# Profoundd archive — Epstein Files
# Bates number: EFTA00731502
# Title:        <lb UNITED NATIONS
# Dataset:      9
# Pages:        37
# Images:       37 detected
# Tags:         epstein, doj, dataset-9, image-described
# Source PDF:   https://profoundd.com/epstein-docs/EFTA00731502/download
# Doc viewer:   https://profoundd.com/epstein-docs/EFTA00731502
#
# Text below is what Profoundd has extracted from the source PDF.
# 'ocr-enriched' tag means OCR was applied to scan-only pages.
# Image descriptions are AI-generated factual captions (llava:13b).
#----------------------------------------------------------------------

=== SUMMARY ===
<lb UNITED NATIONS fzitio, UNIVERSITY UNU-INTECH Institute S New Technologies Discussion Paper Series #2005-3 Science and Technology Development Indicators in the Arab Region: A Comparative Study of Gulf and Mediterranean Arab Countries Samia Satti 0. M. Nour August 2005 UNITED NATIONS UNIVERSITY, Institute for New Technologies, Keizer Karelplein 19, 6211 TC Maastricht, The Netherlands Tel: (31) (43) 350 6300, Fax: (31) (43)350 6399, e-mail: postmaster@intech.unu.edu, URL: http://www.intech.unu.


=== EXTRACTED TEXT ===
<lb UNITED NATIONS 
fzitio, UNIVERSITY 
UNU-INTECH 
Institute S New Technologies 
Discussion Paper Series 
#2005-3 
Science and Technology Development Indicators in the Arab 
Region: A Comparative Study of Gulf and Mediterranean 
Arab Countries 
Samia Satti 0. M. Nour 
August 2005 
UNITED NATIONS UNIVERSITY, Institute for New Technologies, Keizer Karelplein 19, 6211 TC Maastricht, The Netherlands 
Tel: (31) (43) 350 6300, Fax: (31) (43)350 6399, e-mail: postmaster@intech.unu.edu, URL: http://www.intech.unu.edu 
EFTA00731502
EFTA00731503
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS 
IN THE ARAB REGION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF GULF 
AND MEDITERRANEAN ARAB COUNTRIES 
Samia Satti 0. M. Nour* 
Abstract 
This paper employs both descriptive and comparative approaches to discuss science and 
technology (S&T) development in Arab countries in the Gulf and Mediterranean regions. 
Throughout the paper we use the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's 
definition of S&T indicators (OECD, 1997). From this research we find that neither the Gulf nor 
the Mediterranean countries investigated possess sufficient human or financial resources to 
promote S&T performance. We show that the low level of resources devoted to S&T 
development together with inadequate economic structures mean that the Gulf and 
Mediterranean Arab countries lag behind the world's advanced and leading developing 
countries in terms of S&T input and output indicators. In both regions, most of the research, 
development and S&T activities occur within public and academic sectors, with only a very 
small contribution from the private sector. When comparing S&T indicators between the two 
Arab regions we find that despite the high standard of economic development in the Gulf 
countries, as measured by gross domestic product per capita and the human development index, 
it is the Mediterranean countries that perform better in most of the S&T input and output 
indicators. Furthermore, we show that there is very limited scientific cooperation within and 
between the Gulf and Mediterranean countries as well as between them and other Arab 
countries. In contrast, three Arab countries from the Mediterranean region — Morocco, Algeria 
and Tunisia — show active scientific cooperation with the international community, especially 
the OECD and France in particular. This implies that social proximity (sharing similar language, 
culture, etc.) can hardly help regional scientific cooperation within the Arab world; it is 
geographical proximity to Europe that motivates these countries' international scientific 
cooperation. 
JEL Classification: O0 
* PhD candidate Maastricht University. Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology 
(MERIT) and The United Nations University (UNU). Institute for New Technologies (INTECH) - E-mail: 
nour@intech.unu.edu. This papa is a revised version of the paper originally prepared for the ERE' 10* Annual 
Conference: Marrakesh — Morocco. 16th to Igh of December 2003. The author acknowledges comments by two 
unknown referees. The usual disclaimer applies. 
EFTA00731504
EFTA00731505
UNU-INTECH Discussion Papers 
ISSN 1564-8370 
Copyright 2005 UNITED NATIONS UNIVERSITY 
Institute for New Technologies, UNU-INTECH 
UNU-INTECH discussion papers intend to disseminate preliminary results of the research 
carried out at the institute to attract comments 
EFTA00731506
EFTA00731507
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
I. INTRODUCTION 9 
2. THE DEFINITION AND SIGNIFICANCE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INDICATORS 
11 
3. GENERAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF GULF AND MEDITERRANEAN 
COUNTRIES 15 
4. S&T INDICATORS IN THE GULF AND MEDITERRANEAN COUNTRIES 17 
4.1. HUMAN AND FINANCIAL INPUT INDICATORS 17 
4.2. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OUTPUT AND IMPACT 21 
5. CONCLUSIONS 31 
REFERENCES 33 
THE UNU•INTECH DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES 37 
EFTA00731508
EFTA00731509
1. INTRODUCTION 
In recent years, a new economic system has evolved that is characterized by both globalization 
and the rise of information and communication technologies. This has driven the need for 
development in science and technology (S&T), which has become more than simply an element 
of economic growth and industrial competitiveness, but is now also essential for improving 
social development, the quality of life and the global environment. For instance, the high level 
of economic and social development in today's industrialized countries is largely the result of 
past intensive investment in S&T; similarly, newly industrialized countries are catching up 
because of their active development of S&T. 
"Access to scientific and technological knowledge and the ability to exploit it are becoming 
increasingly strategic and decisive for the economic performance of countries and regions in 
the competitive globalized economy. The 50 leading MT countries have enjoyed longterm 
economic growth much higher than the other 130 countries of the rest of the world. Between 
1986 and 1994 the average growth rate of this heterogeneous group of countries was around 
three times greater than that of the rest of the world. The average economic wealth per capita of 
these 50 countries has grown by 1.1% per year. On the other hand, the per capita income of the 
group of 130 countries — which perform less well in education, science and technology — has 
fallen over the same period by 1.5% per year. These trends prefigure a new division of the 
global economy, based on access to knowledge and the ability to exploit it". (OECD 1997, ix) 
Hence, within this context, the aim of this paper is to assess S&T development indicators within 
the Arab region and, in particular, to compare the S&T development of those in the 
Mediterranean with those in the Gulf, and to compare them to countries in the rest of the 
world.' Given the recent progress of economic globalization coupled with the emergence of new 
nations active in S&T in different parts of the world, this paper extends the comparison to 
include these new countries as well as those in Europe, the United States and Japan, and then 
draws some policy implications and recommendations for ways to enhance S&T performance in 
the Arab region. 
The Mediterranean region includes eight Arab countries or territories: Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon• Libya, 
Morocco, Palestine. Syria and Tunisia. while the Gulf includes six Arab countries: Bahrain. Kuwait, 
Oman. Qatar. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). 
9 
EFTA00731510
This study differs in several ways from the European Second Report on S&T Indicators (OECD 
1997)2, which provides an excellent and in-depth analysis of S&T performance in the 
Mediterranean countries. First, we distinguish between the Arab Mediterranean countries and 
the non-Arab Mediterranean countries. Secondly, we extend our analysis to compare Arab 
countries in the Mediterranean with those of the Gulf. Thirdly, we attempt to use more up-to-
date data wherever possible. This is so we can help establish the information base necessary to 
stimulate S&T development and support new policies that aim to enhance S&T performance in 
the Arab region. This kind of study highlights recent efforts to create an active Arabian S&T 
base but also emphasizes the need to improve the quality of resources devoted to S&T 
development, which will ultimately contribute to and accelerate development in the region. 
Furthermore, it also helps governments to obtain the most positive impact possible from 
technological progress in terms of growth, employment and the well-being of all Arab citizens. 
The paper is organized in the following way: section 2 discusses the literature available, 
focusing on the definition and significance of S&T indicators. Section 3 shows the general 
socio-economic characteristics of the two groups of Arab countries. Section 4 discusses S&T 
development indicators in the Arab countries, including a comparison of the indicators for 
Mediterranean and Gulf countries, and then compares the Arabian region with the rest of the 
world. Finally section 5 draws conclusions and proposes policies to enhance S&T performance 
in the Arab region, based on the experiences of other countries. 
2 In our view the only shortcoming of the excellent and comprehensive analysis offered by the European 
Second Report on S&T Indicators (OECD 1997) is the lack of information on Palestine and Libya. which 
constrained our attempts to fill this gap. 
10 
EFTA00731511
2. THE DEFINITION AND SIGNIFICANCE OF SCIENCE AND 
TECHNOLOGY INDICATORS 
The S&T system is often defined as consisting of all the institutions and organizations essential 
to the education of scientific people, for example, research and development (MI) institutions, 
professional societies and professional organizations linking individual scientists to each other 
and to their socio-economic environment. The theoretical and empirical literature identifies the 
important role that S&T plays in promoting economic growth and development in both 
developed and developing countries! 
More recent literature addresses the contribution to S&T performance of the 'national systems 
of innovation'; a widely used modern term that reflects the link between technical and 
institutional innovative development, including S&T (e.g. Lundvall 1992; Nelson 1993). 
Lundvall says this broad definition includes "all parts and aspects of the economic structure and 
the institutional set-up affecting learning as well as starching and exploring — the production 
system, the marketing system and the system of finance present themselves as subsystems in 
which learning takes place" (Lundvall 1992, 12-13). In addition, Freeman and Soete argue: 
"The many national interactions (whether public or private) between various institutions 
dealing with science and technology as well as with higher education, innovation and 
technology diffusion in the much broader sense, have become known as 'national systems of 
innovation'. A clear understanding of such national systemic interactions provides an essential 
bridge when moving from the micro• to the macroeconomics of innovation. It is also essential 
for comprehending fully the growth dynamics of science and technology and the particularly 
striking way in which such growth dynamics appear to differ across countries", (Freeman and 
Soete 1997, 291). 
All the definitions of the systems of innovation share the view that S&T institutions play a vital 
role in determining or influencing innovation and development. 
The literature on S&T development often distinguishes between input (resources) and output 
(performance) indicators. For instance, the European Second Report on S&T Indicators (OECD 
1997) discusses numerous traditional input and output indicators for S&T development. The 
input indicators are generally divided into financial and human resources. First financial 
resource or input indicator includes'I= expenditure — the most widely accepted indicator for 
For detailed theoretical and empirical literature and assessment studies, see e.g. Freeman and Soete 
(1997), Dasgupta and David (1994), Foray (1999), Mytelka (2001) and Cooper (1991, 1994). For earlier 
analyses of S&T in the Arab region. see e.g. Qasem (1998a. b). Zahlan (199%. b). Fergany (1999). ESCWA 
(1999a. b). and ESCWA—UNESCO (199%. b). 
I I 
EFTA00731512
evaluating and comparing S&T efforts in different countries and regions. In the absence of an 
average measurement to determine MI within the economic structure and the needs of each 
country, political decision-makers use indicators such as the intensity of (measured as a 
percentage of GDP or per capita)... In addition to financial resources, human resources arc 
central to research and technological innovation activities". There are also general demographic 
and human capital indicators, "such as the number of science and technology graduates and the 
number of scientists and engineers employed in M... [There are] four major points relating 
to human capital: demographic trends, the development of public spending on education, the 
performance of education systems and researchers and engineers active in M. Furthermore, 
"Human resources in science and technology (HRST) are one of the key resources for economic 
growth, competitiveness and more general social, economic and environmental improvement", 
(OECD 1997, 5, 58, 59). 
Output indicators, on the other hand, "can be classified according to three parameters: 
economic, technological and scientific. As to economic outputs, many economists view 
increases in productivity as a major result of technological investment... The percentage of 
high-tech exports in total export figures emerges as a potentially useful means of 
measurement... Clearly not all results arc measurable in economic terms. Scientists and 
engineers often cite the 'learning experience' as one major benefit of engaging in 
activities. To assess the accumulated knowledge of a given country, its stock of technical 
knowledge must be quantified. Without doubt, patents and patents applications are the most 
commonly applied indicator in this respect and, irrespective of the shortcomings implicit in this 
approach, they continue to represent a very useful tool". Finally there are direct research outputs 
or publications, "focusing on the impact of the publication output of a given country or zone and 
comparing it to the number of publications produced over a certain period of time" (OECD 
1997, 79). 
We use these definitions and the summary in Box 1 to evaluate S&T performance in section 4. 
12 
EFTA00731513
Box I. Definition of S&T input and output indicators 
Types S&T IndicatorsNariables 
S&T Input: 
Financial 
and Human 
Resources I. Financial resources: 
percentage of expenditure to GDP or expenditure per capita. area of 
performance, and origin of funding 
change in public spending on education in relation to GDP 
2. Human resources: 
HRST — the human capital engaged in science and including the number of 
scientists and engineers employed in 
total population size and proportion of young people, which represent the human 
resources potential of each country 
educational attainment of the labour force and graduation rates, which show the rate at 
which newly educated graduates are available at the country level to enter the labour 
force, particularly the scientific and technological qualifications and doctorate levels. 
including staff numbers. particularly in S&T fields 
S&T 
Output: 
Economic. 
Technologic 
al and 
Scientific 
Performance I. Economic indicators: 
growth in productivity/economic outputs as a major result of technological investment 
percentage of high-technology exports in total exports 
2. Technological indicators 
number of patents and patent applications 
3. Scientific performance 
direct research output 
number of publications produced over a certain period of time 
I3 
EFTA00731514
EFTA00731515
3. GENERAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF GULF AND 
MEDITERRANEAN COUNTRIES 
S&T performance is often closely related not only to the resources directly devoted to its 
development but also to the whole economic structure that supports it. Therefore, before 
assessing S&T performance in the Gulf and Mediterranean Arab countries it is useful to explain 
the general socio-economic characteristics of the two groups of countries. Table 1 shows the 
demographic structure and the major socio-economic characteristics for this region. 
Table 1. General socio-economic characteristics of the Arab countries' 
Country Population °
i millions) 
i GDP per 
capita 
(PPPd US 
5) Human 
Develo 
pment 
Index°
(%) Life 
Expectancy b
(years) Literacy 
Rateb
(%) Combined 
enrolment 
ratio' (%) 
Arab Gulf countries 
High income 
United Arab Emirates 0.816 74.4 76.7 67 2.9 20.530 
Qatar 0.6 19,844 0.826 71.8 81.7 81 
Kuwait 2.4 18,700 0.820 76.3 82.4 54 
Bahrain 0.7 16.060 0.839 73.7 87.9 81 
Upper middle income 
Oman 2.7 12,040 0.755 72.2 73.0 58 
Saudi Arabia 22.8 13,330 0.769 71.9 77.1 58 
Average Gulf countries 5.4 16.751 0.804 73.4 79.8 67 
Arab Mediterranean 
Upper middle income 
Lebanon 3.5 4,170 0.752 73.3 86.5 76 
Libya 5.3 7,570 0.773 70.5 80.0 92 
Lower middle income 
Tunisia 9.6 6 390 0.740 72.5 72.1 76 
Algeria 30.7 6,090 0.704 69.2 67.8 71 
Egypt 69.1 3,520 0.648 68.3 56.1 76 
Syria 17.0 3,280 0.685 71.5 75.3 59 
Morocco 29.6 3,600 0.606 68.1 49.8 51 
Palestine 3.3 Na 0.731 72.1 89.2 77 
Average Arab 
Mediterranean 21.0 4,946 0.705 70.7 72.1 72 
Average Arab states 289.9 5,038 0.662 66.0 60.8 60 
Source: UNDP (2003). Notes: a 2001, 2000.c 1999, PPP — purchasing power parity. 
4 The World Bank and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Human Development Report 
classify world countries differently according to income level. We use the World Bank classification of 
economies that puts all the Arab Mediterranean countries in the lower middle-income category with the 
exception of Lebanon and Libya. which are classified in the upper middle-income group. 
15 
EFTA00731516
Table I shows the considerable diversity between Gulf and Mediterranean Arab countries in 
terms of population, standard of economic development as measured by GDP per capita and 
human development index. Gulf countries generally have lower population numbers and higher 
standards of economic development. The World Bank classification of economics indicates that 
four of the Gulf countries are in the high-income group and the other two are among the upper 
middle-income economics. Moreover, the UNDP human development index (HDI) shows that 
the GDP per capita is higher for these countries than for both the Mediterranean countries and 
the world average, while life expectancy and literacy rates are classified as high in four of the 
Gulf countries; the other two are among the medium world countries. 
In contrast, the Mediterranean Arab countries have both large geographical and population sizes 
coupled with low standards of economic development and growth indicators as measured by 
GDP per capita. The World Bank classification of economies puts all but two of the Arab 
Mediterranean countries among the lower medium-income group; Libya and Lebanon arc 
classified in the upper medium-income economies. Moreover, the UNDP HDI shows that the 
average GDP per capita for each of the Mediterranean countries falls within the world medium-
income bracket and is, on average, lower than for those of the Gulf countries. This also holds for 
the other HDI components: average life expectancy, literacy rate and combined enrolment 
ratios. Among the Arab Mediterranean countries, Lebanon, Libya and Tunisia show better 
performance in terms of GDP per capita and HDI compared to the others in the region, while the 
combined enrolment ratio is highest in Libya, followed by Palestine. For the Gulf countries, 
Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the UAE show better performances in terms of the majority of 
indicators than either Saudi Arabia or Oman. 
According to the UNDP indicators, poverty is widespread across most of the Mediterranean 
Arab countries especially in Egypt and Algeria, while none of the Gulf countries reportedly 
shares the same problem. Moreover, according to estimates from the International Monetary 
Fund's World Economic Outlook (IMF 2002), average unemployment rates across the 
Mediterranean countries exceed those of the Gulf countries. However, trends in unemployment 
rates show either a slowing increase or an actual decline across the Mediterranean Arab 
countries compared to the rapid increase seen across the Gulf countries. 
The next section of this paper examines whether this economic background affects S&T 
performance in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries. 
16 
EFTA00731517
4. S&T INDICATORS IN THE GULF AND MEDITERRANEAN COUNTRIES 
Based on the definition of S&T indicators provided in section 2, this section presents the input 
indicators (financial and human resources) and output indicators (scientific and technological 
performance) required to measure S&T performance. 
4.1. Human and Financial Input Indicators 
In terms of both financial and human S&T input/resource indicators there are some differences 
between the Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries as well as between them and other 
countries around the world. Table 2 shows that on the whole both financial and human S&T 
input indicators in these regions lag behind those of the advanced and leading developing 
countries. 
4.1.1. Financial Input Indicators 
In particular, table 2 shows that the financial resources devoted to S&T, as measured by the 
percentage share of GDP spent on M, are poor in the Arab countries compared to both 
advanced and leading developing countries like Singapore and Korea. For instance, in the period 
1996-2000, the Arab Mediterranean and Gulf countries devoted an average of only 0.3% of 
their GDP to whereas Sweden, one of the leading advanced industrial countries, spent 
3.8% of GDP on M. However, spending on education, as measured by percentage of both 
GDP and total government expenditure, was found to be similar for the Arab countries and the 
advanced countries. 
Comparing S&T indicators between the two Arab regions shows that the Mediterranean 
countries on average perform better than the Gulf countries in terms of expenditure on both 
education and as percentage of GDP. 
17 
EFTA00731518
Table 2. S&T resource indicators of the Gulf, Mediterranean and world countries 
Country Public 
expenditure on 
education as % 
of GDP' Public 
expenditure on 
education as % 
of government 
expenditure ° Number of 
scientists and 
engineers in 
(per million 
population) ° Number 
of patents 
a. bHigh 
technology 
exports as % 
of 
manufactured 
exports' expenditur 
e as % of 
GDP ' 
1990 1998- 
2000 1990 1998- 
2000 1996- 
2000 1996-2000 1990- 
1999 1990 2001 
Gulf 
countries 
Bahrain 4.2 3.0 14.6 11.4 Na Na 2 0 0 
Kuwait 4.8 Na 3.4 Na 0.2 212 27 4 1 
Oman 3.1 3.9 I1.1 Na Na 8 3 II 
Qatar 3.5 3.6 Na Na Na 591 0 0 0 
Saudi 
Arabia 6.5 9.5 17.8 Na Na Na 103 0 Na 
UAE 1.9 1.9 14.6 Na Na Na 15 0 Na 
Average 
Gulf 4.0 4.4 12.3 11.4 0.2 270 25 2.5 1 
Mediterrane 
an countries 
Algeria 5.3 Na 21.1 Na Na Na Na 0 4 
Egypt 3.7 Na Na Na 0.2 493 38 0 1 
Lebanon Na 3.1 Na ILI Na Na Na Na 3 
Morocco 5.3 5.5 26.1 26.1 Na Na Na 0 II 
Syria 4.1 4.1 17.3 11.1 0.2 29 3 0 I 
Tunisia 6.0 6.8 13.5 17.4 0.5 336 Na 2 3 
Average 
Mediterrane 
an 4.9 4.9 19.5 16.4 0.3 286 20.5 0.4 3.8 
Norway 7.1 6.8 14.6 16.2 1.7 4.112 97 8 12 
Sweden 7.4 7.8 13.8 13.4 3.8 4.511 285 13 18 
UK 4.9 4.5 Na 11.4 1.8 2.666 76 23 31 
Korea. Rep. 
of 3.5 3.8 22.4 17.4 7 2.319 931 18 29 
Singapore Na 3.7 Na 23.6 1.1 4.140 12 39 60 
China 2.3 2.1 12.8 Na 0.1 545 793 0 20 
Sources: UNDP (2003), United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) website: 
http://www.uspro.gov.  Patent data for Korea, Norway, Singapore, Sweden and the UK obtained 
from UNDP (2003) and refers to patents granted in 1999 to residents per million people. For 
China and all Arab countries, patent data was obtained from USPTO during 1991-1999 and 
refers to the number of registered US patents where the inventor of the patent is resident in the 
selected countries. 5
Investigation of the distribution of in Gulf and Mediterranean Arab countries indicates 
that the public sector is responsible for the majority of activities, accounting for 49.4% 
and 80.4% of all MI institutions respectively (figure I). Next to public sector, universities 
5 One limitation of the comparison in our analysis is that we use data and information from two different 
sources: the scarcity of data and information covering all countries limited our attempt to use a unified 
source. For instance there was no data covering Libya or Palestine. 
I8 
EFTA00731519
contribute 43.5% and 13.4% of = institutions in Gulf and Mediterranean countries 
respectively; the private sector makes only a minor contribution, accounting for 7.0% and 6.2% 
of = institutions respectively. The Mediterranean countries appear to be more dependent on 
the public sector than the Gulf countries, reflecting a lack of incentives for private sector 
institutions to invest in = in the Mediterranean compared to the Gulf. This compares poorly 
to most of the industrialized countries, where more than half of = expenditure is financed by 
industry (OECD 1997). 
Figure 1. Percentage distribution of in the Gulf and Mediterranean Arab 
countries 
Source: Adapted from ESCWA-UNESCO (1998b). Notes: Refers to 1991 FTE — 
equivalent. 
4.1.2. Human Resources Input Indicators 
Table 2 shows that there is a low number of scientists and engineers in = in the Gulf and 
Mediterranean countries compared to both advanced and leading developing countries. 
Moreover, the OECD (1997) Second European Report on S&T Indicators shows that there is 
proportionally 10 times fewer = personnel in the Mediterranean countries than in the 
European Union. 
When comparing the two Arab regions, it is the Mediterranean countries that show a marginally 
better performance than the Gulf countries in terms of the number of scientists and engineers in 
19 
EFTA00731520
In terms of the human resources devoted to M, defined by the number of full-time equivalent 
(FTE)6 researchers, and their distribution within IM organizations (figure I), we find that the 
majority of FTE researchers are employed by public and university sectors. The percentage 
share of FTE researchers in the public sector is estimated to be 49.2% and 74.9% in the Gulf 
and Mediterranean Arab countries respectively. Next to the public sector, it is the university 
sector that has the largest percentage share of FTE researchers: at 49.3% and 23.6% 
respectively; the private sector accounts for only 1.4% and 2.6% of total FTE researchers in the 
regions. As with the distribution of institutions, it is the Mediterranean countries that 
appear to be more dependent on the public sector for FTE researchers than the Gulf countries. 
Again, it is the lack of incentives for private sector institutions to hire FTE researchers that leads 
to this disparity. 
In addition, them arc fewer human resources in S&T in both the Gulf and Mediterranean Arab 
countries compared to more developed countries, shown in figures 2 and 3. The Arab countries 
score poorly compared to Korea and Singapore for the Harbison Myers Index', technical 
enrolment index, engineering enrolment index, gross enrolment ratio at tertiary education and 
the share of tertiary students in science, mathematics and engineering" The only exception (not 
shown in figure 3) is the share of tertiary students in science, mathematics and engineering in 
Algeria, which is higher compared to both advanced and developing countries (UNDP 2004). 
Figure 2. Skill indicators in Korea, Singapore and the Arab countries 
0 20 so 60 80 100 120 140 
Korea. Republic of 
Singapore 
Average Gulf countries 
Average Mediterranean 
Arab states 
Source: Adapted from Lai (1999). O Engineering 
enrolment 
index 
■Technical 
enrolment 
index 
• Harbison 
Myers Index 
6 The concept of full-time equivalent researcher is adopted by UNESCO statistics on personnel. 
According to Lall (1999): "Harbison Myers Index is the sum of secondary enrolment and tertiary 
enrolment times five, both as a percentage of age group. Technical enrolment index is tertiary total 
enrolment (times 1000) plus tertiary enrolment in technical subjects (times 5000). both as a percentage of 
population. Engineering skills index is the same as the previous index, with tertiary enrolments in 
engineering instead of enrolment in technical subjects- (tall, 1999: p.52). 
See also Muysken and Nour (2005) and UNDP—AHDR (2003). 
20 
EFTA00731521
Figure 3. Percentage enrolment at tertiary education 
60 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Source: Adapted from UNDP (2002). lahlrOSS enrolment 
ratio at tertiary 
education 4%) 
■Share tertiary 
students in science. 
math and 
engineering 4%) 
When comparing average skill indicators for the Arab Gulf countries with those of the 
Mediterranean, figures 2 and 3 indicate that, on average, the Mediterranean countries perform 
better. Additional information from La11 (1999) and UNDP (2004) indicate that all these skill 
indices are especially high in Lebanon and Kuwait, while the gross enrolment ratio at tertiary 
education is highest in Egypt and Lebanon followed by Qatar and Bahrain. The share of tertiary 
students in science, mathematics and engineering is highest in Algeria, followed by Syria, 
Oman, Morocco, the UAE and Tunisia. With the aforementioned exception of Algeria, 
enrolment in science, mathematics and engineering is lower than enrolment for all other subjects 
in both Mediterranean and Gulf countries. In addition, school-leaving age is highest in Tunisia, 
Qatar, Bahrain and Lebanon. 
4.2. Science and Technology Output and Impact 
As we explained briefly in section 2, the literature distinguishes between S&T outputs, which 
can be measured in terms of publications and patents, and S&T impact, which can be measured 
in terms of economic growth. This section discusses S&T output as measured by number of 
patent filings and scientific publications (in the international refereed literature) but discusses 
S&T impact as measured only by the share of high-technology manufacturing exports. Owing to 
limitations concerning data availability it is not possible to address the impact of technological 
development on economic/productivity growth in much detail. 
We integrate the findings in section 3, concerning the general economic characteristics of the 
Arab economies, with those of section 4.1, regarding S&T input indicators. Using a systematic 
approach we assess S&T performance in terms of inputs and the economic system as a whole. 
Our analysis aims to explain the connection between the S&T system, S&T profile and the 
21 
EFTA00731522
economic or productive structure of these countries. For example, table 2 shows that for both 
patent numbers and the percentage of high-technology exports Arab Gulf and Mediterranean 
countries are substantially behind the advanced and leading developing countries. 
In our view, which is backed up by general S&T literature, the weakness of the S&T base in the 
Arab regions should be interpreted not only in terms of a lack of appropriate inputs but also in 
relation to a poor economic system as a whole. Measuring the strength of the economic and 
welfare systems using income per capita implies that the Gulf countries do very well. However, 
they also exhibit low S&T activity, which seems at odds with the idea that strong S&T is 
necessary for economic growth and development. Of course, the Gulf is hugely dependent on 
oil, giving the impression that there are other ways to become rich than investing in S&T. The 
big question is whether the Gulf countries will stay rich once their oil reserves expire; despite 
their big wealth from oil they still lack well-defined, targeted plans and policies and proper 
incentives to promote S&T performance. For while the Gulf countries perform better than the 
Mediterranean countries in economic terms they lag behind in measurements of S&T 
performance. Therefore, the big wealth from oil, far from contributing to the improvement of 
S&T performance in the Gulf may actually hinder it as it masks the need to develop incentives 
and effective policies to enhance S&T development. The Mediterranean countries' story is 
simpler poor economic structure in combination with inadequate resources devoted to S&T 
development leads to poor S&T performance compared to advanced and developing world 
countries. 
4.2.1. Scientific Publications 9
Figure 4 shows that the number of scientific publications for both Gulf and Mediterranean 
countries grew between the periods 1970-1975 and 1990-1995. On average, Mediterranean 
countries performed better than Gulf countries for number of scientific publications, which 
could be a consequence of their superiority to the Gulf countries in terms of most of the S&T 
indicators: total expenditure on both education and = number of = employees; and 
number of- scientists and engineers. Egypt and Saudi Arabia show the largest overall numb 
9 The OECD (1997) report indicates that prizes awarded to individual scientists is an extreme indicator of 
S&T performance and is one way of measuring IM output. Of all scientific prizes the Nobel prizes for 
science, which have been awarded to scientists in the fields of chemistry, physics and 
medicine/physiology since 1901, are probably the most prestigious. The Arab Gulf and Mediterranean 
countries have only received one Nobel Prize between them: in 1999 an Egyptian scientist received the 
Nobel Prize for chemistry. 
22 
EFTA00731523
Figure 4. Number of S&T publications in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries 
Number of Publications (1970-1995) 
14000 
12000 
10000 
8000 
6000 
4000 
2000 
0 .1.._•111.] st A . ce I yt ,st, e , tt- oc, op op 4), ob.se op 
4 . O 
41* 46‘.- I' tt. cir's I I• 1970-1975 
• 1990-1995 
Source: Adapted from Zahlan (199%). 
Table 3 indicates that, of the Arab Mediterranean countries, Egypt has the best percentage share 
of total world scientific publications. However, the average share of all Arab Mediterranean 
countries remains very low compared to those of the United States, European top 15 and non-
Arab Mediterranean countries. Moreover, the percentage share of both total papers published 
and number of citations in publications in the region is much lower for any of the Arab 
Mediterranean countries than the non-Arab Mediterranean countries (Turkey and Israel 
specifically). Again, Egypt leads the Arab Mediterranean countries in this indicator, followed by 
the group of Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia and then the group of Albania, Cyprus, Lebanon, 
Malta and Syria. Furthermore, in the period 1985-1995, it is Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia that 
display the most coordination, cooperation and networking with the European top 15 countries 
in terms of internationally co-authored papers. 
23 
EFTA00731524
Table 3. Technology output indicators by share of the world's scientific publication output, 
published papers citations and internationally co-authored papers 
Countries Share in world's 
publication output in 
all scientific fields 
combined (%) Share of published paper and 
citation in the Mediterranean 
countries (%) Mediterranean 
share of internationally 
co-authored 
EUR 15 (% countries' 
papers with 
1985- 
1989 1990- 
1995 1985.1989 1990.1995 198 
5 198 
9 199 
0 1995 
Paper 
s Citatio 
n Paper 
s Citatio 
n 
Egypt 0.27 0.29 16.5 16.5 5.7 15.6 8.0 7.5 9.7 11.2 
Algeria/ Morocco/ 
Tunisia 0.08 0.13 4.6 4.6 2.4 6.7 40. 
4 56. 
4 54. 
7 58.7 
Lebanon/ Syria/ 
Malta/ Albania/ 
Cyprus 0.03 0.04 1.9 1.9 0.7 2.0 
23. 
7 30. 
7 21. 
1 48.5 
Average Arab 
Mediterranean i0.13 0.15 7.7 7.7 2.9 8.1 24. 
0 31. 
5 28. 
5 39.5 
Average Non-
Arab 
Mediterranean 20.65 0.72 38.6 38.6 45.6 37.9 9.3 12. 
4 9.4 12.3 
EUR 15 30.42 33.92 Na Na Na Na Na Na Na Na 
USA 36.33 35.82 Na Na Na Na Na Na Na Na 
Source: Adapted from RASC1 Data: Science Citation Index, OECD (1997). Pp. 455, 46O. 
Notes: 'Refers to average for each group: Egypt; Algeria/Morocco/Tunisia; and 
Albania/C)prus/Lebanon/Malta/Syria. =Refers to average for Turkey and Israel. 
Despite, the increasing importance of international cooperation, them is very limited 
cooperation among scientists in both Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries as indicated by the 
number of joint publications and co-authorships (table 4). In particular, it is scientists from the 
Gulf countries who lag behind, accounting for less than 2% of worldwide cooperation. Zahlan 
(I 999a) finds that in 1990, co-authorship within the Gulf countries was only 1.4% of all co—
authored papers; this increased to 3% in 1995. Such limited regional cooperation is also true for 
the Mediterranean countries, for instance in 1995 scientists in the Maghreb countries of Algeria, 
Morocco and Tunisia published 1,206 publications. Of these, 769 were co-authored with 
scientists from other countries yet only I1 included scientists from two Maghreb countries. 
Furthermore, only one out of the II did not involve an OECD partner. 
24 
EFTA00731525
Table t Scientific cooperation: total number of publications and joint publications in the 
Gulf and Maghreb countries 
Country Total number 
of published 
papers Number of 
joint papers Co-authored 
with GCCI
partners Co-authored 
with Arab 
partners Main Arab 
partners 
Egypt 
Gulf countries 1990 1995 1990 1995 1990 1995 1990 1995 1990 1995 
Bahrain 59 106 17 29 3 2 2 1 - 1 
Kuwait 487 290 132 117 0 14 12 12 10 II 
Oman 48 84 25 37 0 0 1 0 1 -
Qatar 48 59 19 36 2 6 24 6 23 
Saudi Arabia 1,031 1,240 242 294 6 9 59 71 48 57 
UAE 49 137 33 55 2 10 13 19 10 14 
Total Gulf 1.722 2.716 468 568 13 35 93 127 75 106 
Total number 
of published 
papers Number of 
joint papers Co-authored 
with OECD 
partners Co-authored 
with Arab 
partners Main partners 
France 
Maghreb 
countries 1990 1995 1990 1995 1990 1995 1990 1995 1990 1995 
Algeria 172 328 137 227 120 187 4 3 90 151 
Morocco 240 536 153 395 132 314 0 2 90 241 
Tunisia 268 342 77 147 69 122 0 3 55 87 
Total Maghreb 680 1206 367 769 321 623 4 8 235 479 
Libya 2 58 58 31 35 II 16 3 7 I1 9 
Total 
Mediterranean 738 1264 398 804 332 639 7 15 246 488 
Source: Adapted from Zahlan (1999a). 
Notes: t GCC - Cur Cooperation Council including Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and 
the United Arab Emirates. 2 The main partners for Libya are India (1990) and UK (1995). 
As shown in table 4 there is an absence of scientific cooperation and co-authorship among 
scientists from the Gulf and Mediterranean countries as well as between them and other Arab 
countries. Where Gulf countries do cooperate with Arab scientists, it tends to be limited to only 
a small number of countries. According to Zahlan (1999a) this is because universities in Gulf 
countries employ professors mainly from other Arab countries. Similarly, in the Mediterranean 
Arab region, cooperation between Maghreb countries and other Arab scientists accounts only 
for 3.0% and 3.5% of all co-authored published papers in 1990 and 1995 respectively (Zahlan, 
I999a). 
Arab countries in the Gulf have only limited cooperation with foreign institutes. For instance, 
while the number of the published papers in the Gulf countries increased from 1,722 in 1990 to 
2,716 in 1995, fewer than a quarter were co-authored with foreign institutes. This contrasts with 
25 
EFTA00731526
the Mediterranean Arab countries, particularly the Maghreb countries that have significant 
cooperation with the OECD: papers co-authored with OECD countries accounted for 90.0% and 
81.3% of total joint publications in 1990 and 1995 respectively. Of all the OECD countries 
France has the highest share of joint papers with Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia, comprising 
67.0% and 613% of total joint papers in 1990 and 1995 respectively. These data are backed up 
by Zahlan (1999a) who finds that scientific workers in the Maghreb are deeply integrated with 
the international scientific community. 
So, despite the social proximity between the populations in terms of religion, language, culture 
and traditions, there is only limited scientific cooperation within and between the Gulf and 
Mediterranean Arab countries, or between them and other Arab countries. In contrast, there is 
active international scientific cooperation between some of the Mediterranean countries and 
other world countries, but this is very limited for all the Gulf countries. One reason for this is 
that scientific workers in the Maghreb, on an individual level, have become deeply integrated 
into the international scientific community but not, however, with their own national or regional 
economies or societies (Zahlan 1999a). More recent literature indicates the role of geographical 
location and proximity in relation to S&T indicators and the transfer of knowledge (Arundel and 
Geuna 2001). France is geographically close and also has colonial ties to Algeria, Morocco and 
Tunisia. Hence, we argue that it is geographic proximity rather than social proximity that drives 
the Maghreb countries' scientific cooperation with the international community and Europe. 
4.2.2. Patent Applications 
Table 2 shows the low number of patent applications made by countries in both of the Arab 
regions compared to advanced and leading developing countries like Singapore, Korea and 
China. In light of our earlier findings, this can be attributed to the Arab countries' low 
percentage share of GDP spent on and the small number of scientists and engineers in 
M. The low number of patent applications implies a low level of innovative activities across 
both Arab Mediterranean and Gulf countries compared to both advanced and developing 
countries. 
Table 5 shows the number of patent applications made between 1985 and 1995 in the Arab 
countries, Europe and the United States by residents and non-residents of the Arab 
Mediterranean countries. During that period residents made fewer patent applications than non-
residents in all Arab Mediterranean countries. Among the Arab Mediterranean countries, the 
highest number of patent applications were filed in Egypt, followed by Morocco, Algeria, 
Tunisia and finally Syria. Moreover, table 5 shows that all Arab Mediterranean countries 
together have filed far fewer patents in both the European and United States patent offices than 
non-Arab Mediterranean countries. 
26 
EFTA00731527
Table 5. Patent applications made by Mediterranean countries at home, in Europe and the 
United States 
Resid 
ents Non- 
reside 
nts Euro 
pe Americ 
a Reside 
nts Non- 
reside 
nts Europ 
e Americ 
a Reside 
nts Non-
reside 
nts 
Year 1985 
' 1985' 1985 
- 
1989 b 1987- 
1989b1990' 1990' 1990- 
1994" 1990- 
1994b1992/1993/1994 
/1995' 
Algeria 19 235 2 Na 0 139 3 Na 0 119 
Egypt 168 671 4 7 278 511 12 16 328 503 
Lebanon Na Na 1 Na Na Na 3 Na Na Na 
Morocco 35 255 4 4 61 268 12 12 89 292 
Syria 4 54 1 Na 3 12 3 Na 4 45 
Tunisia 14 202 3 Na 26 134 5 Na 31 84 
Total Arab 
Mediterra 
near 240 1417 15 II 368 1064 38 28 452 1043 
Total non- 
Arab 
Mediterra 
near 851 3077 828 812 - - 1579 1,997 1352 3827 
Source: Adapted from' OECD (1997): LIME Data, WIPO-Geneva. b OECD (1997) OST Data 
INPI/EPO (SPAT) and USPTO. Non-Arab Mediterranean refers to Albania, Cyprus, Israel. 
Malta and Turkey. 
The low number of patents filed by residents of the Arabic countries can be related to low S&T 
activity in the country. The low number of patents recorded by non-residents, however, needs a 
different interpretation. It is partially because there is a lack of adequate patent legislation, but 
more importantly it is also due to lack of an economic structure within which to take advantage 
of patents. Foreign companies will only register a patent in a country if they fear that a local 
competitor might exploit their technology without paying for it. Therefore the low number of 
patents filed by non-residents in the Arab region implies that the region lacks industries that arc 
internationally competitive, which can also be interpreted in terms of there being a poor 
economic structure. 
In terms of the number of patent applications filed in the United States Patent and Trademark 
Office, table 2 indicates that the Gulf performs better than the Mediterranean. This is probably 
because the Gulf countries have better regulation for patents and better cooperation with the 
United States than the Mediterranean countries. 
27 
EFTA00731528
4.2.3. Share of High Technology Manufacturing Exports 
According to table 2, both the Gulf and the Mediterranean countries have a low share of high-
technology manufacturing exports compared to advanced and leading developing countries. In 
addition, the share of hi-tech manufactured goods in the Arab countries in 1995-1997 is well 
below that of the world average or the corresponding figures for Brazil, Korea, Latin America 
and the Caribbean, Mexico, Singapore and even sub-Saharan Africa (figure 5). This can be 
explained in relation to our earlier findings concerning the Arab countries' inadequate economic 
structure, poor spending on M, low number of scientists and engineers in and low 
patent filings. 
Figure 5. Proportion of high-technology manufactured goods 
High-technology share of manufacturing (19951997) 
Singapore 
Mexico 
Korea 
World 
Latin America, Caribbean 
Brazil 
Sub-Saharan Africa 
Middle East, North Africa 
Average Arab region 
Average Gulf 
Average Mediterranean J 
3 
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 
Source: Adapted from Haddad (2002) and La!! (1999). Computations based on UN COMTRAD£ data 
2000 and 1996 respectively. 
When comparing the average share of exports of high-technology goods manufactured, our 
findings in table 2 indicate that the Mediterranean countries perform much better than the Gulf 
countries. However, information from the OECD (1997) indicates that the Mediterranean 
countries are still some way behind Malta and Israel. For instance, in 1997, hi-tech exports from 
the Arab Mediterranean countries to Europe and the rest of the world ranged between 0.7%-
17% and 0.8%-22% of all exports respectively; lower than the comparable percentages in both 
Malta and Israel, which were around 66% and 32-35% respectively. 
28 
EFTA00731529
4.2.4. Productivity Growth 
Once again it is the Mediterranean Arab countries that out-perform their Gulf counterparts in 
terms of S&T impact as measured by economic growth. Table 6 shows that annual growth rate 
for average GDP per capita during the periods 1975-2001 and 1990-2001 and the average real 
GDP growth rate during the period 1995-2000 are higher in the Mediterranean countries than in 
the Gulf. Moreover, during 1999-2001, the Mediterranean countries show continuous growth 
whereas the Gulf countries experienced rapid economic growth followed by rapid slow down. 
Table 6. Real GDP growth and GDP per capita annual growth rates in the Gulf and 
Mediterranean countries 
Country GDP per capita annual growth 
rate (56)aReal annual GDP growth (%)" 
1975- 
2001 1990-2001 1995-2000 
Average 1999 2000 2001 
Arab Gulf 
(GCC) 
Bahrain 1.1 1.9 4.3 4.3 5.3 4.8 
Kuwait -0.7 -1.0 3.8 -2.9 2.9 -0.6 
Oman 2.3 0.6 3.6 -0.2 5.1 7.3 
Qatar NA NA 9.4 5.3 11.6 7.2 
Saudi Arabia -2.1 -1.1 1.9 -0.8 4.9 1.2 
UAE -3.7 -1.6 5.7 3.9 5.0 5.1 
Total GCC -0.6 -0.2 4.8 1.6 5.8 4.2 
Arab 
Mediterranean 
Algeria -0.2 0.1 2.9 2.3 2.8 3.4 
Egypt 2.8 5.3 5.1 3.3 
Lebanon 4.0 3.6 2.3 1.0 -0.5 2.0 
Morocco 1.3 0.7 1.9 -0.1 1.0 6.5 
Syria 0.9 1.9 3.0 -2.0 0.6 2.7 
Tunisia 2.0 3.1 5.1 6.1 4.7 5.0 
Total 
Mediterranean 1.8 2.0 3.4 2.2 2.3 3.8 
Arab State 0.3 03 3.9 2.4 4.1 3.8 
Developing 
countries 2.3 2.9 5.3 3.9 5.7 4.0 
Source: a UNDP (2003) and IMF (2002). GCC — Gulf Cooperation Council. 
4.2.5. Technology Infrastructures and Technology Achievement Index 
Figure 6 indicates that countries both the Arab regions are lagging behind the rest of the world, 
including advanced and developing countries, in terms of both basic and high technology 
29 
EFTA00731530
infrastructure (BT1 and HTI).'" On average the BTI for Gulf countries is better than for 
Mediterranean countries, while the opposite is true for the HTI. Overall, poor BT1 is to blame 
for the low HTI in both Gulf and Mediterranean countries (Rasiah 2001). Moreover, according 
to the UNDP (2001) HDI classification of world countries according to technology achievement 
index, both the Gulf and Mediterranean countries lag far behind the world's advanced and 
leading developing countries. In fact, the majority of Mediterranean countries are classified as 
being dynamic adopters of new technologies, while the status of the Gulf countries with respect 
to the same classification is unclear, as none of the Gulf countries are classified as either leader, 
potential leader, dynamic or marginalized adopter. 
Figure 6. Basic and high technology infrastructure rating in the Gulf and 
Mediterranean Arab countries compared to world countries 
25 
Vanua USE I
!MI r 
Sync ! 1 Coro MIBasic 
Technology 
Infrastructure 
(1992-1998) 
OHIgh 
Technology 
Infrastructure 
(1991-1997) 
Source: Adapted from Rasiah (2002). 
10 Rasiah (2002) defines basic technology infrastructure (811) as weighted proxies representing basic education 
(enrolment in primary schools), health (physicians per thousand people) and communications (main telephone 
lines ar thousand pI defines high technology infrastructure (HTI) as weighted proxies representing 
investment and scientists and engineers per million people. Rasiah also argues that BTI is an 
essential but not sufficient condition for economies to achieve advanced technological capacity: the incidence 
of economies generating innovation is higher when they also have the high-technology support institutions. The 
lower the 811. the lower the capacity and resources for high technology development. 
30 
EFTA00731531
5. CONCLUSIONS 
This paper shows the status of S&T indicators in the Arab Gulf and Mediterranean countries. It 
is clear that a great disparity exists between these regions in terms of S&T input and output 
indicators. Furthermore, countries in both Arab regions lag behind the world's developed and 
leading developing countries in terms of the same input and output indicators. The combination 
of poor S&T inputs/resources together with an inadequate economic system as a whole results 
in the Gulf and Mediterranean countries producing poor S&T outputs/performances. Moreover, 
we find that most and S&T activities in both Gulf and Mediterranean countries occur 
within the public and university sectors, while the private sector and industry make only a minor 
contribution . 
When comparing S&T input and output indicators of the Gulf countries with t



=== IMAGE DESCRIPTIONS ===
[Image 1] The image is a page from a document, specifically a list of titles or topics, which appears to be part of a larger publication or report. The list is organized in a table format with columns and rows, and each row contains a title or topic followed by a page number. The titles are related to various subjects, such as "The Unified Theory of Sound," "The Unified Theory of Light," "The Unified Theory

[Image 2] The image is a scanned document, likely a report or a list of references. It contains text with bullet points, which are numbered from 1 to 14. The text is in English, and the document appears to be related to research or academic work, as indicated by the references to articles, books, and conferences. The text is too small to read in detail, but it seems to be organized in a structured manner, p

[Image 3] The image is a photograph of a document page. The document appears to be a report or a research paper, as indicated by the text and the layout. The text is in English and discusses topics related to the Mediterranean region, including economic, social, and environmental aspects. There are references to specific countries and organizations, such as the European Union, the World Bank, and the United

[Image 4] The image is a photograph of a document page. The document appears to be an academic paper or article, as indicated by the title "The impact of stress on the cognitive performance of students." The text is in English and is written in a formal academic style. The document includes a list of references at the bottom, which is common in academic papers. The visible text includes the title, an introd

[Image 5] The image shows a page from a document, which appears to be a scientific or academic paper. The text is written in English and discusses the concept of "Sustainable Development" in the context of economic growth. The document is structured with numbered sections and subsections, indicating a formal and organized presentation of information. There are no visible names, dates, places, or logos that 

[Image 6] The image appears to be a page from a document or a book. The text is written in English and discusses economic and developmental topics related to the Mediterranean region. The document mentions the importance of economic development and the role of the European Union in supporting economic growth in the Mediterranean. It also refers to the Mediterranean Action Plan and the Barcelona Process, whi