High prosperity with moderate RD intensity in future

25 Forum Tahunan Pengembangan Iptek dan Inovasi Nasional V, Tahun 2015 Source: the simulation results of EGRI model, 2015 FUTURE TRENDS OF CHANGE IN GOVERNM ENT AND INDUSTRIAL RD IN INDONESIA 2012-2045 TIME P E R C E N T rGovRD rIndRD 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 0,0 10,0 20,0 30,0 40,0 50,0 60,0 Source: the simulation results of EGRI model, 2015 S HARE O F GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRIAL RD 1990-2045 TIME Gov Ind 1990 2005 2020 2045 0,0 20,0 40,0 60,0 80,0 100,0 future past The expectation towards high RD spending by industrial sector is supposed to be something unstoppable due to the pressure of global market ASEAN Economic Community, where ASEAN producers fiercely compete to place for best product and services in regional market. The competitive race will become a reality where more industrial sectors are producing innovative products and service through RD. It is the pressure of global market would carry out the industrial sector to shift its mindset from simply enjoying from what they have been successful producing without RD toward producing innovative products through RD. The contribution of industrial sector in RD is expected to rise from 20 in 2015 to 62 in 2025.

3.3. High prosperity with moderate RD intensity in future

As explained before, the trend of Indonesian RD intensity is expected to increase from low 0.1 of GDP in 2013 towards moderate 0.72 of GDP in 2045. The moderate figure is still below the general trend of prosperous countries. As a properous country, the magnitute of Indonesian economy would become US 5 trillion in 2035 and within 10 years afterward it would fold twice to US 9.5 trillion. In the year 2045 the total population of Indonesia is estimated to reach 357 million people. The Indonesian GDP percapita would increase from around US 3,760 2015 to become US 24,000 in 2045. The standard of living Indonesian people in 2045 would be almost equal to the South Korea in 2015 GDP percapita US 24,000. There is a sharp difference between Indonesia and South Korea. High GDP per capita of South Korea is fitting to the nation of leader in innovative technology, especially electronic and ICT. South Korea is highly advanced economies in innovative industries and creative societies with RD expenditure of 3.4 of GDP 2012. While the Indonesian position in technology innovation would be still in the medium level of sophistication. Indonesia would be difficult to have the global competitiveness in sunrise industries such nano-technology, biotechnology and renewable energy with RD expenditure would still 0.72 of GDP. See Graph 7 Graph. 6 Graph. 7 26 Forum Tahunan Pengembangan Iptek dan Inovasi Nasional V, Tahun 2015 FUTURE TRENDS OF RD INTENSITY AND GDP PER CAPITA US000 IN INDONESIA 2012-2045 TIME RDpGDP GDPpCAP 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 RDpGDP GDPpCAP 0,080 0,000 RDpGDP GDPpCAP 0,208 5,000 RDpGDP GDPpCAP 0,336 10,00 RDpGDP GDPpCAP 0,464 15,00 RDpGDP GDPpCAP 0,592 20,00 RDpGDP GDPpCAP 0,720 25,00 Source: the simulation results of EGRI model, 2015 South Kore a 1990-2013 TIM E GN IpC ap RDpGDP 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 GNIpCap RDpGDP 6.000 1,60 GNIpCap RDpGDP 9.800 1,98 GNIpCap RDpGDP 13.600 2,36 GNIpCap RDpGDP 17.400 2,74 GNIpCap RDpGDP 21.200 3,12 GNIpCap RDpGDP 25.000 3,50 future past Although Indonesia is rich in natural resources and biodiversity but it seems would be unsuccessful to exploit promising technology through RD activities. Indonesia would face the “uneven phenomenon” of high prosperity with moderate RD intensity, that is high living standard with GDP percapita of US 24 thousand coincides with technological dependence society. The medium figure of RD intensity around 0.72 of GDP generally relate to moderately innovative society. It is the feature of a country still buy much and make less in fulfiling of people needs for products and services. Indonesia could prosper and be strong in term of GDP parallel with unhealthy condition due to lack of nutrient in technological learning with RD intensity.

4. Balance of infrastructure quality and RD intensity