Biotechnology Innovation Scorecard
Latvia

Biotechnology Innovation Score Summary

Latvia scored 28.6/100, which places it 39th of the 54 countries studied. Latvia scored below Hungary and Italy. Latvia scored ahead of Saudi Arabia and China.

The overall innovation score is the simple average of the Category Scores shown below, normalized to a score out of 100. For more details on the scoring, see the Methodology page.

The chart below highlights Latvia in the overall rankings. Scroll down to the Category Scores for performance details in the individual categories.

Overall Score

Overall Score

28.6 / 100

Country Rank

39 / 54

Category Scores

These individual category scores are averaged to produce the overall score shown


IP Protection

Latvia scored 3.93/10, in IP Protection which places it 45th of the 54 countries studied. Latvia scored below Turkey and Mexico. Latvia scored ahead of Saudi Arabia and Brazil.

Strong intellectual property (IP) protection is central to biotechnology. In fact, it is said that the scope of IP protection defines the scope of biotechnology innovation.

IP protection is so important in biotechnology because of the years of research, and substantial financial investments are required to produce novel biotechnology products. Without protection from competition or from reverse-engineering, innovators and their financiers would have no certainty of recouping their investments.

In the absence strong intellectual property protection, it is difficult to attract the necessary funding or to convince talented scientists and business founders to take on the risks of innovative research and development.

But IP protection also goes beyond encouraging domestic development. It can also be an important factor in encouraging foreign companies to develop products for domestic needs. For example, a company may elect not to pursue a drug lead if it can only be sold in countries where development costs are unlikely to ever be recovered.

Enterprise Support

Latvia scored 4.50/10, in Enterprise Support which places it 30th of the 54 countries studied. Latvia scored below Japan and the Slovak Republic. Latvia scored ahead of China and Belgium.

Beyond gross measures of inputs and outputs it is also important to consider factors which impact commercial operations in a country.

The metrics in the Enterprise Support category evaluate a country’s business friendly features, and the availability of capital in various forms.

Consider that even if other metrics such R&D intensity or IP protection are strong, without Enterprise Support, it may be prohibitively difficult to start or grow a company. Alternatively, countries with low activity in biotechnology may enact policies creating a more-supportive business environment, whereas countries with strong biotechnology sectors may leverage their strength to levy taxes. In other cases, small economies wishing to avoid a 'bubble' have intentionally instituted policies directed at limiting growth.

Education and Workforce

Latvia scored 1.50/10, in Education and Workforce which places it 46th of the 54 countries studied. Latvia scored below Argentina and Hong Kong. Latvia scored ahead of Brazil and Philippines.

A common question in response to the Scorecard is 'How can a country improve its ranking?' This section provides specific opportunities.

Biotechnology is a technical field by its nature. Even non-research activities require an appreciation (or more) of the science behind a company's products and services. In some industries an MBA or law degree may suffice for management-level positions it is not uncommon for lawyers and managers in biotechnology to have Master's or Doctorate degrees in science, making education an important measure of a country’s capacity for biotechnology innovation.

So, to answer the question of how to improve a country's ranking on the scorecard, the first place to look is often the quantity and quality of science graduates the country produces. Often in order to improve these outputs requires amending supportive polices and foundations.

Foundations

Latvia scored 3.85/10, in Foundations which places it 34th of the 54 countries studied. Latvia scored below China and Lithuania. Latvia scored ahead of Hungary and Italy.

This metric considers factors such as national spending on R&D from government and commercial sources, as more spending will more likely lead to spillover effects that enable home-grown innovation.

The quality of a country's infrastructure can be also an important consideration in doing business in a given country.

For example, biotechnology R&D requires robust and stable electrical inputs. Frequent brownouts or blackouts, or poor transportation infrastructure which limits the utility of backup generators can have severe impacts on research abilities.

The efficiency of ports is also important as import of research materials, or export of perishable finished products, can be very time-sensitive.

While weak enterprise support can potentially be overcome by large foreign enterprises with sufficient capital, infrastructure weaknesses may be beyond the ability of foreign investors to resolve.

Policy and Stability

Latvia scored 6.28/10, in Policy and Stability which places it 29th of the 54 countries studied. Latvia scored below Lithuania and Portugal. Latvia scored ahead of Qatar and South Korea.

Moving beyond hard measures of research output or IP protection which provide a robust overview of how favorable an innovation environment a country may present, it is also important to consider factors in policy and overall stability. After all, weak enforcement of laws, or political stability, can trump the other measures.

Copyright © 2018 thinkBiotech LLC. Source data from Scientific American Worldview