.9 129
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 9.5 112 «É
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 4.7 113
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 127
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 71
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 6.9 91
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 9.6 79 ª
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 17.0 117
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 2.0 26 ª
Infrastructure 25.8 111 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 131 «É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 31.1 121 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 6.9 95
3.1.1 ICT access* 31.1 123 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 4.9 123
3.1.2 ICT use* 26.5 116 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 113
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 41.4 108
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 20.0 105
3.1.4 E-participation* 25.6 112
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.2 113
3.2 General infrastructure 38.3 41 ª
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.3 115
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 137.7 119 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 117
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 38.5 8 ªÈ
Creative outputs 7.9 [113]
3.3 Ecological sustainability 8.0 115 É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 6.6 105 7.1 Intangible assets 7.8 [103]
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 8.7 88 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 103 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 11.4 108
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP n/a n/a
Market sophistication 15.2 120 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
7.2 Creative goods and services 1.1 [117]
4.1 Credit 2.0 131 «É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 15.2 120 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.1 55 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 99
4.2 Investment 3.5 93 7.3 Online creativity 15.1 115
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 9.4 76 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.2 121
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 99 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.4 126
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 83 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 44.9 112
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 70 ª

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 40.1 100

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 6.6 110

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 68.0 81
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 227.7 68 ª

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

United States of America 3 243

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
5 4 High NAC 343.0 26,949.6 80,412

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 74.9 17 Business sophistication 70.6 2 ªÈ

1.1 Institutional environment 78.4 21 5.1 Knowledge workers 81.8 2 ªÈ

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 80.0 23 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 52.0 8
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 76.8 22 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % n/a n/a
1.2 Regulatory environment 81.2 20 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP 2.8 3 ªÈ

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 79.3 18 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 70.0 6 È

1.2.2 Rule of law* 83.2 19 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % 28.1 9

1.3 Business environment 65.0 25 5.2 Innovation linkages 77.1 2 ªÈ

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 75.0 17 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 7.9 3 ªÈ

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 55.1 20 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 91.3 3 ªÈ
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 97.5 3 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 6 È
Human capital and research 56.7 12 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 3.4 13
5.3 Knowledge absorption 52.8 7
2.1 Education 59.5 40
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.6 17
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.4 30
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 19.4 10 È
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 22.6 35
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.5 47
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years 15.9 39
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 1.4 90 «
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 489.4 17
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 81.3 2 ªÈ
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 14.5 71 «É

2.2 Tertiary education 33.2 67 «É

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 79.4 23 Knowledge and technology outputs 60.2 4 È

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 20.1 75 «

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 4.9 51 6.1 Knowledge creation 56.9 10
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 9.9 8
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 77.3 2 ªÈ
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 2.1 15
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 4,932.3 20 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 3.6 3 ª
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 12.6 56 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 100.0 1 ªÈ
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 100.0 1 ªÈ
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 100.0 1 ªÈ
6.2 Knowledge impact 77.1 1 ªÈ
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 1.5 40
Infrastructure 52.3 30 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 7.6 1 ªÈ
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 1.0 1 ªÈ
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 93.3 9 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 43.2 22
3.1.1 ICT access* 97.9 30
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 46.6 16
3.1.2 ICT use* 92.4 9 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 4.2 1 ªÈ
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 92.3 9
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 78.4 14
3.1.4 E-participation* 90.7 10
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 9.4 20
3.2 General infrastructure 49.9 17 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 1.9 58
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 13,427.7 9 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 1.2 110 «É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 77.3 16
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 21.1 93 «
Creative outputs 54.9 8
3.3 Ecological sustainability 13.7 98 «É
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 9.8 73 «
7.1 Intangible assets 52.3 18
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 17.3 66 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 89.9 1 ªÈ
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 119 «É
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 19.4 91 «É
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 21.4 2 ªÈ

Market sophistication 81.5 1 ªÈ 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 65 «

7.2 Creative goods and services 49.1 8 È

4.1 Credit 78.7 3 ªÈ
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.5 17
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 76.0 11 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 3.5 40
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP Ա 216.3 2 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 100.0 1 ªÈ
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 2.6 23
4.2 Investment 69.9 5 È
7.3 Online creativity 65.9 10
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 188.0 6 È
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 58.4 8
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.4 17 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 64.5 14
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 7 È
7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 74.8 22
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 5 È

4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 95.9 1 ªÈ

The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 1.2 51

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 97.6 7
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 26,949.6 1 ªÈ

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

244 Uruguay 62
Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
75 56 High LCN 3.4 103.4 28,984

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 67.4 31 Business sophistication 25.6 70 É

1.1 Institutional environment 74.8 30 5.1 Knowledge workers 29.7 74 É

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 83.3 15 ª 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 24.7 58 É
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 66.2 34 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 53.3 14
1.2 Regulatory environment 63.2 36 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 60 É

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 60.6 40 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % 4.2 84 «É

1.2.2 Rule of law* 65.9 36 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 10.4 73 É

1.3 Business environment 64.3 27 ª 5.2 Innovation linkages 20.8 82 É

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 88.9 4 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.7 107 «É

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 39.8 44 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 45.8 62
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 41.6 81 É
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 54
Human capital and research 26.2 83 É 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 60 É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 26.3 65

2.1 Education 42.5 88 É
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 1.0 39
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 4.4 59
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 7.0 88
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 13.7 76 «É
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 2.1 28 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 17.4 17 ª
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 6.7 16 ª
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 424.8 49 É
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 2.2 79 «É
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary n/a n/a
2.2 Tertiary education 28.4 78 É
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 75.2 30 Knowledge and technology outputs 20.5 69 É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 18.6 88

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 2.3 78 É 6.1 Knowledge creation 12.3 73 É
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.3 91 É
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 7.8 64 É
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 838.5 56 É
6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.3 37
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.4 64 É
6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 11.5 62 É
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 10.4 73
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 15.9 58
6.2 Knowledge impact 20.5 96 É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 0.6 70
Infrastructure 46.5 48 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 77
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 75.9 54 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 12.9 80 É
3.1.1 ICT access* 89.4 67 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 28.6 44
3.1.2 ICT use* 82.2 44
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.3 37
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 73.9 52
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 49.0 51
3.1.4 E-participation* 58.1 61
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.9 80
3.2 General infrastructure 24.3 89 É
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 5.9 15 ª
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 4,440.5 50 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 11.6 24 ª
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 40.9 60 É
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 18.9 106 «É
Creative outputs 20.3 81 É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 39.3 19 ª
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 13.7 37 7.1 Intangible assets 14.2 93 É
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 53.7 10 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 3.0 33 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 49.2 37
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 23.4 94 É 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.7 71
7.2 Creative goods and services 18.6 57
4.1 Credit 16.3 95 É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 1.1 23 ª
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 25.5 73 «É
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 3.8 36
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 26.4 105 «É
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP n/a n/a 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 106
4.2 Investment 10.2 59 7.3 Online creativity 34.4 45
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 8.6 42
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 66 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 22.8 43
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 51 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 71.8 40
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 51
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 43.9 92 É
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 4.5 92 É

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 65.5 86 É
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 103.4 89

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Uzbekistan 83 245

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
91 71 Lower middle CSA 35.7 371.6 10,316

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 49.2 62 È Business sophistication 25.2 71

1.1 Institutional environment 45.0 85 5.1 Knowledge workers 24.6 89

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 54.7 85 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % n/a n/a
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 35.4 91 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 16.9 87 «

1.2 Regulatory environment 23.4 107 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.1 69
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 27.4 102 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 42.4 42 È

1.2.2 Rule of law* 19.3 111 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 8.1 84

1.3 Business environment 79.1 7 ªÈ 5.2 Innovation linkages 29.0 51 È

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 73.2 20 ªÈ 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 0.9 91
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† 85.0 4 ªÈ 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 60.3 37 È
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 72.7 30 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 95
Human capital and research 25.1 93 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 21.9 84

2.1 Education 38.9 104
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.5 74
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 5.3 34 ª
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 9.8 42
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap 13.8 75
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.8 92
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years Ա 12.0 92
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 3.1 47
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 351.4 84 «
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 12.9 58
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 13.1 62
2.2 Tertiary education 34.4 62
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 41.2 81 Knowledge and technology outputs 18.4 78
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % 32.8 12 ªÈ
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.7 95 6.1 Knowledge creation 14.1 66
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 42
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 2.0 91 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 95
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. 547.5 69 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.3 14 ª
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP 0.2 94 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 3.2 116 «
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 4.1 111
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 29.4 56
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 3.9 7 ªÈ
Infrastructure 40.4 70 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 82
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 73.4 63 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 23.1 52
3.1.1 ICT access* 87.2 76 È
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 11.8 87
3.1.2 ICT use* 74.2 77
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 107
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 71.7 57 È
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 38.6 71
3.1.4 E-participation* 60.5 55 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.3 99
3.2 General infrastructure 35.7 49 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.9 85
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 2,043.8 78 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.2 69
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 22.7 82
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 38.7 7 ªÈ
Creative outputs 12.9 103
3.3 Ecological sustainability 12.3 103
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 5.8 112 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 11.3 97
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 2.4 116 «
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 3.1 32 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 36.2 57
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.2 70
Market sophistication 28.9 78 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 69
7.2 Creative goods and services 5.8 94
4.1 Credit 26.4 66 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.1 91
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† 65.8 19 ªÈ
7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 1.7 60
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 36.7 84 7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 3.3 49 È
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.2 51 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.5 65
4.2 Investment 2.4 106 «
7.3 Online creativity 23.2 80
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP Ա 8.1 78 «
7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.7 102
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 87 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 3.2 94
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 90 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 65.6 66
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 85
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 57.9 61
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 2.7 77

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 87.8 44
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 371.6 56

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

246 Viet Nam 44

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
36 53 Lower middle SEAO 100.4 1,434.2 14,285

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 50.5 58 È Business sophistication 31.4 46 È

1.1 Institutional environment 59.3 52 È 5.1 Knowledge workers 26.4 84

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 70.0 40 È 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 10.4 109 «
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 48.6 57 È 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % 8.7 97 «É

1.2 Regulatory environment 34.9 86 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP Ա 0.4 46 È

1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 30.5 95 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % Ա 64.1 9 ªÈ

1.2.2 Rule of law* 39.3 72 È 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 7.5 88

1.3 Business environment 57.3 38 5.2 Innovation linkages 32.2 41 È

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 59.8 42 È 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.5 66
1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† Ա 54.7 21 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 63.8 32 È
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 76.2 24 ªÈ
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 84
Human capital and research 29.3 73 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 67
5.3 Knowledge absorption 35.6 39 È
2.1 Education 45.3 [79]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.4 80
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 2.9 106 «
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 29.4 1 ªÈ
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.2 129 «É
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 4.4 30
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science 467.9 36 È
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses Ա 24.1 52
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary 21.1 102 «

2.2 Tertiary education 23.5 88

2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV 42.2 78 Knowledge and technology outputs 28.5 44 È

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 22.7 63

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % 0.3 105 « 6.1 Knowledge creation 9.7 84
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 68
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 19.2 45 È
6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 91 «
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. Ա 779.3 59 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.3 34
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP Ա 0.4 63 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 5.9 97
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 45.2 36 È
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 14.3 58
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 17.0 55
6.2 Knowledge impact 43.3 22 ªÈ
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % 4.7 3 ªÈ
Infrastructure 44.9 56 È 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 1.1 31
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 63
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 70.6 72 È
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % 38.3 28 È
3.1.1 ICT access* 87.6 75 È
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 32.5 37 È
3.1.2 ICT use* 81.3 48 È
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 105 «
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 61.1 75
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 43.9 61
3.1.4 E-participation* 52.3 71 È
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 36.1 1 ªÈ
3.2 General infrastructure 41.1 34 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.6 95
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. Ա 2,600.0 70 È
6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.8 62 È
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 54.5 42 È
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 33.1 14 ª
Creative outputs 38.2 34 È
3.3 Ecological sustainability 23.0 55
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 10.2 68 7.1 Intangible assets 42.6 29 È
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 26.8 46 7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % 41.2 57
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 2.1 49 È
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 62.1 24 È
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 8.8 22 ªÈ

Market sophistication 39.0 43 È 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 1.5 44
7.2 Creative goods and services 35.8 18 ªÈ
4.1 Credit 31.7 53 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade 0.2 81
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† Ա 47.9 46 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.5 76 «
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 126.4 15 ªÈ
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP Ա 0.1 56 «
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 8.8 1 ªÈ

4.2 Investment 14.4 50 7.3 Online creativity 31.7 51 È

4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 57.1 33 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 2.2 76 È
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 50 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 9.9 56 È
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 44 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 83.1 7 ªÈ
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 48
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 70.9 19 ªÈ
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % Ա 1.2 48 È

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification 93.7 23 È
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 1,434.2 25

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

Zambia 116 247

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
131 103 Lower middle SSA 20.7 83.7 4,068

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 36.5 92 Business sophistication 20.9 95

1.1 Institutional environment 36.7 104 5.1 Knowledge workers 24.5 [90]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 46.7 100 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 12.4 101
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 26.8 109 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 36.6 46 ª

1.2 Regulatory environment 28.4 98 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 27.9 101 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 28.9 96 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 3.4 100

1.3 Business environment 44.4 [67] 5.2 Innovation linkages 22.2 71 ª

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† Ա 44.4 78 ª 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 2.2 39 ªÈ

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† Ա 37.3 82 ª
5.2.3 State of cluster development † Ա 43.2 72 ª
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP Ա 0.0 62 ª
Human capital and research 22.6 [97] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 15.9 119

2.1 Education 45.2 [80]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.2 93
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP 3.6 88
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 5.8 103
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 0.5 109
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.1 117
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary Ա 21.1 103
2.2 Tertiary education n/a [n/a]
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV n/a n/a Knowledge and technology outputs 7.2 131 «É

2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % n/a n/a

2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % n/a n/a 6.1 Knowledge creation 5.9 107
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 106
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 99 «É
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP - -
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 7.4 88
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 6.0 93
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 10.8 129 «É
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬126 «É
Infrastructure 31.9 91 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.0 119 É
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 40.1 112 6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 10.1 86
3.1.1 ICT access* 46.1 111
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 5.0 121
3.1.2 ICT use* n/a n/a
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 116 «É
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 38.3 111
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 21.9 101
3.1.4 E-participation* 36.0 94
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 118
3.2 General infrastructure 27.7 81 ª
6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.2 118
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 969.1 97 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 0.5 124 É
3.2.2 Logistics performance* n/a n/a
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP 30.7 22 ª
Creative outputs 3.0 131 «É
3.3 Ecological sustainability 27.8 43 ªÈ
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 5.3 116 É
7.1 Intangible assets 5.5 111
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 62.3 8 ªÈ
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % n/a n/a
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 123 7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 13.3 101
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 19.3 112 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.8 66 ª

7.2 Creative goods and services 0.5 [126]

4.1 Credit 12.1 108 7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 13.0 125 «
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 2.0 21 ª
7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.0 112
4.2 Investment 5.6 75 7.3 Online creativity 0.3 130 «É
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP 15.7 68 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.1 126 «
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 0.6 120
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 71 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 73
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 40.2 99
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 5.8 101

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 64.8 88
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 83.7 93

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
 GII 2024 rank

248 Zimbabwe 118

Output rank Input rank Income Region Population (mn) GDP, PPP$ (bn) GDP per capita, PPP$
96 131 Lower middle SSA 16.3 44.4 2,750

Score/ Score/
Value Rank Value Rank

Institutions 13.8 130 «É Business sophistication 22.1 91

1.1 Institutional environment 11.6 131 «É 5.1 Knowledge workers 25.2 [87]
1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses* 12.0 132 «É 5.1.1 Knowledge-intensive employment, % 10.1 110
1.1.2 Government effectiveness* 11.2 130 «É 5.1.2 Firms offering formal training, % Ա 26.4 64
1.2 Regulatory environment 6.4 132 «É 5.1.3 GERD performed by business, % GDP n/a n/a
1.2.1 Regulatory quality* 4.4 132 «É 5.1.4 GERD financed by business, % n/a n/a
1.2.2 Rule of law* 8.4 128 É 5.1.5 Females employed w/advanced degrees, % Ա 9.7 78

1.3 Business environment 23.3 [113] 5.2 Innovation linkages 21.9 74

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business† 23.3 117 5.2.1 Public research–industry co-publications, % 1.7 55 ª

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture† n/a n/a 5.2.2 University–industry R&D collaboration† 43.2 71
5.2.3 State of cluster development † 37.5 90
5.2.4 Joint venture/strategic alliance deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 42 ªÈ
Human capital and research 11.7 [127] 5.2.5 Patent families/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 102 «É

5.3 Knowledge absorption 19.1 98

2.1 Education 10.8 [133]
5.3.1 Intellectual property payments, % total trade 0.1 110
2.1.1 Expenditure on education, % GDP Ա 2.1 121 É
5.3.2 High-tech imports, % total trade 6.1 97
2.1.2 Government funding/pupil, secondary, % GDP/cap n/a n/a
5.3.3 ICT services imports, % total trade 1.2 66 ª
2.1.3 School life expectancy, years n/a n/a
5.3.4 FDI net inflows, % GDP 0.9 99
2.1.4 PISA scales in reading, maths and science n/a n/a
5.3.5 Research talent, % in businesses n/a n/a
2.1.5 Pupil–teacher ratio, secondary n/a n/a
2.2 Tertiary education 24.3 86
2.2.1 7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWȴJURVV Ա 9.7 119 É Knowledge and technology outputs 12.5 97
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, % Ա 30.2 19
2.2.3 Tertiary inbound mobility, % Ա 0.5 100 6.1 Knowledge creation 11.6 74
6.1.1 Patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.9 62 ª
2.3 Research and development (R&D) 0.0 [120] 6.1.2 PCT patents by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.1 65
2.3.1 Researchers, FTE/mn pop. n/a n/a 6.1.3 Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.2 38 ª
2.3.2 Gross expenditure on R&D, % GDP n/a n/a 6.1.4 Scientific and technical articles/bn PPP$ GDP 12.8 54 ª
2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, top 3, mn USD$ 0.0 41 «É
6.1.5 Citable documents H-index 7.4 87
2.3.4 QS university ranking, top 3* 0.0 75 «É
6.2 Knowledge impact 18.8 109
6.2.1 Labor productivity growth, % ‫ ܝ‬122
Infrastructure 19.5 128 É 6.2.2 Unicorn valuation, % GDP 0.0 49 «É
6.2.3 Software spending, % GDP 0.2 73
3.1 Information and communication technologies (ICTs) 30.0 123 É
6.2.4 High-tech manufacturing, % Ա 17.2 68
3.1.1 ICT access* 36.0 120 É
6.3 Knowledge diffusion 7.1 106
3.1.2 ICT use* 30.9 114 É
6.3.1 Intellectual property receipts, % total trade 0.0 104
3.1.3 Government’s online service* 32.0 120
6.3.2 Production and export complexity 17.7 109
3.1.4 E-participation* 20.9 123
6.3.3 High-tech exports, % total trade 0.1 121
3.2 General infrastructure 10.1 124 6.3.4 ICT services exports, % total trade 0.5 98
3.2.1 Electricity output, GWh/mn pop. 541.6 109 6.3.5 ISO 9001 quality/bn PPP$ GDP 4.7 64 ªÈ
3.2.2 Logistics performance* 18.2 89
3.2.3 Gross capital formation, % GDP n/a n/a
Creative outputs 16.8 90
3.3 Ecological sustainability 18.6 71
3.3.1 GDP/unit of energy use 3.3 125 «É
7.1 Intangible assets 25.0 70
3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, % 31.9 31 ª
7.1.1 Intangible asset intensity, top 15, % Ա 46.5 53
3.3.3 ISO 14001 environment/bn PPP$ GDP 1.9 54 ªÈ
7.1.2 Trademarks by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 24.0 76
7.1.3 Global brand value, top 5,000, % GDP 0.0 75 «É

Market sophistication 15.3 119 7.1.4 Industrial designs by origin/bn PPP$ GDP 0.7 72
7.2 Creative goods and services 1.1 [118]
4.1 Credit 2.7 130 «É
7.2.1 Cultural and creative services exports, % total trade n/a n/a
4.1.1 Finance for startups and scaleups† n/a n/a 7.2.2 National feature films/mn pop. 15–69 0.1 83
4.1.2 Domestic credit to private sector, % GDP 8.8 129 «
7.2.3 Entertainment and media market/th pop. 15–69 n/a n/a
4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions, % GDP 0.5 42 7.2.4 Creative goods exports, % total trade 0.1 90
4.2 Investment 4.7 [81] 7.3 Online creativity 16.4 110
4.2.1 Market capitalization, % GDP n/a n/a 7.3.1 Top-level domains (TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 0.8 99
4.2.2 Venture capital (VC) investors, deals/bn PPP$ GDP n/a n/a 7.3.2 GitHub commits/mn pop. 15–69 1.0 115
4.2.3 VC recipients, deals/bn PPP$ GDP 0.0 68 7.3.3 Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ GDP 47.3 106
4.2.4 VC received, value, % GDP 0.0 90
4.3 Trade, diversification and market scale 38.4 103
The Global Innovation Index 2024

4.3.1 Applied tariff rate, weighted avg., % 5.9 104

4.3.2 Domestic industry diversification Ա 60.8 98
4.3.3 Domestic market scale, bn PPP$ 44.4 116

NOTES: ª indicates a strength; Ň a weakness; È an income group strength; Éan income group weakness; * an index; † a survey question; ȵ indicates that the
economy’s data is outdated. Square brackets [ ] indicate that the data minimum coverage (DMC) requirements were not met at the sub-pillar or pillar level; n/a
represents missing values; a dash - indicates an indicator which is not relevant to this economy and thus not considered for DMC thresholds.
Appendices

249
Appendix I - Conceptual and
measurement framework of
the Global Innovation Index

Rationale and origins

The Global Innovation Index (GII) was launched in 2007 by Prof. Soumitra Dutta (then at INSEAD)
with the aim of identifying and determining metrics and methods that could capture a picture of
innovation in society that is as complete as possible.

There were several motivations for setting this goal. First, innovation is important for driving
economic progress and competitiveness – for both developed and developing economies.
Many governments are putting innovation at the center of their growth strategies. Second, the
definition of innovation has broadened – it is no longer restricted to research and development
(R&D) laboratories and published scientific papers. The concept of innovation has become more
general and horizontal in nature, and now includes social, business model and technical aspects.
Last, but not least, recognizing and celebrating innovation in emerging markets is critical for
inspiring people – especially the next generation of entrepreneurs and innovators.

Now in its 17th edition, the GII helps to create an environment in which these innovation
factors are subject to continual evaluation. It provides a key tool for decision-makers and a
rich database of detailed metrics, offering a convenient source of information for refining
innovation policies.

Measuring innovation outputs and their impact remains a challenging task, hence great
emphasis is placed on measuring the climate and infrastructure for innovation and assessing
related outcomes.

Although the final results are presented as a ranking, the primary aim of the GII is to improve
the “journey” to more accurate methods of measurement, understanding innovation and
identifying targeted policies, good practices and other levers that foster innovation. The rich
data metrics, at index, sub-index or indicator level, can be used to monitor performance over
time and to benchmark developments against economies within the same region or income
group classification.

Defining innovation in the GII

The GII adopts a broad definition of innovation, originally elaborated in the Oslo Manual
developed by the Statistical Office of the European Communities and the Organisation for
(FRQRPLF&RRSHUDWLRQDQG'HYHORSPHQW 2(&' ,QLWVIRXUWKHGLWLRQLQWKHbOslo Manual
introduced a more general definition of innovation: “An innovation is a new or improved product
or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s previous products
or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use
by the unit (process).” (OECD and Eurostat, 2018

This update of the Oslo Manual also introduced a series of definitions associated with innovation
in business activities and for different types of innovation firms. In this context, innovation
translates as improvements made to outcomes in the form of either new goods or new services,
250 or any combination of these. While the GII focuses on a more general definition of innovation, it
is important to highlight how these specific definitions capture the evolution of the way in which 251
innovation has been perceived and understood over the past two decades.

Economists and policymakers previously focused on R&D-based technological product

innovation, largely produced in-house and mainly in manufacturing industries. Innovation
of this nature was executed by a highly educated labor force in R&D-intensive companies.
The process leading to such innovation was conceptualized as closed, internal and localized.
Technological breakthroughs were necessarily “radical” and took place at the “global knowledge
frontier.” This characterization implied the existence of leading and lagging economies, with
low- or middle-income economies only able to play “catch-up.”

Today, innovation capability is increasingly seen as the ability to exploit new technological
combinations; it embraces the concept of incremental innovation and “innovation without
research.” Non-R&D innovative expenditure is an important component of reaping the rewards
of technological innovation. Interest in understanding how innovation evolves in low- and
middle-income economies is increasing, along with an awareness that incremental forms of
innovation can impact development, and that innovation occurs in the informal economy of
developing countries, too (Kraemer-Mbula and Wunsch-Vincent, 2016).

Furthermore, the process of innovation itself has changed significantly. Investment in

innovation-related activity and intangible assets has intensified consistently at the firm,
economy and global levels, adding both new innovation actors from outside high-income
economies and non-profit actors. The structure of knowledge production activity is more
complex, collaborative and geographically dispersed than ever.

Since its inception, the GII has also made a special effort to cover creativity and creative
outputs, taking a fresh view of the previously siloed approach to innovation versus creativity. In
the opinion of the GII Editors, innovation and creativity are simply two faces of the same coin.

A key challenge is to find metrics that capture innovation as it actually happens in the world
today. Direct official measures that quantify innovation outputs remain extremely scarce. For
example, there are no official statistics on the amount of innovative activity – defined as the
number of new products, processes or other innovations – for any given innovation actor,
let alone for any given country. Most measurements also struggle to appropriately capture
the innovation outputs of a wider spectrum of innovation actors, such as users or the public
and services sectors, or more informal means, which are often the drivers of innovation in
developing countries.

The GII aims to improve the measurement of innovation in order to provide a more complete
picture of innovation ecosystems across the globe. It explores new metrics regularly to reflect
the changing nature of innovation and the increasingly sprawling field of new (big data)

Appendix I - Conceptual and measurement framework of the Global Innovation Index

innovation indicators.

Interest in applying the GII framework and indicators to develop complementary and mutually
reinforcing sub-national innovation indices is also growing among WIPO member states.1 WIPO
has been supporting these exercises since 2022 with work that strives to better measure and
understand sub-national innovation activity (WIPO, 2024a).

The GII conceptual framework

The overall GII ranking is based on two sub-indices that are both equally important in
presenting a complete picture of innovation: the Innovation Input Sub-Index and the Innovation
Output Sub-Index. Hence, three indices are calculated:

1 See Box 2 in the main results and the events “WIPO General Assemblies 2024 – Side Event Global Innovation Index:
Measuring and Promoting Sub-national Innovation Performance: The Role of Regional Innovation Indices”, July 12,
2024, and “Workshop – Global Innovation Index Sharing of Experiences in the Creation & Implementation of Regional
Innovation Indices”, June 7, 2022.
 252 – Innovation Input Sub-Index: Five input pillars capture elements of the economy that enable
and facilitate innovative activities. The idea is that the innovation inputs of today – and
corresponding efforts to develop the science, innovation and human capital base, and
the associated innovation environment – prepare the ground for the innovation outputs
of tomorrow.
– Innovation Output Sub-Index: Innovation outputs are the result of innovative activities
within the economy. Although the Output Sub-Index includes only two pillars, it carries the
same weight as the Input Sub-Index in calculating the overall GII scores. In other words,
innovation output pillars and indicators have a disproportionally greater weight compared
to innovation inputs.
– The overall GII score is the average of the Input and Output Sub-Indices, from which the GII
economy rankings are produced.

Each of the five input and two output pillars is divided into three sub-pillars, each of which is
composed of individual indicators – a total of 78 this year (see the Economy profiles section for
the Framework of the Global Innovation Index 2024). Each sub-pillar is calculated by taking the
weighted average of its individual indicators’ scores, which are normalized to again produce
scores between 0 and 100. Pillar scores are calculated using the weighted average of each pillar’s
sub-pillar scores.

When WIPO became the sole editor of the GII, the development of a robust and modern data
infrastructure was part of the larger plan for GII development, in view of increasing the data
quality and data quality control, and the robustness and replicability of the GII model (Appendix
Box 1).

Appendix Box 1 Building a robust data infrastructure for the Global

Innovation Index

To facilitate and permit a comprehensive workflow of the GII model, from data storage
to the GII calculations, a robust data infrastructure was developed in 2021 and improved
progressively since. The data infrastructure comprises three parts.

'DWDVWRUDJHȁWKH*,,GDWDEDVH All GII data are stored, maintained and managed in the GII
database. The database stores all collected data in a structured manner for all WIPO member
states (not only the ranked GII economies) and for all indicators (those already included in the
GII model and the new ones). It also stores data on outlier analysis (generated by the data
quality checks that the GII team carries out after data collection – see below), as well as all
the data queries sent to the GII data providers following an outlier analysis. As of 2024, the
database will be expanded to also include country level and global aggregate data related to
the Global Innovation Tracker. In addition, the micro-level data, often related to companies,
used in the aggregation of certain GII indicators (e.g., Global corporate R&D investors,
companies’ Unicorn valuation, companies’ Intangible asset intensity, Global brand value, etc.)
has been further expanded and standardized.

7KH*,,UHSRVLWRU\RIFROODERUDWLYHFRGHV The GII repository of collaborative codes is

on GitHub, which is one of the largest code-hosting platforms for version control and
collaboration. The GII repository contains eight repositories in the statistical programming
language R (R-codes), which are linked to diverse elements of the GII workflow and the GII
report, enabling data collection, data calculation and data quality control of all GII indicators.
In 2024, an updated repository for the Global Innovation Tracker – including for trends
calculations at the country level, was further developed and expanded.

7KH*,,5SDFNDJHIRUWKHFDOFXODWLRQRIWKH*,,PRGHO The GII R-package is a custom-built

Global Innovation Index 2024

package of tools, created using R, to calculate the GII model and analyze its results. The
structure of the tailor-made GII R-package follows the general COINr R-package, which was
developed by the European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC) and follows the steps in
the OECD/JRC Handbook for constructing composite indicators.2 The R-package (called GII2)

2 OECD and EC JRC (2008).

has been improved over the years. In 2024, a new suite has been developed to analyze the GII 253
UHVXOWVRYHUWLPHIRUUHVHDUFKSXUSRVHVb

Assuring data quality control is at the center of the GII methodology and processes. Each
collected indicator for the GII undergoes a data quality control and data audit process every
year. Several data tests and analyses are performed on all collected indicators, including the
analysis of means, identification of outliers based on mean and z-scores for both unscaled
and scaled data, analysis of rank changes, analysis of missing data and analysis of outdated
data. Following these analyses, the GII team goes back to the data providers for any necessary
clarification and, when required, the data providers themselves correct the data at the source.
These additional exhaustive checks ensure the reliability of all data used in the GII.

This infrastructure enables a complete workflow that links data storage and data quality
control with data analysis (GII rankings and the GII report) in a fully integrated way, increasing
the overall robustness of the GII data and model.

In 2024, emphasis has been given to the visualization and improved presentation of the GII
data and results through the new GII Innovation Ecosystems and Data Explorer 2024. In
collaboration with OneTandem, the data explorer lets users dynamically generate GII economy
briefs, profiles and country comparisons seamlessly, and to look into the time series of all GII
indicators, including into individual data and micro-data on intangible assets, top universities,
the most valuable brands and others. In 2024, data on the Clusters Ranking, including
individual Cluster briefs have been added to the website. The Data Explorer is also available for
use on mobile phones.

Moving ahead, the GII team will continue exploring and improving the measurement of
innovation through the GII Data Lab. By experimenting with data and novel data-driven
approaches, the GII Data Lab aims to improve the measurement of innovation performance
through the GII model, and to help innovation stakeholders and policymakers to make more
informed decisions about innovation policy, funding, and strategy. As of 2024, the GII Data
Lab focuses on three thematic research lines: (1) Innovation Finance; (2) Entrepreneurship,
startups, and gazelles; and (3) Innovation impact; and a transversal line on big data and new
computational methods.3
b

Adjustments to the GII model in 2024

Appendix Table 1 summarizes the adjustments made to the GII 2024 framework. Two indicators
are combined into a single indicator, creating a change in methodology. In addition, there are

Appendix I - Conceptual and measurement framework of the Global Innovation Index

two new indicators and three indicators have been dropped from the framework. Due to the
addition and removal of these indicators, the numbering of four remaining indicators have been
adjusted, but without altering their methodology. Lastly, the name of one indicator has been
modified under request of the data provider.

3 More information on the GII Data Lab is available at: www.wipo.int/global_innovation_index.

 254 $SSHQGL[7DEOH&KDQJHVWRWKH*,,IUDPHZRUN

GII 2023 Adjustment GII 2024

1.2.3 Cost of redundancy dismissal Removed

Policy stability for doing

1.3.1 Policies for doing business† Name changed 1.3.1
business†

3.3.2 Environmental performance* Removed

New indicator 3.3.2 Low-carbon energy use, %

Public Research–Industry
New indicator 5.2.1
co-publications, %

University-industry R&D University–industry R&D

5.2.1 New indicator numbering 5.2.2
collaboration† collaboration†

State of cluster
5.2.2 State of cluster development† New indicator numbering 5.2.3
development†

GERD financed by abroad, %

5.2.3 Removed
GDP

Generic top-level domains Top-level domains (TLDs)/th

7.3.1 Methodology changed 7.3.1
(TLDs)/th pop. 15–69 pop. 15–69

Country-code TLDs/th pop. 15– Top-level domains (TLDs)/th

7.3.2 Methodology changed 7.3.1
69 pop. 15–69

GitHub commits/mn pop. 15– GitHub commits/mn pop.

7.3.3 New indicator numbering 7.3.2
69 15–69

Mobile app creation/bn PPP$ Mobile app creation/bn

7.3.4 New indicator numbering 7.3.3
GDP PPP$ GDP

Notes: Refer to Appendix III: Sources and definitions for a detailed explanation of terminology and acronyms.
Source: Global Innovation Index 2024, WIPO.

Data limitations and treatment

This year, the GII model includes 133 economies, which represent 92.8 percent of the
world’s population and 97.5 percent of the world’s GDP in purchasing power parity current
international dollars.

The timeliest possible indicators are used for the GII 2024: from the non-missing data, 2.7
percent are from 2024, 32.2 percent are from 2023, 45.8 percent are from 2022, 9.5 percent are
from 2021, 3.9 percent are from 2020, 1.6 percent are from 2019 and the small remainder of 4.3
percent are from earlier years.4

The GII 2024 model includes 78 indicators, which fall into three categories:

– quantitative/objective/hard data (63 indicators);

– composite indicators/index data (10 indicators); and
– survey/qualitative/subjective/soft data (5 indicators).

This year, for an economy to feature in the GII 2024, the minimum data coverage requirement
is at least 35 indicators in the Innovation Input Sub-Index (66 percent) and 16 indicators in the
Innovation Output Sub-Index (66 percent), with scores for at least two sub-pillars per pillar. This
year, 6.1.3 – Utility models by origin/bn PPP$ GDP has been excluded from the minimum data
coverage (DMC) requirement. In the GII 2024, 133 economies had sufficient data available to be
included in the Index. A total of 117 economies did not make it into the GII 2024 due to a lack of
Global Innovation Index 2024

4 The GII is calculated based on 9,275 data points out of a possible 10,374 (133 economies multiplied by 78 indicators),
implying that 10.6 percent of data points are missing. The GII 2024 database includes the data year used for each
indicator and economy, downloadable at www.wipo.int/global_innovation_index/en/2024. If an indicator for an
economy is missing, it is marked as “n/a” in the economy profiles and “–” for cases where the indicator is not treated
as missing.
available data. For each economy, only the most recent yearly data were considered. As a rule, 255
the GII indicators consider data from as far back as 2014.

Missing values

For the sake of transparency and replicability of results, missing values are not estimated; they
are indicated with “n/a” and are not considered in the sub-pillar score. In other words, missing
indicators do not translate into a zero for the country in question; the indicator is simply not
taken into consideration in the aggregation process.

That said, the audit undertaken by the European Commission’s Competence Centre on
Composite Indicators and Scoreboards at the Joint Research Centre (JRC-COIN) (see Appendix
II) assesses the robustness of the GII modeling choices (no imputation of missing data, fixed
predefined weights and arithmetic averages) by imputing missing data, applying random sets
of perturbed weights and using geometric averages. Since 2012, based on this assessment, a
confidence interval has been provided for each ranking in the GII as well as for the Input and
Output Sub-Indices (Appendix II).

Treatment of series with outliers

Potentially problematic indicators with outliers that could polarize results and unduly bias the
rankings were treated according to the rules listed below, as per the recommendations of the
JRC-COIN. Only hard data indicators were treated (32 out of 63).

)LUVWUXOHVHOHFWLRQ

Indicators were classified as problematic if they had:

– an absolute value of skewness greater than 2.25; and

– kurtosis greater than 3.5.5

6HFRQGUXOHWUHDWPHQW

Indicators with between one and five outliers (27 cases) were winsorized; the values distorting
the indicator distribution were assigned the next highest value, up to the level where skewness
and/or kurtosis had the values specified above.6

Indicators with five or more outliers, and for which skewness or kurtosis did not fall within the
ranges specified above, were transformed using natural logarithms after multiplication by a

Appendix I - Conceptual and measurement framework of the Global Innovation Index

given factor f.7 Since only “goods” were affected (i.e., indicators for which higher values indicate
better outcomes, as opposed to “bads”), the following formula was used:

where “min” and “max” are the minimum and maximum indicator sample values, respectively.

This formula achieves two things: it converts all series into “goods” and scales the series within
the range [1, max] so that natural logs are positive, starting at 0, where “min” and “max” are the
minimum and maximum indicator sample values. The corresponding formula for “bads” is:

5 Based on Groeneveld and Meeden (1984), which sets the criteria of absolute skewness above 1 and kurtosis above
3.5. The skewness criterion was relaxed to accommodate the small sample under consideration (133 economies).
6 The indicators treated using winsorization are: 3.2.1, 5.1.3, 5.3.2, 5.3.3, 6.1.5, 7.2.2, 7.3.1 and 7.3.2 (one outlier); 2.2.3,
4.1.3, 4.2.1 and 6.1.3 (two outliers); 4.2.4, 6.3.4 and 7.1.2 (three outliers); 4.2.3, 6.3.3 and 7.2.1 (four outliers); and 4.3.3,
5.3.1, 6.1.2, 6.2.2, 6.3.1, 7.1.4 and 7.2.4 (five outliers). Finally, indicator 7.1.1 was winsorized from the bottom of the
distribution, on one outlier and 5.3.4 on two outlier observations.
7 Indicators 2.3.3, 4.2.2, 5.2.5, 6.1.1 and 7.3.3 were treated using log-transformation (factor fof 1).
 256

Normalization

The 78 indicators were then normalized into the [0, 100] range, with higher scores representing
better outcomes. Normalization was undertaken according to the min–max method, where the
“min” and “max” values were the minimum and maximum indicator sample values, respectively.
Following the recommendation of the JRC-COIN, all indicators, including index and survey data,
were normalized to a 0–100 range. This normalization ensures that all indicators share the same
range, facilitating their individual contribution to the overall index score.

Weights

In 2012, the JRC-COIN and GII team made a joint decision that scaling coefficients of 0.5 or 1.0
should be used instead of importance coefficients. This decision aimed to achieve balanced
sub-pillar and pillar scores by considering the underlying components. In other words, the goal
was to ensure that indicators and sub-pillars contribute a similar amount of variance to their
respective sub-pillars/pillars.

To prevent multicollinearity during the aggregation process, any indicators within a sub-index
that exhibited a high correlation, exceeding an absolute correlation of 0.95, were assigned a
weight of 0.5. In 2024, there were no indicators that received a 0.5 weight, and thus all indicators
had a weight of 1. Additionally, two sub-pillars – 7.2 Creative goods and services and 7.3 Online
creativity – were also assigned a weight of 0.5.

Strengths and weaknesses

Strengths and weaknesses are calculated for all economies covered in the GII and are presented
in the individual economy profiles (see the explanatory section Economy profiles). In simple
terms, strengths and weaknesses are the top- and bottom-ranked indicators for each country.
In addition, income group strengths and weaknesses are also provided, which are the respective
high- and low-performing indicators within income groups.

The methodology for the calculation of strengths and weaknesses is as follows:

– The scores of each indicator are converted to percentile ranks.

– Strengths are defined as the indicators of an economy that have a percentile rank greater
than or equal to the 10th percentile rank (across the indicators of that economy). Note that
this can result in more than 10 strengths in the event of tied results.
– Weaknesses are defined in an equivalent manner for the bottom 10 indicators.
– If a country has an indicator that ranks equal to or lower than three, it is automatically a
strength, regardless of the percentile rank.
– Importantly, although the cut-off value used to define the strengths (i.e., the 10th highest
percentile rank) is calculated using only indicator percentile ranks, it is also applied to sub-
pillars and pillars.
– In addition, for pillars and sub-pillars that do not meet the Data Minimum Coverage (DMC)
criteria, strengths and weaknesses are not signaled. Pillars and sub-pillars that do not meet
the DMC show the pillars and sub-pillars in brackets in the economy profiles.
– Income group strengths and weaknesses are somewhat similar to overall strengths and
weaknesses but are defined within income groups and use means and standard deviations.
Global Innovation Index 2024

The methodology for the calculation of income group strengths and weaknesses is as
follows:

– For a given economy, income group strengths are those scores that are above the
income group average plus the standard deviation within the group.
– For that economy, weaknesses are those scores that are below the income group
average minus the standard deviation within the group.
 – The only exceptions to the income group strengths and weaknesses are the top 25 high- 257
income economies, where these strengths and weaknesses are computed within the top
25 group.
– As the only non-high-income economy in the top 25, China’s income group strengths and
weaknesses are computed within the non-top 25 group.

– Since, occasionally, the low threshold for weaknesses is below zero, any score of zero is
automatically marked as a weakness.
– Finally, as of 2023 and following the recommendation of the audit by the WIPO Internal
Oversight Section,8 strengths and weaknesses are reset, or not signaled, where the data
year for a given indicator is older than the indicator mode minus five years. In practice, for
the GII 2024, this means that for indicators with a data year mode of 2023, the data year of
an economy must be 2018 or later to qualify as a strength or weakness.

Caveats on the year-to-year comparison of rankings

The GII compares the performance of national innovation systems across economies and
presents the changes in economy rankings over time.

It is important to note that scores and rankings are not directly comparable between one year
and another. Each ranking reflects the relative position of a particular economy based on the
conceptual framework, the data coverage and the sample of economies of that specific GII
edition, and also reflects changes in the underlying indicators at source and in data availability.

A number of factors influence the year-on-year rankings of an economy:

– the actual performance of the economy in question;

– adjustments made to the GII framework (changes in indicator composition and
measurement revisions);
– data updates, the treatment of outliers and missing values; and
– the inclusion or exclusion of economies in the sample.

Additionally, the following characteristics complicate the time-series analysis based on simple
GII rankings or scores:

– 0LVVLQJYDOXHV: The GII produces relative index scores, which means that a missing value for
one economy affects the index score of other economies. Because the number of missing
values decreases every year, this problem reduces overtime.
– 5HIHUHQFH\HDU: The data underlying the GII do not refer to a single year but to several
years, depending on the latest available year for any given variable. In addition, the

Appendix I - Conceptual and measurement framework of the Global Innovation Index

reference years for different variables are not the same for each economy, due to measures
to limit the number of missing data points.
– 6FDOLQJIDFWRUV: Most GII variables are scaled using either GDP or population, with the
intention of enabling cross-economy comparability. However, this implies that year-on-year
changes in individual indicators may be driven either by the variable (numerator) or by its
scaling factor (denominator).
– Consistent data collection: Measuring the change in year-on-year performance relies
on the consistent collection of data over time. Changes in the definition of variables or in
the data collection process could create movements in the rankings that are unrelated
to performance.

A detailed economy study based on the GII database and the economy profile over time,
coupled with analytical work on the ground, including that of innovation actors and decision-
makers, yields the best results in terms of monitoring an economy’s innovation performance, as
well as identifying possible avenues for improvement.

8 IOD Ref: IA 2022-03, April 14, 2023: www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/about-wipo/en/oversight/docs/iaod/audit/audit-

gii.pdf.
Appendix II - Joint Research
Centre (JRC) statistical
audit of the 2024 Global
Innovation Index

This statistical audit was conducted by -DLPH/DJ¾HUD*RQ]£OH], 3DQDJLRWLV5DYDQRV, 0LFKDHOD

Saisana, 2VFDU6PDOOHQEURHN and &DUORV7DFDR0RXUD, European Commission, JRC, Ispra, Italy.

The process of understanding and modeling the fundamentals of innovation at the national
level and across the globe inevitably entails conceptual and practical challenges. Now in its
17th edition, the Global Innovation Index (GII) 2024, considers these conceptual challenges and
deals with practical issues – related to data quality and methodological choices – by grouping
economy-level data for 133 economies across 78 indicators into 21 sub-pillars, seven pillars,
two sub-indices and, finally, an overall index. This appendix offers detailed insights into the
practical challenges related to the construction of the GII. In particular, it analyzes the statistical
soundness of the conceptual framework and the robustness of calculations and modeling
assumptions used to arrive at the final index rankings.

Statistical soundness should be regarded as a necessary but not sufficient condition for a
sound GII, since the correlations underpinning the majority of the statistical analyses carried
out herein need not “necessarily represent the real influence of the individual indicators on the
phenomenon being measured” (OECD and EC JRC, 2008: 26). Consequently, the development of
the GII must be informed by a dynamic, iterative dialogue between the principles of statistical
and conceptual soundness; or, to put it another way, a process in which the theoretical
understanding of innovation and the empirical observation of the data underlying the variables
complement and strengthen each other.

The European Commission’s Competence Centre on Composite Indicators and Scoreboards

(COIN) at the Joint Research Centre (JRC) in Ispra, Italy, has been invited to audit the GII for a 14th
consecutive year. As in previous editions, the present JRC-COIN audit focuses on the statistical
soundness of the multilevel structure of the index, as well as on the impact of key modeling
assumptions on the results.1 The independent statistical assessment of the GII provided by the
JRC-COIN guarantees the transparency and reliability of the index for both policymakers and
other stakeholders, thus facilitating more accurate priority setting and policy formulation in the
innovation field.

As in the previous GII reports, the JRC-COIN analysis complements the economy rankings of
the GII, the Innovation Input Sub-Index and the Innovation Output Sub-index with confidence
intervals, in order to allow a better appreciation of the robustness of these rankings to the
choice of computation methodology. The JRC-COIN analysis also includes an assessment of the
added value of the GII and it supplements the GII scores with a measure of the “distance to the
performance frontier” of innovation through the use of data envelopment analysis.

1 The JRC analysis was based on the recommendations of the OECD/EC JRC (2008) Handbook on Constructing Composite
Indicators and on more recent research from the JRC. The JRC audits on composite indicators are conducted at the
request of the index developers and are available at: https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/composite-indicators_
258 en and https://composite-indicators.jrc.ec.europa.eu.
Box 1 Conceptual and statistical coherence in the GII 2024 framework 259

Step 1 Conceptual consistency

– compatibility with existing literature on innovation and pillar definition
– use of scaling factors per indicator to present a fair picture of economy differences (e.g.,
GDP, population)

Step 2 Data checks

– check for data timeliness (90 percent of available data refer to 2021 or a later year)
– inclusion requirements per economy (availability of 66 percent for the Input and the Output
Sub-Indices separately and data availability for at least two sub-pillars per pillar)
– check for reporting errors (interquartile range)
– outlier identification (skewness and kurtosis) and treatment (winsorization or
logarithmic transformation)
– direct contact with data providers

Step 3 Statistical coherence

– treatment of pairs of highly collinear variables as a single indicator
– assessment of grouping of indicators into sub-pillars, pillars, sub-indices and the GII
– use of weights as scaling coefficients to ensure statistical coherence
– assessment of arithmetic average assumption
– assessment of potential redundancy of information in the overall GII

Step 4 Qualitative review

– internal qualitative review (by WIPO in partnership with the Portulans Institute, the GII
Corporate and Academic Network partners, as well as the GII Advisory Board members)
– a one-off qualitative audit (by the WIPO Internal Oversight Section)2
– external qualitative review (by JRC-COIN and international experts)

Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.

Conceptual and statistical coherence within the GII framework

The GII model was assessed by the JRC-COIN in June 2024. Suggestions for fine-tuning certain
aspects were taken into account in the final computation of the rankings during an iterative
process with the JRC-COIN aiming to set the foundations for a balanced index. This four-step

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre ( JRC) statistical audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index
process is outlined in Box 1.

6WHS&RQFHSWXDOFRQVLVWHQF\

A total of 78 indicators were selected for their relevance to specific innovation pillars, based on a
literature review, expert opinion, economy coverage and timeliness. To present a fair picture of
economy differences, indicators were scaled either at source or by the GII team, as appropriate
and where needed. For example, Expenditure on education (indicator 2.1.1) is expressed as a
percentage of GDP, while Government funding per pupil at secondary level (indicator 2.1.2) is
expressed as a percentage of GDP per capita. On the advice of JRC-COIN, the GII developers
normalized nine more indicators to a 0–100 range in the 2023 edition, so that all indicators have
the same range, which facilitates their individual contributions to the overall index score.

The 2024 edition of the GII includes some changes to the indicators.

– The number of indicators considered is 78 instead of 80. The Cost of redundancy dismissal,
indicator 1.2.3. in last year’s edition, was dropped from the Regulatory environment sub-

2 Available at: www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/about-wipo/en/oversight/docs/iaod/audit/audit-gii-exec-summary.pdf,

IOD Ref: IA 2022-03, April 14, 2023.
 260 pillar (1.2). This change was informed by a thorough literature review revealing weak fitness
of the indicator with the concept of innovation, as well as concerns about its timeliness.
The sub-pillar now includes two equal-weighted indicators (1.2.1 Regulatory quality and
1.2.2 Rule of law). Additionally, Generic top-level domains (TLDs) and Country-code TLDs
(indicators 7.3.1 and 7.3.2 of the Online creativity sub-pillar 7.3 in the 2023 edition) have been
merged into a single indicator representing the sum of generic top-level domains (TLDs) and
country-code TLDs.
– In sub-pillar 3.3 Ecological sustainability a new indicator, Low-carbon energy use (3.3.2), has
replaced the Environmental performance indicator based on a more stringent fit with the
concept of innovation.
– In sub-pillar 5.2 Innovation linkages, indicator Public Research–Industry co-publications
(5.2.1), has replaced the Gross domestic Expenditure on R&D (GERD) financed by abroad
indicator, based on concerns about the timeliness and future data availability of the latter.
– The computation methodology of indicators 3.1.1 ICT access and 3.1.2 ICT use has changed.
These two variables are themselves composite indices computed by WIPO and their
composition has been changed slightly to better reflect the current discussions at the
International Telecommunications Union (ITU), which provides the raw data for these
indicators.
– The source of data for the indicator 4.3.1 Applied tariff rate has changed from the World
Bank to the World Trade Organization.
– Finally, indicator 1.3.1 Policies for doing business has been renamed Policy stability for
doing business.

The above changes highlight the developer’s meticulous attention to the monitoring, evaluating
and updating of the theoretical framework and the data sources used for the index, with an aim
WRSURYLGHDQHYHQPRUHUREXVWDQGWLPHO\PHDVXUHRILQQRYDWLRQSHUIRUPDQFHb

6WHS'DWDFKHFNV

The data used for each economy were those most recently released within the period 2013 to
2024, with 90 percent of the available data refer to 2021 or a later year. With regards to the
inclusion of countries in the GII, the 2024 edition follows the criteria adopted in 2016, 3 according
to which economies are only included if (i) data availability is at least 66 percent within each
of the two sub-indices (i.e. 35 out of 53 variables within the Input Sub-Index and 17 out of the
25 variables in the Output Sub-Index) and (ii) at least two of the three sub-pillars in each pillar
can be computed. These criteria aim to ensure that economy scores for the GII and for the two
Input and Output Sub-Indices are not overly sensitive to missing values (as was the case for the
Output Sub-Index scores of several economies in previous editions). In the current edition of the
Index, these criteria resulted in the exclusion of one country (Guinea) compared to the previous
edition, while two countries were added (Barbados and Myanmar) compared to the 2023 edition.
7KLVLQFUHDVHGWKHQXPEHURIFRXQWULHVLQWKLVYHUVLRQE\RQH IURPLQWR b

In practice, data availability for all economies included in the GII 2024 is quite satisfactory:
At least 80 percent of data is available for 81 percent of the economies covered (equivalent to
108 economies out of 133), while 75% of the considered indicators are available for 95% of the
economies covered.

Potentially problematic indicators that could bias the overall results were identified on the basis
of two measures related to the shape of the data distributions: skewness and kurtosis. In 2011,
a joint decision by the GII team and the JRC-COIN determined that values would be treated if an
indicator had absolute skewness greater than 2.0 and kurtosis greater than 3.5.4 In 2017, having
analyzed data in the GIIs compiled between 2011 and 2017, less stringent criteria were adopted.
An indicator was only treated if the absolute skewness was greater than 2.25 and kurtosis
greater than 3.5. Such indicators were treated either by winsorization or by natural logarithm (in
Global Innovation Index 2024

cases of more than five outliers; see Appendix I). In 2018, exceptional behavior by foreign direct
investment (FDI) net outflows (indicator 6.3.4 at the time) was observed (Annex 3, JRC Audit, GII

3 These criteria were adopted following a JRC-COIN recommendation based on previous GII audits.
4 Groeneveld and Meeden (1984) set the criteria for absolute skewness above 1 and for kurtosis above 3.5. The
skewness criterion was relaxed in the GII case after ad hoc tests were conducted in the GII 2008–GII 2018
series range.
2018) and, from 2018 onward, it was recommended that the GII rule for the treatment of outliers 261
be amended as follows:

– for indicators with absolute skewness greater than 2.25 and kurtosis greater than 3.5, apply
either winsorization or the natural logarithm (in cases of more than five outliers);
– for indicators with absolute skewness less than 2.25 and kurtosis greater than 10.0, produce
scatterplots to identify potentially problematic values that need to be considered as outliers
and treated accordingly.

For a total of 27 indicators, one up to 5 values were winsorised, while for an additional 5
indicators (2.3.3 Global corporate R&D investors, 4.2.2 Venture capital investors, 5.2.5. Patent
families, 6.1.1 Patents by origin and 7.3.3 Mobile app creation) the natural logarithm was applied.
For two of these five indicators (4.2.2 Venture capital investors and 5.2.5. Patent families) the
values of skewness and kurtosis did not abide by the set thresholds after applying the natural
logarithm transformation.

6WHS6WDWLVWLFDOFRKHUHQFH

Weights as scaling coefficients

The JRC-COIN and GII team jointly decided in 2012 that weights of 0.5 or 1.0 were to be used as
scaling coefficients and not importance coefficients, with the aim of arriving at sub-pillar and
pillar scores that were balanced in their underlying components (i.e., that indicators and sub-
pillars can explain a similar amount of variance in their respective sub-pillars/pillars). Becker et
al.  DQG3DUXROR6DLVDQDDQG6DOWHOOLb  VKRZWKDWLQZHLJKWHGDULWKPHWLFDYHUDJHV
the ratio of two nominal weights gives the rate of substitutability between two indicators, and
hence can be used to reveal the relative importance of individual indicators. This importance
can then be compared with ex-post measures of a variable’s importance, such as the non-linear
Pearson correlation ratio.

As a result of this analysis, two sub-pillars are also given a weight of 0.5 – 7.2 Creative goods
and services and 7.3 Online creativity. In the previous edition of the GII, a weight of 0.5 was also
applied to two indicators of the input sub-pillar 1.2 Regulatory environment – 1.2.1 Regulatory
quality and 1.2.2 Rule of law – but this was amended in this edition of the index. This change is
due to the removal of indicator 1.2.3 from the same sub-pillar (which in the previous edition of
the index had a weight of 1).

Despite this weighting adjustment, two indicators (5.3.4 FDI net inflows and 6.2.1 Labor
productivity growth) were found to be non-influential in this year’s GII framework, meaning
that they could not explain at least 9 percent of economies’ overall variation in the respective

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre ( JRC) statistical audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index
sub-pillar scores.5 These two indicators also remain non-influential at both the sub-index
and the index level, while there are five additional indicators (2.1.1 Expenditure on education,
2.2.2 Graduates in science and engineering, 3.2.3 Gross capital formation, 3.3.2 Low-carbon
energy use, 4.1.3 Loans from microfinance institutions) which are not sufficiently correlated
with the Input Sub-Index level. This means that, at least for 5.3.4 FDI net inflows and 6.2.1
Labor productivity growth, there is evidence of a weak relationship between a country’s
level of innovation and its FDI net inflows or Labor productivity growth. JRC-COIN echoes
its recommendation in the previous audit (WIPO, 2023a) and encourages the developers to
investigate potential alternatives for measuring the underlying concepts of those metrics linked
to innovation performance. The remaining 71 indicators out of the 78 in total were found to be
sufficiently influential in the GII framework.

Principal component analysis and reliability item analysis

Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to assess the extent to which the conceptual
framework is confirmed by statistical approaches. PCA results confirm the presence of a single
latent dimension in each of the seven pillars (one component with an eigenvalue greater

5 An indicator can explain 9 percent of the economy’s variation in the GII sub-pillar scores if the Pearson correlation
coefficient between the two series is 0.3.
 262 than 1.0) that captures between approximately 59 percent (pillar 3: Infrastructure) and up
to 83 percent (pillar 5: Business sophistication) of the total variance in the three underlying
sub-pillars. Furthermore, results confirm the expectation that in the majority of the cases, the
sub-pillars are more closely correlated with their own pillar than with any other pillar and that all
correlation coefficients are close to or greater than 0.70 (Appendix Table 2).

The five input pillars share a single statistical dimension that summarizes 81 percent of the
total variance and the five loadings (correlation coefficients) of these pillars are very similar to
each other. This similarity suggests that the five pillars make a roughly equal contribution to
the variation of the Innovation Input Sub-Index scores, as envisaged by the development team.
Consequently, the reliability of the Input Sub-Index, measured by Cronbach’s alpha value, is very
high at 0.93 – well above the 0.70 threshold for a reliable aggregate (Nunally, 1978).

The two output pillars – Knowledge and technology outputs and Creative outputs – are strongly
correlated with each other (0.86); they are also both strongly correlated with the Innovation
Output Sub-Index (0.96 and 0.97).

Finally, the two sub-indices are equally important in the overall GII. The GII is built as a
simple arithmetic average of the Input Sub-Index and the Output Sub-Index. In fact, the
Pearson correlation coefficients of the two sub-indices with the GII (0.97 in both cases), and
the correlation between themselves (0.90), suggests that they are effectively placed on an
equal footing.

Concluding remarks

Overall, the statistical analysis in this section demonstrates that the grouping of variables into
sub-pillars, pillars and an overall index is statistically coherent within the GII 2024 framework
and that the GII has a balanced structure at each aggregation level. Furthermore, in this
edition of the index, the JRC-COIN found robust evidence of insufficient influence on the GII
framework only for two of the 78 indicators (5.3.4 FDI net inflows and 6.2.1 Labor productivity
growth) – that is, each of these two indicators explains less than 9 percent of countries’
variation in their respective sub-pillar scores.6 Thus, the JRC-COIN recommends investigating
potential alternatives for these two indicators. These alternatives could capture the same or
similar underlying concept that is currently captured by 5.3.4 FDI net inflows and 6.2.1 Labor
productivity growth, but would be correlated with economies’ innovation levels as measured by
their Input and Output Sub-Indices and the GII. The changes made to indicators by the GII team
for the 2024 edition resulted in adequate or good statistical coherence in terms of correlations
between indicators and their correlation with aggregates. This demonstrates that the GII team
has continued dedication to improving the statistical soundness of the GII.
Global Innovation Index 2024

6 An indicator can explain 9 percent of the economy’s variation in the GII sub-pillar scores if the Pearson correlation
coefficient between the two series is 0.3.
$SSHQGL[7DEOH6WDWLVWLFDOFRKHUHQFHLQWKH*,,FRUUHODWLRQVEHWZHHQVXESLOODUV 263
and pillars

Pillars

Human Knowledge
Market Business
Insti- capital Infra- and Creative
Sub-pillar sophist- sophis-
tutions and structure technology outputs
ication tication
research outputs

1.1 Institutional
0.96 0.75 0.8 0.64 0.78 0.67 0.69
environment

1.2 Regulatory
0.94 0.79 0.81 0.67 0.82 0.72 0.74
environment

1.3 Business
0.81 0.38 0.41 0.33 0.47 0.34 0.29
environment

2.1 Education 0.54 0.8 0.63 0.58 0.64 0.6 0.62

2.2 Tertiary
0.55 0.81 0.64 0.58 0.58 0.56 0.59
education

2.3 Research and

development 0.69 0.89 0.74 0.8 0.91 0.9 0.84
(R&D)

3.1 Information
and
communication 0.69 0.8 0.89 0.72 0.73 0.71 0.78
technologies
(ICTs)

3.2 General
0.64 0.58 0.74 0.51 0.58 0.55 0.5
infrastructure

3.3 Ecological
0.37 0.4 0.66 0.37 0.49 0.5 0.47
sustainability

4.1 Credit 0.58 0.68 0.6 0.85 0.65 0.62 0.66

4.2 Investment 0.58 0.61 0.51 0.8 0.66 0.62 0.64

4.3 Trade,
diversification, 0.41 0.67 0.67 0.75 0.63 0.7 0.68
and market scale

5.1 Knowledge
0.66 0.86 0.77 0.71 0.93 0.83 0.8
workers

5.2 Innovation
0.82 0.78 0.7 0.73 0.9 0.81 0.76
linkages

5.3 Knowledge

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre ( JRC) statistical audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index
0.61 0.72 0.69 0.68 0.89 0.8 0.78
absorption

6.1 Knowledge
0.6 0.83 0.68 0.72 0.86 0.91 0.82
creation

6.2 Knowledge
0.6 0.72 0.68 0.74 0.77 0.88 0.73
impact

6.3 Knowledge
0.55 0.73 0.73 0.66 0.78 0.91 0.76
diffusion

7.1 Intangible
0.45 0.67 0.61 0.66 0.67 0.7 0.91
assets

7.2 Creative
goods and 0.66 0.73 0.74 0.71 0.82 0.79 0.8
services

7.3 Online
0.69 0.8 0.74 0.7 0.83 0.79 0.81
creativity

Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.

 264 Added value of the GII

High statistical association between the components of a composite index could be interpreted
by some as a sign of redundancy of information within the composite index. For the case of the
GII, the Input and Output Sub-Indices correlate strongly with each other and with the overall
GII, while the five pillars in the Input Sub-Index have a very high statistical reliability. However,
the tests conducted by the JRC-COIN confirm that this high statistical reliability does not result in
redundancy of information. In particular, a country’s GII ranking differs from that in any of the
seven pillars by 10 positions or more at least 39 percent (up to 70 percent) of the 133 economies
included in the GII 2024 (Appendix Table 3). This serves as a demonstration of the added
value of the GII ranking, which helps to highlight other aspects of innovation within individual
countries that are not immediately apparent from analysis of the seven pillars individually. It
also highlights the usefulness of taking due account of the information contained in each of
the GII pillars, sub-pillars and indicators individually. By doing so, economy-specific strengths
and bottlenecks in terms of innovation can be identified and serve as a basis for evidence-
based policymaking.

$SSHQGL[7DEOH'LVWULEXWLRQRIGLIIHUHQFHVEHWZHHQSLOODUDQG*,,UDQNLQJV

Innovation Output
Innovation Input Sub-Index Sub-Index

Knowledge
Human Market Business and
Rank Insti- capital and Infra- sophist- sophist- technology Creative
differences tutions research structure ication ication outputs outputs
(positions) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

More than
21.8 8.3 8.3 9.8 7.5 4.5 3.8
30
20–29 21.1 13.5 14.3 11.3 9.0 8.3 6.8
10–19 27.1 24.1 30.1 32.3 24.8 26.3 29.3
10 or more* 70.0 45.9 52.7 53.4 41.3 39.1 39.9
5–9 13.5 24.1 23.3 21.1 21.1 24.1 29.3
Less than 5 13.5 28.6 21.8 22.6 32.3 30.8 27.8
Same rank 3.0 1.5 2.3 3.0 5.3 6.0 3.0
Total** 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Spearman
rank
correlation 0.79 0.92 0.87 0.86 0.95 0.94 0.94
coefficient
with the GII

Notes: * This row is the sum of the previous three rows. ** This row is the sum of all white rows.
Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.

6WHS4XDOLWDWLYHUHYLHZ

Lastly, JRC-COIN evaluated the GII results – in particular, the overall economy classifications
and relative performances in terms of the Innovation Input or Output Sub-Indices – with the
aim to verify that the overall results are robust with respect to the modeling assumptions made
during the construction of the GII. Robustness is a powerful characteristic for a composite
index as it verifies its reliability as a monitoring framework of the underlying phenomenon
that is being measured. Overall, the results in this section verify the robustness of GII with
respect to modeling assumptions and its reliability as a monitoring framework for innovation
performance. Notwithstanding these positive results, the structure of the GII model is, and
Global Innovation Index 2024

has to remain, open to future improvements which may be needed as better data, more
comprehensive surveys and assessments, and new, relevant research studies become available.
The impact of modeling assumptions on the GII results 265

An important part of the GII statistical audit is to check the effect of varying assumptions
within plausible ranges. Modeling assumptions with a direct impact on GII scores and rankings
relate to:

– the underlying structure selected for the index based on pillars;

– the choice of individual variables to be used as indicators;
– decisions regarding whether (and how) to impute missing data;
– decisions regarding whether (and how) to treat outliers;
– the selection of the normalization formula to be used;
– the choice of aggregation weights for indicators and their aggregates; and
– the aggregation rule to be used at each different level of the index structure.

The rationale for the choices made by the GII developers regarding each of these issues is well-
grounded: for instance, expert opinion coupled with statistical analysis informs the selection
of the individual indicators; common practice and easier interpretation suggest the use of a
minimum–maximum normalization approach in the [0–100] range; statistical analysis guides the
treatment of outliers; while simplicity and parsimony criteria advocate for the developers’ choice
for not imputing missing data. The uncertainty that naturally stems from the above-mentioned
modeling choices is accounted for in the robustness assessment carried out by the JRC-COIN. In
particular, the methodology applied allows for the joint and simultaneous analysis of the impact
of such choices on the aggregate scores. The analysis carried out by JRC-COIN supplements
the GII 2024 individual economy rankings with confidence intervals, to better appreciate the
robustness of these ranks to the modeling choices.

As suggested by the relevant literature on composite indicators,7 the robustness assessment

is based on Monte Carlo simulation and multi-modeling approaches, applied to the “error-free”
data where potential outliers, errors and typos have already been corrected at a preliminary
stage. In particular, the three key modeling issues considered in the assessment of the GII were
the treatment of missing data, the aggregation weights applied to pillars and the aggregation
formula used at the pillar level.

The Monte Carlo simulation comprised 5,000 runs of different sets of weights for the seven GII
pillars. Weights were assigned to the pillars based on random perturbations centered on the
reference values. The ranges of simulated weights were defined by considering both the need
for a wide enough interval to allow for meaningful robustness checks and the need to respect
the underlying principle of the GII that the Input and the Output Sub-Indices should be placed
on an equal footing. As a result of these considerations, the limit values of uncertainty for the
five input pillars are between 10 and 30 percent, whereas the limit values for the two output

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre ( JRC) statistical audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index
pillars are between 40 and 60 percent (Appendix Table 4).

7 See Saisana, Saltelli and Tarantola (2005); Vertesy and Deiss (2016); Vertesy (2011); Saisana, Hombres and Saltelli
(2011); Montalto et al. (2019).
 266 $SSHQGL[7DEOH8QFHUWDLQW\SDUDPHWHUVPLVVLQJYDOXHVDJJUHJDWLRQDQGZHLJKWV

Reference Alternative(s)

I. Uncertainty in the treatment of

No estimation of missing data Expectation–maximization (EM)
missing values

k-nearest neighbour imputation (kNN, k=

5)

II. Uncertainty in the aggregation

Arithmetic average +ISQIXVMGEZIVEKIɸ
formula at pillar level

III. Uncertainty intervals for the GII

pillar weights

Distribution assigned for robustness

Pillar Reference value for the weight
analysis

Institutions 0.2 U[0.1,0.3]

Human capital and research 0.2 U[0.1,0.3]

Infrastructure 0.2 U[0.1,0.3]

Market sophistication 0.2 U[0.1,0.3]

Business sophistication 0.2 U[0.1,0.3]

Knowledge and technology outputs 0.5 U[0.4,0.6]

Creative outputs 0.5 U[0.4,0.6]

Note: The R package mice was used to create an imputed data set for the uncertainty analysis.
Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.

For transparency and replicability purposes, the GII team has always opted not to estimate
missing data. In the cases where missing data exist, the score of the aggregate containing the
missing value is based on the other elements of the aggregate for which values are observed.
This “no imputation” choice is common in similar contexts and is usually selected to improve
transparency and avoid any methodological black box in the imputation of data. Technically, this
constitutes a form of “shadow” imputation (for example, in an arithmetic average it is equivalent
to replacing the missing value with the arithmetic average of the elements for which values
are observed). Hence, the available data (indicators) in the incomplete pillar may dominate,
sometimes biasing the ranks up or down. To test the impact of not imputing missing values,
the JRC-COIN estimated missing data using two different data imputation approaches: (a) the
expectation–maximization (EM) algorithm and (b) the nearest neighbor (k-NN) approach (using
the five nearest neighbors). Both these were applied within each GII pillar and then compared to
the no-imputation approach (see Appendix Table 6).8

Regarding the aggregation formula, decision-theory practitioners challenge the use of simple
arithmetic averages because of their fully compensatory nature, where a country’s high
comparative advantage on a few indicators can compensate for its comparative disadvantage
on many other indicators (Munda, 2008). To assess the impact of this modeling choice the
JRC-COIN considered the geometric average as an alternative to the arithmetic average. The
geometric average is a partially compensatory approach that rewards economies with balanced

8 The expectation–maximization (EM) algorithm (Little and Rubin, 2002; Schneider, 2001) is an iterative procedure that
finds the maximum likelihood estimates of the parameter vector by repeating two steps: (a) The expectation step
(E-step): given a set of parameter estimates, such as a mean vector and covariance matrix for a multivariate normal
Global Innovation Index 2024

distribution, the E-step calculates the conditional expectation of the complete-data log likelihood, given the observed
data and the parameter estimates. (b) The maximization step (M-step): given a complete-data log likelihood, the
M-step finds the parameter estimates to maximize the complete-data log likelihood from the E-step. The two steps
are iterated until the iterations converge. The k-nearest neighbor approach replaces a missing value for a country
A with the average of the values observed for the same indicator in k (which in this case equal to five) other sample
countries which are identified as country A’s “nearest neighbors”, in the sense that their performance in the other
indicators is similar to that of country A. This involves 2 steps: (a) estimating measure of distance between country A
and all other sample countries (e.g., the Euclidean distance) based on the indicators for which country A has observed
data and selecting the k countries with the smaller distance to country A, and (b) obtaining the average of the
indicator values for the selected countries and using it to fill the missing value for country A.
profiles and motivates economies to improve in the GII pillars in which they perform poorly, and 267
not just in any GII pillar.9

Six models were tested based on the combination of no imputation versus EM or k-NN
imputation and arithmetic versus geometric average. A random combination of these
choices plus a random set of perturbed weights were used in a total of 5,000 simulations
for the GII and each of the two sub-indices (see Appendix Table 4 for a summary of the
uncertainties considered).

Uncertainty analysis results

The main results of the robustness analysis are shown in Appendix Figure 1, with median ranks
and 90 percent confidence intervals computed across the 5,000 Monte Carlo simulations for
the GII and the two sub-indices. Economies are in ascending order (best to worst performing)
according to their reference rank (black line), with the dot representing the median rank over
the simulations.

$SSHQGL[)LJXUH5REXVWQHVVDQDO\VLVRIWKH*,,,QSXWDQG2XWSXW
6XE,QGLFHV

D *,,UDQNVPHGLDQUDQNVDQGSHUFHQWFRQILGHQFHLQWHUYDOV

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Switzerland Japan New Zealand Qatar Colombia Jordan Belarus Nepal Uganda Angola

GII Rank Median Rank

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre ( JRC) statistical audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index
Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.

9 In the geometric average, pillars are multiplied as opposed to summed in the arithmetic average. Pillar weights
appear as exponents in the multiplication. All pillar scores were greater than zero, hence there was no reason to
rescale them to avoid zero values that would have led to zero geometric averages.
 268 E ,QSXWUDQNVPHGLDQUDQNVDQGSHUFHQWFRQILGHQFHLQWHUYDOV

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Singapore Ireland Hungary Bahrain Costa Rica Mexico Cambodia Benin Nigeria Ethiopia

GII Input rank Median Rank

Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.

F 2XWSXWUDQNVPHGLDQUDQNVDQGSHUFHQWFRQILGHQFHLQWHUYDOV

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Switzerland Israel Malta Slovenia Brazil South Africa Peru Albania Namibia Angola

GII Input rank Median Rank

Notes: Median ranks and intervals are calculated over 5,000 simulated scenarios combining simulated weights,
imputation (based on EM or k-NN) versus no imputation of missing values, and geometric versus arithmetic average at the
pillar level. The Spearman rank correlation between the median rank and the GII 2024 rank is 0.998; between the median
rank and the Innovation Input 2024 rank is 0.997; and between the median rank and the Innovation Output 2024 rank
is 0.995.
Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.

All published GII 2024 ranks lie within the simulated 90 percent confidence intervals and for
most economies these intervals are sufficiently narrow to allow meaningful inferences to be
drawn: For 72 of the 133 economies the width of the 90% GII rank confidence interval is less
than 10 positions in rank, while this holds for 94 of the 133 economies in the case of the Input
Sub-Index and for 96 economies in the case of the Output Sub-Index. However, it is also true
that a few economies experience significant changes in rank with variations in weights and
aggregation formula and when imputing missing data. Five economies – Qatar, Madagascar, the
Islamic Republic of Iran, Barbados and Brunei Darussalam – have 90 percent confidence interval
widths of more than 20 positions (21, 23, 24, 29 and 35 positions, respectively). Consequently,
Global Innovation Index 2024

their rankings (49th, 110th, 64th, 77th and 88th) in the GII classification should be interpreted
cautiously and not taken at face value. However, this is a remarkable improvement compared
to GII versions up to 2016, when more than 40 economies had confidence interval widths of
more than 20 positions. The improvement in the confidence that can be placed in the GII 2024
ranking is the direct result of the decision to adopt a more stringent criterion for an economy’s
inclusion since 2016, which now requires at least 66 percent data availability within each of the
WZRVXELQGLFHVb
In a similar fashion, some caution is also warranted with regards to the ranking of four 269
economies (Belarus, Iran, Bolivia and Cabo Verde) for the Input sub-index, for which the
90 percent confidence interval has a width of more than 20 positions (22, 27, 31, and 34). A
similar degree of caution is needed in the Output sub-index for three economies – Guatemala,
Barbados, and Ghana – which have 90 percent confidence interval widths of more than 20
positions (up to 31 for Ghana). The higher data availability in the Output sub-index in the latest
GII editions has contributed to reducing the number of countries with very wide intervals
compared to previous editions (e.g., the GII 2019 edition in which there were 13 countries with
confidence intervals wider than 20 positions).

Although the rankings for a few economies in the GII or in the two sub-indices appear to be
sensitive to methodological choices, the published rankings for the vast majority of the 133
countries included in the 2024 GII can be considered as representative of the plurality of
scenarios simulated in this audit. Taking the median rank as the benchmark for an economy’s
expected rank in the realm of the GII’s unavoidable methodological uncertainties, 81 percent of
the economies are found to shift fewer than three positions with respect to the median rank in
the GII; the percentage for the Input and the Output Sub-Indices is similarly large (at 78 and 76
percent respectively).

In order to offer full transparency and complete information, Appendix Table 5 reports the
GII 2024 Index and Input and Output Sub-Indices’ economy ranks together with the simulated
90 percent confidence intervals to allow a better appreciation of the robustness of the results
to the choice of weights and aggregation formula and the impact of estimating missing data
(where applicable).

Appendix Table 5 GII 2024 and Input/Output Sub-Indices: rankings and 90 percent
confidence intervals
GII 2024 Input Sub-Index Output Sub-Index

Rank Interval Rank Interval Rank Interval

Switzerland 1 1, 1 2 1, 3 1 1, 1

Sweden 2 2, 3 3 2, 3 2 2, 4

United States 3 2, 5 4 4, 5 5 4, 7

Singapore 4 3, 8 1 1, 3 11 10, 12

United Kingdom 5 4, 7 10 7, 11 3 3, 5

Republic of
6 3, 6 6 6, 7 4 4, 6
Korea

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre ( JRC) statistical audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index
Finland 7 5, 9 5 4, 5 9 9, 10

Netherlands 8 7, 10 11 10, 12 8 7, 8

Germany 9 8, 10 13 13, 14 6 6, 7

Denmark 10 10, 11 7 6, 9 12 11, 12

China 11 6, 12 23 18, 24 7 2, 8

France 12 11, 13 17 14, 18 10 9, 11

Japan 13 12, 13 12 10, 12 14 13, 14

Canada 14 14, 17 8 7, 9 20 20, 22

Israel 15 14, 17 22 18, 23 13 13, 14

Estonia 16 14, 18 14 13, 19 16 15, 18

Austria 17 16, 19 20 17, 22 19 18, 20

Hong Kong,
18 14, 26 9 8, 11 31 21, 35
China SAR

Ireland 19 16, 21 25 25, 26 15 15, 18

Luxembourg 20 18, 24 24 21, 25 21 18, 24

Norway 21 19, 23 16 14, 20 26 25, 30

Iceland 22 20, 24 15 14, 17 29 25, 30

Notes: Median ranks and intervals are calculated over 5,000 simulated scenarios combining simulated weights,
imputation (based on EM or k-NN) versus no imputation of missing values, and geometric versus arithmetic average at the
pillar level.
Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.
 270 Appendix Table 5 Continued

GII 2024 Input Sub-Index Output Sub-Index

Rank Interval Rank Interval Rank Interval

Australia 23 21, 26 18 14, 18 30 27, 33

Belgium 24 19, 25 26 23, 26 22 21, 26

New Zealand 25 25, 31 21 20, 24 34 34, 38

Italy 26 23, 29 34 33, 34 18 15, 18

Cyprus 27 25, 30 35 35, 36 17 16, 20

Spain 28 26, 29 29 28, 30 23 22, 24

Malta 29 26, 31 27 27, 28 25 24, 30

Czech Republic 30 23, 31 32 28, 34 24 16, 25

Portugal 31 29, 32 31 29, 32 27 26, 29

United Arab
32 30, 37 19 19, 23 50 49, 53
Emirates

Malaysia 33 33, 37 28 27, 32 41 40, 42

Slovenia 34 32, 36 33 32, 33 37 35, 40

Lithuania 35 34, 39 30 29, 34 42 40, 43

Hungary 36 32, 38 37 35, 37 35 33, 36

Türkiye 37 32, 39 51 45, 53 28 27, 31

Bulgaria 38 35, 39 50 47, 51 32 30, 32

India 39 35, 40 44 40, 46 33 32, 33

Poland 40 39, 42 45 39, 47 38 35, 38

Thailand 41 40, 45 41 39, 46 39 37, 41

Latvia 42 39, 45 38 37, 39 46 40, 48

Croatia 43 41, 45 42 40, 46 40 40, 43

Viet Nam 44 42, 45 53 48, 53 36 35, 39

Greece 45 42, 46 43 40, 46 43 42, 46

Slovakia 46 43, 47 52 49, 54 44 36, 45

Saudi Arabia 47 46, 54 36 35, 38 66 65, 73

Romania 48 47, 49 57 52, 57 45 45, 49

Qatar 49 48, 69 39 38, 45 71 69, 79

Brazil 50 47, 52 58 53, 61 49 48, 51

Chile 51 49, 52 46 42, 46 58 58, 59

Serbia 52 49, 65 47 44, 55 60 58, 71

Philippines 53 49, 56 67 63, 68 53 49, 56

Indonesia 54 53, 63 54 48, 56 67 66, 72

Mauritius 55 52, 72 40 40, 50 79 76, 81

Mexico 56 51, 60 73 66, 74 52 51, 55

Georgia 57 52, 65 48 47, 54 73 65, 73

North
58 56, 69 60 57, 61 63 61, 71
Macedonia

Russian
59 53, 69 76 72, 77 56 54, 58
Federation

Ukraine 60 49, 65 78 72, 79 54 44, 56

Global Innovation Index 2024

Colombia 61 58, 68 65 61, 67 62 61, 66

Uruguay 62 52, 71 56 51, 64 75 61, 75

Armenia 63 56, 67 79 78, 82 55 50, 55

Iran (Islamic
64 56, 80 85 82, 109 48 45, 49
Republic of)

Montenegro 65 56, 68 62 56, 68 72 59, 72

Appendix Table 5 Continued 271

GII 2024 Input Sub-Index Output Sub-Index

Rank Interval Rank Interval Rank Interval

Morocco 66 57, 71 89 82, 90 47 45, 54

Mongolia 67 58, 74 84 80, 89 51 50, 58

Republic of
68 56, 69 80 74, 80 57 55, 57
Moldova

South Africa 69 63, 71 75 68, 75 61 60, 67

Costa Rica 70 59, 72 61 59, 65 76 61, 76

Kuwait 71 67, 77 70 68, 77 68 67, 74

Bahrain 72 64, 83 49 48, 59 93 88, 94

Jordan 73 68, 74 69 60, 70 74 73, 77

Oman 74 72, 81 59 58, 65 86 83, 90

Peru 75 73, 81 63 59, 66 85 83, 90

Argentina 76 69, 81 92 81, 94 59 58, 66

Barbados 77 52, 81 77 60, 80 77 55, 79

Kazakhstan 78 77, 82 72 68, 73 83 82, 90

Jamaica 79 72, 85 91 77, 93 65 61, 77

Bosnia and
80 76, 88 74 70, 80 84 82, 90
Herzegovina

Tunisia 81 73, 84 96 83, 98 64 63, 71

Panama 82 80, 88 83 81, 86 78 77, 85

Uzbekistan 83 73, 86 71 68, 74 91 76, 93

Albania 84 79, 88 66 64, 74 97 92, 97

Belarus 85 71, 89 102 85, 107 69 58, 74

Egypt 86 82, 88 95 85, 95 80 75, 81

Botswana 87 86, 105 64 63, 75 110 110, 129

Brunei
88 76, 111 55 49, 64 123 109, 123
Darussalam

Sri Lanka 89 85, 92 100 89, 102 82 79, 88

Cabo Verde 90 88, 104 68 67, 101 113 102, 113

Pakistan 91 85, 99 116 105, 116 70 68, 80

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre ( JRC) statistical audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index
Senegal 92 86, 98 90 86, 93 95 81, 100

Paraguay 93 88, 101 98 93, 99 90 82, 101

Lebanon 94 87, 99 101 95, 104 88 80, 90

Azerbaijan 95 87, 98 82 77, 88 101 94, 107

Kenya 96 90, 101 105 96, 107 87 85, 91

Dominican
97 91, 101 94 85, 100 99 97, 106
Republic

El Salvador 98 91, 103 107 100, 108 89 87, 95

Kyrgyzstan 99 94, 104 86 82, 101 105 99, 105

Bolivia
(Plurinational 100 94, 113 88 83, 114 106 95, 113
State of)

Ghana 101 96, 115 108 101, 111 94 92, 123

Namibia 102 95, 105 87 83, 96 109 104, 110

Cambodia 103 94, 105 97 94, 103 103 97, 104

Rwanda 104 94, 112 81 81, 96 116 100, 116

Ecuador 105 95, 106 104 98, 106 100 92, 100

Bangladesh 106 97, 112 114 112, 121 92 90, 100

 272 Appendix Table 5 Continued

GII 2024 Input Sub-Index Output Sub-Index

Rank Interval Rank Interval Rank Interval

Tajikistan 107 95, 110 106 101, 116 104 91, 109

Trinidad and
108 101, 116 93 84, 104 119 116, 120
Tobago

Nepal 109 104, 112 110 109, 115 102 96, 108

Madagascar 110 102, 125 129 128, 132 81 80, 98

Lao People's
Democratic 111 106, 116 99 94, 108 121 113, 121
Republic

Côte d'Ivoire 112 109, 123 111 103, 116 107 106, 126

Nigeria 113 106, 123 121 115, 123 98 98, 116

Honduras 114 106, 115 112 108, 117 111 103, 112

Algeria 115 106, 124 113 109, 123 115 106, 120

Zambia 116 112, 127 103 98, 108 131 121, 132

Togo 117 109, 119 122 108, 122 108 108, 112

Zimbabwe 118 109, 123 131 122, 131 96 94, 106

Benin 119 115, 125 109 105, 114 125 125, 131

United Republic
120 116, 127 115 115, 122 118 118, 130
of Tanzania

Uganda 121 116, 123 119 117, 124 117 115, 122

Guatemala 122 106, 123 117 113, 118 122 99, 122

Cameroon 123 118, 125 120 114, 123 120 117, 125

Nicaragua 124 120, 128 118 113, 129 126 113, 128

Myanmar 125 115, 128 128 123, 130 114 102, 114

Mauritania 126 122, 132 125 118, 127 127 125, 133

Burundi 127 124, 131 124 120, 130 128 125, 131

Mozambique 128 126, 132 123 120, 128 129 129, 133

Burkina Faso 129 125, 130 127 124, 130 124 124, 128

Ethiopia 130 124, 131 133 131, 133 112 107, 120

Mali 131 125, 133 126 123, 126 132 122, 133

Niger 132 124, 132 130 122, 131 130 122, 132

Angola 133 131, 133 132 132, 133 133 130, 133

Notes: Median ranks and intervals are calculated over 5,000 simulated scenarios combining simulated weights, imputation
(based on EM or k-NN) versus no imputation of missing values, and geometric versus arithmetic average at the pillar level.
Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.

Sensitivity analysis results

Complementary to the uncertainty analysis, sensitivity analysis has been used to identify which
of the modeling assumptions have the greatest impact on certain country rankings. Appendix
Table 6 summarizes the impact of changes in the imputation method (EM or k-NN imputation)
and/or the aggregation formula (geometric aggregation), keeping the aggregation weights fixed
at their reference values (as in the nominal GII). Similar to the results of previous audits, neither
the GII nor the Input or Output Sub-Indices are found to be heavily influenced by the imputation
Global Innovation Index 2024

of missing data, or by the aggregation formula. In the case of the Input Sub-Index, there exists
a group of three economies, Bolivia, Cabo Verde and the Islamic Republic of Iran – that shift rank
by more than 20 positions when a different imputation method is used (EM or k-NN instead of
no imputation). For Bolivia and Cabo Verde, this can be, at least in part, attributed to their large
share of missing data for the Input Sub-Index, as data are available for less than 72 percent of
the Input Sub-Index indicators for these economies. The Islamic Republic of Iran on the other
hand has a better data availability (86 percent). The choice of the imputation method appears
to also be crucial for the ranking of two other countries in the case of the Output Sub-Index, 273
namely Ghana and Côte d'Ivoire. For these countries, missing data account for 16 and 12 percent
of the Output Sub-Index indicators.

Overall, the analysis carried out by JRC-COIN verifies that the rankings of the 2024 GII are
reliable and, for most economies, the simulated 90 percent confidence intervals are narrow
enough to allow meaningful inferences to be drawn for their relative performance. There are a
few countries that appear to be sensitive to the way missing values are treated, most of which
have a rather large share of missing data. It is however suggested that the readers of the GII
2024 report consider an economy’s ranking in the GII 2024 and in the Input and Output Sub-
Indices not only at face value, but also within the 90 percent confidence intervals, in order to
better appreciate the degree to which an economy’s rank depends on modeling choices.

These confidence intervals also have to be taken into account when comparing economy rank
changes from one year to the next at the GII or Innovation Sub-Index level in order to avoid
drawing erroneous conclusions about an economy’s rise or fall in the overall classifications.
Since 2016, following the JRC-COIN recommendation in past GII audits, the developers’ decision
to apply the 66 percent indicator coverage threshold separately to the Input and Output Sub-
Indices in the GII has led to a net increase in the reliability of economy rankings for both the
GII and the two sub-indices. Furthermore, the adoption in 2017 of less stringent criteria for
skewness and kurtosis (greater than 2.25 in absolute value and greater than 3.5, respectively)
has not introduced any bias into the estimates.

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre ( JRC) statistical audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index
 274 $SSHQGL[7DEOH6HQVLWLYLW\DQDO\VLVLPSDFWRIPRGHOLQJFKRLFHVRQFRXQWULHVZLWKWKH
PRVWVHQVLWLYHUDQNLQJV

Number of countries that:

Spearman
rank improve
Index correlation improve between deteriorate deteriorate
or Uncertainty between by more 10 and by more between
Sub- tested (pillar the two than 20 20 than 20 10 and 20
Index level only) series positions positions positions positions

Geometric vs.
GII 0.995 0 0 0 2
arithmetic average

EM imputation vs.
no imputation of 0.991 1 2 0 1
missing data

k-NN imputation vs.

no imputation of 0.995 0 1 0 2
missing data

Geometric average
and EM imputation
vs. arithmetic
0.989 1 4 0 2
average and no
imputation of
missing data

Geometric average
and k-NN
imputation vs.
0.992 0 2 0 6
arithmetic average
and no imputation
of missing data

Input
Geometric vs.
Sub- 0.996 0 0 0 1
arithmetic average
Index

EM imputation vs.
no imputation of 0.991 0 2 3* 1
missing data

k-NN imputation vs.

no imputation of 0.990 0 3 3* 1
missing data

Geometric average
and EM imputation
vs. arithmetic
0.990 0 2 3* 2
average and no
imputation of
missing data

Geometric average
and k-NN
imputation vs.
0.988 0 5 3* 1
arithmetic average
and no imputation
of missing data

Output
Geometric vs.
Sub- 0.999 0 0 0 0
arithmetic average
Index

EM imputation vs.
no imputation of 0.980 1 14 1** 6
missing data

k-NN imputation vs.

no imputation of 0.988 0 8 1** 3
missing data

Geometric average
and EM imputation
vs. arithmetic
0.980 2 11 2*** 7
average and no
imputation of
missing data
Global Innovation Index 2024

Geometric average
and k-NN
imputation vs.
0.986 0 7 1** 5
arithmetic average
and no imputation
of missing data

Notes: EM is the expectation–maximization algorithm and k-NN is the k-nearest neighbor approach. * Bolivia, Cabo Verde
and the Islamic Republic of Iran. ** Ghana. *** Ghana and Côte d'Ivoire.
Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.
Best-practice frontier in the GII by data envelopment analysis 275

Is there a way to benchmark economies’ multidimensional performance on innovation without

imposing a fixed and common set of weights that may be unfair to a particular economy?

Several policy-related aspects of innovation activity at the national level entail an intricate
balance between global priorities or drivers and economy-specific strategies and challenges.
Comparing multidimensional performance on innovation by subjecting all economies to a
common set of weights may prevent acceptance of an innovation index on the grounds that
the selected weighting scheme may be unfair to a particular economy, in the sense that it does
not reflect its national priorities or the particular challenges that it may be facing vis-à-vis other
economies. An appealing feature of the data envelopment analysis (DEA) literature applied in
real decision-making settings is the determination of endogenous weights that maximize the
overall score of each decision-making unit given a set of other observations. In the absence
of a global consensus or strategy regarding the priorities of innovation activity, and with a
plethora of national innovation strategies taking place under the effect of various country-
specific factors, this approach appears as a reasonable alternative to that of common weights
across economies.

In this section, the assumption of fixed pillar weights common to all economies is relaxed once
more and, this time, economy-specific weights that maximize an economy’s global innovation
score are determined endogenously by means of the Benefit-of-the-Doubt (BoD) model, a
tailored DEA model that is suitable for the case of composite indicators construction.

A question that arises from the GII approach is whether there is a way to benchmark economies’
multidimensional performance on innovation without imposing a fixed and common set
of weights that might not be fair to a particular economy. The original question in the DEA
literature was how to measure each unit’s relative efficiency in production compared to a
sample of peers, given observations on input and output quantities and, often, no reliable
information on prices (Charnes and Cooper, 1985). A notable difference between the original
DEA question and the one applied in the BoD model and used here is that no differentiation
between inputs and outputs is made (Cherchye et al., 2008; Melyn and Moesen, 1991). Thus,
along the lines of Cook et al. (2014), the BoD model evaluates countries with respect to a
best-practice frontier formed by the countries with the relatively best achievements in the
considered Pillars, rather than an efficiency frontier formed by the countries that transform
inputs to outputs in the most efficient way. To estimate DEA-BoD-based distance to the best-
practice frontier scores, we consider the m = 7 pillars in the GII 2024 for n = 133 economies, with
yLMWKHYDOXHRISLOODUbj in economy i. The objective is to combine the pillar scores per economy
into a single number, calculated as the weighted average of the m pillars, where wj represents
WKHZHLJKWRIWKHbj-th pillar. In the absence of reliable information about the true weights, the

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre ( JRC) statistical audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index
weights that maximize the DEA-BoD-based scores are endogenously determined. This gives the
following linear programming problem for each economy i:

(bounding constraint), subject towij * 0, where, j = 1,…,7, i = 1,…,133 (non-negativity constraint).In

this basic programming problem, the weights are non-negative and an economy’s score is
between 0 (worst) and 1 (best). The programming problem used to calculate the DEA-BoD socres
in this audit included also the restrictions:0.2 * (wij*yLM ů wij*yij) * 0.05, j = 1,…,7
(contribution restrictions).

,QWKHRU\HDFKHFRQRP\LVIUHHWRGHFLGHRQWKHUHODWLYHbweight of each innovation pillar to

its score, so as to achieve the best possible score in a computation that reflects its innovation
strategy. In practice, the DEA-BoD method assigns a higher (lower) weightto those pillars in
which an economy is relatively strong (weak). Reasonable constraints are applied to the weights
to preclude the possibility of an economy achieving a perfect score by assigning a zero weight
 276 to weak pillars: for each economy, the share of each pillar score (i.e., the pillar score multiplied
by the DEA-BoD weight over the total score) has lower and upper bounds of 5 percent and
20 percent, respectively. The DEA-BoD score is then measured as the weighted average of all
seven innovation pillar scores, where the weights are the economy-specific DEA-BoD weights,
compared to the best performance among all other economies with those same weights. The
DEA-BoD score can be interpreted as a measure of the “distance to the best-practice frontier.”

Appendix Table 7 presents pie shares and DEA scores for the top 25 economies in the GII
2024 alongside their respective GII 2024 rankings. All pie shares are in accordance with the
starting point of granting leeway to each economy when assigning shares, while not violating
the (relative) upper and lower bounds. In this year, Switzerland, Sweden and Singapore are
the only economies to obtain a perfect DEA-BoD score of 1.00, indicating that they define the
best-practice frontier (in the 2023 GII, the United States was a frontier economy as well). The
United States (0.98), the Republic of Korea (0.95) and Finland (0.95) follow in terms of relative
performance, very close to the best-practice frontier.

The contribution of the seven pillars to the performance score is quite diverse across the top-25
economies, reflecting the likely different priorities within national innovation strategies. These
pie shares can also be seen to reflect different economies’ comparative advantage in certain
GII pillars vis-à-vis all other economies and all pillars. For example, China, France and Japan,
obtain the same performance score (0.87) but China allocates 20 percent of its DEA score to
the Knowledge and technology outputs pillar and 7 percent in the Creative outputs pillar, while
quite the opposite holds for France (5 and 20 percent respectively). On the other hand, Japan
allocates 5 percent of its DEA-BoD score to both Output pillars, while it allocates between 12 and
20 percent to the five Input pillars. In addition, the Business Sophistication pillar contributes 20
percent of China and Japan’s performance score while only 10 percent of France’s, while Human
capital and Research accounts for 18 to 20 percent in the case of France and Japan but 8 percent
in the case of China. Appendix Figure 2 shows how close the DEA scores and the GII 2024 scores
are for all 133 economies (Pearson correlation of 0.995).10
Global Innovation Index 2024

10 For one country (Mali) the DEA-BoD score is lower than the (rescaled) GII score because the restrictions appended in
the DEA-BoD model to restrict the contribution of each of the seven pillars to no less than 5 percent and no more than
20 percent result in the country selecting a set of aggregation weights that is less favorable compared to the nominal
GII weights.
$SSHQGL[7DEOHD3LHVKDUHV DEVROXWHWHUPV DQGHIILFLHQF\VFRUHVIRUWKHWRS*,, 277
HFRQRPLHVLQSXWSLOODUV

 
  
    

     
           

     

      

       

  
      


    


      

  
    
  

! "    # 

$%      

&     

' (     

&%  )   

*   )   

      

+  
    
&% 
,

-      

.      

,     

$ (     

,      

.     

.     

/0      

1     

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre ( JRC) statistical audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index
$2      
 278 $SSHQGL[7DEOHE3LHVKDUHV DEVROXWHWHUPV DQGHIILFLHQF\VFRUHVIRUWKHWRS*,,
HFRQRPLHVRXWSXWSLOODUV

   
    
      "  
          # !!
    !!    

     

       

        

  
       

 
    " 
!

#     " $ 

  
   $  
!  %

& % '      

()  "     

*      

+% ,      

*)  $ $   

-    $  

#    $   

. ! 
     
*) 
/

0     " "

1     $  

/     $ 

( ,      

/       

1      

1      

23%   $   

4%   $  

(5    $  

Notes: Pie shares are in absolute terms, bounded by 0.05 and 0.20 for all seven innovation pillars. In the GII 2024 ranking,
however, each of the five input pillars has a fixed weight of 0.10 while each of the two output pillars has a fixed weight of
0.25. Darker colors represent a higher contribution by those pillars to the overall DEA score, as a result of a country’s
stronger performance in those pillars, which may help to provide evidence for economy-specific strategies. Countries are
ordered according to the DEA-BoD ranking. For countries with a DEA-BoD score equal to 1, there usually exist multiple
alternative sets of pillar weights resulting in the same score (i.e., 1). The pillar shares depicted in this table for the first
three countries (Switzerland, Sweden and Singapore) were derived based on one of these alternative sets of weights.
Different sets of pillar weights for these countries may arise from the use of different software for solving the DEA linear
program, all of which, however, correspond to a DEA efficient frontier score of 1.
Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.
Global Innovation Index 2024
$SSHQGL[)LJXUH*,,VFRUHVDQG'($ȉGLVWDQFHWRWKHEHVWSUDFWLFHIURQWLHUȊVFRUHV 279

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0
Switzerland China Lithuania Croatia Mexico Bahrain Lebanon Trinidad and Tobago Mali

GII (rescaled) DEA-based GII rank

Notes: For comparison purposes, the GII scores were rescaled by dividing them by the result of the best performer in the
overall GII 2024 (Switzerland).
Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2024.

Conclusion

The JRC-COIN analysis suggests that the conceptualized multilevel structure of the GII 2024 –
with its 78 indicators, 21 sub-pillars, seven pillars and two sub-indices comprising the overall
index – is statistically sound and balanced: that is, each sub-pillar makes a similar contribution
to the variation of its respective pillar. The refinements made by the developing team over the
years have helped to enhance the already strong statistical coherence within the GII framework,
in which the capacity of the 78 indicators to distinguish between economies’ performances is
maintained at the sub-pillar level or lower in all but two cases.

The decision not to impute missing values, which is common in comparable contexts and
justified on the grounds of transparency and replicability, can at times have an undesirable
impact on some economies’ scores, with the additional negative side-effect that it might
encourage economies not to report low data values. The GII team’s adoption, in 2016, of a more
stringent data coverage threshold (at least 66 percent data availability for each of the input- and
output-related indicators) has notably improved confidence in the economy ranking for the GII
and the two sub-indices. Moreover, the results of the analysis carried out by JRC-COIN suggest

Appendix II - Joint Research Centre ( JRC) statistical audit of the 2024 Global Innovation Index
that the developer’s decision not to impute missing values has a notable impact in the rankings
of only a very small set of countries and only for the case of the Input or the Output Sub-Indices.

Additionally, the GII team’s decision, in 2012, to use weights as scaling coefficients during index
development constitutes a significant departure from the traditional, yet erroneous, vision of
weights as a reflection of indicators’ importance in a weighted average. It is hoped that such an
approach will be adopted by other developers of composite indicators to avoid situations where
bias sneaks in when least expected.

The JRC-COIN analysis also verified that the strong correlations observed between the GII
components do not result in a redundancy of information within the GII. For more than 39
percent (up to 70 percent) of the 133 economies included in the GII 2024, the GII ranking and
the rankings of any of the seven pillars differ by 10 positions or more. This demonstrates the
added value of the GII ranking, which helps to highlight other components of innovation not
immediately apparent from a separate analysis of each pillar. At the same time, this finding
points to the value of paying particular attention to the GII pillars, sub-pillars and their
constituent indicators individually. By doing so, economy-specific strengths and bottlenecks in
innovation can be identified and serve as an input for evidence-based policymaking.

All published GII 2024 rankings lie within the simulated 90 percent confidence intervals that
take into consideration the unavoidable uncertainties inherent in an estimation of missing
 280 data, the weights (fixed vs. simulated) and the aggregation formula (arithmetic vs. geometric
average) at the pillar level. For the majority of economies, such intervals are narrow enough for
meaningful inferences to be drawn: the intervals comprise 10 or fewer positions for 72 out of the
133 considered economies. The GII rankings of five countries – Qatar, Madagascar, the Islamic
Republic of Iran, Barbados and Brunei Darussalam – should however be interpreted with some
caution, as they appear to be highly sensitive to the methodological choices. The Input and
Output Sub-Indices have the same modest degree of sensitivity to the methodological choices
relating to the imputation method, weights or aggregation formula. Economy ranks, either
in the GII 2024 or in the two sub-indices, can be considered to be representative of the many
possible scenarios: 81 percent of the economies shift fewer than three positions with respect to
the median rank within the GII, 78 percent within the Input Sub-Index and 76 percent within the
Output Sub-Index.

All things considered, the present JRC-COIN audit findings confirm that the GII 2024 meets
international quality standards for statistical soundness, which indicates that it is a reliable
benchmarking tool for innovation practices at the economy level around the world.

Finally, the “distance to the best-practice frontier” measure, calculated using data envelopment
analysis, can be used as a suitable alternative approach to benchmarking economies’
multidimensional performance on innovation, without imposing a fixed and common set of
weights that may be unfair to a particular economy. The results of this analysis are very closely
correlated with the nominal GII ranking, while at the same time allowing economies to select
their best-possible pillar weights that better highlight their relative strengths and potential
national priorities.

The GII should not be considered as the ultimate and definitive ranking of economies with
respect to innovation. On the contrary, the GII best represents an ongoing attempt to find
metrics and approaches that capture the richness of innovation more effectively, continuously
adapting the GII framework to reflect the improved availability of statistics and the theoretical
advances in the field. In any case, the GII should be regarded as a sound attempt, based on the
principle of transparency, matured over 17 years of constant refinement, to pave the way for
better and more informed innovation policies worldwide.
Global Innovation Index 2024
Appendix III - Sources
and definitions

This appendix complements the economy profiles and the online data tables by providing
the title, description, definition and source for each of the 78 indicators included in the Global
Innovation Index (GII) this year.

For all 133 economies in the GII in 2024, the most recent values, within the period 2013 to 2024,
were used for each indicator.

The year provided next to the indicator description (directly below the indicator title)
corresponds to the year when data were most frequently available for economies. When more
than one year is considered, the period used is indicated at the end of the indicator’s source
in parentheses.

Of the 78 indicators, 63 variables are hard data, 10 are composite indicators, marked with an
asterisk (*), and five are survey questions from the World Economic Forum’s Executive Opinion
Survey (three) and from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor’s National Expert Survey (NES)
(two), marked with a dagger (†). Instances marked with a signal indicators that were assigned
half weights and those marked with b are indicators where higher scores indicate poorer
outcomes, commonly known as “bads.” Appendix I presents more details on the computation.

Some indicators are scaled during computation to make them comparable across economies.
Indicators are scaled either in relation to other comparable indicators or through division
by gross domestic product (GDP) in current US dollars, purchasing power parity GDP in
international dollars (PPP$ GDP), population, total trade, etc. In all cases, the scaling factor used
was the value that corresponded to the same year of the indicator.

1. Institutions

1.1. Institutional environment

1.1.1 Operational stability for businesses*

3ROLWLFDOOHJDORSHUDWLRQDORUVHFXULW\ULVNLQGH[ b | 2023

Index that measures the likelihood and severity of political, legal, operational or security risks
affecting business operations. Scores are annualized, standardized and aggregated for end Q1,
Q2, Q3 and Q4.

Source: S&P Global, Market Intelligence, Country Risk Dataset (www.marketplace.spglobal.com/

en/datasets/country-risk-(255)). Data year: 2023.

281
 282 1.1.2 Government effectiveness*

*RYHUQPHQWHIIHFWLYHQHVVLQGH[ _

Index that reflects perceptions of the quality of public services, the quality of the civil service
and the degree of its independence from political pressures, the quality of policy formulation
and implementation, and the credibility of the government's commitment to such policies.
Scores are standardized.

Source: World Bank, Worldwide Governance Indicators (www.govindicators.org). Data

year: 2022.

5HJXODWRU\HQYLURQPHQW

b5HJXODWRU\TXDOLW\

5HJXODWRU\TXDOLW\LQGH[ a | 2022

Index that reflects perceptions of the ability of the government to formulate and implement
sound policies and regulations that permit and promote private-sector development. Scores
are standardized.

Source: World Bank, Worldwide Governance Indicators (www.govindicators.org). Data

year: 2022.

1.2.2 Rule of law*

5XOHRIODZLQGH[ a | 2022

Index that reflects perceptions of the extent to which agents have confidence in and abide by
the rules of society, and in particular the quality of contract enforcement, property rights, the
police and the courts, as well as the likelihood of crime and violence. Scores are standardized.

Source: World Bank, Worldwide Governance Indicators (www.govindicators.org). Data

year: 2022.

%XVLQHVVHQYLURQPHQW

1.3.1 Policy stability for doing business†

7KHH[WHQWWRZKLFKJRYHUQPHQWVHQVXUHDVWDEOHSROLF\HQYLURQPHQWIRUGRLQJEXVLQHVV†
| 2023

Average answer to the survey question: In your country, to what extent does the government
ensure a stable policy environment for doing business? [1 = not at all; 7 = to a great extent].

Source: World Economic Forum, Executive Opinion Survey 2023: “Government ensuring policy
stability” indicator (EOSQ434) (www.weforum.org). Data years: 2015–2023.

1.3.2 Entrepreneurship policies and culture†

(QWUHSUHQHXUVKLSSROLFLHVDQGFXOWXUHLQGH[† | 2023

Average perception scores (five-year average) of experts on entrepreneurial policies and

Global Innovation Index 2024

entrepreneurial culture (Items B, C and I3 and I4 of the GEM National Expert Survey). Experts
in different fields (purposive sampling, minimum 36 experts per year) assess conditions for
entrepreneurship in their country via statements (0= completely false; 10 = completely true).
Country participation in GEM varies and therefore the number of experts and years on which
this item is based differs according to the country. To be eligible for inclusion in this indicator,
countries must have participated in the GEM survey starting from 2016 onwards. Participation in
surveys conducted before 2016 will result in exclusion from this indicator.
Source: Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), National Expert Survey (NES) (www. 283
gemconsortium.org/wiki/1142). Data years: 2016–2023.

2. Human capital and research

(GXFDWLRQ

b([SHQGLWXUHRQHGXFDWLRQ*'3

*RYHUQPHQWH[SHQGLWXUHRQHGXFDWLRQ RI*'3 _

Total general (local, regional and central) government expenditure on education (current, capital
and transfers), expressed as a percentage of GDP. It includes expenditure funded by transfers
from international sources to government.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org). Data
years: 2015–2023.

*RYHUQPHQWIXQGLQJSXSLOVHFRQGDU\*'3FDS

*RYHUQPHQWIXQGLQJSHUVHFRQGDU\SXSLO RI*'3SHUFDSLWD _

Average total (current, capital and transfers) general government expenditure per student, at
secondary level, expressed as a percentage of GDP per capita.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org). Data
years: 2014–2022.

6FKRROOLIHH[SHFWDQF\\HDUV

6FKRROOLIHH[SHFWDQF\SULPDU\WRWHUWLDU\HGXFDWLRQERWKVH[HV \HDUV _

Total number of years that a person of school entrance age can expect to spend within the
primary to tertiary levels of education. For a child of a given age, the school life expectancy
is calculated as the sum of the age-specific enrolment rates for primary to tertiary levels of
education. The part of the enrolment that is not distributed by age is divided by the school-
age population for the primary to tertiary level of education in which they are enrolled and
multiplied by the duration of that level of education. The result is then added to the sum of the
age-specific enrolment rates. A relatively high value indicates a greater probability of children
spending more years in education and a higher overall retention rate within the education
system. It must be noted that the expected number of years does not necessarily coincide with
the expected number of grades of education completed due to grade repetition.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org). Data
years: 2015–2023.

3,6$VFDOHVLQUHDGLQJPDWKVDQGVFLHQFH

3,6$VFDOHVLQUHDGLQJPDWKHPDWLFVDQGVFLHQFH_

PISA is the OECD's (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) Programme
Appendix III - Sources and definitions

for International Student Assessment. PISA measures 15-year-olds' ability to use their reading,
mathematics and science knowledge skills. Results from PISA indicate the quality and equity
of learning outcomes attained around the world. The 2022 PISA survey is the eighth round of
the triennial assessment. The indicator is built using the average of the reading, mathematics
and science scores for each country. PISA scores are set in relation to the variation in results
observed across all test participants in a country. There is, theoretically, no minimum or
maximum score in PISA; rather, the results are scaled to fit approximately normal distributions,
with means around 500 score points and standard deviations around 100 score points. China did
not participate in the 2022 PISA Survey. As a result, China’s scores correspond to their 2018 PISA
 284 results and are only based on the provinces/municipalities of Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and
Zhejiang. The 2022 scores for Azerbaijan correspond only to the capital Baku.

Source: OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) (www.oecd.org/pisa).

Data years: 2015–2022.

3XSLOȁWHDFKHUUDWLRVHFRQGDU\

3XSLOȁWHDFKHUUDWLRVHFRQGDU\b| 2022

The number of pupils enrolled in secondary school divided by the number of secondary
school teachers (regardless of their teaching assignment). Where the data are missing for the
secondary education level as a whole, the ratios for upper-secondary are reported; if these are
also missing, the ratios for lower-secondary are reported instead. A high pupil–teacher ratio
suggests that each teacher has to be responsible for a large number of pupils. In other words,
the higher the pupil–teacher ratio, the lower the relative access of pupils to teachers

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org). Data
years: 2014–2023.

7HUWLDU\HGXFDWLRQ

7HUWLDU\HQUROPHQWJURVV

6FKRROHQUROPHQWWHUWLDU\ JURVV _

The ratio of total tertiary enrolment, regardless of age, to the population of the age group that
officially corresponds to the tertiary level of education. Tertiary education, whether or not at an
advanced research qualification level, normally requires, as a minimum condition of admission,
the successful completion of education at the secondary level. The school enrolment ratio can
exceed 100 percent due to grade repetition and the inclusion of under-aged and over-aged
students, who are early or late entrants.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org). Data
years: 2015–2023.

*UDGXDWHVLQVFLHQFHDQGHQJLQHHULQJ

*UDGXDWHVIURPVFLHQFHWHFKQRORJ\HQJLQHHULQJDQGPDWKHPDWLFVSURJUDPV RIWRWDO
WHUWLDU\JUDGXDWHV _

The share of all tertiary-level graduates in natural sciences, mathematics, statistics, information
and technology, manufacturing, engineering and construction as a percentage of all tertiary-
level graduates.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org);

Eurostat database (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database); and OECD, Education at a
Glance (https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DatasetCode=RGRADSTY). Data years: 2015–2023.

7HUWLDU\LQERXQGPRELOLW\

7HUWLDU\LQERXQGPRELOLW\UDWH  _

The number of students from abroad studying in a given country as a percentage of the total
Global Innovation Index 2024

tertiary-level enrolment in that country.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org). Data
years: 2015–2023.
5HVHDUFKDQGGHYHORSPHQW 5 ' 285

5HVHDUFKHUV)7(PQSRS

5HVHDUFKHUVIXOOWLPHHTXLYDOHQW )7(  SHUPLOOLRQSRSXODWLRQ _

Researchers in R&D are professionals engaged in the conception or creation of new knowledge.
They conduct research and improve or develop concepts, theories, models, techniques,
instrumentation, software or operational methods.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org);

Eurostat database (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database); OECD, Main Science and
Technology Indicators (MSTI) database (https://data-explorer.oecd.org); and Ibero-American
and Inter-American Network of Science and Technology Indicators (RICYT) (www.ricyt.org/en).
Data years: 2014–2022.

*URVVH[SHQGLWXUHRQ5 '*'3

*URVVH[SHQGLWXUHRQ5 ' RI*'3 _

Gross expenditure on R&D (GERD) is the total domestic intramural expenditure on R&D during
a given period as a percentage of GDP. "Intramural R&D expenditure" is all expenditure for R&D
performed within a statistical unit or sector of the economy during a specific period, regardless
of the source of funding.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org);

Eurostat database (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database); OECD, Main Science and
Technology Indicators (MSTI) database (https://data-explorer.oecd.org); and Ibero-American
and Inter-American Network of Science and Technology Indicators (RICYT) (www.ricyt.org/en).
Data years: 2014–2022.

*OREDOFRUSRUDWH5 'LQYHVWRUVWRSPQ86'

$YHUDJHH[SHQGLWXUHRIDFRXQWU\ VWRSWKUHHJOREDOFRPSDQLHVRQ5 'PLOOLRQ86'_

Average expenditure on R&D of the top three global companies. If a country has fewer than
three global companies listed, the figure is either the average of the sum of the two companies
listed or the total for a single listed company. A score of 0 is given to countries with no listed
companies. The data include economies outside the European Union (EU).

Source: The 2023 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard (https://iri.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

scoreboard/2023-eu-industrial-rd-investment-scoreboard). Data year: 2023.

46XQLYHUVLW\UDQNLQJWRS

$YHUDJHVFRUHRIWKHWRSWKUHHXQLYHUVLWLHVDFFRUGLQJWRWKH46ZRUOGXQLYHUVLW\UDQNLQJ 
| 2023

Average score of the top three universities per country. If fewer than three universities are
listed in the QS ranking of the global top 1,000 universities, the sum of the scores of the listed
universities is divided by three, thus implying a score of zero for the non listed universities. The
2024 ranking corresponds to data published in June 2023. Note: the 2024 QS release included
Appendix III - Sources and definitions

a large methodological enhancement, with the addition of three new metrics: Sustainability,
Employment Outcomes and International Research Network.

Source: QS Quacquarelli Symonds Ltd, QS World University Rankings, Top Universities (www.
topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2024). Data year: 2023.
 286 3. Infrastructure

,QIRUPDWLRQDQGFRPPXQLFDWLRQWHFKQRORJLHV ,&7V

3.1.1 ICT access*

,&7DFFHVVLQGH[ _

The ICT access index is a composite index that assigns weights to three ICT indicators (33
percent each): (1) Individuals who own a mobile cellular telephone; (2) Households with Internet
access at home; and (3) Percentage of the population covered by mobile networks (at least
3G, at least LTE/WiMax). The ICT indicator (3) Percentage of the population covered by mobile
networks (at least 3G, at least LTE/WiMax) is calculated by assigning a weight of 40 percent
to Population covered by at least 3G and a weight of 60 percent to Population covered by at
least LTE/WiMax.

Source: WIPO (www.wipo.int); and WIPO based on ITU (https://datahub.itu.int). Data

years: 2021–2022.

b,&7XVH

,&7XVHLQGH[ _

The ICT use index is a composite index that assigns weights to five ICT indicators (20 percent
each): (1) Fixed-broadband Internet basket (% GNI per capita); (2) Fixed-broadband Internet
traffic (GB per subscription); (3) Mobile data and voice high-consumption basket (% GNI per
capita); (4) Mobile-broadband Internet traffic within the country (GB per subscription); and (5)
Active mobile-broadband subscriptions per 100 people.

Source: WIPO (www.wipo.int); and WIPO based on ITU (https://datahub.itu.int). Data year: 2022.

b*RYHUQPHQW VRQOLQHVHUYLFH

*RYHUQPHQWRQOLQHVHUYLFHLQGH[ _

The Online Service Index (OSI) is a component of the E-Government Development Index.
The OSI is a composite indicator that assesses how well governments use technology to
deliver public services at the national level. It is based on a survey of national websites and
e-government policies, with scores normalized to a range of 0 to 1. In the 2022 edition, the OSI
is now calculated based on five weighted sub-indices: services provision (45%), technology (5%),
institutional framework (10%), content provision (5%), and e-participation (35%), with the overall
score calculated from the normalized values of each sub-index.

Source: Division for Public Institutions and Digital Government (DPIDG) of the United Nations
Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA), E-Government Survey 2022 (https://
publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2022). Data
year: 2022.

b(SDUWLFLSDWLRQ

(3DUWLFLSDWLRQ,QGH[ _

The E-Participation Index (EPI) is a measure of citizen engagement in public policy making
through e-government programs. It's a supplement to the United Nations E-Government Survey
Global Innovation Index 2024

that assesses how well governments use online services to provide information, interact with
stakeholders, and engage in decision-making. Scores range from 0 to 1, with higher values
indicating greater e-participation. The index questions are periodically updated to reflect
changes in e-government trends and technologies. In the 2022 Survey, the e-participation
questions were further expanded to reflect current trends and modalities on how governments
engage their people in public policy-making, implementation and evaluation.
Source: Division for Public Institutions and Digital Government (DPIDG) of the United Nations 287
Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA), E-Government Survey 2022 (https://
publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2022). Data
year: 2022.

3.2 General infrastructure

b(OHFWULFLW\RXWSXW*:KPQSRS

(OHFWULFLW\RXWSXW *:KSHUPLOOLRQSRSXODWLRQ _

Electricity production, measured at the terminals of all alternator sets in a station. In addition
to hydropower, coal, oil, gas and nuclear power generation, this indicator covers generation by
geothermal, solar, wind, tide and wave energy, as well as that from combustible renewables and
waste. Production includes the output of plants that are designed to produce solely electricity
as well as the output of combined heat and power plants. Electricity output in GWh is scaled
by population.

Source: International Energy Agency (IEA) World Energy Balances, 2023 edition and 2024 edition
(Population) (www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-balances-overview). Data years: 2021–2022.

b/RJLVWLFVSHUIRUPDQFH

/RJLVWLFV3HUIRUPDQFH,QGH[ _

A multidimensional assessment of logistics performance, the 2023 Logistics Performance Index

(LPI) ranks 139 countries, combining data on six core performance components into a single
aggregate measure that includes customs performance, infrastructure quality and timeliness
of shipments. The data used in the ranking come from a survey of logistics professionals
who are asked questions about the foreign countries in which they operate. The LPI’s six
components are: (1) Customs: the efficiency of customs and border management clearance; (2)
Infrastructure: the quality of trade and transport infrastructure; (3) International shipments:
the ease of arranging competitively priced shipments; (4) Services quality: the competence and
quality of logistics services; (5) Tracking and tracing: the ability to track and trace consignments;
and (6) Timeliness: the frequency with which shipments reach consignees within scheduled or
expected delivery times.

Source: World Bank, Logistics Performance Index 2023 (https://lpi.worldbank.org); and World
Bank (2023) Connecting to Compete 2023: Trade Logistics in the Global Economy – The Logistics
Performance Index and its Indicators (https://lpi.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/2023-04/
LPI_2023_report_with_layout.pdf). Data year: 2023.

b*URVVFDSLWDOIRUPDWLRQ*'3

*URVVFDSLWDOIRUPDWLRQ RI*'3WKUHH\HDUDYHUDJH _

Gross capital formation is expressed as the ratio of total investment in current local currency
to GDP in current local currency. Investment or gross capital formation is measured by the
total value of the gross fixed capital formation and changes in inventories and acquisitions
less disposals of valuables for a unit or sector, on the basis of the System of National Accounts
(SNA) 1993.
Appendix III - Sources and definitions

Source: International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023 (www.
imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October). Data years: 2022–2023.
 288 (FRORJLFDOVXVWDLQDELOLW\

b*'3XQLWRIHQHUJ\XVH

*'3SHUWRWDOHQHUJ\VXSSO\ SHUWKRXVDQG333*'3 _

Purchasing power parity gross domestic product (2015 PPP$ GDP) per total energy supply (TES).
TES is made up of production + imports – exports – international marine bunkers – international
aviation bunkers +/– stock changes. GDP/TES is an indicator of energy productivity.

Source: International Energy Agency (IEA) World Energy Balances, 2023 edition (www.iea.org/
reports/world-energy-balances-overview). Data years: 2021–2022.

b/RZFDUERQHQHUJ\XVH

7KHVKDUHRIDFRXQWU\ȆVWRWDOSULPDU\HQHUJ\FRQVXPSWLRQWKDWLVIURPORZFDUERQLQWHQVLYH
sources | 2022

The low-carbon intensive energy share is calculated based on its share of a country’s total
primary energy consumption (expressed in petajoules). Primary energy is the energy available
in raw, unprocessed natural resources that serve as inputs into the energy system. It measures
total energy consumed before any significant efficiency losses due to converting it to secondary
energy (a transportable form) or final energy (delivered to the consumer). The full energy mix
is considered, comprising high-carbon intensive fossil fuel sources; oil, coal, and natural gas;
as well as low-carbon intensive sources; hydro, nuclear, wind, biomass, solar, geothermal, etc.
The calculation of total primary energy consumed by each country factors in energy that is
imported and consumed (as opposed to imported but transited to another country) and primary
energy that is produced but exported abroad to be consumed elsewhere. All energy sources are
expressed in petajoules. To allow low-carbon intensive primary energy sources to be compared
on a consistent basis with fossil fuels, the “fossil fuel equivalency” (or full/partial substitution)
methodology is used. This is because primary energy that goes into renewables such as wind
and solar is not recorded. This approach converts electrical output from non-combustible
renewable and nuclear energy sources into the equivalent primary energy inputs that would be
needed if the same quantity of electricity was to be generated using fossil fuels. Consequently,
non-fossil fuel electricity generation is divided by a “thermal efficiency factor”, which is an
assumed average efficiency of the global fossil-fueled power plant fleet. For 2022 data this was
40.7%. This factor changes over time as the composition of the global fossil fuel mix changes
and efficiency improvements in thermal power plants are made.

Source: The Energy Institute, Statistical Review of World Energy (www.energyinst.org/statistical-

review). Data year: 2022.

b,62HQYLURQPHQWEQ333*'3

,62(QYLURQPHQWDOPDQDJHPHQWV\VWHPVȁ1XPEHURIFHUWLILFDWHVLVVXHG SHUELOOLRQ
333*'3 _

ISO 14001 specifies the requirements for an environmental management system that an
organization can use to enhance its environmental performance. ISO 14001 is intended for use
by an organization that is seeking to manage its environmental responsibilities in a systematic
manner that contributes to the environmental pillar of sustainability. ISO 14001 helps an
organization to achieve the intended outcomes of its environmental management system,
providing value for the environment, the organization itself and interested parties. Consistent
with the organization's environmental policy, the intended outcomes of an environmental
Global Innovation Index 2024

management system include enhancement of environmental performance, fulfillment of

compliance obligations and achievement of environmental objectives. ISO 14001 is applicable
to any organization, regardless of size, type or nature, and applies to the environmental aspects
of its activities, products and services that the organization determines it can either control
or influence from a life cycle perspective. ISO 14001 does not state specific environmental
performance criteria. It can be used in whole or in part to systematically improve environmental
management. Claims of conformity to ISO 14001, however, are not acceptable unless all its
requirements are incorporated into an organization's environmental management system and 289
fulfilled without exclusion. The data are reported per billion PPP$ GDP.

Source: International Organization for Standardization, ISO Survey of Certifications to

Management System Standards, 2022 (www.iso.org/the-iso-survey.html); and International
Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023 (www.imf.org/en/
Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October). Data year: 2022.

4. Market sophistication

4.1 Credit

b)LQDQFHIRUVWDUWXSVDQGVFDOHXSV†

)LQDQFHIRUVWDUWXSVDQGVFDOHXSV† | 2023

Average perception scores (five-year average) of experts on finance for starting and growing
firms (item A1 of the GEM National Expert Survey). Experts in different fields (purposive
sampling, minimum 36 experts per year) assess conditions for entrepreneurship in their country
via statements (0=completely false; 10 = completely true). Country participation in GEM varies
and therefore the number of experts and years on which this item is based differs according to
the country. To be eligible for inclusion in this indicator, countries must have participated in the
GEM survey starting from 2016 onwards. Participation in surveys conducted before 2016 will be
excluded from this indicator.

Source: Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), National Expert Survey (NES) (www.
gemconsortium.org/wiki/1142). Data years: 2016–2023.

b'RPHVWLFFUHGLWWRSULYDWHVHFWRU*'3

'RPHVWLFFUHGLWWRSULYDWHVHFWRU RI*'3 _

Domestic credit to private sector refers to financial resources provided to the private sector
by financial corporations, such as through loans, purchases of non equity securities, and trade
credits and other accounts receivable, that establish a claim for repayment. For some countries,
these claims include credit to public enterprises. The financial corporations include monetary
authorities and deposit money banks, as well as other financial corporations where data are
available (including corporations that do not allow transferable deposits but do accept such
liabilities as time and savings deposits). Examples of other financial corporations are finance
and leasing companies, money lenders, insurance corporations, pension funds and foreign
exchange companies.

Source: International Monetary Fund, International Financial Statistics and data files (https://
data.imf.org); and World Bank and OECD GDP estimates, extracted from the World Bank's World
Development Indicators database (https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-
indicators). Data years: 2015–2022.

b/RDQVIURPPLFURILQDQFHLQVWLWXWLRQV*'3

/RDQVIURPDOOPLFURILQDQFHLQVWLWXWLRQV RI*'3 _

Appendix III - Sources and definitions

Outstanding loans from all microfinance institutions in a country as a percentage of its GDP.

Source: International Monetary Fund, Financial Access Survey (https://data.imf.

org/?sk=E5DCAB7E-A5CA-4892-A6EA-598B5463A34C). Data years: 2016–2022.
 290 4.2 Investment

b0DUNHWFDSLWDOL]DWLRQ*'3

0DUNHWFDSLWDOL]DWLRQRIOLVWHGGRPHVWLFFRPSDQLHV RI*'3WKUHH\HDUDYHUDJH _

Market capitalization (also known as "market value") is the share price times the number of
shares outstanding (including their several classes) for listed domestic companies. Investment
funds, unit trusts and companies whose only business goal is to hold shares of other listed
companies are excluded. Data are the average of the end of year values for the last three years.

Source: World Federation of Exchanges database (www.world-exchanges.org/our-work/

statistics); and extracted from the World Bank's World Development Indicators database
(https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators). Data years: 2014–2022.

b9HQWXUHFDSLWDO 9& LQYHVWRUVGHDOVEQ333*'3

1XPEHURIYHQWXUHFDSLWDOGHDOVLQYHVWHGLQ SHUELOOLRQ333*'3WKUHH\HDUDYHUDJH _

Refinitiv data on private equity deals, per deal, with information on the location of the firm
investing in a venture capital (VC) deal, among other details. The data extraction corresponds to
a query on VC deals between January 1, 2021, and December 31, 2023 with the data aggregated
by the location of the investing firm. The data represent the three-year average of 2021–23 deals
invested in and are reported per billion PPP$ GDP.

Source: Refinitiv (a London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG) business) Eikon (private equity
screener) accessed March 2024 (https://solutions.refinitiv.com/eikon-trading-software); and
International Monetary Fund World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023 (www.imf.org/
en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October). Data years: 2021–2023.

b9&UHFLSLHQWVGHDOVEQ333*'3

1XPEHURIYHQWXUHFDSLWDOGHDOVUHFHLYHG SHUELOOLRQ333*'3WKUHH\HDUDYHUDJH _

Refinitiv data on private equity deals, per deal, with information on the location of the firm
receiving the VC investment, among other details. The data extraction corresponds to a query
on VC deals between January 1, 2021 and December 31, 2023, with the data aggregated by the
location invested in. The data represent the three-year average of 2021–23 deals received and
are reported per billion PPP$ GDP.

Source: Refinitiv (an LSEG business) Eikon (private equity screener) accessed March 2024
(https://solutions.refinitiv.com/eikon-trading-software); and International Monetary Fund,
World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023 (www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-
database/2023/October). Data years: 2021–2023.

b9&UHFHLYHGYDOXH*'3

7RWDOYDOXHRIYHQWXUHFDSLWDOUHFHLYHG RI*'3WKUHH\HDUDYHUDJH _

Refinitiv data on the monetary value of private equity deals, per deal, with information on the
location of the firm receiving the VC investment, among other details. The data extraction
corresponds to a query on VC deals between January 1, 2021 and December 31, 2023, with
the data aggregated by the location invested in. The data represent the three year average of
reported deal value, in current USD (billions), received and are reported.
Global Innovation Index 2024

Source: Refinitiv (an LSEG business) Eikon (private equity screener) accessed March 2024 (https://
solutions.refinitiv.com/eikon-trading-software); and International Monetary Fund, World
Economic Outlook Database, October 2023 (www.imf.org/en/Publications/SPROLLs/world-
economic-outlook-databases). Data years: 2021–2023.
7UDGHGLYHUVLILFDWLRQDQGPDUNHWVFDOH 291

b$SSOLHGWDULIIUDWHZHLJKWHGDYJ

7DULIIUDWHDSSOLHGZHLJKWHGDYHUDJHDOOSURGXFWV  b | 2022

The Effectively applied tariff is the minimum tariff imposed by one country to another
representing the most advantageous tariff, encompassing all preferential trade agreements
and most-favoured-nation (MFN) tariffs, and weighted by the import values of the product and
country of origin pairings. All calculations have been conducted based on imported products
at the Harmonized System (HS) subheading level. Tariffs include both ad valorem duties and
ad valorem equivalents in the calculations. Any missing tariffs or Ad Valorem equivalents not
calculated at the subheading level have been omitted. The European Union (27) is treated as a
unified entity, thus intra-EU trade has been disregarded.

Source: World Trade Organization's Analytical database (www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/

tariffs_e/tariffs_e.htm). Data years: 2017–2022.

b'RPHVWLFLQGXVWU\GLYHUVLILFDWLRQ

'RPHVWLFLQGXVWU\GLYHUVLILFDWLRQ EDVHGRQPDQXIDFWXULQJRXWSXW b | 2021

The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) for the domestic industry is defined as the sum of the
squared shares of industries in total manufacturing output.

Source: United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Industrial Statistics

Database, two-digit level of the International Standard Industrial Classification (ISIC) Revision
3 (INDSTAT 2 2022), Enhancing the Quality of Industrial Policies (EQuIP) Tool 4: Diversification –
Domestic and Export Dimensions, 2015 (https://stat.unido.org). Data years: 2014–2022.

b'RPHVWLFPDUNHWVFDOHEQ333

'RPHVWLFPDUNHWVFDOHDVPHDVXUHGE\*'3EQ333_

The domestic market size is measured by GDP based on the PPP valuation of country GDP, in
current international dollars (billions).

Source: International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023 (www.
imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October). Data years: 2022–2023.

5. Business sophistication

.QRZOHGJHZRUNHUV

b.QRZOHGJHLQWHQVLYHHPSOR\PHQW

(PSOR\PHQWLQNQRZOHGJHLQWHQVLYHVHUYLFHV RIZRUNIRUFH\HDUVROG _

Sum of people in categories 1 to 3 as a percentage of total people employed, according to the

International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO). Categories included in ISCO 08 are:
1 Managers; 2 Professionals; 3 Technicians and Associate Professionals. Where ISCO 08 data
Appendix III - Sources and definitions

were not available, ISCO 88 data were used. Categories included in ISCO 88 are: 1 Legislators,
senior officials and managers; 2 Professionals; 3 Technicians and associate professionals.

Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), ILOSTAT Database of Labour Statistics (https://
ilostat.ilo.org). Data years: 2014–2023.
 292 b)LUPVRIIHULQJIRUPDOWUDLQLQJ

)LUPVRIIHULQJIRUPDOWUDLQLQJ RIILUPV _

The percentage of firms offering formal training programs for their permanent, full-time
employees in the sample of firms in the World Bank's Enterprise Survey in each country. Data for
Bangladesh, India, Iraq and Madagascar, published in 2022, and covering the COVID-19 period
are not being used after discussions with the Enterprise Survey World Bank staff.

Source: World Bank Enterprise Surveys (www.enterprisesurveys.org). Data years: 2013–2023.

b*(5'SHUIRUPHGE\EXVLQHVV*'3

*(5'SHUIRUPHGE\EXVLQHVVHQWHUSULVHV RI*'3 _

Gross expenditure on R&D performed by business enterprise as a percentage of GDP. For the
definition of GERD, see indicator 2.3.2.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org);

Eurostat database (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database); OECD, Main Science and
Technology Indicators (MSTI) database (https://data-explorer.oecd.org); and Ibero-American
and Inter-American Network of Science and Technology Indicators (RICYT) (www.ricyt.org/en).
Data years: 2014–2022.

b*(5'ILQDQFHGE\EXVLQHVV

*(5'ILQDQFHGE\EXVLQHVVHQWHUSULVHV RI*(5' _

Gross expenditure on R&D financed by business enterprise as a percentage of total gross

expenditure on R&D. For the definition of GERD, see indicator 2.3.2.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org);

Eurostat database (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database); OECD, Main Science and
Technology Indicators (MSTI) database (https://data-explorer.oecd.org); and Ibero-American
and Inter-American Network of Science and Technology Indicators (RICYT) (www.ricyt.org/en).
Data years: 2014–2023.

b)HPDOHVHPSOR\HGZDGYDQFHGGHJUHHV

)HPDOHVHPSOR\HGZLWKDGYDQFHGGHJUHHV WRWDOHPSOR\HG\HDUVROG _

The percentage of females employed with advanced degrees out of total employed. The
employed comprise all persons of working age who, during a specified brief period, were
in one of the following categories: (1) paid employment; or (2) self employment. Data are
disaggregated by level of education, which refers to the highest level of education completed,
classified according to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCE). Data for
Canada are based on Table 14 10 0020 01 of the country's Labour Force Survey estimates.

Source: International Labour Organization, ILOSTAT Database of Labour Statistics (https://

ilostat.ilo.org); and Statistics Canada, Table 14-10-0020-01 Unemployment rate, participation
rate and employment rate by educational attainment, annual (www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/
tv.action?pid=1410002001). Data years: 2014–2023.
Global Innovation Index 2024
,QQRYDWLRQOLQNDJHV 293

b3XEOLFUHVHDUFKȁLQGXVWU\FRSXEOLFDWLRQV

3XEOLFȁSULYDWHFRDXWKRUHGUHVHDUFKSXEOLFDWLRQV RIWRWDOUHVHDUFKSXEOLFDWLRQVILYH\HDU
DYHUDJH _

Public–private co-authored research publications as a percentage of all research publications.

Research publications are limited to the following four main fields of science: Biomedical and
health sciences, Life and earth sciences, Mathematics and computer science, and Physical
sciences and engineering. The definition of the "private sector" includes all for profit business
enterprises, covering all manufacturing and services sectors. This includes research institutes
and other corporate R&D laboratories that are fully funded or owned by for profit business
enterprises. Organizations in the private education sector and private healthcare sector
organizations (including hospitals and clinics) are not classified as private sector.

Source: Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Leiden University, based on Clarivate
Web of Science (www.cwts.nl). Data year: 2023.

b8QLYHUVLW\ȁLQGXVWU\5 'FROODERUDWLRQ†

7KHH[WHQWWRZKLFKEXVLQHVVHVDQGXQLYHUVLWLHVFROODERUDWHRQ5 '† | 2023

Average answer to the survey question: In your country, to what extent do businesses
and universities collaborate on research and development (R&D)? [1 = not at all; 7 = to a
great extent].

Source: World Economic Forum, Executive Opinion Survey 2023 (www.weforum.org). Data
years: 2014–2023.

b6WDWHRIFOXVWHUGHYHORSPHQW†

+RZZLGHVSUHDGFOXVWHUVDUH† | 2023

Average answer to the survey question: In your country, how widespread are well-developed
and deep clusters (geographic concentrations of firms, suppliers, producers of related products
and services, and specialized institutions in a particular field)? [1 = nonexistent; 7 = widespread
in many fields].

Source: World Economic Forum, Executive Opinion Survey 2023 (www.weforum.org). Data
years: 2015–2023.

b-RLQWYHQWXUHVWUDWHJLFDOOLDQFHGHDOVEQ333*'3

Number of joint venture/strategic alliance deals, fractional counting (per billion PPP$ GDP,
three-year average) | 2023

Refinitiv's data on joint ventures/strategic alliances, per deal, with details on the country of
origin of partner firms, among others. The data extraction corresponds to a query on joint
venture/strategic alliance deals between January 1, 2021 and December 31, 2023 The nation
of each company participating in a deal (n companies per deal) is allocated, per deal, a score
equivalent to 1/n (with the effect that all country scores add up to the total number of deals). The
Appendix III - Sources and definitions

data are reported per billion PPP$ GDP.

Source: Refinitiv (an LSEG business) SDC Platinum database (www.refinitiv.com/en/financial-

data/deals-data/joint-venture-deals); and International Monetary Fund World Economic Outlook
Database, October 2023 (www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October).
Data years: 2020–2023.
 294 b3DWHQWIDPLOLHVEQ333*'3

1XPEHURISDWHQWIDPLOLHVILOHGLQDWOHDVWWZRRIILFHV SHUELOOLRQ333*'3 _

A patent family is a set of interrelated patent applications filed in one or more countries or
jurisdictions to protect the same invention. Patent families containing applications filed in at
least two different offices is a subset of patent families where protection of the same invention
is sought in at least two different countries. In this report, "patent families data" refers to
patent families containing applications filed in at least two intellectual property (IP) offices;
the data are scaled by PPP$ GDP (billions). A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by law to
applicants for inventions that are new, non-obvious and industrially applicable. A patent is valid
for a limited period of time (generally 20 years) and within a defined territory. The patent system
is designed to encourage innovation by providing innovators with time-limited exclusive legal
rights, thus enabling them to reap the rewards of their innovative activity.

Source: World Intellectual Property Organization, Intellectual Property Statistics (www.wipo.int/

ipstats); and International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023
(www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October). Data year: 2020.

.QRZOHGJHDEVRUSWLRQ

b,QWHOOHFWXDOSURSHUW\SD\PHQWVWRWDOWUDGH

&KDUJHVIRUXVHRILQWHOOHFWXDOSURSHUW\LHSD\PHQWV RIWRWDOWUDGHWKUHH\HDUDYHUDJH 
| 2022

Charges for the use of intellectual property not included elsewhere, i.e., payments (% of total
trade), average of three most recent years or most recent year. Value is calculated according to
the Extended Balance of Payments Services Classification EBOPS 2010 that is, code SH: Charges
for the use of intellectual property not included elsewhere, as a percentage of total trade.
Total trade is defined as the sum of total imports of code G goods and code SOX commercial
services (excluding government goods and services not included elsewhere) plus total exports
of code G goods and code SOX commercial services (excluding government goods and services
not included elsewhere), divided by 2. According to the sixth edition of the International
Monetary Fund's Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual (BPM6),
the item "Goods" covers general merchandise, net exports of goods under merchanting and
non-monetary gold. The "commercial services" category is defined as being equal to "services"
minus "government goods and services not included elsewhere." Receipts are between
residents and non-residents for the use of proprietary rights (such as patents, trademarks,
copyrights, industrial processes and designs, including trade secrets and franchises), and
for licenses to reproduce or distribute (or both) intellectual property embodied in produced
originals or prototypes (such as copyrights on books and manuscripts, computer software,
cinematographic works and sound recordings) and related rights (such as for live performances
and television, cable or satellite broadcast).

Source: WTO | Statistics - Global Services Trade Data Hub. Trade in Services by Mode of Supply
dataset (www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/services_trade_data_hub_e.htm). Data year: 2022.

b+LJKWHFKLPSRUWVWRWDOWUDGH

+LJKWHFKLPSRUWV RIWRWDOWUDGH _

High-technology imports as a percentage of total trade. High-technology exports and imports

contain technical products with a high intensity of R&D, defined by the Eurostat classification,
Global Innovation Index 2024

which is based on Standard International Trade Classification (SITC) Revision 4 and the OECD
definition (see http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/Annexes/htec_esms_an5.pdf).
Commodities belong to the following sectors: aerospace; computers and office machines;
electronics and telecommunications; pharmacy; scientific instruments; electrical machinery;
chemistry; non-electrical machinery; and armament.
Source: United Nations Comtrade Database (http://comtrade.un.org); and World Trade 295
Organization and United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (https://stats.wto.org).
Data years: 2015–2022.

b,&7VHUYLFHVLPSRUWVWRWDOWUDGH

7HOHFRPPXQLFDWLRQVFRPSXWHUDQGLQIRUPDWLRQVHUYLFHVLPSRUWV RIWRWDOWUDGH _

Telecommunications, computer and information services imports as a percentage of total

trade according to the OECD's Extended Balance of Payments Services Classification EBOPS
2010, coded SI: Telecommunications, computer, and information services. Values are based
on the classification of the sixth (2009) edition of the International Monetary Fund's Balance of
Payments and International Investment Position Manual and Balance of Payments database. For
the definition of total trade, see indicator 5.3.1.

Source: WTO | Statistics - Global Services Trade Data Hub. Trade in Services by Mode of
Supply dataset (www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/services_trade_data_hub_e.htm). Data
years: 2021–2022.

b)',QHWLQIORZV*'3

)RUHLJQGLUHFWLQYHVWPHQW )', QHWLQIORZV RI*'3WKUHH\HDUDYHUDJH _

FDI net inflow is the average of the most recent three years of net inflows of investment to
acquire a lasting management interest (10 percent or more of voting stock) in an enterprise
operating in an economy other than that of the investor. It is the sum of equity capital,
reinvestment of earnings, other long-term capital, and short-term capital as shown in
the balance of payments. This data series shows net inflows (new investment inflows less
disinvestment) in the reporting economy from foreign investors, and is divided by GDP. Data
extracted from the World Bank's World Development Indicators database.

Source: International Monetary Fund, International Financial Statistics and Balance of Payments
databases (https://data.imf.org); World Bank, International Debt Statistics (www.worldbank.
org/en/programs/debt-statistics); and OECD GDP estimates (https://data.oecd.org). Data
years: 2021–2022.

b5HVHDUFKWDOHQWLQEXVLQHVVHV

5HVHDUFKHUVLQEXVLQHVVHQWHUSULVH  _

Researchers in the business enterprise sector, measured in full-time equivalence (FTE), refers
to researchers as professionals engaged in the conception or creation of new knowledge,
products, processes, methods and systems, as well as in the management of these projects,
broken down by the sectors in which they are employed (business enterprise, government,
higher education and private non-profit organizations). In the context of R&D statistics, the
business enterprise sector includes all firms, organizations and institutions whose primary
activity is the market production of goods or services (other than higher education) for sale
to the general public at an economically significant price, and the mainly private non-profit
institutions serving them; the core of this sector is made up of private enterprises.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) online database (http://data.uis.unesco.org);

Eurostat database (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database); OECD, Main Science and
Appendix III - Sources and definitions

Technology Indicators (MSTI) database (https://data-explorer.oecd.org); and Ibero-American

and Inter-American Network of Science and Technology Indicators (RICYT) (www.ricyt.org/en).
Data years: 2014–2022.
 296 6. Knowledge and technology outputs

.QRZOHGJHFUHDWLRQ

b3DWHQWVE\RULJLQEQ333*'3

1XPEHURIUHVLGHQWSDWHQWDSSOLFDWLRQVILOHGDWDJLYHQQDWLRQDORUUHJLRQDOSDWHQWRIILFH
SHUELOOLRQ333*'3 _

The definition of a patent can be found in the description of indicator 5.2.5. A resident patent
application refers to an application filed with an IP office for or on behalf of the first-named
applicant's country of residence. For example, an application filed with the Japan Patent
Office by a resident of Japan is to be considered a resident application for Japan. Similarly, an
application filed with the European Patent Office (EPO) by an applicant who resides in any of the
EPO member states (for example Germany) is considered to be a resident application for that
member state (Germany). Data are scaled by PPP$ GDP (billions).

Source: World Intellectual Property Organization, Intellectual Property Statistics (www.wipo.int/

ipstats); and International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023
(www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October). Data years: 2014–2022.

b3&7SDWHQWVE\RULJLQEQ333*'3

1XPEHURI3DWHQW&RRSHUDWLRQ7UHDW\ 3&7 DSSOLFDWLRQV SHUELOOLRQ333*'3 _

A PCT application refers to an international patent application filed through the WIPO-
administered Patent Cooperation Treaty. The PCT system makes it possible to seek patent
protection for an invention simultaneously in a number of countries by filing a single
international patent application. The origin of PCT applications is defined by the residence of the
first-named applicant. Data are available only for those economies which are PCT Contracting
States (157 to date). Data are scaled by PPP$ GDP (billions).

Source: World Intellectual Property Organization, Intellectual Property Statistics (www.wipo.int/

ipstats); and International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023
(www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October). Data years: 2022–2023.

b8WLOLW\PRGHOVE\RULJLQEQ333*'3

1XPEHURIUHVLGHQWXWLOLW\PRGHODSSOLFDWLRQVILOHGDWWKHQDWLRQDOSDWHQWRIILFH SHUELOOLRQ
333*'3 _

A utility model (UM) is a special form of patent right. The terms and conditions for granting a
UM are slightly different from those for patents and include a shorter term of protection and
less stringent patentability requirements. A resident UM application refers to an application
filed with an IP office for or on behalf of the first-named applicant's country of residence.
For example, an application filed with the IP office of Germany by a resident of Germany is
considered a resident application for Germany. Data are scaled by PPP$ GDP (billions).

Source: World Intellectual Property Organization, Intellectual Property Statistics (www.wipo.int/

ipstats); and International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023
(www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October). Data years: 2017–2022.

b6FLHQWLILFDQGWHFKQLFDODUWLFOHVEQ333*'3
Global Innovation Index 2024

1XPEHURIVFLHQWLILFDQGWHFKQLFDOMRXUQDODUWLFOHV SHUELOOLRQ333*'3 _

The number of articles published in the fields of science and technology. This encompasses 182
different research categories belonging to research areas including engineering, chemistry,
physics, environmental sciences, computer science, mathematics, biochemistry, molecular
biology, oncology, agriculture, cell biology and many more. Article counts are taken from a set of
journals covered by the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and the Social Sciences Citation
Index (SSCI). Articles are classified by year of publication and assigned to each economy on the 297
basis of the institutional address(es) listed in the article.

Articles are counted on a count basis (rather than a fractional basis) – that is, for articles with
collaborating institutions from multiple economies, each economy receives credit on the basis of
its participating institutions. The data are reported per billion PPP$ GDP.

Source: Clarivate, Web of Science, accessed April 17, 2024 (https://clarivate.com/

webofsciencegroup/solutions/web-of-science); and International Monetary Fund, World
Economic Outlook Database, October 2023 (www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-
database/2023/October). Data years: 2022–2023.

b&LWDEOHGRFXPHQWV+LQGH[

7KH+LQGH[LVWKHHFRQRP\ VQXPEHURISXEOLVKHGDUWLFOHV + WKDWKDYHUHFHLYHGDWOHDVW+

citations | 2023

The H-index expresses the journal's number of articles (H) that have received at least H citations.
It quantifies both journal scientific productivity and scientific impact, and is also applicable to
scientists, journals, and so on. The H-index is tabulated from the number of citations received
in subsequent years by articles published in a given year, divided by the number of articles
published that year.

Source: SCImago, SJR SCImago Journal & Country Rank, retrieved April 2024 (www.scimagojr.
com). Data year: 2023.

.QRZOHGJHLPSDFW

b/DERUSURGXFWLYLW\JURZWK

*URZWKUDWHRI*'3SHUSHUVRQHPSOR\HG ILYH\HDUDYHUDJH _

Growth rate of real GDP per person employed, average of five most recent available years
(2019–2023). Growth of GDP per person engaged provides a measure of labor productivity
(defined as output per unit of labor input). GDP per person employed is GDP divided by total
employment in the economy.

Source: The Conference Board Total Economy Database, April 2024 (www.conference-board.org/
data/economydatabase). Data years: 2021–2023.

b8QLFRUQYDOXDWLRQ*'3

&RPELQHGYDOXDWLRQRIDFRXQWU\ VXQLFRUQV RI*'3 _

Total valuation of all unicorns in a country as a percentage of GDP. A unicorn company is a

private company with a valuation over $1 billion. Unicorn companies as of March 20, 2024, with
1,229 unicorns worldwide.

Source: CBInsights, Tracker – The Complete list of Unicorn Companies (www.cbinsights.com/

research-unicorn-companies); and International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook
Database, October 2023 (www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October).
Data year: 2024.
Appendix III - Sources and definitions

b6RIWZDUHVSHQGLQJ*'3

7RWDOFRPSXWHUVRIWZDUHVSHQGLQJ RI*'3 _

Computer software spending includes the total value of purchased or leased packaged
software, such as operating systems, database systems, programming tools, utilities and
applications. It excludes expenditures for internal software development. The data are
 298 estimated based on software and services industry sales data. Data are reported as a
percentage of GDP.

Source: S&P Global, Market Intelligence (www.marketplace.spglobal.com/en/datasets). Data

year: 2023.

b+LJKWHFKPDQXIDFWXULQJ

+LJKWHFKDQGPHGLXPKLJKWHFKPDQXIDFWXULQJ RIWRWDOPDQXIDFWXULQJRXWSXW _

High technology and medium-high technology (MHT) output as a percentage of total

manufacturing output, on the basis of the OECD classification of Technology Intensity
Definition, itself based on International Standard Industrial Classification (ISIC) Rev.4 and Rev.3.

Source: United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Industrial Statistics

Database (INDSTAT) Rev.3 and 4 (https://stat.unido.org); OECD, Directorate for Science,

Technology and Industry, Economic Analysis and Statistics Division, “ISIC Rev. 3 Technology
Intensity Definition: Classification of Manufacturing Industries into Categories Based on R&D
Intensities” (https://one.oecd.org/document/OCDE/GD(97)216/en/pdf); Fernando Galindo-Rueda
and Fabien Verger (2016) “OECD Taxonomy of Economic Activities Based on R&D Intensity”
(www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/oecd-taxonomy-of-economic-activities-based-
on-r-d-intensity_5jlv73sqqp8r-en). Data years: 2014–2022.

.QRZOHGJHGLIIXVLRQ

,QWHOOHFWXDOSURSHUW\UHFHLSWVWRWDOWUDGH

&KDUJHVIRUXVHRILQWHOOHFWXDOSURSHUW\LHUHFHLSWV WRWDOWUDGHWKUHH\HDUDYHUDJH 
| 2022

Charges for the use of intellectual property not included elsewhere, i.e. receipts (% of total
trade), average of three most recent years or most recent year. Value is calculated according to
the Extended Balance of Payments Services Classification EBOPS 2010, that is, code SH: Charges
for the use of intellectual property not included elsewhere, as a percentage of total trade.
Receipts are between residents and non-residents for the use of proprietary rights (such as
patents, trademarks, copyrights, industrial processes and designs, including trade secrets and
franchises), and for licenses to reproduce or distribute (or both) intellectual property embodied
in produced originals or prototypes (such as copyrights on books and manuscripts, computer
software, cinematographic works and sound recordings) and related rights (such as for live
performances and television, cable, or satellite broadcast). Values are based on the classification
of the sixth (2009) edition of the International Monetary Fund's Balance of Payments and
International Investment Position Manual and Balance of Payments database. For the definition of
total trade, see indicator 5.3.1.

Source: WTO | Statistics – Global Services Trade Data Hub. Trade in Services by Mode of Supply
dataset (www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/services_trade_data_hub_e.htm). Data year: 2022.

b3URGXFWLRQDQGH[SRUWFRPSOH[LW\

7KH(FRQRPLF&RPSOH[LW\,QGH[_

The Economic Complexity Index is a ranking of countries based on the diversity and complexity
of their export basket. High-complexity countries are home to a range of sophisticated,
Global Innovation Index 2024

specialized capabilities and are therefore able to produce a highly diversified set of complex
products. Determining the economic complexity of a country is not solely dependent on a
country's productive knowledge. Information about how many capabilities the country has is
contained not only in the absolute number of products that it makes, but also in the ubiquity of
those products (the number of countries that import those products) and in the sophistication
and diversity of the products that those other countries make. Economic complexity expresses
the diversity and sophistication of the productive capabilities embedded in the exports of 299
each country.

Source: The Atlas of Economic Complexity, Growth Lab at Harvard University (https://atlas.cid.
harvard.edu). Data year: 2021.

b+LJKWHFKH[SRUWVWRWDOWUDGH

+LJKWHFKH[SRUWV RIWRWDOWUDGH _

High-technology exports as a percentage of total trade. See indicator 5.3.2 for details. Data for
Hong Kong, China are corrected for re-exports using data from the Trade Data Monitor.

Source: United Nations Comtrade Database (http://comtrade.un.org); World Trade Organization

and United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (https://stats.wto.org); and Trade
Data Monitor (www.tradedatamonitor.com). Data years: 2015–2022.

b,&7VHUYLFHVH[SRUWVWRWDOWUDGH

7HOHFRPPXQLFDWLRQVFRPSXWHUDQGLQIRUPDWLRQVHUYLFHVH[SRUWV RIWRWDOWUDGH _

Telecommunications, computer and information services exports as a percentage of total trade

according to the Extended Balance of Payments Services Classification EBOPS 2010, coded SI:
Telecommunications, computer, and information services. Values are based on the classification
of the sixth (2009) edition of the International Monetary Fund's Balance of Payments and
International Investment Position Manual and Balance of Payments database. For the definition of
total trade, see indicator 5.3.1.

Source: WTO | Statistics – Global Services Trade Data Hub. Trade in Services by Mode of Supply
dataset (www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/services_trade_data_hub_e.htm). Data year: 2022.

b,62TXDOLW\EQ333*'3

,624XDOLW\PDQDJHPHQWV\VWHPVȁQXPEHURIFHUWLILFDWHVLVVXHG SHUELOOLRQ333*'3 
| 2022

ISO 9001 specifies requirements for a quality management system when an organization
needs to demonstrate its ability to provide products and services that meet both customer and
applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. It aims to enhance customer satisfaction
through the effective application of the system, including processes for improving the system
and ensuring conformity to customer and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. All
the requirements of ISO 9001 are generic and are intended to be applicable to any organization,
regardless of its type or size, or the products and services it provides. The data are reported per
billion PPP$ GDP.

Source: International Organization for Standardization, ISO Survey of Certifications to

Management System Standards, 2022 (www.iso.org/the-iso-survey.html); and International
Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023 (www.imf.org/en/
Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October). Data year: 2022.
Appendix III - Sources and definitions
 300 7. Creative outputs

,QWDQJLEOHDVVHWV

b,QWDQJLEOHDVVHWLQWHQVLW\WRS

,QWDQJLEOHDVVHWYDOXHDVDSHUFHQWDJHRIWKHILUP VWRWDOYDOXHDYHUDJHRIWKHWRSILUPV
| 2023

The data cover a global list of firms for which intangible asset value and total firm value are
observed. Only the top 15 firms of each economy are considered, ranked by intangible assets in
absolute terms (in USD). Countries with fewer than 15 firms are not considered. For each firm,
the intangible asset value is divided by the firm's total value before computing the arithmetic
mean across the top 15 firms for each economy.

Source: Brand Finance Global Intangible Finance Tracker (https://brandirectory.com/reports/

gift-2023). Data years: 2022–2023.

b7UDGHPDUNVE\RULJLQEQ333*'3

1XPEHURIFODVVHVLQUHVLGHQWWUDGHPDUNDSSOLFDWLRQVLVVXHGDWDJLYHQQDWLRQDORUUHJLRQDO
RIILFH SHUELOOLRQ333*'3 _

A trademark is a sign used by the owner of certain products or provider of certain services to
distinguish them from the products or services of other companies. A trademark can consist of
words or a combination of words and other elements, such as slogans, names, logos, figures
and images, letters, numbers, sounds and moving images. The procedures for registering
trademarks are governed by the legislation and procedures of national and regional IP offices.
Trademark rights are limited to the jurisdiction of the IP office that registers the trademark.
Trademarks can be registered by filing an application at the relevant national or regional
office(s) or by filing an international application through the Madrid System. A resident
trademark application refers to an application filed with an IP office for or on behalf of the first-
named applicant's country of residence. For example, an application filed with the Japan Patent
Office by a resident of Japan is considered to be a resident application for Japan. Similarly, an
application filed with the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) by an applicant
who resides in any of the EU member states, such as France, is considered to be a resident
application for that member state (France). This indicator is based on class count – the total
number of goods and services classes specified in resident trademark applications. Data are
scaled by PPP$ GDP (billions).

Source: World Intellectual Property Organization, Intellectual Property Statistics (www.wipo.int/

ipstats); and International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023
(www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October). Data years: 2015–2022.

b*OREDOEUDQGYDOXHWRS*'3

*OREDOEUDQGYDOXHRIWKHWRSEUDQGV RI*'3 _

Sum of global brand values, top 5,000 as a percentage of GDP. Brand Finance calculates brand
value using the royalty relief methodology, which determines the value that a company would
be willing to pay to license its brand if it did not own it. The methodology is compliant with
industry standards set in ISO 10668. This approach involves estimating the future revenue
attributable to a brand and calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for the use of the
brand. Brand Finance's study is based on publicly available information on the largest brands in
Global Innovation Index 2024

the world. This indicator assesses the economy's brands in the top 5,000 global brand database
and produces the sum of the brand values corresponding to that economy. This sum is then
scaled by GDP. A score of 0 is assigned where there are no brands in the country that make
the top 5,000 ranking. A score of "n/a" is assigned where Brand Finance has been unable to
determine if there are brands from the country that would rank within the top 5,000 due to data
availability limitations.
Source: Brand Finance database (https://brandirectory.com); and International Monetary Fund, 301
World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023 (www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-
database/2023/October). Data year: 2024.

b,QGXVWULDOGHVLJQVE\RULJLQEQ333*'3

1XPEHURIGHVLJQVFRQWDLQHGLQUHVLGHQWLQGXVWULDOGHVLJQDSSOLFDWLRQVILOHGDWDJLYHQ
QDWLRQDORUUHJLRQDORIILFH SHUELOOLRQ333*'3 _

An industrial design is a set of exclusive rights granted by law to applicants to protect the
ornamental or aesthetic aspect of their products. An industrial design is valid for a limited
period of time and within a defined territory. A resident industrial design application refers to
an application filed with the IP office for or on behalf of the applicant's country of residence. For
example, an application filed with the Japan Patent Office by a resident of Japan is considered
to be a resident application for Japan. Similarly, an application filed with the Office for
Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) by an applicant who resides in any of the OHIM
member states, such as Italy, is considered to be a resident application for that member state
(Italy). This indicator is based on design count – the total number of designs contained in the
resident industrial design applications. Data are scaled by PPP$ GDP (billions).

Source: World Intellectual Property Organization, Intellectual Property Statistics (www.wipo.int/

ipstats); and International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023
(www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October). Data years: 2014–2022.

&UHDWLYHJRRGVDQGVHUYLFHV

b&XOWXUDODQGFUHDWLYHVHUYLFHVH[SRUWVWRWDOWUDGH

&XOWXUDODQGFUHDWLYHVHUYLFHVH[SRUWV RIWRWDOWUDGH _

Creative services exports as a percentage of total exports according to the Extended Balance
of Payments Services Classification EBOPS 2010 – that is, EBOPS code SI3: Information
services; code SJ22: Advertising, market research, and public opinion polling services; code
SK1: Audio-visual and related services; and code SK23: Heritage and recreational services as a
percentage of total trade. Values are based on the classification of the sixth (2009) edition of the
International Monetary Fund's Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual
and Balance of Payments database. See indicator 5.3.1 for the full definition of total trade.

Source: World Trade Organization Global Services Trade Data Hub, Trade in Services by Mode
of Supply dataset (www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/services_trade_data_hub_e.htm). Data
years: 2014–2022.

1DWLRQDOIHDWXUHILOPVPQSRSȁ

1XPEHURIQDWLRQDOIHDWXUHILOPVSURGXFHG SHUPLOOLRQSRSXODWLRQȁ\HDUVROG _

A feature film is defined as a film with a running time of 60 minutes or longer. It includes works
of fiction, animation and documentaries. It is intended for commercial exhibition in cinemas.
Feature films produced exclusively for television broadcasting, as well as newsreels and
advertising films, are excluded. Data are reported per million population aged 15–69 years old.

Source: OMDIA (https://omdia.tech.informa.com/products/cinema-and-movies-intelligence-

Appendix III - Sources and definitions

service); and United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division,
World Population Prospects 2024 (April 2024 update) (https://population.un.org/wpp). Data
years: 2015–2022.
 302 (QWHUWDLQPHQWDQGPHGLDPDUNHWWKSRSȁ

*OREDOWHOHFRPDQGHQWHUWDLQPHQW PHGLDRXWORRN SHUWKRXVDQGSRSXODWLRQȁ\HDUV

old) | 2023

The Global Telecom and Entertainment & Media Outlook is a comprehensive source of global
analyses and five-year forecasts of consumer and advertising spending across different
territories and entertainment and media segments. The figures for Algeria, Bahrain, the Islamic
Republic of Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Tunisia and Yemen
were estimated from a total corresponding to Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries
using a breakdown of total GDP (current USD) for the above-mentioned countries to define
referential percentages.

Source: PwC, Global Telecom and Entertainment and Media Outlook, 2023–2027 (www.pwc.
com/gx/en/industries/tmt/media/outlook.html); United Nations Department of Economic
and Social Affairs, Population Division, World Population Prospects 2024 (April 2024 update)
(https://population.un.org/wpp); and International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook
Database, October 2023 (www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October).
Data years: 2022–2023.

 &UHDWLYHJRRGVH[SRUWVWRWDOWUDGH

&UHDWLYHJRRGVH[SRUWV RIWRWDOWUDGH _

Total value of creative goods exports (current USD) over total trade. Creative goods exports
based on the 2009 UNESCO Framework for Cultural Statistics, Table 3, International trade of
cultural goods and services defined with the Harmonized System (HS) 2007 codes; World Trade
Organization and United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Trade in Commercial
Services database, itself based on the sixth (2009) edition of the International Monetary Fund's
Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual and Balance of Payments
database. For the definition of total trade, see indicator 5.3.1.

Source: United Nations Comtrade Database (http://comtrade.un.org); and World Trade

Organization and United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (https://stats.wto.org).
Data years: 2015–2022.

2QOLQHFUHDWLYLW\

b7RSOHYHOGRPDLQV 7/'V WKSRSȁ

*HQHULFWRSOHYHOGRPDLQV 7/'V DQGFRXQWU\FRGH7/'V SHUWKRXVDQGSRSXODWLRQȁ

\HDUVROG _

The sum of Generic top-level domains (TLDs) and country-code TLDs as a proportion of
thousand population, 15-69 years old. A top-level domain (TLD) encompasses various
categories maintained by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) for internet use.
Generic TLDs cover five generic domains (.biz, .info, .org, .net, and .com), excluding sponsored
domains such as .name or .pro, and all new generic TLDs. Country-code TLDs are assigned to
specific economies, countries, or territories and represent total domain registrations within
each country-code TLD, with exceptions for ccTLDs licensed for global commercial use. For
confidentiality reasons, only normalized values are reported; while relative positions are
preserved, magnitudes are not.

Source: ZookNIC Inc (www.zooknic.com); and United Nations, Department of Economic and
Global Innovation Index 2024

Social Affairs, Population Division, World Population Prospects 2024 (April 2024 update) (https://
population.un.org/wpp). Data years: 2021–2023.
b*LW+XEFRPPLWVPQSRSȁ 303

*LW+XEFRPPLWVSXVKHVUHFHLYHGDQGVHQW SHUPLOOLRQSRSXODWLRQȁ\HDUVROG _

GitHub is the world’s largest host of source code, and a commit is the term used for a change on
this platform. One or more commits can be saved (or pushed) to projects (or repositories). Thus,
“GitHub commit pushes received and sent” refers to the sum of the number of batched changes
received and sent by publicly-available projects on GitHub within a specific economy. Automated
activity resulting in non-productive commits are excluded.

Source: GitHub (https://github.com); and United Nations, Department of Economic and Social
Affairs, Population Division, World Population Prospects 2024 (April 2024 update) (https://
population.un.org/wpp). Data year: 2023.

b0RELOHDSSFUHDWLRQEQ333*'3

*OREDOGRZQORDGVRIPRELOHDSSV SHUELOOLRQ333*'3WZR\HDUDYHUDJH _

Global downloads of mobile apps, by origin of the headquarters of the developer/firm, scaled
by PPP$ GDP (billions). Global downloads are compiled by data.ia, public data sources and the
company's proprietary forecast model based on data from Google Play Store and iOS App Store
in each country. Since data for China are not available for Google Play Store and only for iOS App
Store, data from China are treated as missing and classified as "n/a."

Source: data.ia (a Sensor Tower company) (www.data.ai/en); and International Monetary Fund,
World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023 (www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-
database/2023/October). Data years: 2021–2023.

Appendix III - Sources and definitions

Appendix IV - Global Innovation
Index science and technology
cluster methodology

Since 2016, the Global Innovation Index (GII) has sought to identify science and technology
(S&T) clusters using a bottom-up approach. This approach disregards administrative or political
borders and instead pinpoints those geographical areas that show a high density of inventors
and scientific authors. The resulting clusters often encompass several municipal districts, sub-
federal states and sometimes even two or more countries. Two innovation metrics are employed
in the compilation of the top 100 GII S&T clusters worldwide: location of inventors listed on
published patent applications and authors listed on published scientific articles.

For patents, this method relies on applications under WIPO’s Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).
PCT patents offer a useful basis for analyzing patents globally. The PCT system applies a single
set of procedural rules and collects information based on uniform filing standards. This reduces
potential biases that could arise from using data collected from multiple national sources. The
patents selected were published over the most recent five-year period available, between 2019
and 2023, to minimize the effects of volatility that can occur between years.1

To widen the range of innovation included, scientific publications from the Web of Science’s
Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) are incorporated. The SCIE provides detailed coverage
of the world’s most impactful academic journals. For the analysis presented here, science
and technology fields are the focus, while articles from the fields of social sciences and
humanities are disregarded. In addition, scientific publications are limited solely to articles of
original research. This excludes other published items, such as meeting abstracts, conference
summaries or paper briefs. As with PCT filings, the most recent five-year period according to
data availability was also used for the SCIE – publication years 2018 to 2022.

The WIPO PCT patent data set consists of approximately 1.3 million patent applications
published between 2019 and 2023, containing 4.1 million inventor addresses. For the SCIE, the
data set comprises 7.9 million articles published between 2018 and 2022, containing 27 million
listed author addresses.

The process for geocoding of addresses for this report is as follows. PCT inventor addresses
were geocoded using the Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) ArcGIS World
Geocoder service.2 In cases where the ESRI address matches proved either ambiguous or
insufficiently accurate, the city name in the address string was extracted and matched using
records in the city-level data set from the GeoNames Gazetteer database. 3 This latter database
gives the geolocation of cities around the globe and contains 48,000 geocoded cities. If the
extracted city does not match any known city in the GeoNames database, we attempt to
geocode just the extracted city string using the World Geocoder service. This same city-
matching approach was applied to all SCIE author addresses.

1 In previous editions, PCT publications years were aligned with SCIE publication years, as SCIE data is available with a
one-year lag. Since 2023 we have used the “most recently available data” in order to more accurately reflect the most
recent innovation.
2 ESRI ArcGIS World Geocoder service: www.esri.com/en-us/arcgis/products/arcgis-world-geocoder.
304 3 GeoNames: http://geonames.org.
Overall, 98 percent of inventor addresses were geocoded at either the city level or a more 305
accurate level, while 99.6 percent of scientific author addresses were geocoded at the city level.
Appendix Table 10 provides a summary of the geocoding results for the top 20 countries, which
together account for the majority of inventor and scientific author addresses. As shown in the
table, the coverage of geocoded PCT inventor addresses across all 20 countries is above 99
percent. Similarly, coverage of scientific author addresses is also high, above 99% in all but one
instance. This marks an improvement in geocoding coverage as compared to previous years.
Two reasons account for this. First there was noticeable improvement in ESRI’s World Geocoder
service, especially in Japan and Republic of Korea. Second, we made a stronger effort to match
addresses that were previously not matched to any geocode through increased utilization of
(65,ȆVJHRFRGHUDQGPDQXDOJHRFRGLQJb

Addresses were clustered by applying the density-based spatial clustering of applications with
noise (DBSCAN) algorithm. This algorithm requires predefined radius and density parameters.
As in previous years, a radius of 15 km and a density of 4,500 listed inventors/authors was
applied. Equal weight was given to inventors and authors by expressing data points as a share of
total inventor and author addresses, respectively. Given that the number of scientific articles far
exceeds the number of patents, cluster identification based on the raw data points would have
resulted in clusters shaped predominantly by the scientific author landscape.

The result was an initial list of 242 clusters. After review, neighboring clusters were merged
if the edge of one cluster was within 3–5 km of another and where the co-author/co-inventor
relationships were higher than for any other relationship with any other cluster or non-cluster
points. A total of 20 clusters met these criteria, with mergers reducing the overall number of
clusters identified to 232.4

The remaining 232 clusters were then ranked by counting the number of patents and scientific
articles in a given cluster. Numbers were aggregated using fractional counting, in which counts
reflect the share of a patent’s inventors and an article’s authors present in a particular cluster. In
addition, mirroring the equal weighting approach described above, fractional counts are relative
to the total numbers of patents and scientific articles.

To produce an intensity ranking, the European Commission’s Global Human Settlement Layer
(GHSL) population distribution data were matched geographically to the top 100 clusters
LGHQWLILHGLQWKHRYHUDOOUDQNLQJb 6FKLDYLQDHWDO -XVWDVZLWKLQYHQWRUDXWKRUJHRFRGHG
locations, these population data allowed us to define the total population of a cluster using
a bottom up approach. We chose to define a cluster’s area as all the space within 0.05
degrees of each inventor/author location. Overlaying the resultant cluster polygons on top
of the population data and aggregating all points which lay within each polygon gave a total
population estimate for each cluster.5

Due to the increase in geocoding accuracy and coverage, it was necessary to rerun the
Appendix IV - Global Innovation Index science and technology cluster methodology
clustering process for last year’s S&T clusters. The above steps were repeated for PCT
publication years 2018–2022 and SCIE publication years 2017–2021 to form the 2023 clusters and
their corresponding rankings anew. These updated rankings are the basis for the “Rank Change”
indicators referred to in the section.

The African clusters were created using a process similar to that used for the overall clusters.
Inventor addresses and author affiliations were filtered to include only those within the African
continent. We selected the parameters for DBSCAN through multiple iterations, adjusting
distance and density values to minimize the number of points clustered that are at extreme
distances and maximize the number of points clustered that were close to each other. This
process resulted in a distance parameter of 15 km and a density parameter of 300 creating a
total of 50 clusters. The African clusters went through the same review process as the overall

4 The mergers involved the following clusters: Aurora with Chicago; Baltimore with Washington DC; Boulder with
Denver; Cheonan-si with Seoul; Irvine with Los Angeles; Jerusalem with Tel Aviv; Matsudo with Tokyo–Yokohama;
Rotterdam with Amsterdam; Wilmington with Philadelphia; Worcester with Boston–Cambridge, MA.
5 See Bergquist and Fink (2020: 61–63) for a more detailed description of how population data were matched to
clusters. The clusters were then ranked by dividing the total S&T share by population.
 306 clusters, where clusters near each other were checked if they met the merging criteria. No
clusters were merged

The same distance parameter of 15 km as in the overall clustering was preferred as to both
maintain consistency and because many data points are geocoded only at the city level, so a
relatively large radius is necessary to accommodate this level of geocoding accuracy. The lower
density parameter of 300 for the African clusters, compared to 4,500 for the overall clusters,
reflects the expected patent filing and publication rate from the African continent compared to
other regions.

$SSHQGL[7DEOH7RS6 7FOXVWHUV

Share Share
total of
PCT Scientific PCT total Rank
Cluster app- pub- filings, pubs, Previous change
Rank name Economy lications lications % % Total rank (a)

Tokyo–
1 JP 134,769 117,294 10.5 1.5 11.9 1 0
Yokohama

Shenzhen–
2 Hong Kong– CN / HK 116,411 175,364 9.0 2.2 11.2 2 0
Guangzhou

3 Beijing CN 42,490 308,561 3.3 3.9 7.2 4 1

4 Seoul KR 67,082 140,385 5.2 1.8 7.0 3 ຤

Shanghai–
5 CN 38,699 191,074 3.0 2.4 5.4 5 0
Suzhou

San Jose–
San
6 US 49,299 57,589 3.8 0.7 4.6 6 0
Francisco,
CA

Osaka–
7 JP 38,478 52,800 3.0 0.7 3.7 7 0
Kobe–Kyoto

Boston–
8 Cambridge, US 18,973 76,250 1.5 1.0 2.4 8 0
MA

9 Nanjing CN 7,857 125,607 0.6 1.6 2.2 12 3

San Diego,
10 US 24,555 20,292 1.9 0.3 2.2 9 ຤
CA

New York
11 US 13,945 75,727 1.1 1.0 2.0 10 ຤
City, NY

12 Paris FR 15,648 61,985 1.2 0.8 2.0 11 ຤

13 Wuhan CN 7,403 101,372 0.6 1.3 1.9 13 0

14 Hangzhou CN 11,225 72,226 0.9 0.9 1.8 15 1

15 Nagoya JP 17,184 21,160 1.3 0.3 1.6 14 ຤

Los Angeles,
16 US 11,847 43,464 0.9 0.5 1.5 16 0
CA

17 Daejeon KR 14,021 26,426 1.1 0.3 1.4 18 1

18 ;L DQ CN 2,018 98,853 0.2 1.2 1.4 19 1

Washington,
DC–
19 US 5,897 72,703 0.5 0.9 1.4 17 ຤
Baltimore,
MD

20 Qingdao CN 8,442 47,000 0.7 0.6 1.2 23 3

Global Innovation Index 2024

21 London GB 6,558 58,419 0.5 0.7 1.2 20 ຤

22 Munich DE 10,697 27,205 0.8 0.3 1.2 21 ຤

23 Chengdu CN 2,331 77,466 0.2 1.0 1.2 24 1

24 Seattle, WA US 11,165 19,697 0.9 0.2 1.1 22 ຤

Taipei–
25 TW* 3,887 55,401 0.3 0.7 1.0 27 2
Hsinchu

Notes:(a) This column represents the previous year’s rankings, which have been adjusted to align with the updated
methodology. The codes given in the tables in this appendix are the ISO alpha-2 country codes, with the following
addition: TW* = Taiwan, Province of China.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.
$SSHQGL[7DEOHContinued 307

Share Share
total of
PCT Scientific PCT total Rank
Cluster app- pub- filings, pubs, Previous change
Rank name Economy lications lications % % Total rank (a)

Amsterdam–
26 NL 4,322 52,439 0.3 0.7 1.0 25 ຤
Rotterdam

27 Cologne DE 7,024 33,269 0.5 0.4 1.0 26 ຤

28 Houston, TX US 8,066 23,789 0.6 0.3 0.9 28 0

29 Stuttgart DE 9,346 14,517 0.7 0.2 0.9 29 0

Tel Aviv–
30 IL 7,286 24,955 0.6 0.3 0.9 30 0
Jerusalem

31 Moscow RU 1,946 57,524 0.2 0.7 0.9 31 0

32 Changsha CN 1,256 60,712 0.1 0.8 0.9 37 5

33 Singapore SG / MY 5,234 35,784 0.4 0.5 0.9 34 1

34 Tianjin CN 1,378 59,459 0.1 0.7 0.9 36 2

Philadelphia,
35 US 5,669 32,941 0.4 0.4 0.9 33 ຤
PA

36 Hefei CN 3,848 44,040 0.3 0.6 0.9 40 4

37 Chicago, IL US 5,571 30,658 0.4 0.4 0.8 32 ຤

38 Tehran IR 388 61,774 0.0 0.8 0.8 35 ຤

39 Chongqing CN 1,502 48,120 0.1 0.6 0.7 43 4

40 Stockholm SE 6,044 19,682 0.5 0.2 0.7 38 ຤

Minneapolis,
41 US 6,633 14,869 0.5 0.2 0.7 39 ຤
MN

42 Eindhoven NL 7,893 5,249 0.6 0.1 0.7 41 ຤

Frankfurt
43 DE 5,499 18,242 0.4 0.2 0.7 46 3
am Main

44 Sydney AU 2,747 35,053 0.2 0.4 0.7 44 0

45 Berlin DE 3,483 29,903 0.3 0.4 0.6 42 ຤

46 Melbourne AU 2,017 38,564 0.2 0.5 0.6 45 ຤

47 Harbin CN 276 47,569 0.0 0.6 0.6 54 7

48 Madrid ES 1,636 39,016 0.1 0.5 0.6 47 ຤

49 Jinan CN 1,601 38,277 0.1 0.5 0.6 56 7

50 Zürich CH 3,862 24,162 0.3 0.3 0.6 49 ຤

51 Raleigh, NC US 3,046 28,922 0.2 0.4 0.6 48 ຤

52 Milan IT 2,628 31,473 0.2 0.4 0.6 51 ຤ Appendix IV - Global Innovation Index science and technology cluster methodology
Brussels–
53 BE 3,045 27,565 0.2 0.3 0.6 50 ຤
Antwerp

54 Toronto, ON CA 2,827 28,693 0.2 0.4 0.6 52 ຤

55 Barcelona ES 2,341 30,502 0.2 0.4 0.6 53 ຤

56 Bengaluru IN 4,654 16,029 0.4 0.2 0.6 57 1

57 Copenhagen DK 3,125 24,936 0.2 0.3 0.6 55 ຤

58 Changchun CN 542 40,289 0.0 0.5 0.5 59 1

59 Istanbul TR 2,383 28,135 0.2 0.4 0.5 60 1

60 Denver, CO US 3,264 21,608 0.3 0.3 0.5 58 ຤

61 Shenyang CN 689 36,914 0.1 0.5 0.5 63 2

Montréal,
62 CA 2,343 24,753 0.2 0.3 0.5 61 ຤
QC

63 Delhi IN 1,131 31,795 0.1 0.4 0.5 65 2

Heidelberg–
64 DE 3,929 13,411 0.3 0.2 0.5 62 ຤
Mannheim

65 Dalian CN 1,027 30,602 0.1 0.4 0.5 69 4

 308 $SSHQGL[7DEOHContinued

Share Share
total of
PCT Scientific PCT total Rank
Cluster app- pub- filings, pubs, Previous change
Rank name Economy lications lications % % Total rank (a)

66 Cambridge GB 3,124 17,141 0.2 0.2 0.5 64 ຤

67 Rome IT 981 30,214 0.1 0.4 0.5 67 0

68 Zhengzhou CN 743 31,295 0.1 0.4 0.5 73 5

69 Atlanta, GA US 1,902 22,741 0.1 0.3 0.4 68 ຤

70 Dallas, TX US 3,459 9,845 0.3 0.1 0.4 70 0

71 Helsinki FI 2,911 13,122 0.2 0.2 0.4 72 1

72 Xiamen CN 2,133 17,812 0.2 0.2 0.4 79 7

73 São Paulo BR 727 25,214 0.1 0.3 0.4 71 ຤

74 Vienna AT 1,575 19,895 0.1 0.3 0.4 75 1

Nuremberg–
75 DE 3,397 8,287 0.3 0.1 0.4 74 ຤
Erlangen

76 Portland, OR US 3,643 6,566 0.3 0.1 0.4 66 ຤

77 Zhenjiang CN 1,037 21,984 0.1 0.3 0.4 90 13

78 Oxford GB 1,595 18,365 0.1 0.2 0.4 77 ຤

Pittsburgh,
79 US 1,901 16,464 0.1 0.2 0.4 78 ຤
PA

80 Lanzhou CN 235 26,701 0.0 0.3 0.4 88 8

81 Busan KR 2,291 13,932 0.2 0.2 0.4 80 ຤

82 Chennai IN 1,199 20,339 0.1 0.3 0.3 84 2

Ann Arbor,
83 US 1,247 19,413 0.1 0.2 0.3 81 ຤
MI

84 Mumbai IN 1,705 16,146 0.1 0.2 0.3 82 ຤

85 Fuzhou CN 585 22,735 0.0 0.3 0.3 96 11

86 Ankara TR 897 20,660 0.1 0.3 0.3 87 1

Cincinnati,
87 US 3,029 7,420 0.2 0.1 0.3 76 ຤
OH

88 Daegu KR 1,852 14,667 0.1 0.2 0.3 85 ຤

Vancouver,
89 CA 1,629 15,816 0.1 0.2 0.3 83 ຤
BC

90 Warsaw PL 474 22,404 0.0 0.3 0.3 89 ຤

91 Austin, TX US 2,479 9,591 0.2 0.1 0.3 91 0

92 Lyon FR 2,069 12,030 0.2 0.2 0.3 86 ຤

Kuala
93 MY 623 20,387 0.0 0.3 0.3 93 0
Lumpur

94 Nanchang CN 459 21,353 0.0 0.3 0.3 106 12

95 Cairo EG 166 23,062 0.0 0.3 0.3 103 8

CH / DE /
96 Basel 2,642 7,679 0.2 0.1 0.3 95 ຤
FR

97 Brisbane AU 1,047 16,734 0.1 0.2 0.3 92 ຤

98 Kunming CN 387 20,725 0.0 0.3 0.3 113 15

99 Göteborg SE 2,103 10,125 0.2 0.1 0.3 98 ຤

Macao SAR–
100 CN 3,081 3,917 0.2 0.0 0.3 111 11
Zhuhai
Global Innovation Index 2024

Notes:(a) This column represents the previous year’s rankings, which have been adjusted to align with the updated
methodology. The codes given in the tables in this appendix are the ISO alpha-2 country codes, with the following
addition: TW* = Taiwan, Province of China.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.
$SSHQGL[7DEOH5DQNLQJRI6 7LQWHQVLW\ 309

PCT Scientific Total

app- pub- S&T
lications lications share
Rank Estimated per per per Rank
per- Cluster cluster capita capita capita change
capita name Economy population (a) (a) (a) (b)

1 Cambridge GB 489,751 6,379 35,000 0.9 0

San Jose–San
2 US 6,252,315 7,885 9,211 0.7 0
Francisco, CA

3 Eindhoven NL 1,047,358 7,536 5,011 0.6 0

4 Oxford GB 568,383 2,806 32,312 0.6 0

Boston–
5 Cambridge, US 4,251,769 4,462 17,934 0.6 0
MA

6 San Diego, CA US 3,910,684 6,279 5,189 0.6 1

7 Daejeon KR 2,744,149 5,109 9,630 0.5 1

8 Ann Arbor, MI US 659,434 1,891 29,439 0.5 ຤

9 Seattle, WA US 2,518,357 4,434 7,821 0.4 0

10 Munich DE 2,794,775 3,828 9,734 0.4 1

11 Beijing CN 19,415,177 2,189 15,893 0.4 3

12 Göteborg SE 841,281 2,500 12,035 0.3 0

13 Raleigh, NC US 1,755,703 1,735 16,473 0.3 0

14 Stockholm SE 2,151,605 2,809 9,148 0.3 1

Tokyo–
15 JP 36,304,277 3,712 3,231 0.3 2
Yokohama

16 Copenhagen DK 1,699,974 1,838 14,669 0.3 0

17 Helsinki FI 1,234,101 2,359 10,633 0.3 1

18 Zürich CH 1,952,063 1,979 12,378 0.3 1

CH / DE /
19 Basel 1,021,114 2,588 7,521 0.3 1
FR

20 Stuttgart DE 3,214,610 2,907 4,516 0.3 1

Nuremberg–
21 DE 1,354,796 2,507 6,117 0.3 1
Erlangen

22 Seoul KR 26,388,052 2,542 5,320 0.3 3

23 Qingdao CN 4,847,000 1,742 9,697 0.3 8

Minneapolis,
24 US 2,740,987 2,420 5,425 0.3 ຤
MN

25 Pittsburgh, PA US 1,390,453 1,367 11,840 0.3 ຤ Appendix IV - Global Innovation Index science and technology cluster methodology

26 Nanjing CN 8,663,248 907 14,499 0.3 2

27 Hangzhou CN 7,148,142 1,570 10,104 0.2 2

Heidelberg–
28 DE 1,996,950 1,968 6,716 0.2 ຤
Mannheim

Osaka–Kobe–
29 JP 15,801,605 2,435 3,341 0.2 1
Kyoto

Shenzhen–
30 Hong Kong– CN / HK 50,546,829 2,303 3,469 0.2 2
Guangzhou

31 Wuhan CN 8,697,647 851 11,655 0.2 7

32 ;L DQ CN 6,591,384 306 14,997 0.2 4

33 Changsha CN 4,060,044 309 14,953 0.2 4

Washington,
34 DC–Baltimore, US 7,040,225 838 10,327 0.2 0
MD

35 Cincinnati, OH US 1,836,936 1,649 4,040 0.2 0

36 Paris FR 11,224,000 1,394 5,523 0.2 3

37 Nagoya JP 9,240,326 1,860 2,290 0.2 3

F kf t
Notes: (a) Per capita figures refer to
1,000,000 of population. (b) This column represents the previous year’s
rankings, which have been adjusted to align with the updated methodology. n.a. indicates not applicable. The codes given
 310 $SSHQGL[7DEOHContinued

PCT Scientific Total

app- pub- S&T
lications lications share
Rank Estimated per per per Rank
per- Cluster cluster capita capita capita change
capita name Economy population (a) (a) (a) (b)

37 Nagoya JP 9,240,326 1,860 2,290 0.2 3

Frankfurt am
38 DE 3,805,907 1,445 4,793 0.2 3
Main

39 Denver, CO US 3,074,200 1,062 7,029 0.2 5

40 Vancouver, BC CA 1,944,715 838 8,133 0.2 3

Philadelphia,
41 US 5,109,012 1,110 6,448 0.2 4
PA

42 Lyon FR 1,866,169 1,108 6,446 0.2 0

43 Sydney AU 4,007,620 685 8,747 0.2 3

44 Portland, OR US 2,237,730 1,628 2,934 0.2 ຤

45 Austin, TX US 1,964,534 1,262 4,882 0.2 4

46 Vienna AT 2,413,662 653 8,243 0.2 2

47 Houston, TX US 6,015,423 1,341 3,955 0.2 0

48 Hefei CN 5,560,163 692 7,921 0.2 15

49 Changchun CN 3,630,174 149 11,098 0.2 7

50 Atlanta, GA US 2,867,637 663 7,930 0.2 1

51 Berlin DE 4,276,247 814 6,993 0.2 ຤

52 Chengdu CN 7,771,586 300 9,968 0.1 7

Amsterdam–
53 NL 7,038,077 614 7,451 0.1 1
Rotterdam

54 Melbourne AU 4,546,212 444 8,483 0.1 ຤

55 Jinan CN 4,297,068 373 8,908 0.1 7

56 Montréal, QC CA 3,511,027 667 7,050 0.1 ຤

57 Brisbane AU 2,089,547 501 8,008 0.1 ຤

Brussels–
58 BE 4,277,629 712 6,444 0.1 ຤
Antwerp

59 Milan IT 4,495,551 585 7,001 0.1 ຤

60 Dalian CN 3,555,305 289 8,607 0.1 8

61 Rome IT 3,505,600 280 8,619 0.1 0

62 Harbin CN 4,766,680 58 9,979 0.1 7

63 Toronto, ON CA 4,485,090 630 6,397 0.1 ຤

64 Lanzhou CN 2,762,551 85 9,665 0.1 9

New York City,

65 US 16,136,315 864 4,693 0.1 ຤
NY

66 Warsaw PL 2,558,954 185 8,755 0.1 1

Shanghai–
67 CN 43,746,897 885 4,368 0.1 10
Suzhou

Tel Aviv–
68 IL 7,251,972 1,005 3,441 0.1 ຤
Jerusalem

69 Chicago, IL US 6,776,544 822 4,524 0.1 ຤

70 London GB 10,354,543 633 5,642 0.1 0

Global Innovation Index 2024

Los Angeles,
71 US 12,260,563 966 3,545 0.1 0
CA

72 Daegu KR 2,837,234 653 5,169 0.1 2

73 Singapore SG / MY 7,612,760 688 4,701 0.1 5

74 Zhenjiang CN 3,187,823 325 6,896 0.1 6

75 Barcelona ES 5,053,684 463 6,036 0.1 0

$SSHQGL[7DEOHContinued 311

PCT Scientific Total

app- pub- S&T
lications lications share
Rank Estimated per per per Rank
per- Cluster cluster capita capita capita change
capita name Economy population (a) (a) (a) (b)

76 Xiamen CN 3,577,736 596 4,978 0.1 5

77 Tehran IR 7,470,203 52 8,269 0.1 ຤

78 Tianjin CN 8,224,608 168 7,229 0.1 7

79 Cologne DE 9,606,235 731 3,463 0.1 0

80 Madrid ES 6,443,098 254 6,055 0.1 2

81 Dallas, TX US 4,198,793 824 2,345 0.1 3

Macao SAR–
82 CN 3,100,328 994 1,263 0.1 n.a.
Zhuhai

Taipei–
83 TW* 11,272,371 345 4,915 0.1 3
Hsinchu

84 Fuzhou CN 3,802,578 154 5,979 0.1 5

85 Busan KR 4,138,551 554 3,366 0.1 2

86 Chongqing CN 8,598,002 175 5,597 0.1 4

87 Zhengzhou CN 5,404,356 138 5,791 0.1 4

88 Kunming CN 3,507,173 110 5,909 0.1 n.a.

89 Shenyang CN 6,275,156 110 5,883 0.1 ຤

90 Nanchang CN 4,035,084 114 5,292 0.1 n.a.

91 Ankara TR 5,013,614 179 4,121 0.1 1

92 Moscow RU 14,081,728 138 4,085 0.1 1

93 Istanbul TR 12,724,837 187 2,211 0.0 1

94 Bengaluru IN 14,876,070 313 1,077 0.0 2

95 Kuala Lumpur MY 8,461,712 74 2,409 0.0 0

96 Chennai IN 10,869,934 110 1,871 0.0 1

97 São Paulo BR 18,612,849 39 1,355 0.0 1

98 Delhi IN 28,845,689 39 1,102 0.0 1

99 Mumbai IN 21,362,863 80 756 0.0 1

100 Cairo EG 22,096,805 8 1,044 0.0 n.a.

Notes: (a) Per capita figures refer to 1,000,000 of population. (b) This column represents the previous year’s rankings,
Appendix IV - Global Innovation Index science and technology cluster methodology
which have been adjusted to align with the updated methodology. n.a. indicates not applicable. The codes given in the
tables in this appendix are the ISO alpha-2 country codes, with the following addition: TW* = Taiwan, Province of China.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.
 Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.
312

$SSHQGL[7DEOH6XPPDU\RIJHRFRGLQJUHVXOWV

Scientific publications PCT applications

Sub-Cit
Number City-level Number Block-level level
of geolocation Publications of geolocation geolocat
Country addresses (%) covered (%) addresses (%) (%)

China 6,846,428 99.9 99.9 1,025,503 84.9 2.6

United
States of 7,272,035 100.0 100.0 960,198 96.4 3.5
America

Japan 1,361,613 99.6 99.9 533,790 68.6 26.3

Germany 1,608,493 99.9 99.9 268,710 99.0 0.9

Republic of
910,680 99.1 99.5 313,135 99.2 0.6
Korea

United
1,621,460 99.4 99.6 88,654 54.1 45.6
Kingdom

France 1,173,788 99.1 99.5 106,896 93.8 5.3

Italy 1,395,964 99.9 99.9 47,678 95.0 4.6

India 1,047,506 99.0 99.3 50,617 37.6 60.9

Canada 1,031,392 99.9 99.9 48,766 97.0 2.8

Spain 1,052,056 99.4 99.7 28,297 87.3 12.2

Australia 1,003,923 99.8 99.9 21,331 93.7 5.4

Netherlands 581,502 99.8 99.9 44,609 98.9 0.5

Brazil 782,137 99.8 99.9 10,614 90.9 8.9

Switzerland 392,369 99.7 99.7 42,274 97.8 1.8

Russian
454,048 99.7 99.8 16,063 95.8 3.9
Federation

Sweden 339,569 99.9 99.9 44,645 98.8 0.8

Türkiye 468,830 98.8 98.6 16,799 76.4 22.7

Israel 189,988 98.3 99.4 29,194 86.2 9.3

Belgium 287,322 99.8 99.9 19,779 98.1 1.8

World Total 27,022,686 99.6 99.9 4,113,927 85.2 7.5

Note: This list includes the top 20 countries that account for and ordered by the highest combined shares of patents and
scientific articles. PCT inventor addresses were geocoded to the highest level of detail. Due to their much larger volume,
scientific author addresses were geocoded to the city level only.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.
Global Innovation Index 2024
$SSHQGL[7DEOH$IULFDQ6 7FOXVWHUV 313

PCT Scientific Top

app- pub- Top scientific
Rank Cluster name Economy lications lications applicant organization

Si-Ware Cairo
1 Cairo EG 168 23,062
Systems University

DETNET University of
2 Johannesburg ZA 684 12,814
South Africa Witwatersrand

Stellenbosch University of
3 Cape Town ZA 296 8,804
University Cape Town

Universite de
4 Tunis TN 27 5,416 Della Toffola
Carthage

Alexandria
5 Alexandria EG 27 4,284 Augmania
University

University Of
University Of
6 Durban ZA 42 3,722 Kwazulu-
Kwazulu Natal
Natal

Abd Elaal, Mansoura

7 Mansoura EG 7 3,409
Nasser Kamal University

Gargouri, Universite de
8 Sfax TN 2 3,201
Ahmed Sfax

University of
9 Nairobi KE 23 2,942 IBM
Nairobi

Abd Elwahab,
Zagazig
10 Zagazig EG 4 2,945 Khaled,
University
Mohamed

Endeshaw,
Alexander, Addis Ababa
11 Addis Ababa ET 2 2,857
Skunder, University
Bekele

Dahmane,
12 Algiers DZ 19 2,704 USTHB
Smail

Université Mohammed V
13 Rabat MA 65 2,344 Internationale University in
de Rabat Rabat

El-Gazzar,
Banha–Shibin El Menofia
14 EG 6 2,581 Basim Abd-El-
Kom University
Fattah

Assiut
15 Asyut EG 1 2,506 RIKEN
University

Appendix IV - Global Innovation Index science and technology cluster methodology

Elkazaz,
Mohamed, Tanta
16 Tanta EG 10 1,938
Fadly, Abd El University
Ghany

Ghidhaoui, Universite de
17 Monastir TN 7 1,880
Abir Monastir

Makerere
18 Kampala UG 3 1,901 KOPS
University

mPedigree University of
19 Accra GH 3 1,651
Technologies Ghana

Hassan II
PSA
20 Casablanca MA 71 1,204 University of
Automobiles
Casablanca

Manga, University of
21 Yaoundé CM 4 1,510
Edouard Yaounde I

De Wet,
Christoffel University of
22 Bloemfontein ZA 11 1,386
Johannes the Free State
Henze

Pennsylvania
Beni Suef
23 Beni Suef EG 1 1,423 State
University
University

Note: n.a. indicates not applicable. IBM = International Business Machines, KNUST = Kwame Nkrumah University Science
& Technology, KOPS = KAMATA Online Protection Services, MIT = Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MUHAS =
Muhimbili University of Health & Allied Sciences, RIKEN = The Institute of Physical and Chemical Research (Japan), USTHB
 314 $SSHQGL[7DEOHContinued

PCT Scientific Top

app- pub- Top scientific
Rank Cluster name Economy lications lications applicant organization

Pennsylvania
Beni Suef
23 Beni Suef EG 1 1,423 State
University
University

Cadi Ayyad
Mabrouk,
24 Marrakesh MA 10 1,302 University of
Essaid
Marrakech

University Of
25 Pietermaritzburg ZA 9 1,302 Voss, Michael
Kwazulu Natal

Purdue University of
26 Ibadan NG 0 1,312
University Ibadan

Université Sidi Université Sidi

27 Fès MA 27 1,123 Mohamed Mohamed Ben
Ben Abdellah Abdellah

North West North West

28 Potchefstroom ZA 14 1,176 University - University -
South Africa South Africa

Abd Elmoez,
Mohamed, Minia
29 Minya EG 3 1,225
Hasan, University
Soliman

University of
30 Gondar ET 0 1,173 n.a.
Gondar

Kafrelsheikh
31 Kafr El-Shaikh EG 0 1,161 n.a.
University

Rhodes Rhodes
32 Grahamstown ZA 4 1,075
University University

Okoh-
33 Kumasi GH 1 1,042 Asamoah, KNUST
Kwame

Salama,
Ahmed Suez Canal
34 Ismailia EG 2 962
Mostafa University
Mahmoud

Nelson Nelson
35 Port Elizabeth ZA 20 844 Mandela Mandela
University University

36 Dar es Salaam TZ 0 965 n.a. MUHAS

University of
37 Nsukka NG 0 877 n.a.
Nigeria

University of
38 Lagos NG 7 812 Mastercard
Lagos

Universite de
39 Sousse TN 0 823 n.a.
Sousse

Abdelmonem,
University of
40 Khartoum SD 10 738 Mohamed
Khartoum
Osman

Coly, University
41 Dakar SN 8 678 Mohidine El Cheikh Anta
Tamame Diop Dakar

University of
Global Innovation Index 2024

42 Harare ZW 1 658 MIT

Zimbabwe

African
University of
43 Abuja NG 1 635 Udeh, Oliver
Science &
Tech.
$SSHQGL[7DEOHContinued 315

PCT Scientific Top

app- pub- Top scientific
Rank Cluster name Economy lications lications applicant organization

Djogbenou, Univ Abomey

44 Cotonou BJ 1 612
Luc Calavi

Kumwenda,
University of
45 Lusaka ZM 1 587 Misheck
Zambia
Harris

Kafuti
Kinshasa– Kanyembo, Universite de
46 CD / CG 1 522
Brazzaville Dominique- Kinshasa
Myrtille

Univ Felix
Fofana,
47 Abidjan CI 2 500 Houphouet
Mouramane
Boigny

Univ Joseph Ki
48 Ouagadougou BF 1 497 Maia Africa
Zerbo

Mohammed
Madani,
49 Oujda MA 2 420 First University
Zakaria
of Oujda

University of
50 Blantyre MW 0 415 n.a.
Malawi

Note: n.a. indicates not applicable. IBM = International Business Machines, KNUST = Kwame Nkrumah University Science
& Technology, KOPS = KAMATA Online Protection Services, MIT = Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MUHAS =
Muhimbili University of Health & Allied Sciences, RIKEN = The Institute of Physical and Chemical Research (Japan), USTHB
= University Science & Technology Houari Boumediene.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2024.

Appendix IV - Global Innovation Index science and technology cluster methodology

Bibliography

References

Afolabi, V. (2024). Ingenuity and the challenges of scale-up of social enterprises: The Nigerian
context. In Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship. Lagos
and Geneva: Eko Innovation Center and World Intellectual Property Organization. Available
at: www.wipo.int/web/global-innovation-index/2024/contributors.

AKOU (2023). Impact of the Lloyds Bank and Bank of Scotland Social Entrepreneurs Programme:
Impact Report 2023. Available at: www.the-sse.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SSE-LBS-
ImpactReportFinal.pdf.

Bacq, S. and F. Janssen (2011). The multiple faces of social entrepreneurship: A review of
definitional issues based on geographical and thematic criteria. Entrepreneurship and Regional
Development, 23(5–6).

Battilana, J. and S. Dorado (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of
commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6).

Battilana, J., et. al. (2015). Harnessing productive tensions in hybrid organizations. Academy of
Management Journal, 58(6): 1658–85.

Becker, W., et. al. (2017). Weights and importance in composite indicators: Closing the gap.
Ecological Indicators, 80, 12–22.

Bergquist, K. and C. Fink (2000). The top 100 science and technology clusters. In Dutta, S.,
B. Lanvin and S. Wunsch-Vincent (eds), The Global Innovation Index 2020: Who Will Finance
Innovation? Ithaca, NY, Fontainebleau and Geneva: Cornell University, INSEAD and World
Intellectual Property Organization. Available at: www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_
gii_2020.pdf.

Bergquist, K. and C. Fink (2020). The top 100 science and technology clusters. In Dutta, S.,
B. Lanvin and S. Wunsch-Vincent (eds), The Global Innovation Index 2020: Who Will Finance
Innovation? Ithaca, NY, Fontainebleau and Geneva: Cornell University, INSEAD and World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

Besharov, M., J.-B. Litrico and S. Kislenko (2019). The many roads to revenue generation. Stanford
Social Innovation Review, 17(4). Stanford: Stanford Social Innovation Review, Stanford University.

Billimoria, J. (2024). Creating change: A social innovator's blueprint. In Global Innovation Index
2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship. Amsterdam and Geneva: Catalyst 2030
(One Family Foundation) and World Intellectual Property Organization. Available at: www.wipo.
int/web/global-innovation-index/2024/contributors

Bornstein, D. and S. Davis (2010). Social Entrepreneurship: What Everyone Needs to Know. London:
Oxford University Press.
316
Bosma, N. (2024). How do entrepreneurs across the globe assess their own social impact? 317
New evidence from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. In Global Innovation Index 2024:
Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship. Utrecht and Geneva: Utrecht University School
of Economics and World Intellectual Property Organization. Available at: www.wipo.int/web/
global-innovation-index/2024/contributors

British Council (2018a). Reaching the Farthest First: The State of Social Enterprise in the Philippines.
Available at: www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/the_state_of_social_enterprise_in_the_
philippines_british_council_singlepage_web.pdf.

British Council (2018b). Social Enterprise Landscape in Morocco. Available at: www.britishcouncil.
org/sites/default/files/social_enterprise_landscape_in_morocco.pdf.

British Council (2019). Social Enterprise in Vietnam. Available at: www.britishcouncil.org/sites/

default/files/state_of_social_enterprise_in_vietnam_british_council_web_final.pdf.

British Council (2020). The State of Social Enterprise in Thailand. Available at: www.britishcouncil.
org/sites/default/files/state_of_social_enterprise_in_thailand_2020_final_web.pdf.

British Council (2022). The State of Social Enterprise in Nigeria. Available at: www.britishcouncil.
org/sites/default/files/state_of_social_enterprise_in_nigeria.pdf.

British Council and Social Enterprise UK (2022). More in Common: The Global State of Social
Enterprise. Available at: www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/more_in_common_global_
state_of_social_enterprise.pdf.

Calic, G. and E. Mosakowski (2016). Kicking off social entrepreneurship: How a sustainability
orientation influences crowdfunding success. Journal of Management Studies, 53(5).

Catalyst 2030 (2022). Catalysing Change. Available at: https://catalyst2030.net/wp-content/

uploads/Catalyst-2030-brochure-7-May-2022.pdf.

Centre for Asian Philanthropy and Society (2019). Business for Good: Maximizing the Value of Social
Enterprises in Asia. Available at: www.caps.org/work/our-research_business-for-good.

Charnes, A. and W.W. Cooper (1985). Preface to topics in data envelopment analysis. Annals of
Operations Research, 2, 59–94.

Cherchye, L., W. Moesen, N. Rogge, T. Van Puyenbroeck, M. Saisana, M. et al. (2008). Creating
composite indicators with DEA and robustness analysis: The case of the Technology
Achievement Index. Journal of Operational Research Society, 59(2), 239–251.

Choi, N. and S. Majumdar (2014). Social entrepreneurship as an essentially contested

concept: Opening a new avenue for systematic future research. Journal of Business Venturing,
29(3): 363–76.

Çiftçi, E. (2024). Empowering Youth: The transformative impact of social entrepreneurship

in developing economies. In Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social
Entrepreneurship. Istanbul and Geneva: SosyalBen Foundation Türkiye and World Intellectual
Property Organization. Available at: www.wipo.int/web/global-innovation-index/2024/
contributors

Cook, W.D., K. Tone and J. Zhu (2014). Data envelopment analysis: Prior to choosing a model.
Omega, 44, 1–4.

Dees, G (1998). The meaning of “social entrepreneurship”. Available at: https://centers.fuqua.duke.

edu/case/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2015/03/Article_Dees_MeaningofSocialEntrepreneursh
ip_2001.pdf.
Bibliography
 318 Defourny, J. and M. Nyssens (2010). Conceptions of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship
in Europe and the United States: Convergences and divergences. Journal of Social
Entrepreneurship, 1(1): 32–53.

Dey, A. and A. Gupta (2024). Innovating at the grassroots: The rise of social entrepreneurship
in emerging economies. In Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social
Entrepreneurship. Ahmedabad and Geneva: Grassroots Innovation Augmentation
Network and World Intellectual Property Organization. Available at: www.wipo.int/web/
global-innovation-index/2024/contributors

Euclid Network (2022). European Social Enterprise Monitor 2021–2022. Available at: https://
knowledgecentre.euclidnetwork.eu/european-social-enterprise-monitor-2021-2022.

Fink, C., R. Lamb, B. Le Feuvre and H. Zhou (2022). How the COVID-19 crisis affected international
intellectual property filings. In Fink, C., Y. Ménière, A. Toole and R. Veugelers (eds), Resilience and
Ingenuity: Global Innovation Responses to COVID-19. Center for European Policy Research.

Garg Patel, S. (2024). The Social Innovation Highway to Ecosystem Transformation. InGlobal
Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship. Palo Alto and Geneva:
Skoll Foundation and World Intellectual Property Organization. Available at: www.wipo.int/web/
global-innovation-index/2024/contributors

Ganz, M., T. Kay and J. Spicer (2018). Social enterprise is not social change. Stanford Social
Innovation Review, 16(2).

Ghauri, P. N., M. Tasavori and R. Zaefarian (2014). Internationalisation of service firms through
corporate social entrepreneurship and networking. International Marketing Review, 31(6).

Giridharadas, A. (2018). Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World. Knopf
Doubleday Publishing Group.

Groeneveld, R.A. and G. Meeden (1984). Measuring skewness and kurtosis. TheStatistician,
33(4), 391–399.

Hand, D., B. Ringel and A. Danel (2022). Sizing the Impact Investing Market. The Global Impact
Investing Network. Available at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/giin-web-assets/giin/assets/
publication/research/2022-market-sizing-report-final.pdf.

Hand, D., S. Sunderji and N. Pardo (2023). Emerging Trends in Impact Investing. Global Impact
Investing Network. Available at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/giin-web-assets/giin/assets/
publication/research/vol-4-2023-giinsight-%E2%80%93-emerging-trends-in-impact-investing.
pdf.

Haugh, H.M. and A. Talwar (2016). Linking social entrepreneurship and social change: The
mediating role of empowerment. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(4): 643–58.

Hottenrott, H (2024): An economic perspective on social entrepreneurship: Insights and policy

implications. In Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship.
Munich and Geneva: Technical University of Munich, Leibniz Centre for European Economic
Research and World Intellectual Property Organization. Available at: www.wipo.int/web/
global-innovation-index/2024/contributors

International Energy Agency (IEA) (2023). World Energy Investment 2023. Paris: IEA. Available
at: www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-investment-2023.
Global Innovation Index 2024

International Energy Agency (IEA) (2024). Global EV Outlook 2024. Paris: IEA. Available at: www.
iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2024.

International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) (2023). Renewable Power Generation Costs in
2022. Abu Dhabi: IRENA. Available at: https://mc-cd8320d4-36a1-40ac-83cc-3389-cdn-endpoint.
azureedge.net/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2023/Aug/IRENA_Renewable_power_ 319
generation_costs_in_2022.pdf?rev=cccb713bf8294cc5bec3f870e1fa15c2.

International Telecommunication Union (ITU) (2023). Measuring Digital Development: Facts and
Figures 2023. Geneva: ITU. Available at: Facts and Figures 2023 (itu.int).

IQVIA Institute for Human Data Science (2024). Global Trends in R&D 2024: Activity, Productivity,
and Enablers. Available at: www.iqviainstitute.org.

Joyce, A., et. al.(2022). The health and well-being impacts of a work integration social enterprise
from a systems perspective. Health Promotion International, 37(1).

Kannan, S and S. Ramanujam (2024). Social entrepreneurship in India: Game-changer or a

passing fad? In Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship.
New Delhi and Geneva: Confederation of Indian Industry and World Intellectual Property
Organization. Available at: www.wipo.int/web/global-innovation-index/2024/contributors

Klijn, V. and F. Bonnici (2024). Policy tools to unlock the potential of social entrepreneurship. In
Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship. Geneva: Schwab
Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship, World Economic Forum and World Intellectual Property
Organization. Available at: www.wipo.int/web/global-innovation-index/2024/contributors

Kraemer-Mbula, E. (2024). Harnessing innovation: The transformative potential of social

enterprises in Africa. In Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social
Entrepreneurship. Johannesburg and Geneva: University of Johannesburg and World Intellectual
Property Organization.Available at: www.wipo.int/web/global-innovation-index/2024/
contributors

Kraemer-Mbula, E. and S. Wunsch-Vincent (eds) (2016). The Informal Economy in Developing

Nations: Hidden Engine of Innovation? (Intellectual Property, Innovation and Economic
Development). Cambridge and Geneva: Cambridge University Press and World Intellectual
Property Organization.

Lechterman, T. and J. Mair (2024). Social enterprises as agents of social justice: A Rawlsian
perspective on institutional capacity. Organization Studies.

Litrico, J.B. and M.L. Besharov (2019). Unpacking variation in hybrid organizational forms:
Changing models of social enterprise among nonprofits, 2000–2013. Journal of Business
Ethics, 159(2).

Little, R.J.A. and D.B. Rubin (2002). Statistical Analysis with Missing Data, 2nd edition. Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Mair, J. (2020). Social entrepreneurship: Research as disciplined exploration. In Powell, W. and P.

Bromley (eds), The Nonprofit Sector (3rd edn). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 333–357.

Mair, J. and E. Noboa (2006). Social entrepreneurship: How intentions to create a social venture
are formed. In: Mair, J. J. Robinson, and K. Hockerts (eds), Social Entrepreneurship. London:
Palgrave Macmillan, 121-135.

Mair, J. and N. Rathert, (2024) [Forthcoming]. The political side of social enterprises: A
phenomenon-based study of policy and sociocultural advocacy. Journal of Management Studies.

Martin, R. L. and S. Osberg (2007). Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition. Stanford
Social Innovation Review, 5(2), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.48558/TSAV-FG11.

Melyn, W. and W. Moesen (1991). Towards a synthetic indicator of macroeconomic performance:

Unequal weighting when limited information is available. Public Economics Research Paper 17.
Bibliography

Leuven: Centre for Economic Studies.

 320 Mitzinneck, B.C. and M. Besharov (2019). Managing value tensions in collective social
entrepreneurship: The role of temporal, structural, and collaborative compromise. Journal of
Business Ethics, 159(2).

Montalto, V., et. al. (2019). Culture counts: An empirical approach to measure the cultural and
creative vitality of European cities. Cities, 89, 167–185.

Montoya Castaño, D. (2024). Innovation: An effective strategy for social impact in the
Colombian Public University. In Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social
Entrepreneurship. Bogota and Geneva: Universidad Nacional de Colombia and World Intellectual
Property Organization. Available at: www.wipo.int/web/global-innovation-index/2024/
contributors

Morrison Foerster, LexMundi Pro Bono Foundation and Catalyst 2030 (2022). Legal Reform as
a Catalyst for social Enterprise: An International Social Enterprise Law & Policy Report. Available
at: www.lexmundiprobono.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Lex_Mundi_ProBono_A4_Report_
INTERACTIVE_2022.pdf.

Müller, C. (2023). World Robotics 2023 – Industrial Robots. Frankfurt am Main: IFR Statistical
Department, VDMA Services GmbH.

Munda, G. (2008). Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation for a Sustainable Economy. Berlin and
Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

Nicholls, A. (ed.) (2008). Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change. London:
Oxford University Press.

Nicholls, A. (2010). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: reflexive isomorphism in a pre-

paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34(4).

Nicholls, A. (2021a). Impact Measurement and Management in Sustainable Finance. Background

paper. Asian Development Bank. Available at: www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-
document/691951/ado2021bp-measurement-mgt-sustainable-finance.pdf.

Nicholls, A. (2021b). Policies, Initiatives, and Regulations Related to Sustainable Finance.

Background paper. Asian Development Bank.Available at: www.adb.org/sites/default/files/
institutional-document/691951/ado2021bp-policies-initiatives-regulations.pdf.

Nicholls, A. (2021c). Sustainable Finance: A Primer and Recent Developments. Background

paper. Asian Development Bank. Available at: www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-
document/691951/ado2021bp-sustainable-finance.pdf.

Nindl, E. et al. (2023). The 2023 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard. Luxembourg:
Publications Office of the European Union. doi:10.2760/506189, JRC135576. Available at: https://
publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC135576.

Nunally, J. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2003). The Non-profit
Sector in a Changing Economy, Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED). Paris:
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Publishing. Available
at: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264199545-en.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2022). Designing Legal
Global Innovation Index 2024

Frameworks for Social Enterprises: Practical Guidance for Policy Makers, Local Economic and
Employment Development (LEED). Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) Publishing. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1787/172b60b2-en.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2024). OECD Main Science
and Technology Indicators. R&D and related highlights in the March 2024 Publication, OECD
Directorate for Science, Technology and Innovation.
OECD and EC JRC (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and European 321
Commission, Joint Research Centre) (2008). Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators:
Methodology and User Guide. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) and Eurostat (2018). Oslo
Manual 2018: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation (4th edn). Paris and
Luxembourg: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and Eurostat. Available
at: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264304604-en.

Oelberger, C.R. and S.Y. Shachter (2021). National sovereignty and transnational philanthropy:
The Impact of countries’ foreign aid restrictions on US foundation funding. Voluntas, 32(2).

Pache, A.C., J. Battilana and C. Spencer (2024). An integrative model of hybrid governance: The
role of boards in helping sustain organizational hybridity. Academy of Management Journal, 67(2).

Paruolo, P., M. Saisana and A. Saltelli (2013). Ratings and rankings: Voodoo or science? Journal of
the Royal Statistical Society, A 176(3), 609–634.

5DQ%DQG6:HOOHU  $QH[LWVWUDWHJ\IRUWKHGHILQLWLRQDOHOXVLYHQHVV$WKUHHરGLPHQVLRQDO

framework for social entrepreneurship. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(2).

de Rassenfosse, G. and S. Wunsch-Vincent (2024). Enabling Innovation Measurement at the Sub-

National Level: A WIPO toolkit. Lausanne and Geneva: École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne
and WIPO.

Rayner, C. (2024): Social entrepreneurship case studies. In Global Innovation Index 2024:
Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship. Oxford and Geneva: Skoll Centre for Social
Entrepreneurship, Saïd Business School and World Intellectual Property Organization. Available
at: https://www.skollcentre.org/leading-and-organising-impact.

Saisana, M., B. D’Hombres and A. Saltelli (2011). Rickety numbers: Volatility of university rankings
and policy implications. Research Policy, 40(1), 165–177.

Saisana, M., A. Saltelli and S. Tarantola (2005). Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques
as tools for the analysis and validation of composite indicators. Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society, A 168(2), 307–323.

Savaget, P., P. Ozcan and T. Pitsis (2024). Social entrepreneurs as ecosystem catalysts:
The dynamics of forming and withdrawing from a self-sustaining ecosystem. Journal of
Management Studies.

Schiavina, M., et. al.(2023). GHS-POP R2023A – GHS population grid multitemporal (1975–2030).
Brussels: European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC). Available at: http://data.europa.
eu/89h/2ff68a52-5b5b-4a22-8f40-c41da8332cfe.

Schneider, T. (2001). Analysis of incomplete climate data: Estimation of mean values and
covariance matrices and imputation of missing values. Journal of Climate, 14(5), 853–871.

Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship (2024). Trusting in Humanity: The Power of People
to Lead Their Own Change – 2024 Awardees and Impact Report. Available at: www3.weforum.org/
docs/WEF_Trusting_in_Humanity_The_power_of_people_to_lead_their_own_change_2024.pdf.

Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship and WEF (World Economic Forum) (2024). The
State of Social Enterprise: A Review of Global Data 2013–2023. Available at: www3.weforum.org/
docs/WEF_The_State_of_Social_Enterprise_2024.pdf.

Seelos, C. and J. Mair (2017). Innovation and Scaling for Impact: How Effective Social Enterprises Do
It. Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books, an imprint of Stanford University Press.
Bibliography
 322 Siemens Stiftung (2020). Social Enterprises as Job Creators in Africa: Part 1. Available at: https://
www.siemens-stiftung.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/studie-socialenterprisesasjobcreatorsi
nafrica-part1-siemensstiftung.pdf.

Smith, W.K. and M.L. Besharov (2019). Bowing before dual Gods: How structured flexibility
sustains organizational hybridity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 64(1): 1–44.

Smith, W.K., M. Gonin and M.L. Besharov (2013). Managing social-business tensions: A review
and research agenda for social enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(3): 407–42.

Social Enterprise UK (2023). Mission Critical: State of Social Enterprise

Survey 2023. Available at: www.socialenterprise.org.uk/seuk-report/
mission-critical-state-of-social-enterprise-survey-2023.

Stephan, U., L.M. Uhlaner and C. Stride (2015). Institutions and social entrepreneurship: The
role of institutional voids, institutional support, and institutional configurations. Journal of
International Business Studies, 46(3).

Stumbitz, B., I. Vickers and F. Lyon (2019). Social Enterprises and Their Ecosystems in Europe:
Country Report – United Kingdom. European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment,
Social Affairs and Inclusion, Publications Office. Available at: https://data.europa.eu/
doi/10.2767/330252.

Sutter, C., G.D. Bruton and J. Chen (2019). Entrepreneurship as a solution to extreme poverty: A
review and future research directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 34(1).

Tobias, J.M., J. Mair and C. Barbosa-Leiker (2013). Toward a theory of transformative

entrepreneuring: Poverty reduction and conflict resolution in Rwanda’s entrepreneurial coffee
sector. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(6): 728–42.

UK DCMS and BEIS (2019). Social Enterprise: Market Trends 2019. United Kingdom Department
for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and Department for Business, Energy
and Industrial Strategy (BEIS).Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/
media/630f6349d3bf7f2a3a74b0ad/Social_Enterprise_Market_Trends_2019_-_Middlesex_
University.pdf.

UNICEF and WHO (United Nations Children’s Fund and World Health Organization) (2023).
Progress on Household Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene 2000–2022: Special Focus on Gender.
Available at: https://washdata.org/reports/jmp-2023-wash-households.

United Nations General Assembly (2023). Promoting the Social and Solidarity Economy for
Sustainable Development, UN Res 77/281.

Valera, A., et. al., (2022). The Unlonely Planet 2022. Ashoka. Available at: www.ashoka.org/sites/
default/files/2022-02/Unlonely%20Planet%20Report%202022%20–%20Ashoka%20Impact%20
Study.pdf.

Vertesy, D. (2016). A Critical Assessment of Quality and Validity of Composite Indicators of

Innovation. Paper presented atthe OECD Blue Sky III Forum on Science and Innovation Indicators.
Ghent, 19–21 September 2016.

Vertesy, D. and R. Deiss (2016). The Innovation OutputIndicator 2016: Methodology Update, EUR
27880. Luxembourg: European Commission, Joint Research Centre.
Global Innovation Index 2024

Volk, A. (2021). Investing For Impact: The Global Impact Investing Market 2020. International
Finance Corporation, World Bank Group. Available at: https://www.ifc.org/content/dam/ifc/doc/
mgrt/2021-investing-for-impact-fin2.pdf.

Weerawardena, J. and G.S. Mort (2006). Investigating social entrepreneurship: A

multidimensional model. Journal of World Business, 41(1).
WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) (2010). Special theme: The impact of the 323
economic crisis and recovery on innovation. In World Intellectual Property Indicators 2010.
Geneva: WIPO. Available at: www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/intproperty/941/wipo_
pub_941_2010.pdf.

WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) (2023a). Global Innovation Index 2023:
Innovation in the face of uncertainty. Geneva: WIPO. DOI:10.34667/tind.48220.

WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) (2023b). Intellectual Property Offices and
Sustainable Innovation: Implementing the SDGs in National Intellectual Property Systems. Geneva:
World Intellectual Property Organization. Available at: www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo-
pub-rn2023-10-en-intellectual-property-offices-and-sustainable-innovation.pdf.

WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) (2023c). World Intellectual Property Indicators
2023. Geneva: WIPO. Available at: www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo-pub-941-2023-en-
world-intellectual-property-indicators-2023.pdf.

WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) (2024a). Enabling Innovation Measurement at the
Sub-National Level: A WIPO Toolkit. Authors: Gaétan de Rassenfosse (EPFL) and Sacha Wunsch-
Vincent (WIPO). Geneva: World Intellectual Property Organization, Department for Economics
and Data Analytics. Available at: www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4746.

WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) (2024b). Patent Cooperation Treaty Yearly Review
2024: The International Patent System. Geneva: WIPO. Available at: www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/
en/wipo-pub-901-2024-en-patent-cooperation-treaty-yearly-review-2024.pdf.

Zahra, S.A. and M. Wright (2016). Understanding the social role of entrepreneurship. Journal of
Management Studies, 53(2): 610–629. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12149.

Zulkefly, N. A., N. Abdul Ghani, C.P.Y. Chin, S. Hamid, and N.A. Abdullah (2022). The future
of social entrepreneurship: modelling and predicting social impact. Internet Research,
32(2), 640-653.

Bibliography
The Global Innovation Index 2024 (GII) takes the pulse of
innovation against a background of steady but slow global
economic growth, shrinking innovation finance and sluggish
productivity.

Tracking the most recent global innovation trends, the GII finds
that innovation investments have slowed in 2023, making the
outlook for 2024 and 2025 more uncertain than ever. Yet, the
picture is not entirely bleak. Technological progress and adoption
continue unabated in fields as diverse as supercomputing,
connectivity, health and green technologies.

The thematic focus of the 2024 report is social entrepreneurship.

It looks at how a flurry of new ventures are finding innovative
solutions directly addressing critical societal issues. Examples
drawn from around the world showcase successful examples of
social entrepreneurship, helping guide innovation policymakers
and support schemes to better scale social entrepreneurship
ventures for maximum systemic impact.

Core to its economic and social development mission, the GII

2024 reveals who is leading globally in innovation, ranking the
innovation performance of 133 economies and highlighting their
strengths and weaknesses. Governments around the world use
the GII to benchmark innovation performance and improve
innovation policy and its impact.

The underlying 133 GII economy profiles can be accessed at

www.wipo.int/gii-ranking.

The full report can be downloaded at

www.wipo.int/global_innovation_index. wipo.int