GII 2021 results
The GII helps create anenvironment that evaluates
innovation factors continuously.
In 2021, it provides
detailed innovation metrics
for 132 economies.

20

The following sections present the results of the GII 2021.
Appendix I provides details on how to interpret andanalyze the results, in particular regarding year-on-yearcomparison of the GII ranks, which requires
cautious interpretation.1

The GII 2021 innovation leaders
Only a few economies have consistently
delivered peak innovation performance.
Only Switzerland and Sweden have remained in the top
three of the innovation ranking for more than a decade.
Switzerland, Sweden, the United States of America andthe United Kingdom have ranked in the top five for the
past three years, while the Republic of Korea joins the top
five of the GII for the first time in 2021 (Figure 8).
The top 25 of the most innovative economies are mainly
from Europe, with France (11th) and Estonia (21st) making
notable progress. Five Asian economies shine in the top 15– the Republic of Korea (5th) and Singapore (8th) in the top 10,
with China (12th), Japan (13th) and Hong Kong, China (14th)
following. Singapore has been among the top 10 mostinnovative economies consistently for the past 14 years.
China is still the only middle-income economy to make itinto the top 30. China reaches the top three in the South
East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania (SEAO) region for the
first time and remains top of the upper middle-income
group (Figure 9).
Bulgaria (35th) and Malaysia (36th) are the only othermiddle-income economies close to the top 30 of the GII(see Table 5), but with no consistent increase in rank overtime. Indeed, Malaysia has been hovering close to the top
30 for the past 11 years but has not yet reached the mark.
Japan ranks 13th, up from 16th in 2020. The United ArabEmirates (UAE) (33rd) remains in the top 35 this year andmoves up one place. The UAE has been moving up the
rankings since 2018, when it ranked 38th. Turkey (41st) makes
a big jump into the top 50 and Brazil (57th) moves closer.
Since 2013, China has moved up the GII ranks
consistently and steadily, establishing itself as a global
innovation leader and getting closer to the top 10 every
year. The performance of China is at the frontier ofachievement, notably in innovation outputs. For instance,

China’s levels of patents by origin, scaled by GDP, arehigher than those of Japan, Germany and the UnitedStates, and are even more impressive when considered inabsolute terms. The same is true with regard to the levelsof Trademarks and Industrial designs by origin as apercentage of GDP. However, China is still behind,relative to Germany and the United States, in Human
capital and research and in indicators such as
Researchers (45th) and Tertiary enrolment (57th). China
also trails the United States in Market sophistication andBusiness sophistication, and is even further behind in
Institutions (61st).
The Republic of Korea (5th) made notable advances in the
Innovation Output Sub-Index (5th) and, in particular, in theindicators Trademarks by origin (8th), Global brand value(5th) and Cultural and creative services exports (40th). It
also ranks 3rd worldwide in the new GII output indicator
Production and export complexity. In terms of innovation
inputs, the Republic of Korea moved up the rankings in
two pillars: Institutions (28th) and Infrastructure (12th). It
also comes top in the sub-pillar ICTs (1st) and, notably, in
Government’s online service and E-participation.

A changing global innovation landscapeSelected middle-income economies arechanging the innovation landscape, startingwith China, Turkey, Viet Nam, India and thePhilippines are now pulling their weight.
It is challenging for emerging economies to consistently
improve their innovation performance and systems tomatch high-income, more prosperous economies. Only alimited number of middle-income economies havemanaged to catch up in innovation, by complementing
successful domestic innovation with international
technology transfer.
In addition to China, Bulgaria and Malaysia, which lead the
middle-income group rankings, only Turkey (41st), Thailand(43rd), Viet Nam (44th), the Russian Federation (45th), India(46th), Ukraine (49th) and Montenegro (50th) make it into the
top 50.
However, besides China, only the TVIPs (Turkey, Viet Nam,
India and the Philippines) are systematically catching up.
All four Asian economies have romped up the ranks by anaverage of 22 positions in the past decade: Turkey from
GII 2021 results

21

Figure 8
Movement in the GII top 15, 2017–2021

Am

er

ic a

a
a
re
hin
Ko
,C
s
f
g
d
o
n
n
re
y
k
la
Ki
St
n
li c
r la
Ko
d
po ma r
e
an
er
d
d
l
de
g
ub
m
an
tz
he
an
te
te
n c hin a
ga
i
e
l
r
n
i
i
t
n
p
ae
p
a
n
n
e
e
o
n
n
e
e
U
Fr
Sw
G
D
N
Ja
U
Sw
Si
Fi
H
C
Is r
R
es
at

nd

2021

1

2

3

4

of

d
ng

5

om

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

I re

The Republic of Korea
enters the top five in 2021.
Turkey jumps into the top
50 at 41st place.
la n

d

2020

France breaks into the top
15 and ranks 11th in 2021.
India and the Philippines
reach the top 50.

China breaks into the top
15 in 2019; it is 12th in 2021.
Israel makes it to top 10.

2019

L

em
ux

bo

ur

g

2018

Ic

2017

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

e la

13

nd

14

15

Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2021.
Note: Year-on-year comparisons of the GII ranks are inﬂuenced by changes in the GII model and data availability.

22

Global Innovation Index 2021

Sweden has been in the
top 3 from 2011 up to 2021.
Chile moves into the top 50.

Switzerland has ranked firstfrom 2011 up to 2021.
Malaysia gets closer to the
top 35.

Figure 9
Global innovation leaders, 2021

Top three innovation economies
by region

Top three innovation economies
by income group

Europe1 Switzerland
2 Sweden
3 United Kingdom

High-income
1 Switzerland
2 Sweden
3 United States of America

Northern America
1 United States of America
2 Canada

Upper middle-income
1 China
2 Bulgaria
3 Malaysia

Latin America and the Caribbean
1 Chile2 Mexico
3 Costa Rica
Central and Southern Asia
1 India
2 Iran (Islamic Republic of)
3 Kazakhstan

Lower middle-income
1 Viet Nam
2 India
3 Ukraine
Low-income
1 Rwanda
2 Tajikistan
3 Malawi

South East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania
1 Republic of Korea
2 Singapore
3 China
Northern Africa and Western Asia†
1 Israel
2 United Arab Emirates
3 Turkey
Sub-Saharan Africa*
1 South Africa
2 Kenya
3 United Republic of Tanzania
Indicates the movement of rank within the top three, relative to 2020, andindicates a new entrant into the top three in 2021.
†

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 Turkey (4th).

* Top three in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) – excluding island economies. The top five in the region comprise Mauritius (1st), South Africa (2nd), Kenya (3rd),
Cabo Verde (4th) and the United Republic of Tanzania (5th).
Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2021.
Notes: World Bank Income Group Classification (June 2020). Year-on-year GII rank changes are influenced by performance and methodologicalconsiderations; some economy data are incomplete (see Appendix I).
GII 2021 results

2365th in 2011 to 41st in 2021; Viet Nam from 76th in 2012 to44th this year; India from 62nd to 46th; and the Philippinesfrom 91st to 51st. It is noteworthy that these are particularly
large economies, which have the potential to radicallychange the global innovation landscape for good.
Turkey makes it into the top 50, gaining 10 ranks this year
to reach the 41st position. Viet Nam is overtaken by
Thailand, as it declines by two ranks, from 42nd to 44th.
This is nevertheless a considerable improvement on its
average rank of 68th during the period 2013–2015.
Viet Nam continues to lead the lower middle-income
group (Table 1).
India (46th) moves further ahead, by two spots (48th in GII
2020), after making it into the top 50 last year. It takes
2nd place in the lower middle-income group. India held the
3rd position in its income group in 2019 and 2020 having
entered the top three in 2019. India has also been
portrayed as successful in developing sophisticatedservices that are technologically dynamic and can be
traded internationally (Aghion et al., 2021). It continues tolead the world in the ICT services exports indicator (1st)and holds top ranks in other indicators, such as Domestic
industry diversification (12th) and Graduates in science andengineering (12th).
Aside from the TVIPs, there are other economies thatmove up the rankings this year. Among the most notable
movers are the Islamic Republic of Iran (60th), Oman (76th),
Uzbekistan (86th), Paraguay (88th), Cabo Verde (89th) and
Sri Lanka (95th).
Outside the top 100, Guatemala (101st), Tajikistan (103rd),Madagascar (110th) and Zimbabwe (113th) have made themost progress through the ranks, improving by between
five and seven positions overall.
Rwanda (102nd) regains the 1st position in the low-income
group after being 2nd in 2020. It ranked 1st in 2019, 2016
and 2015 and has been consistently in the top three of its
income group since 2014.
Tajikistan (103rd) and Malawi (107th) make it into the top
three in the low-income economies group (see Table 1).

Table 110 best-ranked economies by income group
Rank

Global Innovation Index 2021

Rank

Global Innovation Index 2021

High-income economies (51 in total)

Upper middle-income economies (34 in total)

1

Switzerland (1)1China (12)2Sweden (2)2Bulgaria (35)3

United States (3)3Malaysia (36)4

United Kingdom (4)4Turkey (41)5

Republic of Korea (5)5Thailand (43)6Netherlands (6)6Russian Federation (45)7

Finland (7)7Montenegro (50)8Singapore (8)8Serbia (54)9Denmark (9)9Mexico (55)10

Germany (10)10

Costa Rica (56)

Lower middle-income economies (34 in total)

Low-income economies (13 in total)

1

Viet Nam (44)1

Rwanda (102)2India (46)2

Tajikistan (103)3

Ukraine (49)3Malawi (107)4

Philippines (51)4Madagascar (110)5Mongolia (58)5

Burkina Faso (115)6

Republic of Moldova (64)6

Uganda (119)7

Tunisia (71)7

Mozambique (122)8

Morocco (77)8Mali (124)9Kenya (85)9Togo (125)10Uzbekistan (86)10

Ethiopia (126)

Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2021.
Note: The overall Global Innovation Index rank is reported in brackets next to the economy.
24

Global Innovation Index 2021

Innovation overperformers
Several developing economies are performing
above expectation on innovation relative totheir level of economic development.
For several years, the GII has demonstrated the positive
relationship between innovation and economic
development: the more developed an economy is, themore it innovates, and vice versa (Figure 10). However,some economies break out of this pattern. Some performabove or below expectations, relative to their predictedperformance and level of development.
In the GII 2021, 19 economies are performing above
expectations relative to their level of development– termed innovation achievers (Table 2).
India, Kenya, the Republic of Moldova and Viet Nam arestill record holders for being innovation achievers for
11 consecutive years. India’s innovation performance isabove the average for the upper middle-income group in
five of the seven innovation pillars (it scores below averagein the pillars of Infrastructure and Creative outputs). Kenya
keeps its 3rd place in sub-Saharan Africa and scores above
its income group in Institutions, Market and Businesssophistication and Knowledge and technology outputs. It
also scores above the average for its region in Human
capital and research and Creative outputs. Viet Nam
continues to score above the lower middle-income groupaverage in all pillars and scores even above the average ofthe upper middle-income group in Market and Businesssophistication, as well as in both output pillars.
However, there is change too this year. Brazil (57th), theIslamic Republic of Iran (60th) and Peru (70th) are innovationachievers in 2021 for the first time ever. In the case of
Brazil, this distinction coincides with an upward move inthe rankings to gain the 57th place.
Sub-Saharan Africa is the region with the highest numberof economies performing above expectations (six in total).
South East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania is 2nd (with four
economies), Europe is 3rd (three economies), and Northern
Africa and Western Asia, Latin America and the
Caribbean, and Central and Southern Asia tie in 4th place(with two innovation achievers each).2
Conversely, 31 economies are performing below
expectations on innovation. In the high-income group,
three are European Union economies – Greece, Lithuania
and Romania. In the upper middle-income group, there
are two Latin American and Caribbean economies– Argentina and the Dominican Republic. In the lower
middle-income group, 11 economies are performing below

expectations for their level of development, notably fivefrom sub-Saharan Africa – Angola, Benin, Côte d’Ivoire,
Cameroon and Nigeria.3
Relative to 2020, 30 economies changed performancegroups. Fifteen economies changed their performancestatus from below expectations to matching expectations.
The majority of these cases (six economies) are from Latin
America and the Caribbean – the Plurinational State of
Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador, Guatemala, Paraguay and Uruguay.

The persistent regionalinnovation divide
The geography of innovation is changing
unevenly. South East Asia, East Asia, andOceania is closing the global innovation
divide with Northern America and Europe.
Despite some innovation “catch-up,” divides still exist withrespect to national innovation performance in the world
regions. This year, there are no changes in terms of whichworld regions perform best in innovation. Northern
America and Europe continue to lead, followed by South
East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania (SEAO), and, moredistantly, by Northern Africa and Western Asia, Latin
America and the Caribbean, Central and Southern Asia,and sub-Saharan Africa, respectively.

Northern America
Northern America, composed of the United States andCanada, is the most innovative world region. The UnitedStates keeps its 3rd place in the GII ranking, and Canada
goes up one spot to reach the 16th place. The region is thehighest performer in all GII pillars compared to all otherworld regions. The United States performs best in
Business sophistication (2nd) and Knowledge andtechnology outputs (3rd), while Canada comes top in
Market sophistication (1st) and fifth in Institutions.

EuropeEurope is still the second most innovative region in theworld. It hosts a large number of innovative economies:
16 European economies are innovation leaders (i.e., in the
top 25). A total of 10 economies move up the ranks thisyear: France (11th), Iceland (17th), Austria (18th), Estonia(21st), Hungary (34th), Bulgaria (35th), Slovakia (37th),
Lithuania (39th), the Russian Federation (45th) andBelarus (62nd).

GII 2021 results

25

Figure 10
The positive relationship between innovation and development60

50

GII score

Bulgaria
40

India

Thailand
Viet Nam
Philippines
UkraineMongolia
South Africa
Tunisia

30

BrazilIran (Islamic Republic of)
Republic of Moldova

Peru

MoroccoKenya
United Republic of Tanzania
MalawiRwandaMadagascar

20

7

8

9
GDP per capita (PPP$ logarithmic scale)

Performing above expectations for level of development

Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2021.
Note: Bubbles sized by population.
26

Global Innovation Index 2021

10

11

Table 2Innovation achievers in 2021, their income group, region, and years as an innovation achiever
EconomyIncome group

RegionYears as an innovation achiever (total)

India

Lower-middle income

Central and Southern Asia

2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019,2020, 2021 (11)Kenya

Lower-middle income

Sub-Saharan Africa

2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020,2021 (11)

Republic of Moldova

Lower-middle income

Europe2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020,2021 (11)Viet Nam

Lower-middle income

South East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020,2021 (11)Malawi

Low-income

Sub-Saharan Africa

Mongolia

Lower-middle income

South East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 (9)2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 (9)RwandaLow-income

Sub-Saharan Africa

2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 (9)UkraineLower-middle income

Europe2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 (9)ThailandUpper-middle income

South East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania 2011, 2014, 2015, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 (7)Bulgaria

Upper-middle income

Europe2015, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021 (5)Madagascar

Low-income

Sub-Saharan Africa

2016, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021 (5)South Africa

Upper-middle income

Sub-Saharan Africa

2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 (4)MoroccoLower-middle income

Northern Africa and Western Asia

2015, 2020, 2021 (3)Philippines

Lower-middle income

South East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania 2019, 2020, 2021 (3)Tunisia

Lower-middle income

Northern Africa and Western Asia

2018, 2020, 2021 (3)United Republic of Tanzania

Lower-middle income

Sub-Saharan Africa

2017, 2020, 2021 (3)BrazilUpper-middle income

Latin America and the Caribbean

2021 (1)

Iran (Islamic Republic of)Upper-middle income

Central and Southern Asia

2021 (1)PeruUpper-middle income

Latin America and the Caribbean

2021 (1)

Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2021.
Notes: Income group classification follows the World Bank Income Group Classification (June, 2020). Geographic regions correspond to the United
Nations publication on standard country or area codes for statistical use (M49).

On average, Europe is the second best performer
worldwide, behind Northern America, in all GII pillars,
except for Market sophistication, where it is also behind
the average of the SEAO region. Finland has the mosthighly performing Institutions in the region (2nd worldwide).
Sweden leads in Human capital and research (2nd) andBusiness sophistication (1st), Norway comes top in
Infrastructure worldwide (1st), while the United Kingdom
leads in Market sophistication (4th). Switzerland is theregional leader in innovation outputs: it ranks 1st worldwide
in Knowledge and technology outputs and 2nd in Creative
outputs.

South East Asia, East Asia, and Oceania (SEAO)
The innovation performance of the SEAO region has been
the most dynamic in the past decade, closing the gap with
Northern America and Europe. Five SEAO economies areworld innovation leaders: the Republic of Korea (5th),
Singapore (8th), China (12th), Japan (13th), and Hong Kong,
China (14th). Among these leaders, China, the Republic ofKorea and Japan have made the greatest advances up the
rankings in the past 10 years (see Table 3).

Thailand (43rd), Viet Nam (44th), the Philippines (51st) andIndonesia (87th) have moved up between 5 and 40 GII
ranks over the past decade. Thailand and Viet Nam rank
among the top 30 worldwide in Market sophistication, as
does the Philippines in Knowledge and technology
outputs. They are now leaders in key innovation
indicators, too. For instance, Thailand ranks 1st in R&D
financed by business; and Viet Nam and the Philippines
are world leaders in High-tech exports.

Northern Africa and Western Asia
In Northern Africa and Western Asia, the United ArabEmirates (UAE) remains in the top 35 and moves up toachieve the 33rd rank. Turkey makes a big jump into the top
50, reaching the 41st spot. An additional eight economies
in the region move up the ranks, including Egypt (94th) and
Algeria (120th).
Cyprus is the regional leader in Institutions (26th) and Creative
outputs (20th), while Israel leads in Knowledge andtechnology outputs (6th), Market sophistication (8th), Businesssophistication (8th) and Human capital and research (19th).
The UAE tops the region in Infrastructure (14th).

GII 2021 results

27

The United States leads in several key innovation indicators.
Hong Kong (China), Israel and Singapore follow

The economies at the top of the rankings are world
leaders in key innovation indicators. This year, theUnited States is the absolute leader in this regard;
holding first place in 13 indicators out of the 81 used,
including metrics such as Global corporate R&D
investors, venture capital deals received, the quality of
its universities, the quality and impact of its scientificpublications (H-index), the number of patents by origin
and E-participation.

Hong Kong, China follows the United States in 2nd place,with world-topping performances in indicators such as
New businesses, High-tech imports and Global brandvalue. Israel and Singapore tie in 3rd place, attaining the
top rank in R&D expenditures and Regulatory quality,
respectively. They are followed by China and theRepublic of Korea in joint 5th place, leading on High-tech
exports and Researchers, among other indicators.
Luxembourg comes 7th with the top performance inKnowledge-intensive employment; and Switzerland andJapan are equal 8th, leading in Patent families, andProduction and export complexity.

Economies with the most top-ranked GII indicators, 2021
Innovation indicators in which economies score best worldwide
EconomyInputs

Outputs

Total

6

United States of America

7

Hong Kong, China

13

7

11

4

Israel6410Singapore

6

4

10

China

3

Republic of Korea

5

Luxembourg

6

8

2

2

4

Japan

2

4

Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2021.
Note: The GII methodology allows multiple economies to rank first in an indicator; see Economy profiles and Appendix I.
Global Innovation Index 2021

9

4

Switzerland

28

9

6

6

6

Table 3
GII 2021 rankings in Asia (excluding Western Asia)
Rank Top 15

Rank

Top 50Rank Top 60

Rank

Top 100

Rank Top 130

5

Republic of Korea

36

Malaysia

51

Philippines

79

Kazakhstan

103

Tajikistan

8

Singapore

43

Thailand58

Mongolia

82

Brunei Darussalam

109

Cambodia

12

China

44

Viet Nam

60

Iran (Islamic Republic of)86

Uzbekistan

111

Nepal

13

Japan

46

India

87

Indonesia

116

Bangladesh

14

Hong Kong, China

95

Sri Lanka

117

98

Kyrgyzstan

Lao People’s Democratic
Republic

99

Pakistan127

Myanmar

Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2021

Table 4
GII 2021 rankings in Latin America and the Caribbean
Rank Top 60

Rank

Top 80Rank Top 100

53

Chile

65

Uruguay83

PanamaRank Top 110
101

Guatemala55

Mexico67

Colombia

88

Paraguay

104

Bolivia (Plurinational State of)56

Costa Rica

70

Peru

91

Ecuador108

Honduras

57

Brazil73

Argentina

93

Dominican Republic

74

Jamaica96

El Salvador

97

Trinidad and Tobago

Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2021

Latin America and the Caribbean
In Latin America and the Caribbean, no economy makes it
into the top 50. Chile (53rd), Mexico (55th), Costa Rica (56th)
and Brazil (57th) are the only economies in the region in the
top 60 (see Table 4). Moreover, with the exception of
Mexico, these Latin American innovation pockets have not
improved their rankings consistently over the past 10
years. However, Brazil makes a strong advance this year,
improving by five positions and achieving its best ranksince 2012.
Chile has the most balanced innovation system, ranking
highest in the region in Institutions (40th) and Infrastructure(47th) (Table 5). Conversely, and relative to theirperformance in all GII pillars, Mexico is still behind in
Institutions (77th) and Infrastructure (67th), while Costa Rica
and Brazil are lagging in Infrastructure and Market
sophistication. Brazil is the only economy in the region forwhich expenditures on R&D are above 1 percent of GDP
and comparable to some European economies, such as
Croatia and Luxembourg. Brazil also ranks highest in theregion in the indicator Global corporate R&D investors(26th), above Mexico (31st) and Argentina (36th).

Colombia still has a relatively unbalanced innovation
system, performing less well in Human capital and research(78th) and in the innovation outputs pillars, in contrast to its
relatively good performance in Market sophistication (42nd)
and Business sophistication (50th). Peru achieves its best
ranking this year in Market and Business sophistication(38th and 37th, respectively), but still struggles to translate its
innovation inputs into outputs. It is also an innovationachiever for the first time this year, highlighting its potential
for further improvements in the future (see Table 2).

Central and Southern Asia
In Central and Southern Asia, India leads in 46th position,
having consistently risen up the ranks since 2015, when it
ranked 81st. The Islamic Republic of Iran is 2nd in theregion, going up to 60th place. Kazakhstan ranks 3rd at the79th position (see Table 3). Uzbekistan continues to move
upward, by seven places, and achieves the 86th rank in
2021. The innovation performance of Kazakhstan (79th)
and Tajikistan (103rd) improved in 2021 but has been lesssteady over the past years.

In the top 80, Uruguay (65th), Colombia (67th), Peru (70th) andArgentina (73rd) all moved up the ranks in 2021. Over the
past 10 years, Colombia and Peru have improved theirrankings, but not at a steady pace and with some difficulty.
GII 2021 results

29

Table 5
GII 2021 rankings overall and by pillar
Country/Economy

Switzerland
SwedenUnited States of America
United Kingdom
Republic of Korea
Netherlands
FinlandSingapore
Denmark
Germany
FranceChina
Japan
Hong Kong, China
IsraelCanadaIceland
Austria
Ireland
NorwayEstonia
Belgium
Luxembourg
Czech Republic
Australia
New Zealand
Malta
CyprusItaly
Spain
PortugalSlovenia
United Arab Emirates
Hungary
Bulgaria
Malaysia
Slovakia
LatviaLithuania
PolandTurkeyCroatia
Thailand
Viet Nam
Russian Federation
India
GreeceRomania
UkraineMontenegro
Philippines
Mauritius
Chile
SerbiaMexicoCosta Rica
BrazilMongolia
North Macedonia
Iran (Islamic Republic of)South Africa
BelarusGeorgia
Republic of Moldova
Uruguay
Saudi Arabia
Colombia
Qatar
Armenia
Peru
30

Global Innovation Index 2021

Overall
GII

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70

Institutions

Human
capital andresearch

13
9
12
15
28
6
2
1
8
17
19
61
7
11
34
5
14
16
18
3
22
23
27
32
10
4
37
26
36
31
25
20
30
42
47
41
39
29
33
38
93
46
64
83
67
62
51
53
91
48
90
21
40
50
77
66
78
76
52
124
55
85
35
81
44
101
56
57
65
70

6
2
11
10
1
14
4
9
5
3
15
21
20
25
19
18
23
7
27
13
34
8
40
33
12
17
41
42
31
30
24
28
22
36
65
39
58
46
43
37
26
47
63
79
29
54
16
76
44
59
80
71
51
62
56
61
48
81
73
49
67
38
60
77
64
32
78
75
94
53

InfrastructureMarketsophistication

Businesssophistication

2
3
23
10
12
16
11
15
5
21
17
24
9
6
40
30
25
7
4
1
8
35
33
19
20
22
18
28
26
13
31
27
14
32
36
51
39
55
42
41
48
29
61
79
63
81
45
37
94
60
86
65
47
44
67
71
69
91
49
70
83
59
85
82
53
54
57
34
80
78

6
11
2
4
18
31
19
5
7
20
17
16
15
3
8
1
25
40
48
21
10
33
53
50
9
14
63
46
43
32
56
71
26
65
72
30
73
45
35
60
49
67
27
22
61
28
70
76
88
41
86
29
66
58
55
85
75
13
12
82
23
101
34
74
108
39
42
83
99
38

4
1
2
21
7
5
6
3
11
12
19
13
10
24
8
20
18
15
17
23
29
16
9
25
26
30
14
28
32
35
41
27
22
31
42
39
43
40
45
38
46
55
36
47
44
52
60
54
53
67
33
111
48
63
56
49
34
71
65
115
51
69
61
87
81
89
50
96
98
37

Knowledge
Creativeand technology outputs
outputs

1
2
3
10
8
7
5
13
14
9
16
4
11
62
6
23
25
19
15
28
22
17
38
12
42
39
44
21
18
26
34
32
59
20
27
31
30
45
49
36
50
47
40
41
48
29
52
35
33
78
24
93
58
43
53
56
51
85
57
46
61
37
75
54
63
69
72
79
64
87

2
5
12
4
8
7
16
17
13
11
6
14
18
1
30
19
10
27
29
25
15
36
3
22
24
23
9
20
34
32
26
38
40
47
21
37
43
39
41
50
35
54
55
42
56
68
69
72
48
33
65
31
60
76
52
45
66
28
83
46
79
93
74
53
64
78
82
63
49
77

Table 5
GII 2021 rankings overall and by pillar (continued)
Country/Economy

Tunisia
KuwaitArgentina
Jamaica
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Oman
MoroccoBahrainKazakhstan
Azerbaijan
JordanBrunei Darussalam
PanamaAlbania
Kenya
Uzbekistan
Indonesia
Paraguay
Cabo Verde
United Republic of Tanzania
Ecuador
Lebanon
Dominican Republic
Egypt
Sri Lanka
El Salvador
Trinidad and Tobago
Kyrgyzstan
Pakistan
Namibia
GuatemalaRwandaTajikistan
Bolivia (Plurinational State of)SenegalBotswana
Malawi
HondurasCambodia
Madagascar
Nepal
Ghana
Zimbabwe
Côte d’Ivoire
Burkina Faso
Bangladesh
Lao People’s Democratic Republic
Nigeria
UgandaAlgeria
ZambiaMozambique
Cameroon
Mali
Togo
Ethiopia
Myanmar
Benin
Niger
GuineaYemen
AngolaOverallGII

Institutions

Human
capital andresearch

75
86
102
43
82
71
74
49
45
58
63
24
69
60
80
94
107
110
88
103
126
112
96
114
119
98
72
95
99
73
117
54
118
131
68
59
105
121
111
108
115
120
129
79
92
122
130
109
89
104
125
127
113
106
87
116
123
84
97
100
132
128

35
69
50
86
68
45
82
83
66
89
84
52
99
90
92
72
91
98
95
125
97
87
102
93
118
106
100
70
117
57
120
114
85
55
104
130
122
96
109
116
115
101
88
124
103
128
113
121
131
74
107
112
105
123
110
126
108
111
129
132
127
119

71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132

Source: Global Innovation Index Database, WIPO, 2021.

InfrastructureMarketsophistication

Businesssophistication

89
43
64
104
52
56
84
38
58
88
102
46
50
62
114
72
68
77
66
105
74
100
75
92
73
99
90
87
117
112
122
101
126
106
108
93
127
116
107
132
98
97
128
109
111
95
123
120
103
96
119
76
115
124
110
121
113
118
130
131
129
125

98
94
110
116
51
84
91
78
80
36
47
106
97
79
54
24
57
89
128
109
44
90
104
96
118
105
119
52
120
92
77
93
37
59
107
113
81
62
69
122
68
115
64
117
114
95
103
102
111
132
87
126
129
121
112
130
124
123
100
131
125
127

114
100
57
58
99
94
105
90
78
92
85
84
103
68
77
123
110
66
74
119
97
64
86
106
62
80
104
107
88
112
79
82
129
75
131
73
95
72
117
125
59
108
101
91
120
122
70
76
118
124
83
127
93
109
128
126
132
113
116
121
102
130

Knowledge
Creativeand technology outputs
outputs

55
60
73
95
66
107
67
82
86
115
76
130
113
103
65
77
74
117
122
100
97
91
108
70
68
124
83
102
71
119
90
96
80
112
88
101
84
118
111
99
121
104
109
110
106
92
127
123
105
125
120
116
98
94
128
81
89
131
114
132
126
129

80
89
73
51
99
71
70
106
110
67
88
85
58
81
95
113
91
62
59
44
86
92
84
104
100
57
103
120
87
105
75
117
107
111
109
112
97
102
98
61
108
94
101
121
129
123
90
116
126
118
125
115
124
122
119
127
131
128
132
96
114
130

4th quartile (best performers, ranks 1st to 33rd)
3rd quartile (ranks 34th to 66th)
2nd quartile (ranks 67th to 99th)
1st quartile (ranks 100th to 132nd)
GII 2021 results

31Overall, the region performs best in Market sophistication.
In terms of innovation inputs, Kazakhstan leads the regionin Institutions (45th rank overall) and Infrastructure (58th),
the Islamic Republic of Iran leads in Human capital andresearch (49th), Uzbekistan in Market sophistication (24th)and India in Business sophistication (52nd). India is also at
the top of the region in the Knowledge and technology
outputs pillar (29th), while the Islamic Republic of Irancomes top in Creative outputs (46th).

Sub-Saharan Africa
In sub-Saharan Africa, only Mauritius (52nd) and South
Africa (61st) rank in the top 65; and only Kenya (85th) andthe United Republic of Tanzania (90th) have remained
firmly within the top 100 and have improved theirperformance over the past five years. No economy has
steadily improved its rankings over time. A total of 10
economies in the region move up the GII ranks this year,
including Kenya (85th), Namibia (100th), Malawi (107th),
Madagascar (110th), Zimbabwe (113th) and Burkina Faso
(115th). Cabo Verde reaches 89th place this year, aconsiderable increase from its position at 103rd placein 2013.
On average, the region performs best in Institutions, evenranking above the average of the Central and Southern
Asia region. Mauritius ranks highest in the region in
Institutions (21st), Infrastructure (65th) and Creative outputs(31st). Namibia comes top in Human capital and research(57th), and South Africa in Market sophistication (23rd),
Business sophistication (51st) and Knowledge andtechnology outputs (61st).

Creating balanced and efficientinnovation ecosystems
Innovation leaders have balanced andhigh-performing innovation systems.
However, efficiency in translating innovation
inputs into outputs is still eluding several
high-income economies
Innovation leaders and the economies that haveconsistently advanced up the GII ranks over the past
decade have dynamic innovation systems and combine
efficiency in translating innovation inputs into outputs witha balanced and strong performance across all GII pillars.
Translating an economy’s investments in innovation – inthe form of R&D, education, and solid infrastructure andinstitutions supporting innovative activities – into
innovation outputs is not an easy feat.
32

Global Innovation Index 2021

Some economies excel in efficiently converting innovation
inputs into outputs. Among the high-income groupeconomies, Switzerland (1st) produces considerably
higher levels of outputs than other high-income
economies, such as Sweden (2nd), the United States (3rd)and Singapore (8th), at comparable levels of innovation
inputs (Figure 11). The Czech Republic (24th) produces thesame levels of outputs as Japan (13th) or Singapore (8th) atmuch lower levels of innovation inputs.
Among the upper middle-income group economies, China(12th) ranks 7th overall in the Innovation Output Sub-Index,
and its levels of outputs are comparable to those ofhigh-income economies like the United Kingdom (4th), theNetherlands (6th) and Germany (10th), even though its
overall level of innovation inputs is lower. Bulgaria (35th)
has outputs comparable to high-income economies, suchas Norway (20th) and Italy (29th), with fewer inputs.
The United Republic of Tanzania (90th), among the lower
middle-income group economies, performs on innovation
outputs at levels comparable to high-income Latin
American economies Chile (53rd) and Uruguay (65th). In
addition, Viet Nam (44th) and the Philippines (51st) do thesame, relative to other high-income European Union
economies, such as Latvia (38th), Lithuania (39th) and
Poland (40th), with a lower level of innovation inputs.
Low-income sub-Saharan Africa economies Malawi(107th), Madagascar (110th), Ethiopia (126th) and Guinea(130th) are also efficiently transforming their limited
innovation inputs and resources into innovation outputs.
However, there are also several high-income economies
that struggle to obtain a better balance between their levelof investments and their level of innovation results, to thedetriment of their overall innovation performance and GII
ranking. This group includes, notably, oil and natural gas
producers and exporters Canada (16th), Norway (20th), theUnited Arab Emirates (UAE) (33rd), Bahrain (78th) and
Brunei Darussalam (82nd). All these economies rank
considerably lower in the Innovation Output Sub-Index,
relative to their ranking in the Innovation Input Sub-Index.
For instance, the UAE ranks 23rd in innovation inputs
overall, and 47th in outputs. The economy’s ranking ininnovation outputs has, however, improved this year
relative to 2020, moving in the right direction to achieve
greater balance in the innovation system.
Peru (70th), despite being an innovation achiever, it is also
struggling to effectively utilize its innovation inputs (ranked
52nd in the Innovation Input Sub-Index) into innovation
results (82nd) and more effort is needed to achieve a betterbalance in the innovation system.

Figure 11
Innovation input to output performance, 2021

Switzerland
60

China

Singapore

Czech Republic

Canada40

Bulgaria

NorwayOutput score

New Zealand
UkraineIran (Islamic Republic of)Armenia

Australia

Viet Nam
Philippines
United Arab Emirates

Republic of Moldova

United Republic of Tanzania
20

Pakistan

Madagascar

Guatemala
Malawi

Myanmar
Yemen

20

Peru

Sri Lanka
BahrainEthiopia

Kazakhstan
Brunei Darussalam

Guinea

30

40

50

60

70

Input score
Efﬁcient
Inefﬁcient
Not labeled
Fitted line

GII 2021 results

33Moreover, innovation leaders have complementarity andbalance across the different areas of their innovation
system. A successful innovation system balances
knowledge creation, exploration and investments – theinnovation inputs – with the production of ideas andtechnologies toward application, exploitation and impact– the innovation outputs.
A balanced and strong performance across all sevenpillars is most clearly evident among the innovation leaders(top 25). Only 15 economies – including Switzerland,
Sweden, the United States, Singapore and France, or
11 percent of all economies ranked this year, have strong
performances across all seven GII pillars (Table 5).
However, certain economies that are ranked lower overall
in the GII are also leaders in specific areas. Examples
include Turkey, highly ranked in Human capital andresearch (26th); Thailand, Viet Nam and Uzbekistan, with
their relatively high ranking in Market sophistication (27th,
22nd and 24th, respectively); and Mongolia, ranked in the
top 30 in Creative outputs (28th). These discrepancies in
performance within economies also hint at innovation
systems that are changing and dynamic with the potential
for increased overall performance in the future.

Table 6
Top S&T cluster of each economy or cross-borderregion, 2021
Rank

Economy1

Tokyo–Yokohama

JP

0

2

Shenzhen–Hong Kong–Guangzhou

CN/HK

0

3

Beijing

CN

1

4

Seoul

KR

−1

5

San Jose–San Francisco, CA

US

0

10

Paris

FR

0

15

LondonGB

019

Amsterdam–Rotterdam

NL

−1

20

Cologne

DE

−1

27

Tel Aviv–Jerusalem

IL

−3

28

Taipei–Hsinchu

TW

−1

29

Singapore

SG

−1

31

Melbourne

AU

4

32

Moscow

RU

035

Stockholm

SE

−2

36

Eindhoven

BE/NL

−2

40

Toronto, ON

CA

−1

41

TehranIR243

Brussels

BE

−2

46

Madrid

ES

−1

48

Milan

IT

0

49

Istanbul

TR

2

50

Zürich

CH/DE

−1

56

Copenhagen

DK

−2

62

Bengaluru

IN

−2

66

São Paulo

BR

−5

71

ViennaAT−174

Helsinki

FI

−6

92

Lausanne

CH/FR

−3

100

Warsaw

PL−1

Source: WIPO Statistics Database, April 2021.

34

Global Innovation Index 2021

RankchangeCluster name

The GII top science and technology
clusters
New science and technology (S&T) clusters
are emerging. Clusters in China made themost consistent rank improvements. Delhi,
Mumbai and Istanbul also advanced strongly
this year.
Divides also exist in the ranking of the global science andtechnology (S&T) clusters. The top 100 S&T clusters are
hosted by 26 economies, of which six – Brazil, China,
India, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Turkey and the RussianFederation – are middle-income economies (Table 6).
Tokyo-Yokohama is the top-performing cluster again,
followed by Shenzhen–Hong Kong–Guangzhou, Beijing,
Seoul and San Jose–San Francisco (see Annex Table 3,
Top 100 clusters). The top 10 clusters remain the same aslast year with only minor shifts. Beijing overtook Seoul tooccupy the 3rd spot, and Shanghai switched with New York
City, NY in 8th position. The largest increases in rank camefrom three Chinese clusters – Qingdao (+16 positions),
Shenyang (+14) and Dalian (+13). Shenyang and Dalian,along with the Korean cluster Daegu, make up the three
new entrants into this year’s top 100 clusters (Map 1).
The United States continues to host the largest number ofclusters (24), followed by China (19), Germany (9) andJapan (5). Chinese clusters experienced the largest
increases in S&T output, with the median increase
equating to +14.4 percent, and China hosts the fastest
growing clusters with Qingdao (+33.1 percent) andSuzhou (+21.7 percent).4 Other middle-income clusters
besides China also experienced strong growth, including
Delhi (+6.6 percent), Mumbai (+6.3 percent) and Istanbul(+5.5 percent). High-income economy clusters grew at a
slower pace than clusters in middle-income economies. A
decline within clusters in the United States accounted formost of this slower growth. There were some notable
exceptions, namely Kanazawa (+12.1 percent) in Japan,
Daejon (+9.0 percent) in the Republic of Korea andMelbourne (+7.8 percent) in Australia.
Many European and U.S. clusters show more intense S&T
activity than their Asian counterparts do. The UnitedStates has nine clusters in the top 25 by S&T intensity,
followed by Germany and Sweden (with three each).
Cambridge in the United Kingdom and Eindhoven in the
Netherlands/Belgium, emerge as the most S&T-intensive
clusters. Ann Arbor, Michigan (United States), Oxford(United Kingdom) and San Jose–San Francisco, CA(United States) follow (see Annex Table 4, Ranking of S&T
intensity, 2015–2019). As was the case in the previous
year’s ranking, S&T intensity was higher if patenting
activity drove a cluster’s output, with 15 out of the top 25
clusters deriving the majority of their output from patents.

Map 1
Top 100 clusters worldwide

S&T clusters
Noise (non-cluster points)
Source: WIPO Statistic Database, April 2021.
Note: Noise refers to all inventor/author locations not classified as being in a cluster.
GII 2021 results

35

Conclusion
In conclusion, the GII continues to support and foster
innovation through changing times. The aim of the GII is toprovide insightful data on innovation and, in turn, to assist
policymakers in evaluating their innovation performanceand making informed innovation policy decisions. The
2021 edition of the GII – with its informed conclusions on
innovation developments both generally and in thecontext of the COVID-19 pandemic – makes a significant
contribution to this end.
Two key insights emerge from this year’s report.
• The global innovation landscape is changing too
slowly. The GII has been warning of this for several
years now, as high-income economies, notably from
Northern America and Europe, continue to lead the
GII ranks and have the strongest and most balanced
innovation systems. There is an urgent need for thisto change, particularly in the context of the COVID-19
crisis. Confronted with an unprecedented crisis, it isimportant to fully leverage the power of innovation tocollectively build a cohesive, dynamic and sustainable
recovery. The short-term and longer term impacts ofthe pandemic on science and innovation systems haveto be monitored and findings acted up on.
• There are a few middle-income economies, notably
the TVIPs, that are catching up with the leaders.
However, the pandemic’s effects on R&D investment– the uneven reduction of R&D expenditures in some
sectors and the fact that governments have not madeinnovation and R&D a priority in current stimulus
packages – will hamper convergence. It is therefore
crucial that support for innovation becomes broader
and that it is conducted in a countercyclical way(i.e., as business innovation expenditures slump,governments strive to counteract that effect with theirown expenditure boosts to innovation, even in the faceof higher public debt).
Future editions of the GII will track these developments
closely and continue the journey toward enabling policy
and business leaders by fostering a better understanding
and measurement of innovation.

36

Global Innovation Index 2021

Notes1

It is important to remember that various factors, includingchanges to the methodology for the calculation ofindicators, data availability and changes to the GII modeland measurement framework, influence the year-on-yearcomparisons of GII ranking. See Appendix I for more details.

2

Nine economies are no longer innovation achievers in
2021, relative to 2020: three economies from Europe (North
Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia); two from Latin America
and the Caribbean (Costa Rica and Jamaica); two from
Northern Africa and Western Asia (Armenia and Georgia); andtwo from sub-Saharan Africa (Mozambique and Niger).

3

Angola (132nd) rejoins the innovation ranking in 2021,
thanks to improved availability of innovation data. The
last time Angola was included in the GII was in 2015.

4

S&T output growth refers to the net S&T output over time,
which is the difference in total patents and publications
for each cluster, for all points that were located inside
the same cluster compared to the previous year.

Reference
Aghion P., C. Antonin and S. Bunel (2021). The Power of Creative
Destruction: Economic Upheaval and the Wealth of Nations.
Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

GII 2021 results

37