1、IMD WORLD DIGITAL COMPETITIVENESS RANKING 2020 3IMD WORLD DIGITAL COMPETITIVENESS RANKING 2020 Preface We are pleased and proud to present the IMD World Digital Competitiveness Ranking (WDCR) for 2020. The fourth edition of this ranking comes at a very challenging time for the world. Since the begin

2、ning of the year, every aspect of our lives has been affected by the pandemic. Technology has been incorporated to address the pandemic in different dimensions from communication to monitoring, assessing and, hopefully in the non- distant future, finding a cure for the virus. WDCR measures the capac

3、ity and readiness of 63 economies to adopt and explore digital technologies for economic and social transformation. The ranking relies on three factors: Knowledge, which captures the intangible infrastructure necessary for the learning and discovery dimensions of technology; Technology, which quanti

4、fies the landscape of developing digital technologies; and Future Readiness, that examines the level of preparedness of an economy to assume its digital transformation. For most countries the responses of our survey were acquired during the first wave of COVID-19. To be clear, the questions we ask d

5、o not refer specifically to issues related to the pandemic. Still, if technology is the most important tool in our battle against the pandemic, some of the trends we identify have an added significance. And the trends follow past observations. The role of knowledge generation and talent development

6、in combination with effective regulation and infrastructure, continue to drive digital competitiveness. Furthermore, the flexibility and adaptability of not only enterprises but of individuals as well sustain the digital progress of countries. An undertaking like the IMD World Digital Competitivenes

7、s Ranking could not have been accomplished without the support and assistance of many stakeholders. Our Partner Institutes, the IMD Alumni community and our Panel of Experts from all the countries generously offer data and insights that are crucial for completing such a project. We are fortunate and

8、 honored for their continuous collaboration. Yet, this year, they miraculously managed to make us feel that it was business as usual and not a uniquely complicated and difficult environment. The reason you have this publication in your hands now is, to a great extent, due to our stakeholders. We are

9、 humbled and thankful! Professor Arturo Bris Director IMD World Competitiveness Center Dr Christos Cabolis Chief Economist Technology, which quantifies the landscape of developing digital technologies; and Future Readiness, that examines the level of preparedness of an economy to assume its digital

10、transformation. In this edition of the WDCR, we introduce one new variable related to “Entrepreneurial fear of failure” as an additional criterion in the Business Agility sub-factor. The source of this variable is the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM). In 2020, USA held the top position for the

11、third consecutive year. Singapore held the 2nd spot, while Denmark overtook Sweden to claim 3rd place. Hong Kong climbed three ranks to 5th, and Switzerland dropped one place to claim the 6th spot. 2020 has been a challenging year for the world. Every aspect of our lives has been affected by COVID-1

12、9 and technology has been incorporated to address the pandemic in different dimensions from communication to monitoring, assessing and, hopefully in the non-distant future, finding a cure for the virus. For most countries the responses of our survey were acquired during the first wave of COVID-19. T

13、o be clear, the questions we ask do not refer specifically to issues related to the pandemic. Still, if technology is the most important tool in our battle against the pandemic, some of the trends we identify have an added significance. Arturo Bris Director IMD World Competitiveness Center Jos Cabal

14、lero Senior Economist IMD World Competitiveness Center Christos Cabolis Chief Economist IMD World Competitiveness Center Marco Pistis Research Specialist IMD World Competitiveness Center Trends in the IMD World Digital Competitiveness Ranking, 2020 Figure 1:Changes in Digital competitiveness ranking

15、 between 2019 and 2020 19IMD WORLD DIGITAL COMPETITIVENESS RANKING 2020 For 2020, economies that top our ranking focus on building their talent pool and thus strengthen the knowledge infrastructure necessary to develop and employ digital technology with Singapore, Switzerland, and the Netherlands ho

16、lding the top three positions respectively. In addition, most leading economies in our ranking provide an effective regulatory framework that enables the development and introduction of technologies. Singapore, Norway, UAE and Denmark capture the top four places in this sub-factor. Finally, top perf

17、ormers in digital competitiveness also combine individual adaptability with business agility in their economies. The Republic of Korea, Denmark and the USA excel in the dimension of individual adaptive attitudes while Taiwan-China, the USA, the Republic of Korea and China capture the four highest pl

18、aces in the area of business agility. In the following sections, we review the main facts for the top ten economies, we identify the characteristics of the largest increases and declines, as well as the challenges for the bottom ten economies in our ranking. We begin by outlining the trends in digit

19、al competitiveness at the sub- regional level. Figure 2: Trends in Digital Competitiveness by region Digital competitiveness regional trends: Overall ranking The WDCR studies 63 economies most of which have a high or middle level of income per capita. Figure 1 provides a visualization of the changes

20、 in the ranking between 2019 and 2020. Of the economies in the study, 29, experienced a decline in the ranking. From the remaining, 23 advanced, while 11 remained in the position as last year. The largest improvements in the ranking compared to 2019 have been experienced by Cyprus, Estonia, Turkey,

21、Greece, Brazil and China. The largest declines have affected instead South Africa, Luxembourg, Russia, Mexico and Spain. Below, we discuss these trends in more details. Figure 2 presents the sub-regional overall digital competitiveness ranking trend for the years 2016 to 2020. Only Eastern Asia and

22、South America regions achieved an increase in their digital competitiveness rankings between 2019 and 2020; the other sub-regions remained stable or experienced a decline in their overall average positions. Eastern Asia tops the regional rankings, steadily increasing since 2016 from an average ranki

23、ng position of about 20th to about 15th in 2019 finally reaching an average of 13.4 in 2020. Western Europe remains stable at about 21st in 2020 but becomes the second most digital competitive region because of a small decline experienced IMD WORLD DIGITAL COMPETITIVENESS RANKING 202020 Figure 3: Di

24、gital competitiveness factors performance across regions in 2020 better worse by North America (which drops from an average position of about 20th over the past four years to 22.3 in 2020). Southern Asia and the Pacific and Western Asia and Africa regions saw a decline in the 2019-2020 period reachi

25、ng the 33rd and the 36th positions respectively. The performance of Eastern European countries is stable in 2020 around an average 40th position. Ex-Cis and Central Asia economies declined from about 45th to 47th during the same period. Conversely, the South American region shows a slight improvemen

26、t this year increasing its average position from 56th in 2019 to an average ranking of 55th in 2020. In terms of the digital competitiveness factors (Figure 3), regional rankings are fairly similar to the overall digital competitiveness scores. However, a noticeable difference is present in the know

27、ledge factor where North America and Ex-CIS and Central Asia economies perform better compared to the general score. Top 10 The top 10 economies remain the same as last year. The USA continues to lead the IMD World Digital Competitiveness Ranking for the third consecutive year. Likewise, Singapore r

28、emains in the 2nd spot. While Denmark overtakes Sweden moving up one place (3rd and 4th respectively), Hong Kong SAR rises three ranks to 5th. Switzerland drops to 6th (from 5th) and similarly the Netherlands declines to 7th (from 6th). Korea Rep. moves up to 8th (from 10th), Norway remains at 9th a

29、nd Finland rounds up the top 10 dropping 3 places from 7th. The USAs performance is largely driven by the knowledge and future readiness factors. More specifically, it is sustained by factors related to scientific concentration (e.g., percentage of scientific and technical employment and the use of

30、robots in education and R Data 2019 is sum of 4 quarters. B Population - market size (Estimates in millions) UNDP Human Development Report 2019 Mid-year estimates. Croatia: new census in 2011 with a new methodology.India: break in series in 2011. Jordan: series have been revised according to the the

31、 new Population and Housing Census published in 2016: end of year population for 2019. Portugal: methodological change in 2011. Russia: including Crimea as of 2015. UAE: re-estimation of the national population was made by the National Bureau of Statistics in 2010 (consequent increase as of 2008). L

32、ithuania: break in series 2011 - census revised population figure downwards by 10% (emigration to EU over past decade). Philippines: Latest available census data is for 2010. 2011-2015 figures are projections based on PSAs annual Philippines in Figures publication. Factor 1: Knowledge 1.1 Talent 1.1

33、.1 Educational assessment PISA - Math (PISA survey of 15-year olds) PISA 2018 (OECD) http:/www.oecd.org/pisa/ The OECDs Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a regular survey of 15-year olds which assesses aspects of their preparedness for adult life. PISA selects a sample of stud

34、ents that represents the full population of 15-year-old students in each participating country or education system, in both public and private schools. Mathematical literacy: an individuals capacity to identify and understand the role that mathematics plays in the world, to make well-founded judgmen

35、ts and to use and engage with mathematics in ways that meet the needs of that individuals life as a constructive, concerned and reflective citizen. Scientific literacy: an individuals scientific knowledge and use of that knowledge to identify questions, to acquire new knowledge, to explain scientifi

36、c phenomena, and to draw evidence based conclusions about science-related issues, understanding of the characteristic features of science as a form of human knowledge and enquiry, awareness of how science and technology shape our material, intellectual, and cultural environments, and willingness to

37、engage in science-related issues, and with the ideas of science, as a reflective citizen. Hong Kong (China), Netherlands, Portugal and United States: Data did not meet the PISA technical standards but were accepted as largely comparable. China: limited regions (B-S-J-Z); the municipalities of Beijin

38、g and Shanghai and the provinces of Jiangsu and Zhejiang participated. Notes and Sources by Criteria The source of the survey criteria is always : IMD World Competitiveness Centers Executive Opinion Survey 2020. Which was conducted from mid-February to early May 2020, with a total number of 5866 res

39、pondents. Standard notes used in the data tables When statistical data is not available or is too out-dated to be relevant for a particular economy, the name appears at the bottom of the statistical table and a dash is shown. When the data is older than the reference year, the year of the data is sh

40、own next to the criterion value. Exchange Rate As most data are expressed in U.S. dollars, you will find the exchange rates used at the beginning of the Statistical Tables. The sources for the Exchange Rates are International Financial Statistics Online March 2020 (IMF) and national sources. Per cap

41、ita For all information presented “per capita” the sources for the population are Passport GMID (Euromonitor) and national sources. % of GDP For all information presented as a “percentage of GDP” the sources for GDP are the OECD Main Economic Indicators April 2020 and national sources. 175IMD WORLD

42、DIGITAL COMPETITIVENESS RANKING 2020 1.1.6 Net flow of international students (Tertiary-level international students inbound minus students outbound (per 1000 people) UNESCO http:/stats.uis.unesco.org Net flow of internationally mobile students (inbound from abroad studying in a given country minus

43、outbound from a given country), both sexes, in tertiary education. Data can refer to the school or financial year prior or after the reference year. 1.2 Training for 25 years and more. Singapore: proportion of resident non-students aged 25-34 years with polytechnic, professional qualification or oth

44、er diploma, or university qualification. Japan: Data for tertiary education include upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary programmes (less than 5% of adults are in this group). 1.2.4 Pupil-teacher ratio (tertiary education) (Number of pupils per teacher) UNESCO http:/stats.uis.unesco.org OE

45、CD Education at a Glance 2019 National sources Average number of pupils per teacher at a given level of education, based on headcounts of both pupils and teachers. Tertiary education (ISCED levels 5 to 8). Tertiary education builds on secondary education, providing learning activities in specialised

46、 fields of education. It aims at learning at a high level of complexity and specialisation. Tertiary education includes what is commonly understood as academic education but also includes advanced vocational or professional education. Australia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece and Ireland: based on

47、full-time equivalents. Philippines: Academic Year 2017-2018 data. Data includes students and faculty from both public and private tertiary educational institutions. 1.2.5 Graduates in Sciences (% of graduates in ICT, Engineering, Math Mathematics and Statistics; Information and Communication technol

48、ogies; Engineering, manufacturing and construction. In tertiary education (ISCED2011 levels 5 to 8), both sexes (%). Philippines: Academic Year 2017- 2018 data. 1.2.6 Women with degrees (Share of women who have a degree in the population 25-65) OECD Education at a Glance 2019 Educational attainment

49、in tertiary education of 25-64 year-old females expressed as a percentage of the female population 25-64. In most countries data refer to ISCED 2011 (codes 5/6/7/8). Japan: includes data from another category. Kazakhstan: Proportion of women aged 24-44 who have received tertiary education. IMD WORLD DIGITAL COMPETITIVENESS RANKING 2020176 Scientific concentration 1.3.1 Total expenditure on R this is the gross annual investment in telecom (including fixed, mobile and other services) for acquiring property and network. The term investment means the expenditure