These European Countries Are Working Hard To Develop Technology In Poorer Nations

africa internet

The centre For Global Development recently published its annual report on which looks at which richer countries are most committed to development in poorer nations.

One aspect of this involves looking in to which countries are helping with the development of new technology.

Based on a number of factors, each country is given a scaled score. A score of 5.0 represents an average effort to promote technology in poorer countries. Below this number obviously equals a sub-average effort and above is equal to a superior attempt.

In this case each country’s government spending on research and development along with its intellectual property rights legislation come under scrutiny.

The nations are given a different score for different factors which are then averaged out to determine which country ranks the highest.

SOURCE: centre For Global Development

#10 Sweden

Score: 4.9

Commendable for: Providing patent exceptions for research purposes.

Not so good for: Allowing copyrighting of databases; not revoking unused patents; not forcing patent holders to licence to meet social needs; not avoiding intellectual property rights extension in bilateral trade treaties; not providing subsidies for private research and development.

SOURCE: centre For Global Development

#9 Switzerland

Score: 5.0

Commendable for: Revoking unused patents; providing patent exceptions for research purposes.

Not so good for: Not forcing patent holders to licence to meet social needs; allowing copyrighting of databases; not providing subsidies for private research and development.

SOURCE: centre For Global Development

#8 Netherlands

Score: 5.3

Commendable for: Providing patent exceptions for research purposes.

Not so good for: Not revoking unused patents; allowing copyrighting of databases; not forcing patent holders to licence to meet social needs.

SOURCE: centre For Global Development

#7 Austria

Score: 5.5

Commendable for: Providing patent exceptions for research purposes; revoking unused patents.

Not so good for: Not forcing patent holders to licence to meet social needs; not avoiding intellectual copyrights extension in bilateral trade treaties; allowing copyrighting of databases.

SOURCE: centre For Global Development

#6 Norway

Score: 5.8

Commendable for: Providing subsidies for private research and development; providing patent exceptions for research purposes.

Not so good for: Allowing copyrighting of databases; not revoking unused patents; not forcing patent holders to licence to meet social needs.

SOURCE: centre For Global Development

#5 Spain

Score: 5.9

Commendable for: Subsidies for private research and development; revoking unused patents; providing patent exceptions for research purposes.

Not so good for: Allowing copyrighting of databases; not avoiding intellectual property rights extension in bilateral trade treaties.

SOURCE: centre For Global Development

Tied #3 France

Score: 6.1

Commendable for: Tax subsidies for private research and development; providing patent exceptions for research purposes.

Not so good for: Not avoiding intellectual property rights extension in bilateral trade treaties; allowing copyrighting of databases; not revoking unused patents; not forcing patent holders to licence to meet social needs.

SOURCE: centre For Global Development

Tied #3 Finland

Score: 6.1

Commendable for: Providing patent exceptions for research purposes.

Not so good for: Tax subsidies for private research and development; not avoiding intellectual property rights extension in bilateral trade treaties; allowing copyrighting of databases; not revoking unused patents.

SOURCE: centre For Global Development

#2 Denmark

Score: 6.5

Commendable for: Providing patent exceptions for research purposes.

Not so good for: Not avoiding intellectual property rights extension in bilateral trade treaties; allowing copyrighting of databases; not revoking unused patents; not forcing patent users to licence to meet social needs.

SOURCE: centre For Global Development

#1 Portugal

Score: 7.0

Commendable for: Tax subsidies for private research and development; avoiding intellectual property rights extending into bilateral trade agreements; not allowing copyrighting of databases; forcing patent holders to licence to meet social needs; providing patent exceptions for research purposes.

Not so good for: Allowing patenting of new plant and animal varieties; limiting scope for patenting software innovations; not revoking unused patents.

SOURCE: centre For Global Development

These Are The Best Places To Buy Property In Europe >

NOW WATCH: Briefing videos

Business Insider Emails & Alerts

Site highlights each day to your inbox.

Follow Business Insider Australia on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Instagram.