This chapter gives comparisons between New Zealand and Australia, and between New Zealand and selected countries for innovation rates, characteristics, and activities.
Most Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries collect innovation data in accordance with the Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data.1 However, due to differences in coverage, direct international comparisons are not always possible.
Please view detailed table 4 (in chapter 17 of the pdf or in the available files section online) along with this chapter.
New Zealand and Australian comparisons
Australia measures innovation with similar classifications to New Zealand, so comparisons can be made between the countries. Australia has rates of innovation and innovation activities similar to those of New Zealand.
When New Zealand is compared with Australia on a similar basis, New Zealand has a slightly lower overall innovation rate. For example, results for the same business size and industry coverage are 48 percent for New Zealand and 52 percent for Australia. However, the rates of each of the four main types of innovation show some differences, as presented in table 3.01.
Table 3.01
| New Zealand and Australian Innovation rates |
| |
New Zealand(1) |
Australia(2) |
| Percent |
| Goods or service innovations |
26 |
29 |
| Operational process innovations |
23 |
25 |
| Organisational or managerial processes |
26 |
29 |
| Marketing methods |
25 |
20 |
| Overall New Zealand innovation rate |
46 |
... |
| Comparable overall innovation rate(3) |
48 |
52 |
1. For more information on businesses included, see chapter 14. 2. Australian results differ from those published, as they exclude any businesses with less than five employees. Results are the latest available; those for the last last two financial years ending 2008. 3. Result is presented using similar business-size and industries. This excludes the agriculture, forestry, and fishing; and education and training industries. |
Table 3.02 shows other innovation characteristics that can be compared for the two countries. Note that these particular results for Australia are as published,2 and not directly comparable with New Zealand results due to different survey populations and periods. However, they do illustrate the relative ratings of various innovation activities in the two countries.
Table 3.02
| New Zealand and Australian innovation characteristics |
| |
New Zealand(1) |
Australia(2) |
| Percent |
| Proportion of non-technological(4) innovators in manufacturing sector |
34 |
32(3) |
| Proportion of non-technological(4) innovators in services sector |
32 |
28(3) |
| Proportion of businesses who cooperate |
10 |
16(3) |
| Implemented Innovations |
41 |
32(3) |
| Proportion of innovators cooperating with publically funded research agencies(5) |
8 |
7(6) |
| Proportion of innovators cooperating with universities(7) |
4 |
2(6) |
1. For more information on businesses included, see chapter 14. 2. Australian results include businesses with 0–5 employees and exclude the agriculture industry. 3. Results are the latest available; those for the year ended 30 June 2007. 4. Refers to organisational, managerial, or marketing innovations. 5. New Zealand collects this information in a broader question, which may include research agencies that are not publically funded. 6. Results are for the year ended 30 June 2007. 7. New Zealand results include polytechnics and universities.
Note: Manufacturing has been defined as businesses in the Manufacturing industry of the Australia and New Zealand Standard Industial Classification (ANZSIC). Services has been defined as businesses in the ANZSICs of G,F,H,I,J,K,L,M,N,P,Q,R, and S. |
The highest reported responses for some of New Zealand’s innovation results are similar to those of Australia. The industry with the highest innovation rate is the same for both countries: information media and telecommunications. The highest reported responses for sources of information for innovation and for methods of protecting intellectual property rights are also similar.
Other international comparisons
New Zealand’s innovation rate can also be compared with other countries. These comparisons are indicative only, as differences exist between the countries in innovation definitions, methodologies, and other factors also make direct comparisons difficult.
Table 3.03
Rates of innovation activity
By selected countries |
| Country |
Innovation activity |
Number of years |
Employee-size threshold |
| Goods or services (product) |
Operational processes |
Organisational or managerial processes |
Marketing methods |
Total innovation rate
|
| Percent |
| Australia(1) |
29 |
25 |
29 |
20 |
52 |
2(2) |
5 |
| Finland |
31 |
23 |
25 |
22 |
48 |
3(3) |
10 |
| New Zealand |
26 |
23 |
26 |
25 |
46 |
2(4) |
6 |
| Ireland |
28 |
35 |
32 |
27 |
45 |
3(3) |
10 |
| Denmark |
22 |
21 |
28 |
25 |
42 |
3(3) |
2(5) |
| Norway |
21 |
18 |
20 |
20 |
34 |
2(3) |
5 |
1. Australian results differ from those published, as they exclude businesses with less than 5 employees. 2. The reference period for Australia is the two calendar years 2007–2008. 3. The reference period for the European countries is the three calendar years 2006–2008, and the most recently published results are included. 4. The reference period for New Zealand is the last two financial years as at August 2009. 5. The employee-size threshold for Denmark differs for different industries. Sources: National Statistical agencies in each country |
1. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and Statistical Office of the European Communities (2005).
2. Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (2010).