Final Report of R&D Survey 2012

National Survey of
Reserch and Development (R&D) 2012

Commissioned By:
Malaysian Science and Technology Information Centre (MASTIC)
Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Malaysia (MOSTI)
Cunducted By:
Published By:
Malaysian Science and Technology Information Centre (MASTIC)
Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Malaysia
Level 4, Block C5, Complex C,
Federal Government Administrative Centre
62662 Putrajaya Malaysia
Tel: 603 - 8885 8038
Fax: 603 8889 2980
Email: mastic@mastic.gov.my
Website: http://www.mastic.gov.my
Copyright c 2012 MASTIC. All rights reserved. No part of this publication
may be reproduced in any form either in whole or part, without written
permission from the publisher.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Malaysian Science and Technology Information Centre (MASTIC) would like to express its
gratitude and appreciation to the top management of the Ministry of Science, Technology and
Innovation (MOSTI) namely, the Secretary-General for the guidance and support towards the
publication of The National Survey of Research & Development (R&D) 2012 report. MASTIC
is especially grateful to the members of the Technical Committee and National Science and Research
Council (NSRC) for their much appreciated advice and inputs for this report.
Special thanks to the MASTIC team and the consultant team led by Prof. Dr. Ratnawati Mohd Asraf
from IIUM Consultancies Sdn. Bhd. for their contributions and praiseworthy eorts in the
preparation of this report.
Under-Secretary
MASTIC, MOSTI
iii
RESEARCH TEAM
Project Manager:
Dr. Tan Yit Quin
Survey Logistics and Technical Support:
Mrs. Anita Bahari

Mr. Ramlee Ab Ghani
Mr. Vinson Embaran
Mrs. Radah Hasbullah
Ms. Nabilah Mohd Taha
Mrs. Dzarifa Ahmad
Lead Consultant:
Prof. Dr. Ratnawati Mohd Asraf
Consultants:
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ismail Sheikh Ahmad

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Gairuzazmi Mat Ghani
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Isarji Hj. Sarudin
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tunku Badariah Tunku Ahmad
Mr. Mohd Shukri Nordin
Project Coordinators:
Mrs. Noor Muhaini Mohd Hisham

Mrs. Norshuhaida Zakaria
Research Assistants:
Mrs. Nuruljannah Md Husin

Ms. Masyitah Kipli
Ms. Norhanizan Zakaria
Editors:
Prof. Dr. Ratnawati Mohd Asraf

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tunku Badariah Tunku Ahmad
iv
FOREWORD
The 2012 Report on the National Survey of Research & Development was based on the survey
carried out in 2011 and 2012 for the nancial years 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011. The survey was rst
carried out in 1994 to assess the trends and developments in R&D in Malaysia, specically in
institutions of higher learning, government agencies and research institutes, and the business
enterprise. From 1994 to 2008, the survey was conducted every two years. However, since 2008, it
has been conducted every year.
The survey received good cooperation from the all sectors involved, and we hope that this
cooperation will continue and be even better in future. We certainly will not spare any eorts in
enhancing the usefulness of the survey, as it has always been our objective to make it an
informative tool for policy makers to develop strategies and directions for R&D in Malaysia and to
benchmark our countrys performance in R&D with that of other countries.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
RESEARCH TEAM
FOREWORD
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
KEY R&D TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
iii
iv
v
vi
viii
ix
x - xv
xvi - xxi
CHAPTER 1:
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
INTRODUCTION
PREAMBLE
THE NATIONAL SURVEY OF R&D
THE OBJECTIVES OF THE SURVEY
THE SCOPE OF THE SURVEY
THE ORGANISATION OF THE REPORT
1
2
3
3
3
CHAPTER 2:
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
METHODOLOGY OF THE SURVEY

INTRODUCTION
SURVEY RESPONDENTS BY SECTOR
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
PROCEDURES TO INCREASE PARTICIPATION IN THE SURVEY
PARTICIPATION OF THE BUSINESS SECTORS, IHLs, AND GRIs
ACCURACY AND RELIABILITY OF THE R&D DATA
4
4
4
4
5
6
8
CHAPTER 3:
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
OVERVIEW OF R&D IN MALAYSIA

INTRODUCTION
GROSS EXPENDITURE ON R&D
SOURCES OF FUNDS
HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
CONCLUSION
11
11
12
15
16
19
CHAPTER 4:
4.0
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
R&D IN THE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE

INTRODUCTION
BUSINESS EXPENDITURE ON R&D (BERD)
SOURCES OF FUNDS FOR R&D IN THE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE
CONCLUSION
20
20
23
24
26
CHAPTER 5:
5.0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
R&D IN THE INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING (IHLs)

INTRODUCTION
SOURCES OF FUNDS
CONCLUSION
27
27
27
29
30
33
vi
CHAPTER 6:
6.0
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
R&D IN THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND RESEARCH INSTITUTES (GRIs)

INTRODUCTION
SOURCES OF FUNDS
CONCLUSION
34
34
36
37
39
CHAPTER 7:
7.0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
INTRODUCTION
GROSS EXPENDITURE ON R&D ACROSS COUNTRIES
R&D INTENSITY: GERD PER GDP
BUSINESS EXPENDITURE ON R&D
HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT IN R&D
CONCLUSION
40
40
40
42
43
45
48
CHAPTER 8:
8.0
8.1
CONCLUSION
INTRODUCTION
THE WAY FORWARD
49
49
50
APPENDIX
LIST OF IHL AND GRI
51
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
CHAPTER 2:
Figure 2.1:

Flowchart of the Verication Process
10
CHAPTER 3:
Figure 3.1:
Figure 3.2:
Figure 3.3:
Figure 3.4:
Figure 3.5:
Figure 3.6:
Figure 3.7:
Figure 3.8:
Figure 3.9:
Figure 3.10:
Figure 3.11:
OVERVIEW OF R&D IN MALAYSIA

Gross expenditure on R&D (2000-2011)
R&D Expenditure by Sector (2000-2011)
Total R&D Expenditure by Sector (2011)
R&D Expenditure by Field of Research (2011)
R&D Expenditure by Socio-Economic Objective (2011)
R&D Expenditure by Type of Research Activity (2011)
Sources of Funds for National R&D (2011)
Headcount of Research Personnel and Researchers per 10,000 Labour Force
Headcount of Researchers by Qualications (2006-2011)
Headcount of Researchers by Gender (2006-2011)
FTE of Research Personnel (2000-2011)
12
13
13
14
14
15
16
17
17
18
19
CHAPTER 4:
Figure 4.1:
Figure 4.2:
Figure 4.3:
Figure 4.4:
Figure 4.5:
Figure 4.6:
Figure 4.7:
Figure 4.8:

R&D Expenditure by Current and Capital Cost (2000-2011)
Distribution of R&D Expenditures by Sector (2000-2011)
Expenditures by Sector (2002-2011)
Expenditure by Type of Research (2000-2011)
Sources of Funds for R&D in the Business Enterprise (2006-2011)
Headcount of Research Personnel in Business Enterprise (2000-2011)
Proportion of Female Researchers to Male Researchers (2006-2011)
20
21
21
22
24
24
25
26
CHAPTER 5:
Figure 5.1:
Figure 5.2:
Figure 5.3:
Figure 5.4:
Figure 5.5:
Figure 5.6:
Figure 5.7:

R&D Expenditure by Current Cost and Capital Cost (2000-2011)
Sources of Funds for R&D in the IHLs (2008-2011)
Headcount of Research Personnel (2000-2010)
FTE of Research Personnel(2000-2011)
Proportion of Researchers by Qualications(2000-2011)
27
28
30
30
31
32
32
CHAPTER 6:
Figure 6.1:
Figure 6.2:
Figure 6.3:
Figure 6.4:
Figure 6.5:
Figure 6.6:

Expenditure by Current and Capital Cost (2000-2011)
GRI Sources of Funds (2006-2011)
Headcount of Research Personnel (2000-2011)
34
35
36
37
38
38
viii
CHAPTER 7:
Figure 7.1:
Figure 7.2:
Figure 7.3:
Figure 7.4:
Figure 7.5:
Figure 7.6:
Figure 7.7:
Figure 7.8:
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
GERD in Selected Countries (USD Million) (2012)
GERD per GDP (%) (2012)
BERD per GERD (2012)
BERD per GDP (%)(2012)
Headcount of Researchers (2012)
Researchers per 10,000 Labour Force (2012)
FTE of R&D Personnel per Capita (FTE per 1,000 people) (2012)
Percentage of Female Researchers Relative to Male Personnel (2012)
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
LIST OF TABLES
CHAPTER 2:
Table 2.1:
Table 2.2:
Table 2.3:

Participation of the Business Enterprise in the National R&D Survey (2009-2011) 6
Participation of IHLs in the National R&D Survey (2009-2011)
7
Participation of GRIs in the National R&D Survey (2009-2011)
7
CHAPTER 4:
Table 4.1:
Table 4.2:

Expenditure by FOR (2011)
Expenditure by SEO (2011)
23
23
CHAPTER 5:
Table 5.1:
Table 5.2:

Expenditure According to Field of Research (2011)
Expenditure According to Socio-Economic Objectives (2011)
29
29
CHAPTER 6:
Table 6.1:
Table 6.2:

Expenditure According to Field of Research (2011)
Expenditure According to Socio-Economic Objectives (2011)
36
36
xi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Malaysias gross expenditure on R&D (GERD) has steadily increased since 2000. A sharp
increase in GERD is particularly notable between 2006 and 2009, reaching close to an estimated
RM7.2 billion in 2009; an increase of 97.4% percent over that of 2006. In 2011, total R&D spending
across all sectors of the economy, public and private, was estimated at RM9.4 billion.
Malaysias research intensity (GERD/GDP), which is the percentage of her GDP that is spent
on R&D, has also charted a consistent increase since 2004. Indeed, GERD/GDP rose from 0.63% in
2004 to 0.79% in 2008, and further to 1.01% in 2009, meeting the target of 1.0% set in RMKe-10 to
be achieved by 2015. Our research intensity continued to improve, and in 2010 and 2011, Malaysia
recorded a GERD/GDP of 1.07%.
From 2002 to 2011, the business sector has been the largest performer of R&D in Malaysia,
accounting for over 50% of the GERD since 2000. In 2011, the business enterprise is estimated to
have spent RM5.3 billion on R&D activities. Although they remain the largest performer of R&D in
the country, the amount reported for 2011 is a decrease from the previous expenditure of RM5.5
billion in 2010.
Second to the business sector in R&D spending was the higher education sector, consisting of
both public and private institutions of higher learning, whose expenditure has increased over the
years, recording approximately 29% of the GERD in 2010 and 2011.
In 2011, the largest percentage (66.4%) of the expenditure went into Applied Research
(RM6.3 billion), followed by Basic Research (RM1.6 billion) and Experimental Development (RM1.5
billion). The bulk of the basic research (82.2%) was conducted in the IHLs.
The top ve elds of research (FOR) in 2011 were:
o
o
o
o
o
ICT (38.3%);
Engineering and Technology (24.2%);
Natural Sciences (12.8%);
Agricultural and Forestry (7.1%); and
Biotechnology (6.8%).
The top ve socio-economic objectives (SEO) for which R&D was carried out in 2011 were:
o
Sustainable Economic Development (41.5%);
o
Advancement of Knowledge (19.6%);
o
Advanced Experimental and Applied Science (16.8%);
o
Society (13.8%); and
o
Environment (6.1%).
Only 2.3% of the R&D projects were carried out for the purpose of defence and security.
The major sources of funds for R&D in 2011 were business (55.0%), at an estimated RM5.2 billion,
followed closely by the federal government (41.4%), at an estimated RM3.9 billion. The government plays a
major role in national R&D, providing incentives for R&D in the form of various grants and double tax
exemption to the business sector, and research grants, labour cost, and research facilities to IHLs and GRIs.
99.4% and 86.4% of the funding for R&D in the GRIs and the IHLs respectively come from the government.
The year 2011 recorded the highest headcount (96,961) for R&D personnel, which includes
researchers, technicians, and support sta. The highest number of researchers (73,752) was also recorded in
2011, with an estimated 58.2 researchers out of 10,000 labour force, topping the target set by the Ninth
Malaysia Plan (9MP) of 50 researchers per 10,000 labour force by 2010.
The headcount of researchers with PhDs and masters degrees has increased markedly:
o
o
7,001 researchers with PhDs (2006) to 33,272 (2011); and

5,337 researchers with Masters (2006) to 24,691 (2011).
Female participation in R&D has steadily increased over the years. In 2008, women accounted for
40.9% of Malaysias R&D workforce, while in 2009, 50.9% of the workforce were women, the highest
recorded since 2000; outnumbering their male counterparts by a small margin. The gures then dropped
slightly to 48.8% and 48.7% respectively in 2010 and 2011. The proportion of female relative to male
researchers is much higher than that of many advanced economies.
xi
KEY INDICATORS OF R&D ACTIVITIES IN MALAYSIA 2009-2011

YEAR
Labour force (Million)
2009
2010
12.173
12.676
28.1
28.6
29.0
712,857
795,037
881,080
1,128 companies
1,171 companies
1,242 companies
32 institutes
39 institutes
40 institutes
33 agencies or
institutes
34 agencies or
institutes
40 agencies or
institutes
1,193 organisations
1,244 organisations
1,322 organisations
RM7,199.9
RM8,510.7
RM9,422.0
RM5,873.9
RM1,326.0
1.01
RM6,732.5
RM1,778.2
1.07
RM6,674.0
RM2,748.0
1.07
70,453
88,314
96,961
53,304
67,412
73,752
17,149
20,902
23,209
35,461.43
29,608.18
0.50
0.56
50,483.98
41,253.37
0.57
0.61
57,404.89
47,242.10
0.59
0.64
47.1
55.4
58.2
Total Population (Million)

GDP (RM Million) (Based on current price)
2011
11.315
OVERVIEW OF NATIONAL R&D

SURVEY
Organisations Surveyed With R&D
Business Enterprise
Institutions of Higher Learning
( IHL )
Government Agencies and
Research Institutes ( GRI )
Total
Gross Expenditure on R&D ( GERD )
(Million)
Current Expenditure (Million)
Capital Expenditure (Million)
GERD/GDP (%)
Human Resource in R&D
Total Headcount of R&D
Personnel
Total Headcount of Researchers
Total Headcount of Technicians &
Support Sta
Total FTE of R&D Personnel
Total FTE of Researchers
FTE per R&D Personnel
FTE per Researcher
Researchers per 10,000 Labour
Force
FOR & SEO
Three Main Fields of Research

(FOR)
1. ICT (63.2%)
2. Engineering and
Technology (12.0%)
3. Natural Sciences
(6.6%)
1. ICT (45.5%)
2. Engineering and
Technology (27.6%)
3. Biotechnology
(6.6%)
1. ICT (38.3%)
2. Engineering and
Technology (24.2%)
3. Natural Sciences
(12.8%)
Three Main Socio-Economic

Objectives (SEO)
1. Sustainable
Economic
Development
(39.5%)
2. Society (25.8%)
3. Advanced
Experimental &
Applied Science
(20.4%)
1. Sustainable
Economic
Development (36.2%)
2. Advanced
Experimental &
Applied Science
(18.8%)
3. Advancement of
Knowledge (18.1%)
1. Sustainable
Economic
Development
(41.5%)
2. Advancement of
Knowledge (19.6%)
3. Advanced
Experimental And
Applied Science
(16.8%)
xii
R&D IN THE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (BE)

YEAR
Total R&D Expenditure (Million)
2009
2010
2011
RM5,029.5
RM5,531.5
RM5,339.0
RM4,054.1
RM4,304.0
RM4,027.3
RM975.4
RM1,227.5
RM1,311.7
Headcount of R&D Personnel
6,655
9,858
10,876
Headcount of Researchers
3,729
5,741
6,325
Headcount of Technicians &

Support Sta
2,926
4,117
4,551
FTE of R&D Personnel
5,763.16
9,117.57
9,778.01
FTE of Researchers
3,413.04
5,477.62
5,856.77
0.87
0.92
0.90
FTE per Researcher
0.92
0.95
0.93
Other Indicators

(FOR)

Objectives (SEO)
1. ICT
2. Biotechnology
3. Engineering and
Technology
1. ICT
2. Engineering and
Technology
3. Biotechnology
1. ICT
2. Engineering and
Technology
3. Biotechnology
1. Sustainable
Economic
Development
2. Society
3. Advanced
Experimental and
Applied Science
1. Sustainable
Economic
Development
2. Advanced
Experimental and
Applied Science
3. Environment
1. Sustainable
Economic
Development
2. Advancement of
Knowledge
3. Advanced
Experimental and
Applied Science
xiii
R&D IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING ( IHL )

YEAR
2009
2010
2011
RM1,711.1
RM2,464.4
RM2,725.6
RM1,488.9
RM2,093.8
RM2,287.2
RM222.2
RM370.6
RM438.4
57,437
71,579
78,683
46,709
58,699
64,253

Support Sta
10,728
12,880
14,430
26,080.77
37,251.45
43,147.15
FTE of Researchers
23,923.60
33,372.75
38,833.25
0.45
0.52
0.55
FTE per Researcher
0.51
0.57
0.60
Other Indicators

(FOR)

Objectives (SEO)
1. Engineering and
Technology
2. Natural Sciences
3. Medical and
Health Sciences
1. Engineering and
Technology
2. Natural Sciences
3. Medical and Health
Sciences
1. Engineering and
Technology
2. Natural Sciences
3. Medical and
Health Sciences
1. Sustainable
Economic
Development
2. Society
3. Advanced
Experimental &
Applied Science
1. Sustainable
Economic
Development
2. Advancement of
Knowledge
3. Society
1. Society
2. Advanced
Experimental and
Applied Science
3. Sustainable
Economic
Development
xiv
R&D IN GOVERNMENT AGENCIES & RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS ( GRI )

YEAR
2009
2010
2011
RM459.3
RM514.8
RM1,357.4
RM330.9
RM334.7
RM359.5
RM128.4
RM180.1
RM997.9
6,361
6,877
7,402
2,866
2,972
3,174

Support Staff
3,495
3,905
4,228
3,617.50
4,114.96
4,479.73
FTE of Researchers
2,271.54
2,403.00
2,552.08
0.57
0.60
0.61
FTE per Researcher
0.79
0.81
0.80
Other Indicators

(FOR)

Objectives (SEO)
1. Agriculture and
Forestry
2. Natural Sciences
3. Biotechnology
1. Agriculture and
Forestry
2. Natural Sciences
3. Biotechnology
1. Natural Sciences
2. Agriculture and
Forestry
3. Biotechnology
1. Sustainable
Economic
Development
2. Society
3. Advancement of
Knowledge
1. Sustainable
Economic
Development
2. Society
3. Advancement of
Knowledge
1. Sustainable
Economic
Development
2. Advanced
Experimental and
Applied Science
3. Society
xv
KEY R&D TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
The following denitions, adapted from the Frascati Manual (2002), were used in the survey:
Research and Development (R&D)
R&D refers to any creative work undertaken on a systematic basis in order to increase the stock of
knowledge which includes knowledge of man, culture and society and the use of this stock of
knowledge to devise new applications. R&D covers three activities: basic research, applied research
and experimental development (Frascati, p.30).
Basic Research
The systematic study directed towards greater knowledge or understanding of the fundamental
aspects of phenomena and of observable facts, without specic applications for processes or
products in mind (Frascati, p. 231).
Applied Research
Original work undertaken to acquire new knowledge with a specic application in view. It also
involves research to determine possible uses from the ndings of the basic research or to determine
new methods or ways of achieving some specic or predetermined objectives (Frascati, p. 78).
Experimental Development
Research involving systematic work using existing knowledge gained from other research and/or
practical experiences for the purpose of creating new or improved materials, equipment, products,
systems, processes or services (Frascati, p. 79).
xvi
Activities that are excluded from R&D
Consultancy.
All education and training of personnel in the natural sciences, engineering, medicine,
agriculture, the social sciences and the humanities in universities and special institutions of
higher and post-secondary education should be excluded. However, research by students at
the PhD level carried out at universities should be counted, whenever possible, as a part of
R&D.
General-purpose data collection such as routine topographical mapping; routine geological,

hydrological, oceanographic and meteorological surveying etc.
Market surveys.
Maintenance of national standards, the calibration of secondary standards and routine

testing and analysis of materials, products, processes, soils, atmosphere, etc.
Feasibility studies such as the investigation of proposed engineering projects, using existing
techniques to provide additional information before deciding on implementation.
The routine investigation and normal application of specialised medical knowledge.
All administrative and legal work connected with patents and licences (However, patent
work connected directly with R&D projects is R&D).
Software-related activities of a routine nature.
R&D Personnel/Manpower
All persons directly employed in R&D (such as researchers, technicians, and other supporting sta)
and those providing direct services to the conduct of R&D (such as R&D managers, administrators,
and clerical sta). These persons may be fully or partially engaged in the R&D activities. Persons
providing an indirect service, such as canteen and security sta, are excluded (Frascati, p. 92).
Researchers
Professionals engaged in the conception or creation of new knowledge, products, processes,
methods and systems, as well as those engaged in managing the projects concerned. These
professionals encompassed a broad range of scientists, engineers, lecturers, and the like who are
involved in generating new knowledge, products and applications through research.
In the higher education context of this survey, researchers included the following :
all those academic sta engaged in research, supervising students research and managing
the research of others;
all graduate research assistants employed in research projects; and
all postgraduate research students at the PhD level, both fulltime and part-time.
Postgraduate students at the masters degree level were not included in the headcount of
researchers.
xvii
By convention, members of the armed forces with similar skills who perform R&D should also be
included (Frascati, p. 93).
Managers and administrators engaged in the planning and management of the scientic and
technical aspects of a researchers work also fall into this category. Their rank is usually equal or
superior to that of persons directly employed as researchers and they are often former or part-time
researchers (Frascati, p. 93).
Technicians
Persons whose main tasks require technical knowledge and experience in one or more elds of
engineering, physical and life sciences (technicians) or social science and humanities (equivalent
sta). They participate in R&D by performing scientic and technical tasks involving the application
of concepts and operational methods, normally under the supervision of researchers (Frascati,
p. 94).
Supporting Sta
Skilled and unskilled craftsmen, secretarial and clerical sta who are directly associated with R&D
projects, or who participate by supporting such projects. Managers and administrators dealing
mainly in nancial and personnel matters, and in general administration, insofar as their activities are
a direct service to R&D are included in this category (Frascati, p. 94).
Headcount (HC)
The total number of persons who are mainly or partially employed in R&D. This includes both
full-time and part-time employed sta (Frascati, p. 98).
Full-Time Equivalence (FTE)
The measurement unit of R&D personnel. One FTE may be thought of as one person-year. Thus, a
person who normally spends 30% of his/her time on R&D and the rest of the time on other activities
(such as teaching, being involved in university administration and student counselling) should be
considered as 0.3 FTE. Similarly, if a full-time R&D worker is employed at an R&D unit for only six
months, his/her FTE should be 0.5. Since the normal working day (period) may dier from sector to
sector and even by institution, it is not meaningful to express FTE in person-hours (Frascati, p. 99).
R&D Expenditure
Total domestic expenditure (i.e. money spent on and payments made for) scientic research and
experimental development activities expressed as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
Its calculation includes current costs and capital expenditures, and excludes depreciation costs.
xviii
Current Expenditure
Internal operational spending on goods (e.g. purchase of equipment and materials) and services
(e.g. wages and salaries of R&D personnel) consumed within the current year, which needs to be
made recurrently to sustain R&D activities. The calculation of current expenditure includes labour
and operating costs.
Labour Cost
A researchers, technicians and supporting stas total salary (basic salary plus allowances)
multiplied by his/her FTE.
Operating Cost
Ongoing expenditures made out to sustain an R&D activity, which include costs of consumables,
repairs, maintenance, fuels, purchasing of materials, books, periodicals, and annuals for R&D
related purposes, prototypes, subscription to reference databases, and commissioned work.
Operating costs also include rents, fees and hiring expenses associated with R&D, data processing,
and payments to external organisations for use of specialised testing facilities.
Capital Expenditure
The total amount spent on xed assets used in the conduct of R&D, such as land, buildings and
other structures (e.g. labs, plants, etc.), vehicles, software, machinery, and equipment. This
includes the estimated value of the space in which the research is conducted (such as a lab, etc.),
although it may not have involved direct expenditure on the part of the researcher(s) (Frascati, p.
111).
Sources of Funds
Funds are money received in various forms (e.g. grants, contracts, salaries, commission, donations,
etc.) to nance R&D activities.
Malaysian Funds
These are monies received from sources within Malaysia. They consist of various government funds
and the institutions own funds. Government funds may come from the Malaysian federal
government, state or local governments, Malaysian NGOs, the private sector and other bodies
within Malaysia, while own funds are an institutions internally-generated income.
xix
Federal Government Funds

Money received from any Malaysian federal government body, such as ScienceFund, TechnoFund,
Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS), National Institute of Health (NIH), CESS, and others.
State or Local Government Funds
Money received from the state government and municipalities, including their agencies.
Funds from Other Sources in Malaysia
Money received from other sources in Malaysia, such as specic ministries, the private sector and
NGOs.
Institutions Own Funds
The institutions or companys internally-generated funds, for example income from endowments,
shareholdings and property, plus surplus from the sale of non-R&D services such as fees from
individual students, subscriptions to journals, and sale of serum or agricultural produce (Frascati,
p.117).
Foreign Funds
Money received from sources outside of Malaysia, such as that from foreign governments,
international organisations (e.g. UNESCO, the Japan Foundation, the Asian Development Bank, etc.),
and private corporations (e.g. Microsoft Corporation, General Motors, etc.).
R&D Classication
R&D activities, purposes and outputs are classied by Field of Research (FOR) and Socio-Economic
Objective (SEO) codes.
i.
Field of Research (FOR)
Classication codes used to categorise R&D activities according to the discipline under
which they were conducted.
ii.
Socio-Economic Objective (SEO)
Classication codes used to categorise R&D activities according to the purpose for
which they were conducted, or the outcome(s) they produced.
xx
Sector Classication
The R&D performers involved in the survey are classied into three distinct sectors: government,
higher education and business enterprise.
(i)
Business Enterprise Sector
This sector includes all rms, organisations and institutions whose primary activity is
the market production of goods or services (other than higher education) for sale to
the general public at an economically signicant price (Frascati, p. 54).
(ii)
Higher Education Sector
This sector encompasses all universities, colleges of technology, polytechnics and

other institutions of post-secondary education, whatever their source of nance or
legal status may be. It also includes all research institutes, experimental stations and
clinics operating under the direct control of or administered by or associated with
higher education institutions (Frascati, p. 68).
(iii)
Government Sector
This sector comprises all government organisations, ministries, statutory boards,

departments, oces and other bodies which furnish, but normally do not sell to the
community, those common services, which cannot otherwise be conveniently and
economically provided. It includes those that administer the state and the
economic and social policy of the community, but excludes the public institutions of
higher education (Frascati, p.62).
xxi
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION
Methodology Of The Survey
Overview Of R&D In Malaysia
R&D In The Business Enterprise
R&D In The Institutions Of Higher Learning (Ihls)
R&D In The Government Agencies And Research Institutes (Gris)
International Comparisons
ICT (38.3%)
Engineering & Technology (24.2%)
Natural Sciences (12.8%)
Agriculture & Forestry (7.11%)
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.0 PREAMBLE
Innovation, technological advancement, and investment in capital embodied in new technologies are
central to economic growth and development. In addition to these, intangible capital in the form of
knowledge embodied in the workforce and business plans is also a signicant correlate of economic
growth1. Indeed, innovation and the accumulation of intangible capital have together accounted for
2
a signicant increase in productivity worldwide . In eective terms, income can only grow if there are
sustained productivity improvements, without which ination will creep into the economy, hence
underscoring the importance of innovation for a countrys development.
An important component in innovation and technological advancement is investment in research
and development (R&D). In order to create economic benets, the results of R&D must be translated
into tangible products and processes, and widely adopted. That is, R&D must lead to innovation and
to the dissemination of technologies that enhance productivity. Competitive advantage at the micro
and macro levels grows out of innovation and technological advancement through R&D, and is
manifested in the production of goods, products, processes, and approaches to marketing, among
other things. At the national level, innovative capacity is derived from the collective innovative
capacity of public and private institutions in the country.
Malaysias economic transformation from a low to a middle-income economy was driven by factor
accumulation; namely from capital in the form of investments, energy in the form of cheap fuel, and
labour both domestic and foreign, but largely low-skilled. However, given the intensied competition
for foreign direct investment (FDI) and talent, in addition to nite natural resources, a factor-driven
growth model is not sustainable and is inconsistent with the economic structure required for a
high-income economy 3. Malaysia needs to move up the value chain, shifting to higher value-added
activities in order to compete with high-income economies. The shift to higher value-added activities
requires innovation, technological advancement and productivity growth through R&D. Malaysia can
only achieve its Vision 2020 target, which is to become a self-sucient industrialized nation by the
year 2020, through intensied R&D that subsequently leads to sustained productivity improvements.
1
2
3
Corrado, Carol, Charles Hulten, and Daniel Sichel (2009). "Intangible Capital and U.S. Economic Growth," The Review of Income and Wealth, vol. 55 (September),
pp.661-685.
Ben Bernanke, Chairman Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Systemat the conference New Building Blocks for Jobs and Economic Growth Georgetown
University May 16, 2011.
Young, A. 1995, The Tyranny of Numbers: Confronting the Statistical Realties of East Asian Growth Experience, Quarterly Journal of Economics, pp.641-680
1
Summary Report
One of the ten big ideas proposed under the 10th Malaysia Plan in order to achieve the target of
Vision 2020 is to support innovation-led growth. And to support innovation-led growth, the
Malaysian government has committed to the following:
To shape a supporting economic system for innovation by developing human capital,
investing in innovation infrastructure, and using economic incubators;
To create innovation opportunities by improving the public procurement system and
reforming regulations;
To put in place innovation enablers to reduce ineciencies in government institutions
that support R&D and upgrade intellectual property regulations; and
To fund innovation through the Mudharabah Innovation Fund.
4
By 2015, Malaysia targets to achieve a GERD/GDP of 1.0% . To reach the target, the government
has committed to increasing R&D expenditure during the Tenth Plan period through a combination
of greater public R&D funding and facilitation support for private sector R&D. The government has
also provided various research grants and investment incentives through the Ministry of Science,
Technology and Innovation (MOSTI), the Inland Revenue Board (IRB), and the Ministry of
International Trade and Industry (MITI), among others, to support and encourage researchers and
industries to conduct R&D activities in priority areas, as well as to ensure that R&D activities are
relevant to the needs of the country and industries. Among the incentives given for R&D
investments are tax exemption on adjusted income, pioneer tax exemption on statutory income,
and investment tax allowance on qualifying capital expenditure (QCE). The government has also
allocated billions of ringgit in research grants to government research institutes (GRIs) and
institutions of higher learning (IHLs). In addition, because the quality of R&D at IHLs hinges on the
quality of its researchers, the government has also set to improve academic R&D by increasing the
number of researchers with PhDs, aiming at a target of 75 per cent for research universities and 60
per cent for other public universities 5. Subsequently, the implementation of the MyBrain 15
programme is underway to nance doctoral studies for the purpose of increasing the number of
PhD holders to 18,000 by 2015 and 60,000 by 2023.
1.1 THE NATIONAL SURVEY OF R&D
To achieve the above-mentioned targets and to assist in R&D-related policy-making processes, the
government must have the capability and mechanisms to capture R&D activities that have been
conducted in the country. Therefore, it is essential for Malaysia to have a detailed and
comprehensive information base on her R&D activities. For this reason, the Malaysian Science and
Technology Information Centre (MASTIC) has been conducting The National Survey of R&D since
1994 to record the R&D activities and expenditure by government departments, the business
enterprise, government agencies and research institutes, and institutions of higher learning in the
country.
4
5
Economic Planning Unit. (2010). Tenth Malaysia Plan 2011-2015.

Speech by the Prime Minister in the Dewan Rakyat. Tenth Malaysia Plan 2011-2015.
2
Summary Report
1.2
THE OBJECTIVES OF THE SURVEY
The main objectives of the National Survey of Research and Development are to:
1.
assess the trends and developments of R&D in Malaysia in the institutions of higher learning,
government institutions and research institutes, and the business enterprise;
2.
compare where Malaysia stands internationally with regard to R&D;
3.
propose recommendations for the continued development of R&D in Malaysia; and
4.
guide the government in making policy decisions with regard to R&D.
1.3
THE SCOPE OF THE SURVEY
The National Survey of Research and Development reports on the inputs to Malaysian R&D; namely,
R&D expenditure and R&D personnel. It also reports on other aspects related to these inputs such as
types of expenditure, GERD/GDP, types and elds of research, and sources of R&D funding. However,
it does not capture nor report on R&D outputs such as products, inventions, publications, intellectual
property (IP), or patents, as these are not within the scope of the survey.
1.4
THE ORGANISATION OF THE REPORT
This report presents the results of the National R&D Survey in Malaysia for the scal years 2000 to
2011, with a more detailed elaboration given for the scal year 2011. The denitions and methods
used in this survey are based on the internationally agreed upon guidelines as put forth by the
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) member countries, otherwise
known as the Frascati Manual. In the chapters that follow, we present the methodology of the
survey, which includes the key R&D terms and denitions, the trends and developments in R&D in
Malaysia for the years 2000-2011, and a comparison of Malaysian R&D with that of foreign countries.
The report concludes with a summary of the main ndings, the implications of the ndings, and
recommendations for the continued development of R&D in the country.
3
Summary Report
CHAPTER 2:
METHODOLOGY OF
THE SURVEY
ICT (38.3%)
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY OF THE SURVEY

2.0
INTRODUCTION
This chapter explains the methods used in the National R&D Survey 2012. The chapter begins with
a description of the respondents by sector, followed by the range of activities used to get the full
participation of institutions, agencies, and companies in the survey, the resulting response rates,
and the measures undertaken to ascertain the accuracy, reliability, and trustworthiness of the R&D
data. The methodology used to capture the R&D activities is based on the internationally agreed
upon guidelines as put forth by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) member countries, otherwise known as the Frascati Manual.
2.1
SURVEY RESPONDENTS BY SECTOR
To allow for international comparison, and to be consistent with the classication adopted in the
Frascati Manual, the R&D performers in Malaysia were classied into three major sectors:
(i)
the business enterprise sector comprising private enterprises and public enterprises;
(ii)
the higher education sector, or institutions of higher learning (IHLs), consisting of both
public and private universities and university colleges; and
(iii)
the government sector consisting primarily of government-owned bodies, constituents

and research institutes (GRIs).
2.2
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
Prior to 2008, data from the IHLs and GRIs were gathered from individual researchers. In 2008,
following the methodology proposed and used by UNESCO, the collecting of data by institution was
introduced to increase the rate of response from those IHLs that had a low rate of response from
their researchers. From 2009 until 2011, this method of data collection was used for all the IHLs
and GRIs. For the business enterprise, companies were identied from a list provided by the
Department of Statistics Malaysia (DOSM) and from the 2008 register of R&D performing
companies. These registers were combined and subsequently updated, with those that had ceased
operations struck o the list. All the companies in this register were approached and requested to
participate. In addition, the survey also employed, since 2008, the top down approach to
increase the participation of the business enterprise in the survey (See Section 2.3). The survey for
all three sectors involved the use of questionnaires and R&D reporting templates that included
items that are central to the measurement of R&D activity as proposed by the Frascati Manual and
as reported by organisations such as the United Nations Educational, Scientic and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and the IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook (WCY).
4
Summary Report
2.3
PROCEDURES TO INCREASE PARTICIPATION IN THE SURVEY
As in any survey, the issue of participation and rate of response is of primary importance. Hence, the
following steps were taken to increase the participation of the above sectors in the survey:
2.3.1 Collecting data by institution
The method of collecting data by institution was introduced to increase the rate of response from
those IHLs that had a low rate of response from their researchers. From the scal year 2009 until
2011, this method of data collection was used for all the IHLs and GRIs. The primary advantage of this
method of data collection is that rather than collecting data from individual researchers, as done in
previous surveys, this technique required only one entity, the Research Management Centre (RMC)
of an IHL or GRI, to report on behalf of all researchers within the institution. To obtain the gures for
researchers, technicians, supporting sta, FTE, labour cost, capital expenditure and the rest, the RMC
had to collaborate with the Human Resource Department, Postgraduate Studies Division and
Bursars Oce. Collecting data by institution not only removed the burden of reporting from
individual researchers, thereby increasing within-institution response rates, but it also enabled the
survey to capture R&D manpower and expenditure more accurately. All IHLs and GRIs were invited
to attend workshops on completing the template for data by institution (Section 2.3.4).
2.3.2 Using the top-down approach for companies
Prior to 2008, data were obtained from individual companies. This, however, has not always resulted
in a high rate of response. In 2008, an innovation in data collection was introduced, in which parent
organisations were approached to provide the R&D data of those companies under which they are
listed. This approach has led to a sharp increase in the number of companies that participated in the
survey (Table 2.3).
2.3.3 Follow-up Calls
For those companies that were approached individually, follow-up calls were made to ensure that
the respondents understood the importance of their participation in the survey and how to ll out
the questionnaire or R&D template. Respondents that needed help with the questionnaire or
template were identied and arrangements were made to assist them in completing the forms.
2.3.4 Workshops
A number of workshops were organised to help the respondents understand the R&D terms being
measured and how their calculations might be drawn. The workshops, held on separate occasions
for the IHLs, GRIs, and business enterprise, began with a talk that re-explained the purpose and
importance of the survey, the meanings and concrete examples of terms such as FTE, researchers,
capital expenditure, etc., and how best to derive their estimates. The second half of the workshops
was a practical, hands-on session where the respondents were trained on how to use the template
for institutional reporting, and given direct assistance with the calculations and with lling out the
template.
5
Summary Report
2.3.5 Visits
Ocial visits were made to selected IHLs, companies, and organisations that were known or
expected to have large R&D expenditures. As these parties were identied as substantial
performers of R&D in the country, the visits were critical in getting them to participate. During the
visits, meetings and discussions were held with the top management of every organisation, e.g.
Vice Chancellors of Research and Innovation, Deans of Research Management Centres, company
CEOs, Finance Directors, etc. The discussions helped to eliminate confusion and apprehension
about the survey, and in getting the organisations to agree to provide R&D data.
2.3.6 Help Sessions
Visits were made to institutions and companies that had requested help with various issues found
dicult by the respondents, particularly those pertaining to the identication of R&D manpower
and the calculations of FTE, labour cost, and capital and current expenditure. These visits helped
the various entities to overcome the obstacles in lling in the questionnaire forms or templates, and
subsequently increased the surveys response rates.
2.3.7 Helpline
Finally, a helpline was also maintained to provide assistance with questions and diculties that the
respondents may have had about the survey.
2.4
PARTICIPATION OF THE BEs, IHLs, AND GRIs
The strategies used resulted in increased participation rates in the three sectors. In addition, for the
IHLs and GRIs, the method of reporting by institution ensured that all the research projects in that
particular institution were reported, in contrast to those years prior to 2008, where the number of
projects reported would depend on the number of researchers who responded. Tables 2.1, 2.2,
and 2.3 highlight the participation of BEs, IHLs, and GRIs respectively for the years 2009 to 2011.
Table 2.1: Participation of the Business Enterprise in the National R&D Survey (2009 - 2011)
Number of BEs
Number of BEs that
responded
Number of BEs that
conducted R&D
Number of BEs that did not
conduct R&D
Response Rate (%)
2009
2,009
2010
2,038
2011
2,091
1,283
1,313
1,366
1,128
1,171
1,242
155
63.9
142
64.4
124
65.3
Corrado, Carol, Charles Hulten, and Daniel Sichel (2009). "Intangible Capital and U.S. Economic Growth," The Review of Income and Wealth, vol. 55 (September),
pp.661-85.
Ben Bernanke, ChairmanBoard of Governors of the Federal Reserve Systemat the conference New Building Blocks for Jobs and Economic Growth Georgetown University
May 16, 2011.
Young, A. 1995, The Tyranny of Numbers: Confronting the Statistical Realties of East Asian Growth Experience, Quarterly Journal of Economics, pp.641-680
6
Summary Report
Table 2.2: Participation of IHLs in the National R&D Survey (2009 - 2011)
Number of IHLs
Number of IHLs that
responded
Number of IHLs that
conducted R&D
Number of IHLs that did not
conduct R&D
Response Rate (%)
2009
42
2010
42
2011
49
36
40
47
32
39
40
4
85.7
1
95.2
7
95.9
Table 2.3: Participation of GRIs in the National R&D Survey (2009 - 2011)
Number of GRIs
Number of GRIs that
responded
Number of GRIs that
conducted R&D
Number of GRIs that did not
conduct R&D
Response Rate (%)
2009
202
2010
202
2011
202
195
196
202
33
34
40
162
162
162
96.5
97.0
100
As shown in Table 2.2, the response rate for the IHLs in 2010 and 2011 was 95.2% and 95.9%
respectively, an increase of about 10% from 2009 (85.7%); while for the GRIs (Table 2.3), the rate of
response has been consistently high since 2009: from 96.5% in 2009, to 97.0% in 2010, to 100% in
2011. In the business enterprise, however, the rate of response is lowerranging from 63.9% in
2009 to 65.3% in 2011 (Table 2.1), although the participation, in terms of the number of
companies that responded to the survey, has increased manifoldfrom 198 companies in 2002, to
204 in 2006, to 949 in 2008, and to 1,242 in 2011.
Despite using various strategies such as calling CEOs to request for their companies participation in
the survey, sending follow-up emails, making follow-up calls and visits, and conducting workshops,
the rate of response in the business sector is not as high as that of the IHLs and GRIs.
Many companies did not want to disclose their R&D expenditure; some stated that they would not
participate, while others did not return the survey forms. These issues underscore the diculty in
getting the business sector to respond to the survey as participation is voluntary, and companies do
not feel obliged to participate. This is in contrast to the practice in Singapore, which invokes the
countrys statistics act 6, making it mandatory for institutions to participate, resulting in a much
higher rate of response.
6
From their 2011 register of R&D performing companies, a response rate of 79% was obtained. 63% of the companies reported conducting R&D in 2011 while 16%
reported not doing so, or had ceased business operations. From their 2010 register, the response rate was 93%. 83% reported conducting R&D in 2011 while 10%
reported that they did not or had ceased operations. See 8.1.1, 8.2.2, and 8.2.3, Pg. 19, National Survey of R&D in Singapore 2011.
Available at: http://www.a-star.edu.sg/Portals/0/media/RnD_Survey/RnD_2011.pdf
7
Summary Report
2.4.1 Interpretation of the Findings

It should be stressed that as in any survey, the results are estimates of the various indicators of R&D
as they are based on the response of the three sectors to the survey. The results for the IHLs and
GRIs are likely to be representative of the R&D activities in these institutions as the rates of
response are very highabove 95% (with the exception of 2009 in the IHLs)the highest being
100% for the GRIs in 2011 (Tables 2.2 and 2.3). However, for the Business Enterprise, the rates of
response were lower, averaging at around 65% from 2009 to 2011. Although survey experts such as
Babbie (1998) and Dillman (2007) regard these as being good to very good rates of response for
mail surveys, the percentage of non-response should be taken into consideration when interpreting
the ndings.
In addition to the issue of response rate, it should also be highlighted that the majority of the
companies that responded to the survey were ICT companies. For example, in 2011, of the 2,091
companies that were surveyed, 977 of those that responded were in ICT. While this may make the
results for expenditure according to eld of research (FOR) seem skewed towards ICT, the results, in
fact, parallel the importance of ICT as the key driver of the Governments Economic Transformation
Programmes 7, contributing 9.8% to the national GDP in 2009, and targeted to increase to 10.2% by
8
2015 . It can be argued that given its comparatively large contribution to national GDP, it is very
likely that expenditure on research in ICT is also very high, as R&D is needed to sustain this growth.
2.5
ACCURACY AND RELIABILITY OF THE R&D DATA
Rigorous measures were undertaken to ensure that the R&D data provided by the respondents
from the three sectors were accurate and reliable. They included the following:
2.5.1 Understanding the R&D Terms and Their Measurement
To ensure that the respondents correctly understood the R&D terms being captured in the survey
and their sector-specic measurements, talks, workshops and practical hands-on sessions were
conducted and personal consultation provided.
2.5.2 Institutional or Company-Level Verication
Before being endorsed by the respective institutions and sent to MASTIC, the data went through a
round of checking and verication by key personnel in these institutions with knowledge of the
institutions R&D manpower and spending, such as the Finance Director, Accountant (for the
business enterprise), the Human Resource Manager and the Deans the Deans of Research, and
Postgraduate Studies (for the IHLs). Each of these personnel veried dierent components of the
R&D report.
7
8
MATRADE: http://www.matrade.gov.my/en/foriegn-buyers-section/70-industry-write-up--services/543-ict-industry
Frost and Sullivan: http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/report-brochure.pag?id=4H22-01-00-00-00
8
Summary Report
2.5.3 Accuracy and Consistency Check

In the second stage of verication, the data were cleaned manually by checking for completeness,
missing statistics, inconsistencies, mismatches and possible double counting. Data that were found
to be complete and accurate were submitted to MASTIC for verication and approval. Incomplete
datasets were sent back for completion within a certain deadline, while data that did not tally (e.g.
mismatch between current expenditure and combined labour and operating costs) and gures that
looked suspect (e.g. too many researchers in relation to institution or company size) were
highlighted and scrutinized. The datasets were later referred back to the respondents for
correction. The referral for correction came with some suggestions as to how the errors could be
amended.
2.5.4 Correction and Verication by Institution
The inconsistencies and mismatches found in the data were re-inspected and audited against the
institutions R&D database, after which the corrected data were again checked at the institutional
or company level through the same verication loop mentioned in (i) above. The corrected data
were re-endorsed before being submitted to MASTIC.
2.5.5 Rechecking by Consultants
The resubmitted data were referred to consultants for verication, paying special attention to the
corrected gures before being submitted to MASTIC.
2.5.6 Verication and Approval by MASTIC
MASTIC exercised strict measures in examining R&D datasets and approved them only after nding
no error within the datasets. Unapproved datasets were referred back to the consultants and would
go down the verication loop again, while approved R&D datasets were keyed in for analysis and
generation of charts.
2.5.7 Verication and Approval by Technical Committee
Once veried and approved by MASTIC, the data were submitted to the Technical Committee for
verication and endorsement, and thereafter the National Science and Research Council (NSRC) for
the same process.
The verication process is summarised in Figure 2.1.
From their 2011 register of R&D performing companies, a response rate of 79% was obtained. 63% of the companies reported conducting R&D in 2011 while 16%
reported not doing so, or had ceased business operations. From their 2010 register, the response rate was 93%. 83% reported conducting R&D in 2011 while 10%
reported that they did not or had ceased operations. See 8.1.1, 8.2.2, and 8.2.3, Pg. 19, National Survey of R&D in Singapore 2011. Available at: http://www.a-star.edu.sg/Portals/0/media/RnD_Survey/RnD_2011.pdf
9
Summary Report
Figure 2.1: Flowchart of the Verication Process

Start
Helping institutions understand the R&D concepts and their

measurement
Verication of data by institution
Submission of R&D data by institution

No
Accuracy or Consistency Check by Consultants
Complete
Yes/No
No
Yes
Verication and approval by MASTIC
Complete
Yes/No
Yes
Verication and approval by Technical Committee
Verication and approval by the National Science and
Research Council (NSRC)
* MATRADE: http://www.matrade.gov.my/en/foriegn-buyers-section/70-industry-write-up--services/543-ict-industry
* Frost and Sullivan: http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/report-brochure.pag?id=4H22-01-00-00-00
Finish
10
Summary Report
CHAPTER 3:
OVERVIEW OF R&D
IN MALAYSIA
ICT (38.3%)
CHAPTER 3: OVERVIEW OF R&D IN MALAYSIA
3.0
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents an overview of R&D expenditure and activities in Malaysia over an 11-year
period from 2000 to 2011, with a special emphasis on 2011 ndings. The gures and interpretation
are based on the information collected from three sectors of the economy the business
enterprise, government research institutes (GRIs), and institutions of higher learning (IHLs) that
had participated in the National R&D Survey 2012. The overview highlights developments in the
national R&D landscape over the years with respect to gross expenditure, research intensity,
sources of funds, Fields of Research (FOR) and Socio-Economic Objective (SEO), manpower,
full-time equivalence (FTE) and female participation in R&D. Some discussion is given to how
Malaysia compares to selected foreign economies in these measures. The trends that are
highlighted shed light on where Malaysia is, how far she has come, and what she needs to
accomplish in terms of R&D. A summary of R&D highlights and a conclusion are presented at the
end of the chapter.
3.1
As shown in Figure 3.1, gross expenditure on R&D (GERD) in Malaysia has steadily increased since
the year 2000. A sharp increase in GERD is particularly notable between 2006 and 2009, reaching
close to an estimated RM7.2 billion in 2009; an increase of 97.4% over that of 2006. In 2011, total
R&D spending across all sectors of the economy, public and private, is estimated at RM9.4 billion,
an increase of 10.7% from 2010 and 30.9% from 2009.
Across the 11-year period, current expenditure constitutes the bulk of R&D spending. This is
because current expenditure, which includes both labour and operating costs, is the expenditure
required to maintain the research facilities and research personnel in the institutions of higher
learning, government research institutes, and business enterprise, while capital expenditure is
usually a one-o expenditure, given that it is the expenditure spent on land, buildings, vehicles,
machinery, and equipment.
Malaysias research intensity, which is the percentage of her GDP that is spent on R&D (GERD/GDP),
has also charted a consistent increase since 2004. Indeed, her GERD/GDP rose from 0.64 in 2006 to
0.79 in 2008, an increase of 28.13 %, and further to 1.01 in 2009, meeting the target of 1.0 set by
the Economic Planning Unit (EPU) in 10 th Malaysia Plan to be achieved by 2015. Our research
intensity continued to improve, and in 2010 and 2011, Malaysia recorded an estimated GERD/GDP
of 1.07%. Hence, it is important that the continued growth in R&D intensity be maintained as this
will help to secure Malaysias foothold as an emerging economy in an increasingly globalised world.
11
Summary Report
Figure 3.1: Gross expenditure on R&D (2000-2011)

1.07
1.01
1.07
1.20
0.64
5134.1
936.7
6070.8
5873.9
1326.0
7199.9
2004
2006
2008
2009
Current Expenditure
Capital Expenditure
Total
2748.0
3297.7
349.0
3646.7
2002
6732.5
2196.6
647.2
2843.8
2000
1778.2
1375.2
1125.4
2500.6
0.50
9422.0
0.80
6674.0
0.63
8510.7
0.69
2010
2011
GERD/GDP
0.60
0.40
GERD/GDP (%)
1.00
0.79
807.2
864.3
1671.5
RM Million
10000.0
9000.0
8000.0
7000.0
6000.0
5000.0
4000.0
3000.0
2000.0
1000.0
0.0
0.20
0.00
Year
3.1.1 R&D Expenditure by Sector

Consistently throughout the 11-year span, the business sector has been the largest performer of
R&D in Malaysia (Figure 3.2). In 2011, the business enterprise is estimated to have spent RM5.3
billion on R&D activities, which was almost four times the estimated amount spent by GRIs (RM1.4
billion) and double that by IHLs (RM2.7 billion) (Figure 3.3). Although they remain the largest
performer of R&D in the country, the amount reported for 2011 is a decrease from the previous
expenditure of RM5.5 billion in 2010.
Second to the business sector in R&D spending was the higher education sector, consisting of both
public and private institutions of higher learning, whose expenditure appears to have increased
over the years, recording approximately 29% of the GERD in 2010 and 2011. While the R&D
spending of the higher education sector continued to rise, suggesting the increased importance of
academia as key players in Malaysias R&D, that of the GRIs uctuated in the range of 5.2% to 14.4%
from 2006 to 2011, with 2011 recording the highest spending over the 5-year period. Prior to 2006,
GRIs appeared to play a greater role in Malaysias R&D but gradually dwindled in this role as the
business enterprise assumed greater dominance in R&D.
The observed R&D trends by sector are consistent with those of other countries. The U.S. business
sector, for example, accounted for 70% of her gross expenditures on R&D in 2009, while that of
Japan accounted for almost 76%. China and South Korea were well above the U.S. level, while
France and the United Kingdom were lower, at 62% and 60% respectively 9.
Science and Engineering Indicators 2012; available at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/ seind12/pdf/seind12.pdf
12
Summary Report
Figure 3.2: R&D Expenditure by Sector (2000-2011)
Year
2011
14.4
2010
6.0
2009
6.4
2008
2006
28.9
29.0
2004
84.9
18.0
10.0
71.5
14.4
25.0
0.0
70.5
9.9
20.3
2000
69.9
19.6
10.4
2002
65.0
23.7
9.9
5.2
56.7
65.3
17.1
20.0
30.0
57.9
40.0
GRI
IHL
50.0
60.0
70.0
BUSINESS ENTERPRISE
80.0
90.0
100.0
Percentage (%)
Figure 3.3: R&D Expenditure by Sector (2011)
GRI
14.4%
(RM1.4
billion
BUSINESS
ENTERPRISE
56.7%
(RM5.3
billion)
IHL
28.9%
(RM2.7
billion)
3.1.2 Expenditure by Type of Activity

R&D Expenditure by FOR
Malaysias R&D activities were spread out over the study of ICT, engineering and technology, natural
sciences, agriculture and forestry, biotechnology, medical and health sciences, social sciences,
humanities, and economics, business, and management. In 2011, based on the information
obtained from the number of companies that responded to the survey (See Sections 2.4 and 2.4.1),
she invested the most in ICT research, estimated at 38.3% of the GERD, or RM3.6 billion. This
nding parallels the fact that presently, ICT has become the key driver of the Governments
11
Economic Transformation Programmes 10 , contributing 9.8% to the national GDP in 2009 . The
second highest R&D expenditure was in the eld of Engineering and Technology, estimated at
24.2% of the GERD, or RM2.3 billion (Figure 3.4).
10
11
http://www.matrade.gov.my/en/foriegn-buyers-section/70-industry-write-up--services/543-ict-industry
ICT facts and gures, pg 1; and Frost and Sullivan: http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/report-brochure.pag?id=4H22-01-00-00-00
13
Summary Report
The natural sciences received close to 13% (RM1.2 billion) of the nancial share, while agriculture
and forestry had a share of slightly more than 7% of the total R&D expenditure. Malaysia spent the
least on R&D in the areas of Economics, Business and Management (1.46%), Humanities (2.06%)
and the Social Sciences (2.68%) in 2011, where research in these areas is not as costly as that in the
business-dominated areas such as ICT and Engineering and Technology, where R&D and innovation
are regarded as being crucial determinants of competitiveness.
R&D Expenditure by SEO
Sustainable economic development was the prime objective galvanising Malaysias R&D activities in
2011, accounting for 41.5% of the GERD (Figure 3.5). Advancement of Knowledge was the second
highest SEO for which Malaysian R&D was conducted (19.6%), while Advanced Experimental and
Applied Science was the third highest SEO (16.8%). Malaysia geared just a small portion of her R&D
(RM217.6 million or 2.31% of GERD) for the purpose of national defence and security. This gure
stands in stark contrast to some foreign economies that invest massive amounts annually on
defence and security-related R&D, such as the U.S. and Israel.
Figure 3.4: R&D Expenditure by Field of

Research (2011)
Humanities
2.06%
Medical and
Health
Sciences
4.50%
Social
Sciences
2.68%
Economics,
Business and
Management
1.46%
Figure 3.5: R&D Expenditure by Socio-Economic

Objective (2011)
Environment
6.08%
Defence and
Security
2.31%
Biotechnology
6.83%
Agriculture
and Forestry
7.11%
Natural
Sciences
12.80%
(RM1.2
billion)
14
Summary Report
ICT
38.33%
(RM3.6
billion)
Engineering
and
Technology
24.21%
(RM2.3
billion)
Society
13.78%
Advanced
Experimental
and Applied
Science
16.81%
Sustainable
Economic
Development
41.46%
Advancement
of Knowledge
19.57%
3.1.3 R&D Expenditure by Research Type

In terms of expenditure by research type (Figure 3.6), more than 66.4% of the GERD went into the
conduct of applied research (RM6.3 billion), while only about 16.4% (RM1.5 billion) was directed
into experimental development. In this regard, Malaysias focus diers from that of the U.S. and
Australia, which tend to spend signicantly more on experimental development research and less
on applied R&D. The U.S., for example, reportedly spent 60% of GERD on experimental
development, while Australia 80% 12. However, the percentage that we spent on basic research
(17.2%) is very close to that recorded in established economies, for instance the U.S., which spent
18% of her GERD in 2008 on basic research13.
Figure 3.6: R&D Expenditure by Type of Research Activity (2011)
Experimental
16.40%
(RM1.5
billion)
Basic
17.18%
(RM1.6 billion)
Applied
66.42%
(RM6.3 billion)
3.2
SOURCES OF FUNDS
The major sources of funds for R&D in 2011 were business (55%), estimated at RM5.2 billion,
followed closely by the federal government (41.4%), estimated at RM3.9 billion (Figure 3.7). The
government plays a major role in R&D, providing incentives for R&D in the form of various grants
and double tax deduction to the business sector, and research grants, as well as operating and
capital costs to IHLs and GRIs. The bulk of government funding for R&D, however, goes to the GRIs
and IHLs, where 99.4% (See Chapter 6, Figure 6.2) of the funds in the GRIs and 86.4% (See Chapter
5, Figure 5.2) of the funds in the IHLs come from government.
12
13
Australian Bureau of Statistics; available at http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@ .nsf/mf/8112.0

2012 Global R&D Funding Forecast; available at http://battelle.org/ docs/default-document-library/2012globalforecast. pdf
15
Summary Report
Figure 3.7: Sources of Funds for National R&D (2011)

IHL
3.14%
Foreign
0.31%
Other
0.16%
Government
41.38%
(RM3.9 billion)
Business Enterprise
55.01%
(RM5.2
billion)
3.3
3.3.1 R&D Personnel and Researchers per 10,000 Labour Force

Since 2008, there has been a marked growth in the countrys R&D manpower (which includes
researchers, technicians, and support sta). The total headcount of R&D personnel grew by
137.4%; from 40,840 persons in 2008 to 96,961 persons in 2011 (Figure 3.8). It is worth noting that
the 2011 headcount of 96,961 is almost four times the total headcount recorded in 2006 (24,588).
Of interest is the total number of researchers, which recorded an increase of 134.6% over the
4-year period. The number of researchers rose sharply from 31,442 persons in 2008 to more than
53,000 and 67,000 in 2009 and 2010 respectively to 73,752 in 2011. In brief, over the 4-year period
between 2008 and 2011, the number of researchers has more than tripled.
Similarly, the number of technicians has also increased. From slightly below 2,800 persons in 2008,
it almost doubled to 5,135 persons in 2009, and rose further by 157.5% to reach a total of 7,210
persons in 2010. By 2011, the total headcount of technicians increased by 198.4% from that
recorded in 2008 (8,347 persons). The same pattern is observed for R&D support sta, whose
number increased by 125.1% in 2011 (14,862 persons) from the gure recorded in 2008 (6,601
persons). The most drastic increase in support sta is discerned in 2009, where the growth in
number amounted to 82% from that of the previous year.
16
Summary Report
Figure 3.8: Headcount of Research Personnel and Researchers per 10,000 Labour Force
70,000
55.4
60,000
47.1
73,752
12
30.0
13
0
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
60.0
40.0
8,347
14,862
67,412
7,210
13,692
31,442
2,797
6,601
17.9
19,021
1,891
3,676
10,000
21.3
18.0
23,092
2,919
4,972
20,000
15.6
17,790
3,090
4,057
30,000
28.5
53,304
5,135
12,014
40,000
70.0
50.0
50,000
15,022
2,289
5,951
Headcount
58.2
Researchers per 10,000 Labour

Force
80,000
2009
20.0
10.0
0.0
2010
2011
Year
Technicians
Researchers per 10,000 Labour Force
Researchers
Support Sta
3.3.2 Researcher Headcount by Qualications (2006-2011)

The quality of R&D personnel and the qualications they hold are instrumental in the advancement
of R&D. This is an aspect where Malaysia can aspire to improve in light of future R&D development.
In 2011, the number of PhD qualied researchers involved in R&D was estimated at 33,272, close
to 45.1% of the total researchers in Malaysia (Figure 3.9). The share of PhDs among researchers,
one indicator of researcher quality, was the highest among researchers in the IHLs (See Chapter 5,
Figure 5.7). R&D sta with a masters degree constituted approximately 33.5%, while those with a
bachelors degree and a diploma approximated 15.7% and 1.8% respectively of the total R&D
personnel in 2011.
Figure 3.9: Headcount of Researchers by Qualications (2006-2011)
35, 000
30, 000
5, 000
7,001
5,337
5,148
1,535
10, 000
2010
11,565
1,319
2,905
29,189
23,340
11,336
2,041
1,506
2009
15, 000
33, 272
24,691
19,799
20,704
9,487
2,090
1,224
20, 000
11, 550
10,303
8,115
1,474
Headcount
25, 000
0
2006
PhD
2008
Master
Bachelor
Non - Degree/ Diploma
Not Specied
2011
Year
12. Australian Bureau of Statistics; available at http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@ .nsf/mf/8112.0

13. 2012 Global R&D Funding Forecast; available at http://battelle.org/ docs/default-document-library/2012globalforecast. pdf
17
Summary Report
3.3.3 Researcher Headcount by Gender (2000-2011)

An analysis of researchers by gender shows that female participation in R&D has steadily increased
over the years. In 2008, women accounted for 40.9% of Malaysias R&D workforce, which was 3.2%
higher than that in 2006 (Figure 3.10). Female researchers further increased in number in 2009,
accounting for slightly more than half of the workforce (50.9%). This is the highest female
participation recorded in the Malaysian R&D scene over an 11-year span since 2000, where female
researchers actually outnumbered their male counterparts. The gures then dropped slightly to
48.8% and 48.7% respectively in 2010 and 2011. However the gures show that male and female
participation in Malaysias R&D is about equal.
Figure 3.10: Headcount of Researchers by Gender (2000-2011)
50.9
70,000
Headcount
60,000
50,000
33.9
33.7
35.8
37.7
48.8
60.0
48.7
50.0
40.9
34,522
40,000
37,814
40.0
30.0
26,167
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
14,817
11,859
9,925
5,097
11,794
5,996
8,275
7,162
2000
2002
2004
2006
Female Researchers
20.0
18,578
Male Researchers
27,137
32,890
35,938
2010
2011
10.0
12,864
2008
Percentage (%)
80,000
0.0
2009
Year
Proportion of Female R&D Researchers
3.3.4 Researcher Intensity and Full-time Equivalence (FTE)

Researcher intensity is measured by full-time equivalence (FTE) as a percentage of the labour force
or volume of work put into R&D. The measurement of FTE is based on an estimation of the amount
of time in a year that a research personnel devotes to R&D. As a rule of thumb, the greater the FTE
of research personnel, the greater is his or her R&D intensity. Commensurate with the rise in total
research personnel headcount (see Figure 3.8), Malaysian FTE also indicates a substantial increase
over time. Figure 3.11 shows a considerable growth of total FTE from 2006 (13,415.90) particularly,
to 2011 (57,404.89). This was largely brought about by the marked increase in researcher FTE,
which grew by 387.3% over the 11-year period (2000-2011). On the other hand, the FTEs of
technicians and support sta remained relatively constant from 2000 to 2009, but showed a small
growth in 2010 and 2011.
18
Summary Report
Figure 3.11: FTE of Research Personnel (2000-2011)

70,000.00
57,404.89
60,000.00
50,483.98
35,461.43
16,344.53
1,865.06
4,077.70
29,608.18
1,986.49
3,866.76
41,253.37
3,675.62
5,554.99
47,242.10
4,548.89
5,613.90
10,000.00
9,694.20
1,142.50
2,579.20
20,000.00
12,669.49
1,597.80
3,619.30
30,000.00
7,157.54
1,378.80
2,194.70
40,000.00
6,422.70
921.50
2,715.50
FTE
50,000.00
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2009
2010
2011
22,287.29
10,059.70 10,731.04 17,886.59 13,415.90
0.00
RESEARCHERS
SUPPORT STAFF
3.4
TECHNICIANS
TOTAL FTE OF RESEARCH PERSONNEL
Year
CONCLUSION
The upward trends in GERD, research intensity or GERD/GDP, R&D personnel, and researcher
intensity build a good prospect for Malaysias participation in the global economy and help to pave
the way for greater economic competitiveness. With increasing public and private sector
investment in R&D over the years, Malaysia has made great strides in growing her capability in
research and innovation, and developing tangible manpower for economic competitiveness, hence
moving closer towards establishing a knowledge-based society
19
Summary Report
CHAPTER 4:
R&D IN THE
BUSINESS ENTERPRISE
ICT (38.3%)
CHAPTER 4: R&D IN THE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE
4.0
INTRODUCTION
The business enterprise is considered a primary driver of Malaysias economic growth. In order to
support the business enterprise and boost its growth potential, the government is undertaking a
series of initiatives such as modernising business regulations, liberalising the services sector,
removing market distortions by rationalising subsidies, introducing competition legislation, and
improving the interface between government and business. The economic growth is expected to
stimulate the business enterprise to increase its investments in R&D, subsequently reducing its
dependence on federal assistance in line with Malaysias need to develop a strong, aggressive, and
highly motivated business sector. This chapter reports on the R&D activities in the business
enterprise based on the participation of 1,128 R&D performing companies in 2009, 1,171 in 2010,
and 1,242 in 2011.
4.1
BUSINESS EXPENDITURE ON R&D (BERD)
4.1.1 Expenditure by Type of Cost

In 2011, the business enterprise spent an estimated RM5.3 billion in R&D (Figure 4.1). The total
R&D expenditure in the business enterprise (BERD) grew steadily from RM967.9 million in 2000 to
RM5.5 billion in 2010, but dropped to RM5.3 billion in 2011. This is due to the fact that 327
companies spent less on R&D in 2011 than they did in 2010. From 2002 to 2011, the bulk of
business expenditure on R&D went into current costs, which includes labour and operating costs.
Figure 4.1: R&D Expenditure by Current and Capital Cost (2000-2011)
6,000.0
5,531.5
5,029.5
5,000.0
5,339.0
4,279.4
Current
Capital
4,027.3
1,311.7
2006
1,227.5
2004
4,054.1
2002
975.4
2,860.3
236.1
2000
967.9
3,586.8
1,599.1
434.3
0.0
2,033.4
932.7
700.3
1,000.0
1,633.0
692.6
2,000.0
4,304.0
3,096.4
3,000.0
370.6
597.3
RM Million
4,000.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
Total
Year
20
Summary Report
4.1.2 Expenditure by Sector

Of the gross R&D expenditure in 2011, it is estimated that 56.7% was contributed by the business
enterprise (Figure 4.2). Institutions of higher learning contributed an estimated 28.9% of the
expenditure, while government research institutes (GRIs) contributed an estimated 14.4%. As is the
case in many developed countries such as Japan, Korea, the U.S., and Germany14 , our business
enterprise has consistently dominated R&D spending from 2000 to 2011. However, although it still
remains the highest spending sector in terms of R&D (Figure 4.3), its share of the total declined
from 70.5% in 2008 to 56.7% in 2011, while that of the IHLs rose from 19.6% in 2008 to 28.9% in
2011.
Figure 4.2: Distribution of R&D Expenditures by Sector (2000-2011)
Year
2011
2010
6.0
2009
6.4
2008
84.9
9.9
71.5
18.0
10.0
57.9
17.1
25.0
0.0
65.3
14.4
20.3
2000
70.5
19.6
10.4
2002
69.9
23.7
5.2
2004
65.0
29.0
9.9
2006
56.7
28.9
14.4
20.0
30.0
40.0
GRI
50.0
IHL
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Percentage (%)
BUSINESS ENTERPRISE
Figure 4.3: Expenditure by Sector (2002-2011)

9,422.0
10,000.0
8,510.7
8,000.0
7,199.9
6,070.8
189.5
360.8
3,096.4
603.1
1,188.3
4,279.4
459.3
1,711.1
5,029.5
514.8
2,464.4
5,531.5
1,357.4
2,725.6
5,339.0
2,000.0
3,646.7
2,843.7
296.9
513.3
2,033.5
4,000.0
507.1
360.4
1,633.1
RM (Million)
6,000.0
2002
2004
2006
2008
2009
2010
2011
2,500.6
0.0
GRI
14
The IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook (2012)
21
Summary Report
IHL
Business Enterprise
Total
Year
4.1.3 R&D Expenditure by Type of Research

Figure 4.4 shows R&D expenditure in the business sector by type of research. The highest
expenditure in 2011 was on applied research (RM4.3 billion), followed by that on experimental
development (RM895.3 million), and basic research (RM181.4 million). The focus on applied
research bets the business enterprise considering that applied research seeks to address and
answer issues or problems that typically lead to commercialisation. The statistics indicate a slight
decrease in the R&D expenditure of the business enterprise in applied research, down from RM4.8
billion in 2009 to RM4.5 billion in 2010. The R&D expenditure for experimental development, on
the other hand, charted an increase; from RM122.3 million in 2009 to RM837.7 million in 2010, and
RM895.3 million in 2011. This is a positive development, as the production of patents and the
degree of innovativeness within a country are often associated with the amount of experimental
development conducted within sectors of the economy, as observed among giant economies with
high degrees of innovativeness such as Denmark, the U.S., Sweden, etc.
Figure 4.4: Expenditure by Type of Research (2000 - 2011)
6,000.00
4,262.20
895.33
2008
181.41
2006
4,467.67
2004
837.65
160.48
3,599.22
519.70
2002
226.17
233.10
1,355.00
1,508.30
1,000.00
122.30
246.10
1,143.40
644.00
2000
2,000.00
119.80
57.30
1,313.50
262.30
3,000.00
4,787.40
4,000.00
306.65
514.04
147.21
RM Million
5,000.00
0.00
Basic
Applied
2009
2010
Experimental Development
2011
Year
4.1.4 Expenditure by FOR and SEO

Based on the number of companies that responded to the survey, it is estimated that in 2011, the
bulk of the business sectors R&D expenditure (63.7%) went into ICT research (Table 4.1). This
nding parallels the fact that ICT has become an important sector in Malaysias economic
development ever since the Government incorporated it in as one of the strategies towards
creating an industrial-based economy, as articulated in the Second Outline Perspective Plan
1991-2000, and consequently, a knowledge-based economy, as outlined in the Third Outline
Perspective Plan 2001-2010. Presently, ICT has become the key driver of Malaysias Economic
Transformation Programmes 15 , contributing 9.8% to the national GDP in 2009, and targeted to
16
increase to 10.2% by 2015 .
15
16
http://www.matrade.gov.my/en/foriegn-buyers-section/70-industry-write-up--services/543-ict-industry
ICT facts and gures, pg 1; and Frost and Sullivan: http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/report-brochure.pag?id=4H22-01-00-00-00
22
Summary Report
The second highest expenditure on R&D was on engineering and technology (23.9%), followed by
biotechnology (8.1%). In comparison, smaller amounts were spent on research in the natural
sciences (2.5%) and agriculture and forestry (1.7%), while the least went into medical and health
sciences (0.2%) and economics, business, and management (0.02%).
On the other hand, the leading socio-economic objectives for which business R&D was conducted
in 2011 (Table 4.2) were sustainable economic development (44.0%), advancement of knowledge
(21.5%), and advanced experimental and applied science (11.7%). Society, environment, and
defence and security represented lesser SEOs, constituting an estimated 9.9%, 8.9%, and 4.0%
respectively of the 2011 BERD. The expenditures reected in these FORs and SEOs were in line with
Malaysias greater push for the economic viability and scientic stock of knowledge much needed
to establish and sustain a knowledge-based economy.
Table 4.1: Expenditure by FOR (2011)
FOR
Information, Computer
and Communication
Technology (ICT)
Engineering and
Technology
Biotechnology
Natural Sciences
Agriculture and Forestry
Medical and Health
Sciences
Economics, Business, and
Management
4.2
%
63.71
23.86
8.11
2.48
1.65
Table 4.2: Expenditure by SEO (2011)

SEO
%
Sustainable Economic
Development
Advancement of
Knowledge
Advanced Experimental
and Applied Science
44.04
21.48
11.74
Society
9.90
0.18
Environment
8.87
0.02
Defence and Security
3.97
SOURCES OF FUNDS FOR R&D IN THE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE
The companies reported that they relied heavily on their own funds to conduct R&D activities
(Figure 4.4). Consistently across 2006 to 2011, the utilization of companys own funds to support
R&D activities constituted more than 90% of total spending. Federal funding contributed between
0.28% (2006) and 9.41% (2010) to business R&D, while funding from foreign and other sources was
very small and almost negligible. Although the business enterprise reported relying much on its
own funds to conduct R&D activities, it did, in fact, receive substantial federal support for its R&D
from incentives such as double tax deduction and other tax incentives. Federal support for business
R&D has always been in the backdrop, with the government regularly channelling provisions of
nancial incentives in myriad forms. The total tax deduction submitted by the business enterprise
to the Inland Revenue Board of Malaysia (LHDN) was estimated at RM90.0 million in 2011, RM136.6
million in 2010, and RM142.3 million in 200917 , which are not reected under Sources of Funds for
R&D in the Business Enterprise as shown in Figure 4.5.
17
Inland Revenue Board of Malaysia (IRBM)
23
Summary Report
Figure 4.5: Sources of Funds for R&D in the Business Enterprise (2006-2011)
120
2008
BUSINESS ENTERPRISE
4.3
96.15
2009
2010
GOVERNMENT
OTHER
3.62
0.21
0.02
90.48
93.81
2006
9.41
0.11
2.43
0.03
20
6.15
0.02
0.03
40
0.28
0.21
60
97.54
80
99.51
Percentage (%)
100
2011
FOREIGN
Year
4.3.1 R&D Personnel by Headcount

In 2011, the business enterprise reported a total of 10,876 R&D personnel, which was an increase
of 10.3% from 2010 and 48.1% from 2009 (Figure 4.6). Of the total R&D manpower in 2011, 6,325
(58.2%) were researchers, 2,821 (25.9%) were technicians, and 1,730 (15.9%) were support sta.
The scal year 2011 also recorded a high of 2,821 technicians, with some decrease in the number
of support sta.
Figure 4.6: Headcount of Research Personnel in Business Enterprise (2000-2011)
12,000
10,876
9,858
10,000
8,737
7,025
6,655
4,160
834
2,031
3,661
973
1,532
3,729
1,077
1,849
5,741
2,029
2,088
6,325
2,821
1,730
3,349
764
1,064
4,000
2,000
6,166
5,177
4,246
5,940
877
1,920
6,000
2,304
343
1,599
Headcount
8,000
2006
2008
2009
2010
2011
15
2000
16
2002
2004
Year
Researchers
Technicians
Support Sta
Headcount
24
Summary Report
Headcount and Proportion of Researchers by Gender

Figure 4.7 indicates the proportion of female to male researchers in the business sector from 2000
to 2011. Of the 6,325 researchers reported in 2011, 1,930 (30.5%) were female, a slight decrease
from the reported 1,798 (31.3%) in 2010 and 1,163 (31.2%) in 2009. From 2008 to 2011, the
percentage of female researchers was around 30%.
Figure 4.7: Proportion of Female Researchers to Male Researchers (2000 - 2011)

6,000
Headcount
5,000
25.5
24.5
21.5
2,000
1,000
3,015
2,528
30.5
35.0
30.0
1,093
1,930
15.0
3,943
2,568
2,566
2008
2009
25.0
20.0
1,163
4,425
495
31.3
1,798
1,145
821
1,809
31.2
1,515
4,000
3,000
27.5
29.9
4,395
10.0
Proportion (%)
7,000
5.0
0.0
0
2000
2002
2004
2006
Number of Male Researchers
2010
2011
Number of Female Researchers
Year
4.3.2 FTE of R&D Personnel

Figure 4.8 reports the full time equivalence of research personnel, which is the amount of time the
research personnel spend in a year on R&D. The total FTE of research personnel reported in 2011
was 9,778.0, which was an increase from 9,117.6 in 2010, and 5,763.2 in 2009. The largest FTE was
reported by researchers (5,856.8), followed by technicians (2,665.4), and support sta (1,255.8).
The FTE of researchers rose from 3,413.0 in 2009 to 5,477.6 in 2010 and 5,856.8 in 2011.
25
Summary Report
Figure 4.8: FTE of Research Personnel (2000 - 2011)

12,000.00
10,000.00
9,117.57
9,778.01
8,000.00
5,575.70
5,763.16
3,357.00
2,000.00
2,767.10
621.90
877.70
4,104.30
647.68
1,375.22
3,529.30
611.90
1,486.64
3,320.70
883.20
1,371.80
3,413.04
925.17
1,424.95
5,477.62
1,916.08
1,723.87
5,856.77
2,665.44
1,255.80
4,266.70
4,000.00
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2009
2010
2011
0.00
Researchers
4.4
5,627.84
1,983.00
241.50
1,132.50
FTE
6,127.20
6,000.00
Technicians
Support Sta
Total
Year
CONCLUSION
The total R&D expenditure for the business enterprise demonstrates an upward trend from 2000 to 2010;
however, the 2011 data indicate a slight decrease of 3.5% in R&D spending to RM5.3 billion, from RM5.5
billion in 2010. Even though the data on the sources of funds indicate that the business enterprise was the
major funder of its R&D activities (96.2% in 2011), the governments enormous nancial assistance in terms
of double tax deduction amounting to RM90.0 million in 2011, provides a more accurate picture of
government support for R&D. The data on business R&D manpower also revealed a steady increase in the
total number of research personnel from 6,655 in 2009 to 10,876 in 2011.
26
Summary Report
CHAPTER 5:
R&D IN THE
INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER
LEARNING (IHLs)
ICT (38.3%)
CHAPTER 5: R&D IN THE INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING (IHLs)

5.0
INTRODUCTION
R&D activities in the higher education sector are an important means of expanding existing
knowledge and generating new insights, solutions, and products for local consumption and the
international market. They also help to develop the nations R&D manpower capability by serving as
a platform to train and produce future scientists, researchers, technicians and related research
personnel. At institutions of higher learning (IHLs), knowledge is shared, put to the test, veried,
developed into applications, and rendered as products. In the process, new knowledge is created
and skills are transferred. Hence, IHLs through their R&D activities play an unequivocal role in
contributing to economic growth and national development. These activities should, therefore, be
captured and reported appropriately to reect this important role. This chapter presents the R&D
statistics of Malaysian IHLs in terms of total R&D expenditure, sources of funds, research area
concentration and type, and research personnel.
5.1
5.1.1 R&D Expenditure by Type of Cost

All of the IHLs surveyed reported that they conduct R&D activities in one form or another. In 2011,
the IHLs spent an estimated RM2.7 billion on R&D activities (Figure 5.1). The estimated total R&D
expenditure in the IHLs posted a steady growth from RM1.2 billion in 2008 to RM1.7 billion in 2009,
RM2.5 billion in 2010, and RM2.7 billion in 2011. Since 2006, the growth in expenditure on
academic R&D has been distinct, increasing by 229.4% in 2008, a further 44.0% in 2009, 44.0% in
2010, and 10.6% in 2011; suggesting an increase in R&D intensity in IHLs over the years.
Figure 5.1: R&D Expenditure by Current Cost and Capital Cost (2000-2011)
3,000.0
2,725.6
2,464.4
2,000.0
513.3
1,077.8
110.5
1,488.9
222.2
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2009
Current Expenditure
360.8
Capital Expenditure
438.4
360.4
305.4
55.4
0.0
286.1
401.2
112.1
500.0
209.8
150.6
1,000.0
2,093.8
1,188.3
370.6
1,500.0
2,287.2
1,711.1
144.0
142.1
RM (Million)
2,500.0
2010
2011
Total Expenditure
Year
27
Summary Report

As is the case in many advanced countries such as the U.S., France, and South Korea18, basic research
continues to dominate academic R&D in Malaysia (Figure 5.2). Basic research is important to the
IHLs as it extends the frontiers of knowledge, links graduate education and research, prepares the
next generation of researchers, provides a strong grounding for applied and experimental
development research, and strengthens innovation capacity. In 2011, spending on basic research
took up the biggest portion of the total expenditure on R&D, amounting to RM1.3 billion or 48.8%
of the GERD. Lesser amounts were expended on applied research (RM1.1 billion or 41%) and
experimental development (RM278.5 million or 10.2%). Since 2006, there has been a steady
growth in the R&D expenditures for basic and applied research in the IHLs, suggesting greater
research intensity in Malaysian higher learning institutions and an increasing role of Malaysian
academia as key players in national R&D.
Figure 5.2: Expenditure by Type of Research (2000 - 2011)
1,400.00
1,200.00
2004
2006
2008
2009
278.51
836.00
749.40
125.70
2002
1,330.89
1,116.21
527.10
499.40
161.80
2000
304.90
133.70
179.90
47.20
200.00
162.60
237.20
113.50
400.00
111.30
135.20
114.00
600.00
1,197.70
961.80
800.00
103.96
146.90
35.28
RM (Million)
1,000.00
0.00
Basic
Applied
Experimental
2010
2011
Year
5.1.3 R&D Expenditure by FOR and SEO

R&D Expenditure according to Field of Research (FOR)
As shown in Table 5.1, more than one-third of the expenditure in the IHLs is concentrated in the
eld of engineering and technology (34.4%), while 15.8% and 13.1% are concentrated in the natural
sciences and the medical and health sciences respectively. The social sciences, ICT, humanities,
biotechnology, economics, business and management, and agriculture and forestry all account for
less than 9% each. It should also be noted that while it is an important sector of the economy, ICT
accounts for only 7.5% of the expenditure of higher education R&D.
18
Science and Engineering Indicators 20127 Data obtained from Inland Revenue Board of Malaysia (IRBM)
28
Summary Report
R&D Expenditure according to Socio-Economic Objectives (SEO)

In terms of SEO, academic R&D is almost evenly spread out across four main objectives related to
Society (25.5%), Advanced Experimental and Applied Science (24.6%), Sustainable Economic
Development (23.7%), and Advancement of Knowledge (23.4%) (Table 5.2). Higher-education
expenditures on R&D activities related to the Environment (2.6%) and Defence and Security (0.2%)
are marginal.
Table 5.1: Expenditure According to Field
of Research (2011)
FOR
Engineering and
Technology
Natural Sciences
Medical and Health
Sciences
Social Sciences
ICT
Humanities
Biotechnology
Economics, Business and
Management
5.2
Table 5.2: Expenditure According to

Socio-Economic Objectives (2011)
SEO
%
34.4
15.8
13.1
8.9
7.5
7.1
5.1
4.6
3.5
Society
25.5
and Applied Science
24.6
Development
Advancement of
Knowledge
23.7
23.4
Environment
2.6
0.2
SOURCES OF FUNDS
For the 2011 scal year, the federal government was reported by the IHLs as being the main
provider of R&D funds (86.4%), as has been the case for the past three years. Academic R&D was
also supported by the IHLs own funds (10.9%) and funds from the business sector (1.8%), although
these amounts were very small compared to those provided by federal funds. The funding received
from foreign bodies or other sources accounted for less than 1% each (Figure 5.3). The data
highlight the ever important role of the federal government as a consistent provider of funds for
academic R&D.
29
Summary Report
2009
Government
1.79
10.86
0.88
0.03
83.93
2.66
12.26
1.12
0.04
1.51
17.16
0.79
0.04
80.49
2008
5.3
86.44
18
91.35
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
1.64
3.80
0.46
2.75
Percentage (%)
Figure 5.3: Sources of Funds for R&D in the IHLs (2008 - 2011)
2010
Business Enterprise
IHL
2011
Foreign
Other
Year
5.3.1 Research Personnel

The data in Figure 5.4 indicate that 78,683 research personnel were involved in R&D activities in the
higher education sector in 2011. The total research personnel headcount for IHLs demonstrates an
encouraging upward trend; from 28,775 in 2008 to 57,437 in 2009, and 71,579 in 2010. An
overwhelming majority of this number were researchers, with appreciably much smaller
headcounts of technicians and support sta. In 2011, 81.7% (64,253) of the total headcount were
researchers (Figure 5.4).
Figure 5.4: Headcount of Research Personnel (2000 - 2010)
90,000
78,683
80,000
71,579
57,437
60,000
50,000
40,000
28,775
20,000
11,239
12,538
14,809
13,007
10,000
8,909
808
1,522
10,527
913
1,098
12,805
679
1,325
12,152
335
520
24,131
985
3,659
46,709
3,032
7,696
58,699
4,125
8,755
30,000
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2009
2010
64,253
4,422
10,008
Headcount
70,000
Year
Researchers
30
Summary Report
Technicians
Support Sta
Total Headcount
5.3.2 Headcount and Proportion of Researchers by Gender

Figure 5.5 shows the distribution of male and female researchers in Malaysian IHLs. The gures
indicate that the percentage of female researchers was highest in 2009 (52.4%), rising more than
ten percentage points compared to the previous years. In fact, between 2009 and 2011, the
proportion of female to male researchers is almost equal, with female researchers outnumbering
their male counterparts by a very small margin. The increase in the proportion of female relative to
male researchers is reective of the increased number of female academics in institutions of higher
learning.
52.4
60,000
Headcount
50,000
38.9
35.8
39.8
40.2
60.0
50.0
29,142
31,909
22,240
30,000
40.0
30.0
20.0
20,000
50.3
42.0
40,000
10,000
50.4
13,995
5,444
3,465
6,755
3,772
7,713
5,092
7,272
4,880
10,136
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
24,469
29,557
32,344
2010
2011
Proportion (%)
70,000
10.0
0.0
2009
Year
5.3.3 FTE of Research Personnel

Figure 5.6 shows a rising trend in research personnel FTE, the amount of time in a year research
personnel spends on R&D, from 13,702.5 in 2008 to 26,080.8 in 2009 to 37,251.5 in 2010. The
research personnel FTE reveals an increase of 90.3% from 2008 to 2009, and 42.8% from 2009 to
2010. The FTE of technicians also shows an upward trend, from 479.4 in 2008 to 607.6 in 2009,
1,291.8 in 2010, to 1,399.3 in 2011. In 2011, the FTE of research personnel in the IHLs is estimated
to be 43,147.2.
31
Summary Report

50,000.00
43,147.15
45,000.00
37,251.45
40,000.00
26,080.77
35,000.00
13,702.50
33,372.75
1,291.80
2,586.90
38,833.25
1,399.30
2,914.60
0.00
23,923.60
607.60
1,549.57
5,000.00
11,457.60
479.43
1,765.47
10,000.00
5,096.75
119.19
222.08
15,000.00
6,434.40
267.90
1,035.80
20,000.00
3,187.00
248.70
376.20
25,000.00
3,141.40
218.10
378.50
FTE
30,000.00
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2009
2010
2011
3,738.00
7,738.10
3,811.90
Researchers
5,438.02
Technicians
Support Sta
Total FTE
Year
In terms of qualications, the 2011 data show that slightly over half of the researchers (50.8%) had
doctoral degrees, 36.2% had masters degrees, 12.2% had bachelors degrees, and 0.7% held
diplomas or other non-degree qualications (Figure 5.7). The proportion of researchers holding
doctoral degrees increased from 41.3% in 2009 to 48.6% in 2010, and 50.8% in 2011; while the
proportion of researchers holding masters degrees decreased from 42.1 % in 2009, to 37.4% in
2010, and 36.2% in 2011.
Figure 5.7: Proportion of Researchers by Qualications (2000 - 2011)

120.0
Percentage (%)
100.0
80.0
1.8
13.7
20.0
22.6
29.4
60.0
40.0
25.7
2.8
1.0
15.3
33.9
30.6
38.2
41.9
36.4
2002
2004
1.5
1.4
20.5
15.1
36.9
42.1
41.0
41.3
2008
2009
0.7
0.6
13.4
12.2
37.4
36.2
48.6
50.8
2010
2011
22.8
34.2
49.8
0.0
2000
2006
Year
PhD
32
Summary Report
Master
Bachelor
Non-Degree / Diploma
5.4
CONCLUSION
The total R&D expenditure for the IHLs indicates an upward trend; from an estimated RM360.8
million in 2006 to an estimated RM2.7 billion in 2011. Notable increases in federal funding for IHLs
reveal continued government support for academic R&D. Likewise, there is a steady increase in
researcher headcount from 28,775 in 2008 to 78,683 in 2011. The R&D expenditure on basic
research also highlights the important role of IHLs in promoting graduate education and research,
strengthening innovation capacity, and preparing the next generation of researchers. The
uninterrupted growth in R&D spending in the IHLs undoubtedly reects the policy of the Ministry
of Education (MOE) in advancing the research university agenda based on the National Higher
Education Strategic Plan 2007 -2010.
33
Summary Report
CHAPTER 6:
R&D IN THE
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
AND RESEARCH
INSTITUTES (GRIs)
ICT (38.3%)
CHAPTER 6: R&D IN THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND RESEARCH INSTITUTES (GRIs)

6.0
INTRODUCTION
The GRIs in Malaysia provide an important input to industrial and commercial innovation by researching and
developing strategic areas and ideas that have bottom-line relevance to the government. In lieu of this, the
GRIs are important components of the national innovation system, where their objective is not only to help
the local industry but also the socio-economic development of the country. This chapter presents the R&D
activities in the government agencies and research institutes in Malaysia from 2000 to 2011. The chapter
discusses R&D expenditure in the GRIs based on the participation of 33 GRIs in the year 2009, 34 in 2010,
and 40 in 2011, representing response rates of 96.5%, 97%, and 100% respectively.
6.1
6.1.1
R&D Expenditure by Type of Cost
Between 2002 and 2006, R&D expenditure in the GRIs showed a signicant decline, from an estimated
RM507.1 million in 2002 to approximately RM189.5 million in 2006 (Figure 6.1). Total expenditure grew
signicantly from RM189.5 million to an estimated RM603.1 million in 2008, but declined to RM459.3
million in 2009. In 2010, it rose to RM514.8 million, and in 2011, R&D expenditure surged to approximately
RM1.4 billion. With the exception of 2002 and 2011, where capital expenditure was three times that of
current expenditure, most of the expenditure was on current costs. Indeed, in 2011, capital expenditure was
three times that of current expenditure.
Figure 6.1: Expenditure by Current and Capital Cost

1,600.0
1,357.4
1,400.0
1,000.0
2000
2002
Current Expenditure
2004
514.8
2006
2008
Capital Expenditure
2009
2010
Total Expenditure
359.5
334.7
180.1
330.9
189.5
128.4
196.3
100.6
232.7
0.0
274.4
200.0
292.5
400.0
459.3
997.9
603.1
296.9
469.5
507.1
133.6
417.4
57.5
600.0
132.0
800.0
124.9
RM Million
1,200.0
2011
Year
34
Summary Report

From 2000 to 2011, the research in the GRIs was mostly focused on applied research. The highest
expenditure on applied research was in 2011, at an estimated RM879.9 million. From 2008 to 2011,
the expenditure for applied research was almost doubles that of basic and experimental
development (Figure 6.2).
Figure 6.2: Expenditure by Type of Research (2000-2011)
1,000.00
900.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
53.30
190.30
53.30
44.60
110.30
34.60
65.20
490.90
47.00
92.54
325.17
41.61
100.13
373.13
41.55
100.00
41.00
266.10
200.10
200.00
41.34
191.20
184.94
300.00
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2009
2010
371.56
879.89
500.00
106.00
RM Million
700.00
0.00
Basic
Applied
Experimental
2011
Year
6.1.3 R&D Expenditure by FOR and SEO

True to the objectives for which they were set up, the GRIs invested the most in research in the
natural sciences, estimated at 47.4% of the GERD (RM643.7 million), and in agricultural and
forestry, estimated at 35.8% of the GERD (RM486.0 million) (Table 6.1). They spent the least on
R&D in the areas of ICT (0.33%), Economics, Business and Management (0.84%), and the Social
Sciences (0.82%) in 2011. As shown in Table 6.2, sustainable economic development was the prime
objective galvanizing R&D activities in the GRIs in 2011, accounting for 66.94% of the GERD.
Advanced experimental and applied science was the second highest SEO for which R&D was
conducted (21.09%), while society was the third highest SEO (5.51%). The GRIs geared just a small
portion of her R&D (0.06% of GERD) for the purpose of national defence and security.
35
Summary Report

Field of Research (2011)
FOR
SEO
Natural Sciences
47.42
35.80
Biotechnology
5.29
Engineering and
Technology
Medical and Health
Sciences
Economics, Business and
Management
Social Sciences
Information, Computer
and Communication
Technology (ICT)
5.15
4.34
0.84
Development
66.94
and Applied Science
21.09
Society
5.51
Advancement of
Knowledge
4.29
Environment
2.11
0.06
0.82
0.33
Humanities
6.2

Socio-Economic Objectives (2011)
0.01
SOURCES OF FUNDS
The federal government has been the major provider of R&D funds for Malaysian GRIs since 2006
(Figure 6.3), providing more than 95% of the funding over the years, with the exception of 2008
where the government contributed 85.1%. Since 2006, foreign funding and institutions of higher
learning have been contributing less than 3% of the total funds for the R&D activities.
99.4
99.2
98.7
2006
Business Enterprise
Government
2009
Higher Education
2010
Foreign
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.3
2008
0.7
0.3
14.9
85.1
2.4
2.2
Percentage (%)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
95.4
Figure 6.3: GRI Sources of Funds (2006-2011)
2011
Other
Year
36
Summary Report
6.3
6.3.1 Headcount of Research Personnel

The total headcount for research personnel in the GRIs dropped sharply (by 41.4%) from 7,777 in
2000 to 4,556 in 2006 (Figure 6.4). From 2006 to 2011, research personnel headcount increased
steadily, and as of 2011, there were 7,402 research personnel engaged in R&D activities. The
highest headcount for researchers (4,347) was recorded in 2004, but this gure dropped
signicantly to 2,709 in 2006.
7,777
7,222
7,437
5,899
6,361
6,877
7,402
4,347
1,363
1,727
2,709
722
1,125
3,650
839
1,410
2,866
1,026
2,469
2,972
1,056
2,849
3,174
1,104
3,124
4,556
3,914
1,413
1,895
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
3,809
1,138
2,830
Headcount
Figure 6.4: Headcount of Research Personnel (2000 - 2011)
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2009
2010
2011
Researchers
Technicians
Support Sta
Headcount
Year
6.3.2 Proportion of Researchers According to Gender

It is important to note the growing number of female researchers in the GRIs since 2000. In terms
of proportion to males, female participation in R&D activities in the GRIs increased from 29.9% in
2000 to 52.4% in 2011, recording a slightly greater proportion of female to male researchers
between 2009 to 2011 (Figure 6.5). The substantial rise in female representation in the R&D
workforce meets the national expectation that more women participate in the economy following
improved educational and employment opportunities provided by the government and other
sectors in the country.
37
Summary Report

5,000
Headcount
4,000
3,000
1,137
29.9
1,403
35.8
38.4
1,668
44.8
2,511
60
52.4
50
40
1,137
2,672
51.6
1,635
2,000
1,000
42.0
52.5
2,679
1,572
2,015
1,505
1,535
1,664
1,361
1,437
1,510
2009
2010
2011
30
20
10
0
2000
2002
2004
2006

Proportion of Female Researchers
2008
Year
6.3.3 FTE of Research Personnel

The total FTE of research personnel in the GRIs, or the amount of time in a year they spend on R&D,
declined from 2000 to 2002. In 2004, there was a sharp increase in researcher FTE to 4,021.3
before it fell sharply in 2006 to 2,350. From 2006, researcher FTE continued to rise, reaching a high
of 4,479.73 in 2011, with researcher FTE being the highest, at 2,552.08, followed by that of
supporting sta at 1,443.50. It is important to mention that from 2000 to 2011, researchers had
the highest proportion of research personnel FTE. (Figure 6.6).

5,000.0
4,479.73
4,500.0
4,021.3
4,000.0
3,500.0
2,964.7
3,009.09
2,652.4
3,617.50
2,350.09
3,000.0
2,500.0
1,203.5
508.1
940.8
2,130.8
682.2
1,208.3
1,068.21
411.44
870.44
1,566.23
502.43
940.43
2,271.54
453.72
892.24
2,403.00
467.74
1,244.22
2,552.08
484.15
1,443.50
2,000.0
1,298.3
461.9
1,204.5
FTE
4,114.96
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2009
2010
2011
1,500.0
1,000.0
500.0
0.0
Researcher
Technician
Supp. Sta
Total
Year
38
Summary Report
6.4
CONCLUSION
Between 2000 and 2011, R&D expenditure in the GRIs does not display a consistent pattern, with
some years experiencing an increase and others a decrease. In particular, signicant declines in
spending were observed for the periods 2002-2006 and 2008-2009, which might have been due to
a lack of funding. Although the government is the major provider of their R&D funds, the GRIs in
those periods might have suered a setback in funding due to two global phenomena: the
post-Asian nancial crisis in which Malaysia experienced a large depreciation of the ringgit and
massive capital ight, and the global recession that hit Malaysia in 2008. These periods saw not just
Asian countries but also the entire world going through a period of reduced economic activity as a
result of a slowed economy. However, given the fact that the objective of the GRIs is to help the
local industry and the socio-economic development of the country, it is important that a consistent
ow of adequate funding for R&D be maintained so that these objectives may be realised.
39
Summary Report
CHAPTER 7:
INTERNATIONAL
COMPARISONS
ICT (38.3%)
CHAPTER 7: INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS

7.0
INTRODUCTION
International panel data studies have shown a positive relationship between R&D activities and
productivity growth , and estimates of social returns on R&D have clustered in the range of 20 to 60
per cent, making R&D a major source of growth , responsible for at least half of all increases in per
capita output . These suggest that R&D plays a central role as the engine of a countrys growth and
development. Hence, a comparison of Malaysias R&D activities vis--vis developed nations will
help to indicate her potential and to achieve a developed nation status by 2020.
19
20
This chapter compares Malaysias R&D activities with those of selected countries in the East and
South East Asian region and the advanced economies . These country groups were selected for
comparison in this chapter to address the objectives of the national R&D survey, which were to
compare Malaysias R&D activities with those in the East Asian region, and benchmark her R&D
achievement with that of developed nations. The comparison also aims to provide a broad picture
of the distribution of R&D activities in the East Asian region and around the world.
21
The International data used for the analysis in this chapter were obtained from the IMD World
Competitiveness Yearbook 2012 (WCY) and the UNESCO Institute of Statistics. However, the
Malaysian R&D indicators published in the WCY 2012 are estimated data, based on extrapolations
of previous values. Hence, most of the charts in this chapter show two dierent numbers to
represent Malaysias R&D indicators, the rst being indicators from the National R&D survey 2012
(marked as MALAYSIA*), and the second being estimated gures from the IMD World
Competitiveness Yearbook 2012 (marked as MALAYSIA**).
7.1
GROSS EXPENDITURE ON R&D ACROSS COUNTRIES
The gross expenditure on R&D (GERD) is used as an indicator of a countrys R&D activities. It is
based on the expectation that the higher a countrys R&D expenditure is, the greater are its R&D
activities.
Frantzen, Dirk, 2000, R&D, Human Capital and International Technology Spillovers: A Cross Country Analysis,Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 102 ,pp. 57-75; and
Grith Rachel, Stephen Redding, and John Van Reenen, 2004, Mapping the Two Faces of R&D: Productivity Growth in a Panel of OECD Countries, Review of
Economics and Statistics, 86 ,pp. 883-895
20 Griliches, Z. (1992). The Search for R&D Spillovers, Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 94, pp. 29-47.
21
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan,
Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, United
Kingdom, United States.
19
40
Summary Report
As highlighted in Figure 7.1, global R&D expenditure is concentrated in mainly two countries, the
U.S. and Japan. China, in third place, is estimated to have spent a fourth of the amount spent by the
USA, while Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Korea, and Canada follow closely behind.
Malaysias GERD of USD3.1 billion as obtained from the National R&D survey 2012 places her
between the Czech Republic (32) and South Africa (33), although her GERD as estimated by the
WCY ranks her in the 34th place.
Malaysias GERD, estimated at USD3.1 billion, is much smaller than those of advanced economies
as well as those of the Newly Industrializing Economies (NIE) in the East Asian region such as South
Korea (USD38.0 billion), Taiwan (USD12.5 billion), and Singapore (USD4.8 billion). In the South East
Asian region, it is larger than those of Thailand (USD0.63 billion), Indonesia (USD0.21 billion) and
the Philippines (USD0.17 billion), but second to that of Singapore. It should be emphasized that this
comparison is intended to show the global distribution of R&D and not a countrys research
intensity, as GERD does not take into account the size of the economy and the size of the
population. This is reected by the skewed distribution of global GERD towards that of the U.S.,
Japan, and China, where the GERD is aected by the size of its population and economy, as further
highlighted in. Section 7.2.
Figure 7.1: GERD in Selected Countries (USD Million)
USA (2009)
JAPAN (2009)
CHINA MAINLAND (2010)
GERMANY (2010)
FRANCE (2010)
UNITED KINGDOM (2010)
KOREA (2010)
CANADA (2010)
ITALY (2010)
BRAZIL (2010)
AUSTRALIA (2008)
SWEDEN (2010)
INDIA (2010)
TAIWAN (2010)
ISRAEL (2010)
NORWAY (2010)
TURKEY (2010)
SINGAPORE (2010)
IRELAND (2010)
CZECH REPUBLIC (2010)
MALAYSIA (2011)*
SOUTH AFRICA (2008)
MALAYSIA (2010)**
GREECE (2007)
HONG KONG (2010)
NEW ZEALAND (2009)
THAILAND (2009)
JORDAN (2010)
QATAR (2007)
INDONESIA (2010)
PHILIPPINES (2009)
401,576 (1)
169,047 (2)
104,318 (3)
92,458 (4)
57,789 (5)
39,858 (6)
37,935 (7)
28,366 (8)
25,878 (9)
24,891 (10)
23,994 (11)
15,707 (14)
14,015 (17)
12,480 (18)
9,567 (20)
7,075 (25)
6,167 (26)
4,759 (27)
3,703 (29)
3,091 (32)
3,079
2,547 (33)
1,885 (34)
1,836 (35)
1,714 (37)
1,527 (38)
627 (45)
268 (53)
220 (55)
209 (56)
166 (57)
0
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000

GERD (USD Million)
Source: The IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook (2012).

Note: MALAYSIA* is the GERD taken from the National R&D survey 2012 while MALAYSIA** is the GERD
estimated by WCY. The numbers in parenthesis show the rank of the countries when compared according to
their GERD.
41
Summary Report
7.2
R&D INTENSITY: GERD PER GDP
To make GERD gures comparable across countries, measures of R&D intensity are used. This
approach provides a means of adjusting for the dierences in the sizes of national economies. One
of these measures is the GERD per GDP.
Malaysias GERD per GDP for 2011 is 1.07%. This means that the gross expenditure on R&D
accounted for 1.07% of Malaysias GDP. The country with the highest GERD/GDP is Israel, at 4.41%,
while Finland, Korea, Japan, Sweden and Denmark all have GERD/GDP of above 3.0% (Figure 7.2).
Among the advanced economies as listed by the WCY, Brazil, Hungary and Russia are the closest to
Malaysia, with a GERD per GDP of 1.16%, while the average for the OECD countries stands at 2.3%
in 2009. Closer to Malaysia, Singapore recorded a GERD per GDP of 2.09%, twice that of Malaysia,
while the GERD/GDP recorded by Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia is below 0.3%.
Figure 7.2: GERD per GDP (%)
ISRAEL (2010)
FINLAND (2010)
KOREA (2010)
SWEDEN (2010)
JAPAN (2009)
DENMARK (2010)
SWITZERLAND (2008)
TAIWAN (2010)
USA (2009)
GERMANY (2010)
AUSTRALIA (2008)
SINGAPORE (2010)
NETHERLANDS (2010)
CANADA (2010)
NEW ZEALAND (2009)
ITALY (2010)
BRAZIL (2010)
HUNGARY (2010)
RUSSIA (2010)
MALAYSIA (2011)*
JORDAN (2010)
INDIA (2010)
TURKEY (2010)
LITHUANIA (2010)
MALAYSIA(2010)**
HONG KONG (2010)
QATAR (2007)
THAILAND (2009)
PHILIPPINES (2009)
INDONESIA (2010)
4.41 (1)
3.88 (2)
3.74 (3)
3.40 (4)
3.36 (5)
3.06 (6)
2.99 (7)
2.90 (8)
2.88 (9)
2.82 (10)
2.28 (14)
2.09 (17)
1.82 (19)
1.80 (20)
1.77 (22)
1.76 (23)
1.32 (30)
1.26 (31)
1.16 (32)
1.16 (33)
1.16 (34)
1.07
1.01 (35)
0.85 (38)
0.84 (39)
0.79 (41)
0.79 (42)
0.76 (43)
0.28 (52)
0.24 (53)
0.10 (56)
0.03 (57)
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
GERD/GDP (%)
Note: MALAYSIA* is the GERD per GDP taken from the National R&D survey 2012 while MALAYSIA** is the GERD/GDP estimated by WCY.
The numbers in parenthesis show the rank of the countries when compared according to their GERD/GDP.
42
Summary Report
It should be mentioned that many of the advanced European countries have not reached the target
for R&D intensity set by the European Union (EU). The 2002 Lisbon strategy had set for the EU an
objective of devoting 3% of its GDP to R&D activities by 2010, but the 3% target was not reached. It
was subsequently re-articulated and maintained in the Europe 2020 Strategy adopted in 2010, and
now forms one of ve key targets to be achieved by EU Member States by the year 2020 .
22
7.3
BUSINESS EXPENDITURE ON R&D
The New Economic Model (NEM) aims to transform Malaysia into a high-income advanced nation
with inclusiveness and sustainability by 2020. The model emphasizes the need for a competitive
and investor-friendly market (NEAC), and the role of the business sector as the catalyst for growth,
as its R&D is the most closely linked to the creation of new products and production techniques, as
well as to a countrys innovation eorts.
23
30
42.55
41.45
51.25
50.67
56.67
60.51
60.93
68.75
70.32
71.54
73.42
75.76
70.45
60.83
55.54
47.39
37.96
28.59
40
43.29
50
57.23
60
69.63
70
67.3
BERD/GERD (%)
80
74.8
90
79.81
Figure 7.3: BERD per GERD
10
3.64
20

Note: MALAYSIA* is the BERD per GERD taken from the National R&D survey 2012 while MALAYSIA** is the
GERD/GDP estimated by WCY.
The importance of the business sectors involvement in R&D is manifested in the advanced
economies BERD per GERD, which shows the share of business-sector R&D relative to the total
R&D expenditure. In 2011, Malaysia recorded a BERD of 56.67% of her GERD, several percentages
smaller than the BERD/GERD shares of many advanced economies, which ranged between 60% and
80% (Figure 7.3).
22
23
"R & D expenditure" - Statistics Explained (2013/3/3) <http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/R_%26_D_expenditure>

OECD (2011), Business R&D, in OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2011, OECD Publishing.
43
Summary Report
BERD per GDP, on the other hand, shows the R&D intensity of the business sector. Specically, it
shows the percentage of the GDP that is spent on R&D by the business sector. Malaysias BERD per
GDP in 2011 is 0.61 (Figure 7.4); which is quite low when compared to that of developed East Asian
countries such as Singapore (1.27), South Korea (2.8), and Taiwan (2.08). The worlds highest
performer of business R&D is Israel (3.52), followed by South Korea (2.8), Finland (2.7). The U.S.,
however, has a BERD per GDP of only 2.03%, far smaller than Israels, even though the U.S. BERD for
2010 (USD282,393 million) is the highest globally .
24
Figure 7.4: BERD per GDP (%)

ISRAEL (2010)
3.52 (1)
KOREA (2010)
2.80 (2)
FINLAND (2010)
2.70 (3)
JAPAN (2009)
2.54 (4)
SWEDEN (2010)
2.34 (5)
SWITZERLAND (2008)
2.20 (6)
DENMARK (2010)
2.08 (7)
TAIWAN (2010)
2.08 (8)
USA (2009)
2.03 (9)
GERMANY (2010)
1.90 (10)
AUSTRALIA (2009)
1.33 (15)
1.30 (17)
SINGAPORE (2010)
1.27 (18)
1.07 (21)
ITALY (2010)
0.67 (31)
MALAYSIA (2011)*
0.61
MALAYSIA (2010)**
0.56 (32)
BRAZIL (2010)
0.55 (33)
NEW ZEALAND (2009)
0.55 (34)
SOUTH AFRICA (2009)
0.51 (35)
HONG KONG (2010)
0.33 (38)
INDIA (2010)
0.17 (46)
THAILAND (2009)
0.09 (50)
PHILIPPINES (2008)
0.05 (52)
INDONESIA (2008)
0.04 (53)
QATAR (2007)
0.01 (55)
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
BERD/GDP (%)

Note: MALAYSIA* is the BERD per GDP taken from the National R&D survey 2012 while MALAYSIA** is the
BERD/GDP estimated by WCY. The numbers in parenthesis show the rank of the countries when compared
according to their BERD/GDP.
24
44
Summary Report
Given Malaysias relatively small share of BERD relative to the GERD, the New Economic Models aim
of having the business sector as the nations primary driver for long-term economic growth may not
fully
materialize unless serious eorts are made to push for greater R&D in the private sector.
To this end, the move of shifting incubators towards the private sector, stipulated under the 10th
Malaysia Plan, is deemed a good step in increasing R&D in the private sector.
7.4
HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT IN R&D
Malaysias economic growth was driven predominantly by factor accumulation; especially of low
skilled workers. However this model is not sustainable, and is inconsistent with the economic
structure of most advanced economies. A transformational shift is needed for Malaysia to be
among the advanced economies. Malaysia needs to build her competency in S&T and R&D, and
improve on her ability to innovate; and rms need to move up the value chain and be involved in
higher valued-added activities. The stock of researchers is an indicator of Malaysias competency in
R&D, and provides a benchmark with regard to the possibility of moving up the value chain, as it is
the researchers, those who are at the frontiers of technology, who will lead innovation and the
transformation of the economy. Indeed, the Ninth Malaysia Plan had set the target of 50 researchers for every 10,000 members of the labour force by 2010.
23
7.4.1 Headcount of Researchers

In 2011, the number of researchers in Malaysia is estimated at 73,752. The country with the largest
number of researchers is Japan, with 889,341 researchers (Figure 7.5). However, it should be
mentioned that the headcount of researchers is a function of the size of the economy and the size
of the population; hence countries with large populations will tend to have more researchers.
1,271
4,872
4,134
21,393
24,049
34,387
41,143
43,418
54,505
52,568
55,797
55,858
59,341
67,245
124,796
73,752
231,910
295,696
345,912
368,915
385,489
484,566
Headcount
1,000,000
900,000
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
889,341
Figure 7.5: Headcount of Researchers
Source: UNESCO Institute of Statistics (www.uis.unesco.org)

Notes: Statistic for Malaysia is taken from National R&D survey 2012. There were no data available for the U.S.
22 "R & D expenditure" - Statistics Explained (2013/3/3) <http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/R_%26_D_expenditure>

23 OECD (2011), Business R&D, in OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2011, OECD Publishing.
45
Summary Report
7.4.2 Researchers per 10,000 Labour Force

Researchers per 10,000 labour force (Figure 7.6) compares the proportion of researchers in the
labour force across countries, and is an indicator of researcher intensity. In this regard, Iceland is
leading other countries with a capacity of 223.6 researchers per 10,000 labour force. In the case of
Malaysia in 2011, 58.2 out of 10,000 labour force are researchers. Even though this topped the
target set by the Ninth Malaysia Plan, it is still smaller than the proportion of researchers in other
advanced economies such as South Korea and Singapore, with 142.5 and 127.4 researchers per
10,000 labour force respectively, and the OECD average of 76.0 researchers per 10,000 labour force
.
25
3.5
36.6
22.8
58.2
47.1
60.3
59.3
82.3
61.0
84.4
50.0
82.8
87.8
114.2
102.5
125.5
223.6
100.0
117.8
134.9
127.4
142.5
136.9
147.2
150.0
142.8
200.0
171.8
Researchers per 10,000 Labour Force
250.0
207.2
Figure 7.6: Researchers per 10,000 Labour Force
0.0
Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (www.uis.unesco.org)

Notes: Statistic for Malaysia is taken from the National R&D survey 2012. There were no data available for the
U.S.
7.4.3 Full Time Equivalence (FTE) of Research Personnel

A nations workforce must adequately respond to the needs of the productive sectors in the
economy. By this token, qualied researchers are of paramount importance for quality R&D, but
having qualied researchers alone is not sucient for R&D activities, and is not the only factor that
determines the success and quality of R&D. Researchers require support from technicians and
administrative personnel to assist in R&D activities. The FTE of research personnel indicates the
amount of time in a year that they have undertaken for R&D activities.
25
Source: OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2011
46
Summary Report
Researcher intensity, however, is measured using FTE per 1,000 people. Iceland, with a research
personnel FTE of 11.77 per 1,000 people, ranks the highest, while Malaysias research personnel
FTE per 1,000 people of 1.98 (Figure 7.7) would have placed her between Poland and Mainland
China. China, the country with the greatest number of research personnel, has a research
personnel FTE per 1,000 people that is less than Malaysia, at 1.90, even though her total FTE is the
highest globally at 2,553,800 . For the advanced economies, the minimum research personnel FTE
per 1,000 people is about 3.
26
Figure 7.7: FTE of R&D Personnel per Capita (FTE per 1,000 people)
ICELAND (2009)
11.77 (1)
FINLAND (2010)
10.42 (2)
LUXEMBOURG (2010)
9.74 (3)
DENMARK (2010)
9.61 (4)
TAIWAN (2010)
9.10 (5)
SWEDEN (2010)
8.26 (6)
SWITZERLAND (2008)
8.06 (7)
NORWAY (2010)
7.37 (8)
SINGAPORE (2010)
7.29 (9)
CANADA (2008)
7.25 (10)
JAPAN (2009)
6.89 (12)
KOREA (2010)
6.78 (13)
GERMANY (2010)
6.74 (14)
NEW ZEALAND (2009)
6.58 (15)
AUSTRALIA (2008)
6.31 (17)
5.14 (22)
ITALY (2010)
3.64 (28)
HONG KONG (2010)
3.43 (30)
CROATIA (2010)
2.28 (35)
BULGARIA (2010)
2.19 (36)
POLAND (2010)
2.14 (37)
MALAYSIA (2011)*
1.98
1.90 (38)
BRAZIL (2010)
1.39 (40)
QATAR (2007)
1.31 (41)
TURKEY (2010)
1.12 (43)
THAILAND (2009)
0.86 (45)
MALAYSIA (2010) **
0.78 (46)
CHILE (2008)
0.75 (47)
PHILIPPINES (2009)
0.19 (51)
INDONESIA (2009)
0.18 (52)
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
FTE per 1,000 People

Note: MALAYSIA* is the FTE per 1,000 people taken from the National R&D survey 2012 while MALAYSIA** is the
FTE per 1,000 people estimated by the WCY. The numbers in parenthesis show the rank of the countries when
compared according to their FTE per 1,000 People.
26
47
Summary Report
7.4.4 Female Researchers

As shown in Figure 7.8, the percentage of female researchers in many of the advanced Western
European nations is smaller than that of their Eastern European counterparts. The data parallel the
ndings of the European Commission (2008), which found that only 15% of full professors in
European universities are women and that women are under-represented in decision-making
scientic boards in almost all European countries . In contrast, Malaysia recorded a percentage of
48.7% female relative to male researchers, which is far better than the situation in many advanced
economies, including Denmark (31.9%), Finland (31.4%), Singapore (28.5%), Germany (24.9%),
South Korea (16.7%), and Japan (13.6%).
27
20.0
13.6
24.9
26.9
25.9
France (2009)
Netherlands (2009)
16.7
28.1
Czech Republic (2010)
31.4
28.5
Finland (2009)
30.0
Singapore (2009)
32.2
31.9
China (2009)
33.8
Italy (2009)
Denmark (2009)
35.7
35.2
Norway (2009)
Turkey (2010)
Slovenia (2009)
37.1
35.8
Kuwait (2009)
38.1
37.9
Poland (2009)
Spain (2009)
39.5
Iceland (2009)
40.0
United Kingdom (2009)
42.4
41.0
Slovakia (2010)
46.4
42.5
47.6
Bulgaria (2009)
Estonia (2009)
48.7
48.5
Malaysia (2011)
Percentage (%)
50.0
Kazakhstan (2009)
60.0
50.9
Figure 7.8: Percentage of Female Researchers Relative to Male Personnel
10.0
Japan (2009)
Germany (2009)
South Korea (2010)
Croatia (2009)
Lithuania (2009)
0.0
Source: UNESCO Institute of Statistics (www.uis.unesco.org)

Notes: Statistic for Malaysia is taken from National R&D survey 2012. There are no data available for the U.S.
7.5
CONCLUSION
The distribution of R&D activities at the global level is concentrated in three regions: North
America, Europe and East Asia. In the South East Asian region, Malaysia is a distant second to Singapore, and in the East Asian region, Malaysia is behind the worlds leading economies such as South
Korea, Japan, and Taiwan in almost all of the R&D measures. In order to achieve the goals of Vision
2020, Malaysias R&D activities need to be at par with those of advanced economies. Hence,
Malaysias targets for all measures of R&D should be set high enough such that they will elevate her
to a position that is at par or at least comparable with that of advanced economies, specically in
terms of R&D performance and economic achievement.
27
European Commission. (2008) Mapping the Maze: Getting More Women to the Top in Research. Luxembourg: Oce for Ocial Publications of the European
Communities.
48
Summary Report
CHAPTER 8:
CONCLUSION
ICT (38.3%)
CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION
8.0
INTRODUCTION
Malaysias gross expenditure on R&D has steadily increased since 2000. A sharp increase in GERD is
particularly notable between 2006 and 2009, reaching close to an estimated RM 7.2 billion in 2009;
an increase of 97.4% over that of 2006. In 2011, total R&D spending was estimated at RM9.4 billion.
Malaysias research intensity (GERD/GDP) has also charted a consistent increase since 2004.
Indeed, GERD/GDP rose from 0.63% in 2004 to 0.79% in 2008 and further to 1.01% in 2009,
meeting the target of 1.0 set in the RMKe-10 to be achieved by 2015. Our research intensity
continued to improve, and in 2010 and 2011, Malaysia recorded a GERD/GDP of 1.07%. Although
this is an improvement over previous GERD/GDP values, it is still low when compared to that of a
developed South East Asian country such as Singapore (1.27) and developed East Asian countries
such as South Korea (2.8) and Taiwan (2.08).
From 2000 to 2011, the business sector has been the largest performer of R&D in Malaysia,
accounting for more than 60% of the GERD since 2000with the exception of 2000 (57.9%) and
2011 (56.7%). However, Malaysias BERD per GDPwhich shows the percentage of the GDP that is
spent on R&D by the business sectoris considered low when compared to that of other countries
during the same period. Malaysias BERD/GDP in 2011 is 0.61.
The number of research personnel has also increased markedly since 2006. 2011 recorded the
highest headcount (96,961) for R&D personnel, which includes researchers, technicians, and
support sta. The highest number of researchers (73,752) was also recorded in 2011, with an
estimated 58.2 researchers per 10,000 labour force, topping the target set by the Ninth Malaysia
Plan of 50 researchers per 10,000 labour force by 2010.
The trends also show a marked increase in researchers with Masters and PhDs. The headcount of
researchers with PhDs increased from 7,001 in 2006 to 33,272 in 2011, close to 47% of the total
number of researchers; while those with masters degrees increased from 5,337 in 2006 to 24,691
in 2011.
Female participation in R&D has also steadily increased over the years. In 2008, women accounted
for 40.9% of Malaysias researchers, while in 2009, 50.9% were women, the highest recorded since
2000, outnumbering their male counterparts by a small margin. Female researcher participation
declined only slightly in 2010 and 2011 to 48.8% and 48.7% respectively. The percentage of female
relative to male researchers is much higher than that of many advanced economies such as
Denmark (31.9%), Finland (31.4%), Singapore (28.5%), Germany (24.9%), South Korea (16.7%), and
Japan (13.6%).
26 The IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook (2012)
49
Summary Report
8.1
THE WAY FORWARD
The marked increases in the various measures of R&D, i.e. GERD, GERD/GDP, headcount of
researchers and research personnel, and researcher intensity, point to the fact that Malaysia is
making steady progress in R&D. In addition, there is also an increase in the number of researchers,
as reected in the substantial increase in those with PhD and Masters degrees, as well as in the
participation of women in R&D, amounting to about 50% of the total number of researchers.
However, these achievements, though notable, are not sucient to allow us to reach the goal of
being a high-income nation by 2020 as emphasised in the NEM and the 10th Malaysia plan. To
achieve this goal, we need to invest suciently in R&D as this will lead to greater economic growth.
Our researcher intensity of 58.2 researchers per 10,000 labour force is still below that of many
advanced economies such as Singapore (127.4), Germany (114.2), and France (102.5), and the
OECD average of 76 researchers per 10,000; while our GERD/GDP of 1.07% is also below that of
advanced economies and the OECD average of 2.3% and the EU target of 3.0%. While it may not be
possible nor appropriate to try to achieve, by 2020, the target of spending 3.0% of our GDP on R&D
as set by the EU for their member countries, it is important, nevertheless, that we set for ourselves
new targets as international cross-sectional time series data have shown that a countrys R&D
intensity is strongly correlated with its productivity.
In this regard, we should aim to achieve a GERD/GDP of at least close to the OECD average of 2.3%.
Given our past performance in R&D, and our present GERD/GDP of 1.07%, it is perhaps reasonable
to set the target of achieving a GERD/GDP of 2.0% by 2020.
With regard to the number of researchers, we propose a target of 70 researchers per labour force,
close to the OECD average of 76; given our present headcount of 58.2 researchers per 10,000
labour force. We also propose a target of 60,000 researchers with PhDs by 2023 following the
Ministry of Higher Educations (MOHE) target. This is a target that is likely to be achieved, as MOHE
has already put in place the mechanism to achieve this target in their National Higher Education
Strategic Plan Phase 2 (2010 - 2015) .
28
In addition to developing our research and researcher intensity, there is also a need to improve our
Business Expenditure on R&D (BERD) as it plays a signicant role in propelling developed nations
well ahead of less developed nations. BERD in developed countries range from 60% to 80%; with
70% being the OECD average. We suggest aiming for a BERD/GERD of at least 70%, following the
OECD average. Given Malaysias relatively small share of BERD relative to her GERD, the New
Economic Models aim of having the business sector as the nations primary driver for long-term
economic growth may be hampered unless Malaysia makes serious eorts to push for greater,
stronger, more diverse, and more resilient R&D. To this end, the shifting of economic incubators
towards the private or business sector, articulated in the 10th Malaysia Plan, can be considered as
a smart economic move for increasing Malaysias performance in R&D. However, it should also be
emphasised that the role of the government is to facilitate R&D, and not to provide the bulk of the
investment for business R&D, which should come from its own funds. Thus, a close synergy of
business and government supported R&D is what Malaysia needs to galvanize national
development and sustain long-term economic growth.
28
Pelan Strategik Pengajian Tinggi Negara Fasa 2 (2010 - 2015): http://jpt.mohe.gov.my/DASAR/bab-psptn/Bab3.pdf
50
Summary Report
Appendix
LIST OF IHL
AIMST
CURTIN
CYBERMED
KDU
KLIUC
KUIS
MMU
MONASH
NOTTINGH
OUM
SEGI
SUNWAY
SWINBURNE
TATI
TAYLORS
UIAM
UITM
UKM
UM
UMK
UMP
UMS
UMT
UNIKL
UNIMAP
UNIMAS
UNISEL
UNISZA
UNITEN
UPM
UPNM
UPSI
USIM
USM
UTAR
UTEM
UTHM
UTM
UTP
UUM
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
AIMST University
Universiti Teknologi Curtin Sarawak Malaysia
Kolej Universiti Sains Perubatan CyberJaya
Kolej Damansara Utama
Kolej Universiti Infrastruktur Kuala Lumpur
Kolej Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Selangor
Universiti Multimedia
Universiti Monash Malaysia
Universiti Nottingham (Malaysia)
Universiti Terbuka Malaysia
Kolej Universiti SEGi
Kolej Universiti Sunway Universiti Kuala Lumpur
Universiti Teknologi Swinburne Kampus Sarawak
Kolej Universiti TATI
Kolej Taylor's
Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia
Universiti Teknologi Mara
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
Universiti Malaya
Universiti Malaysia Kelantan
Universiti Malaysia Pahang
Universiti Malaysia Sabah
Universiti Malaysia Terengganu
Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia
Universiti Malaysia Perlis
Universiti Malaysia Sarawak
Universiti Selangor
Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin
Universiti Tenaga Nasional
Universiti Putra Malaysia
Universiti Teknologi Curtin Sarawak Malaysia
Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia
Universiti Sains Malaysia
Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman
Universiti Teknikal Malaysia
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS
Universiti Utara Malaysia
26 The IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook (2012)
51
Summary Report
Appendix
LIST OF GRI
ABI
:
ANM
:
ARSM
:
CRAUN
:
CRC
:
CREAM
:
CSM
:
FELCRA
:
FRIM
:
IAB
:
IHSR
:
IKIM
:
IKU
:
IMR
:
INTAN
:
IPGM
:
IPHARM
:
IPP
:
JMG
:
JPS
:
JPSB
:
JTSB
:
JTSK
:
KEMAS
:
LKM
:
MARDI
:
MIB
:
MIMA
:
MIROS
:
MOH Dental
:
MOH Pharmacy :
MPB
:
MPOB
:
NAHRIM
:
NIOSH
:
PPTAP
:
RISDA
:
SBC
:
STRIDE
:
VRI
:
Institut Agro Bioteknologi Malaysia

Agensi Nuklear Malaysia
Agensi Remote Sensing Malaysia
Craun Research Sdn. Bhd
Clinical Research Centre
Construction Research Institute of Malaysia
Cyber Security Malaysia
Lembaga Penyatuan dan Pemulihan Tanah Persekutuan
Institut Penyelidikan Perhutanan Malaysia
Institut Aminuddin Baki
Institut Penyelidikan Sistem Kesihatan
Institut Kefahaman Islam Malaysia
Institut Kesihatan Umum
Institut Penyelidikan Perubatan
Institut Tadbiran Awam Negara
Institut Pendidikan Guru Malaysia
Institut Farmaseutikal & Nutraseutikal Malaysia
Institut Penyelidikan Perikanan
Jabatan Mineral dan Geosains Malaysia
Jabatan Perhutanan Sarawak
Jabatan Perhutanan Sabah
Jabatan Pertanian Sabah
Jabatan Pertanian Sarawak
Jabatan Kemajuan Masyarakat
Lembaga Koko Malaysia
Institut Penyelidikan dan Kemajuan Pertanian Malaysia
Institut Bioteknologi Melaka
Institut Maritim Malaysia
Institut Penyelidikan Keselamatan Jalan Raya
Bahagian Kesihatan Pergigian
Bahagian Perkhidmatan Farmasi
Lembaga Lada Malaysia
Lembaga Minyak Sawit Malaysia
Institut Penyelidikan Hidraulik Kebangsaan Malaysia
Institut Keselamatan dan Kesihatan Pekerjaan Negara
Pusat Penyelidikan Ternakan Air Payau
Pihak Berkuasa Kemajuan Pekebun Kecil Perusahaan Getah
Sarawak Biodiversity Centre
Institut Penyelidikan Sains dan Teknologi Pertahanan
Institut Penyelidikan Veterinar
28 Pelan Strategik Pengajian Tinggi Negara Fasa 2 (2010 - 2015): http://jpt.mohe.gov.my/DASAR/bab-psptn/Bab3.pdf
52
Summary Report

Final Report of R&amp;D Survey 2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Report of R&amp;D Survey 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

National Survey of

Reserch and Development (R&D) 2012

Dr. Tan Yit Quin

Survey Logistics and Technical Support:

Mrs. Anita Bahari

Prof. Dr. Ratnawati Mohd Asraf

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ismail Sheikh Ahmad

Mrs. Noor Muhaini Mohd Hisham

Mrs. Nuruljannah Md Husin

Prof. Dr. Ratnawati Mohd Asraf

METHODOLOGY OF THE SURVEY

OVERVIEW OF R&D IN MALAYSIA

R&D IN THE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE

R&D IN THE INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING (IHLs)

R&D IN THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND RESEARCH INSTITUTES (GRIs)

METHODOLOGY OF THE SURVEY

OVERVIEW OF R&D IN MALAYSIA

R&D IN THE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE

R&D IN THE INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING (IHLs)

R&D IN THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND RESEARCH INSTITUTES (GRIs)

METHODOLOGY OF THE SURVEY

R&D IN THE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE

R&D IN THE INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING (IHLs)

R&D IN THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND RESEARCH INSTITUTES (GRIs)

7,001 researchers with PhDs (2006) to 33,272 (2011); and

KEY INDICATORS OF R&D ACTIVITIES IN MALAYSIA 2009-2011

Total Population (Million)

OVERVIEW OF NATIONAL R&D

Three Main Fields of Research

Three Main Socio-Economic

R&D IN THE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (BE)

Current Expenditure (Million)

Capital Expenditure (Million)

Headcount of R&D Personnel

Headcount of Technicians &

FTE of R&D Personnel

FTE per R&D Personnel

FTE per Researcher

Human Resource in R&D

Three Main Fields of Research

Three Main Socio-Economic

R&D IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING ( IHL )

Total R&D Expenditure (Million)

Current Expenditure (Million)

Capital Expenditure (Million)

Headcount of R&D Personnel

Headcount of Technicians &

FTE of R&D Personnel

FTE per R&D Personnel

FTE per Researcher

Human Resource in R&D

Three Main Fields of Research

Three Main Socio-Economic

R&D IN GOVERNMENT AGENCIES & RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS ( GRI )

Total R&D Expenditure (Million)

Current Expenditure (Million)

Capital Expenditure (Million)

Headcount of R&D Personnel

Headcount of Technicians &

FTE of R&D Personnel

FTE per R&D Personnel

FTE per Researcher

Human Resource in R&D

Three Main Fields of Research

Final Report of R&D Survey 2012

Final Report of R&D Survey 2012