Global Is at Ion Council Sweden

Competitiveness in the Global Economy:
Sweden’s Position
Professor Michael E. Porter

Dr Christian Ketels
Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness
Harvard Business School
Globalization Council
Stockholm, Sweden
April 27, 2007
This presentation draws on ideas from Professor Porter’s articles and books, in particular, The Competitive Advantage of Nations (The Free Press,
1990), “Building the Microeconomic Foundations of Competitiveness,” in The Global Competitiveness Report 2006 (World Economic Forum, 2006),
“Clusters and the New Competitive Agenda for Companies and Governments” in On Competition (Harvard Business School Press, 1998), and
ongoing research on clusters and competitiveness. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any
form or by any means - electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise - without the permission of Michael E. Porter.
Further information on Professor Porter’s work and the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness is available at www.isc.hbs.edu
Sweden Globalization Council 2007 04-17-07.ppt 1 Copyright 2007 © Professor Michael E. Porter
A Changing Global Competitive Environment
• Fewer barriers to trade and investment

Driver • Rapidly increasing stock and diffusion of knowledge
• Competitiveness upgrading in many countries
• Globalization of markets
• Globalization of value chains
Market
• Internationalization of capital, especially portfolio investment
reaction
• Increasing knowledge and skill intensity of competition
• Value increasingly in the service component of activities
• Productivity increasingly determines success

• Competition among nations need not be zero-sum
Implications
• Economic success depends on providing unique value, not
just meeting best practice benchmarks
Swedish Competitiveness in 2007
• Sweden is one of the primary beneficiaries of globalization
HOWEVER
• Other countries are catching up, exposing remaining weaknesses in

Swedish competitiveness
• Recent policy changes are a move in the right direction but they are
not sufficient
Long-Term Trends in Prosperity
GDP per capita, US-$,
PPP-adjusted
45,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
Sweden
25,000
20,000 United States

EU-15
15,000
Countries that have surpassed Sweden

10,000
in terms of prosperity:
1970s: Canada, Iceland, Norway

5,000 1980s: Austria, Denmark
1990s: Australia, Ireland, UK
0
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Source: Groningen Growth and Development Center, The Conference Board, 2006
What Creates Sustainable Prosperity?
Prosperity
Prosperity
Productivity
Productivity Competitiveness
Innovative
Innovative Capacity
Capacity
Determinants of Productivity and Productivity Growth
Macroeconomic,
Macroeconomic, Political,
Political, Legal,
Legal, and
and Social
Social Context
Context
Microeconomic
Microeconomic Capabilities
Capabilities
Sophistication
Sophistication Quality
Qualityof
ofthe
the
of
ofCompany
Company Business
Business
Operations
Operationsand
and Environment
Environment
Strategy
Strategy
• A sound context creates the potential for competitiveness, but is not sufficient
• Competitiveness ultimately depends on improving the microeconomic capability
of the economy and the sophistication of local companies and local
competition
Improving the Business Environment
Context
Context for
for
Firm
Firm
Strategy
Strategy
and
and Rivalry
Rivalry
z A local context and rules that
encourage investment and
sustained upgrading
Factor –e.g., Intellectual property
Factor Demand
(Input) protection Demand
(Input) Conditions
Conditions z Meritocratic incentive systems Conditions
Conditions across all major institutions
z Open and vigorous competition
z Presence of high quality, among locally based rivals z Sophisticated and demanding
specialized inputs available local customer(s)
to firms z Local customer needs that
–Human resources anticipate those elsewhere
–Capital resources Related
Related andand z Unusual local demand in
–Physical infrastructure Supporting
Supporting specialized segments that can be
–Administrative infrastructure Industries
Industries served nationally and globally
–Information infrastructure
–Scientific and technological z Access to capable, locally based suppliers
infrastructure and firms in related fields
–Natural resources z Presence of clusters instead of isolated
industries
• Successful economic development is a process of successive economic upgrading, in which

the business environment in a nation evolves to support and encourage increasingly
sophisticated ways of competing
The Boston Life Sciences Cluster
Health
Cluster
Cluster Organizations
Organizations
Health and
and Beauty
Beauty MassMedic,
Products MassMedic, MassBio,
MassBio, others
others
Products Teaching
Teaching and
and Specialized
Specialized Hospitals
Hospitals
Surgical
Surgical Instruments
Instruments
and Suppliers
and Suppliers
Medical
Medical Equipment
Equipment Specialized
Specialized Business
Business
Services
Services
Biopharma
Biopharma- - Banking,
Biological
Biological Banking, Accounting,
Accounting, Legal
Legal
Dental
Dental Instruments
Instruments ceutical
ceutical
Products
Products
and Suppliers
and Suppliers Products
Products
Specialized
Specialized Risk
Risk Capital
Capital
Ophthalmic
Ophthalmic Goods
Goods VC
VC Firms,
Firms, Angel
Angel Networks
Networks
Diagnostic
Diagnostic Substances
Substances Specialized
Specialized Research
Research
Service
Service Providers
Providers
Research
Research Organizations
Organizations Laboratory,
Containers Laboratory, Clinical
Clinical Testing
Testing
Containers
Educational
Educational Institutions
Institutions
Analytical
Analytical Instruments
Instruments Harvard
Harvard University,
University, MIT,
MIT, Tufts
Tufts University,
University,
Boston University, UMass
Boston University, UMass
Institutions for Collaboration
Selected Massachusetts Organizations, Life Sciences
Life
Life Sciences
Sciences Industry
Industry Associations
Associations University
University Initiatives
Initiatives
zz Massachusetts
Massachusetts Biotechnology
Biotechnology Council
Council zz Harvard
Harvard Biomedical
Biomedical Community
Community
zz Massachusetts
Massachusetts Medical
Medical Device
Device Industry
Industry zz MIT
MIT Enterprise
Enterprise Forum
Forum
Council
Council zz Biotech
Biotech Club
Club at
at Harvard
Harvard Medical
Medical School
School
zz Massachusetts
Massachusetts Hospital
Hospital Association
Association zz Technology
Technology Transfer
Transfer offices
offices
General
General Industry
Industry Associations
Associations Informal
Informal networks
networks
zz Associated
Associated Industries
Industries of
of Massachusetts
Massachusetts zz Company
Company alumni
alumni groups
groups
zz Greater
Greater Boston
Boston Chamber
Chamber of of Commerce
Commerce zz Venture
Venture capital
capital community
community
zz High
High Tech
Tech Council
Council of
of Massachusetts
Massachusetts zz University
University alumni
alumni groups
groups
Economic
Economic Development
Development Initiatives
Initiatives Joint
Joint Research
Research Initiatives
Initiatives
zz Massachusetts
Massachusetts Technology
Technology Collaborative
Collaborative zz New
New England
England Healthcare
Healthcare Institute
Institute
zz Mass
Mass Biomedical
Biomedical Initiatives
Initiatives zz Whitehead
Whitehead Institute
Institute For
For Biomedical
Biomedical
zz Mass
Mass Development
Development Research
Research
zz Massachusetts
Massachusetts Alliance
Alliance for for Economic
Economic zz Center
Center for
for Integration
Integration of
of Medicine
Medicine and
and
Development
Development Innovative
Innovative Technology
Technology (CIMIT)
(CIMIT)
The Composition of Regional Economies
United States, 2004
Natural
Natural
Traded
Traded Local
Local Resource-Driven
Resource-Driven
Share of Employment 29.3%

29.3% 70.0%
70.0% 0.7%
0.7%
Employment Growth Rate, 0.7%
0.7% 2.4%
2.4% --1.2%
1.2%
1990 to 2004
Average Wage $49,367

$49,367 $30,416
$30,416 $35,815
$35,815
Relative Wage 137.2%
137.2% 84.5
84.5 99.5
99.5
Wage Growth 4.2%
4.2% 3.4%
3.4% 2.1%
2.1%
Relative Productivity 144.1

144.1 79.3
79.3 140.1
140.1
Patents per 10,000 23.0

23.0 0.4
0.4 3.3
3.3
Employees
Number of SIC Industries 590

590 241
241 48
48
Note: 2004 data, except relative productivity which uses 1997 data.
Source: Prof. Michael E. Porter, Cluster Mapping Project, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School
Specialization of Regional Economies
Select U.S. Geographic Areas
Denver,
Denver,CO CO Chicago
Chicago
Leather
Leatherand
andSporting
SportingGoods
Goods Communications
CommunicationsEquipment
Equipment
Oil and Gas Boston
Boston
Oil and Gas Processed
ProcessedFood
Food
Aerospace Analytical
AnalyticalInstruments
Instruments
Seattle-Bellevue-
Seattle-Bellevue- AerospaceVehicles
Vehiclesand
andDefense
Defense Heavy
HeavyMachinery
Machinery
Everett, Education
EducationandandKnowledge
KnowledgeCreation
Creation
Everett,WAWA Communications Equipment
Aerospace
AerospaceVehicles Pittsburgh, Communications Equipment
Vehicles Wichita,
Wichita,KSKS Pittsburgh,PAPA
and
andDefense
Defense Aerospace
AerospaceVehicles
Vehiclesand
and Construction
ConstructionMaterials
Materials
Fishing
Fishingand
andFishing
Fishing Defense
Defense Metal Manufacturing
Metal Manufacturing
Products
Products Heavy
HeavyMachinery
Machinery Education
EducationandandKnowledge
Knowledge
Analytical
AnalyticalInstruments
Instruments Oil
Oil andGas
and Gas Creation
Creation
San
San Francisco-
Francisco-
Oakland-San
Oakland-San Jose
Jose
Bay
Bay Area
Area
Communications
Communications
Equipment
Equipment
Agricultural
Agricultural Raleigh-Durham,
Raleigh-Durham,NC NC
Products
Products Communications
CommunicationsEquipment
Equipment
Information
Information Information
InformationTechnology
Technology
Technology
Technology Education
Educationand
and
Knowledge
KnowledgeCreation
Creation
Los
Los Angeles
Angeles Area
Area
Apparel
Apparel Atlanta,
San Atlanta,GA
GA
Building
Building Fixtures,
Fixtures, SanDiego
Diego Construction
Leather ConstructionMaterials
Materials
Equipment
Equipment and
and Leatherand
andSporting
SportingGoods
Goods Transportation
Power Transportationand
andLogistics
Logistics
Services
Services PowerGeneration
Generation Houston
Houston Business Services
Education Business Services
Entertainment
Entertainment Educationand
andKnowledge
Knowledge Heavy
HeavyConstruction
ConstructionServices
Services
Creation
Creation Oil
Oil andGas
and Gas
Aerospace
AerospaceVehicles
Vehiclesand
andDefense
Defense
Note: Clusters listed are the three highest ranking clusters in terms of share of national employment
Source: Cluster Mapping Project, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School
Related Clusters in the U.S. Economy
Jewelry &
Schematic Representation Forest
Precious Products
Metals
Apparel Footwear
Leather Plastics Construction
and Materials
Furniture
Related
Products Building
Textiles Chemical Oil and
Fixtures,
Products Gas
Equipment
Sporting Financial and
and Recreation Services Pharma- Services
ceutical Heavy
Goods
Construction
Services
Publishing Education Prefabricated
and Printing and Medical
Enclosures
Knowledge Devices
Creation
Tobacco Agricultural Analytical Aerospace

Products InformationInstruments Vehicles &
Tech. Defense
Aerospace
Trans- Engines
Lightning & Automotive
Processed portation Communi- Electrical
Food and cations Equipment
Fishing & Logistics Equipment Metal
Fishing Manufacturing
Products Hospitality Power
Production
and Tourism Generation
Technology
Heavy
Machinery
Entertainment
Distribution Business
Services Services Motor Driven
Products
Note: Clusters with overlapping borders or identical shading have at least 20% overlap (by number of industries)
in both directions. Clusters in which Stockholm has a strong position within Sweden are in bold
Cross-National Collaboration of Cluster Initiatives
SWEDEN
SWEDEN FINLAND
FINLAND
Biotech
Biotech Umeå
Umeå Centre
Centre of
of Expertise,
Expertise, Gene
Gene Technology
Technology
Uppsala
Uppsala BIO
BIO and
and Molecular
Molecular Biology
Biology
Biomedical
Biomedical Development,
Development, West
West Sweden
Sweden FIVDIC,
FIVDIC, In
In Vitro
Vitro Diagnostics
Diagnostics Industry
Industry Cluster
Cluster
Livets
Livets Nya
Nya Verktyg
Verktyg Culminatum,
Culminatum, Medical
Medical &Welfare
&Welfare Technologies
Technologies
Healthcare
Healthcare Technology
Technology Alliance
Alliance Technology
Technology Centre
Centre Teknia
Teknia Ltd
Ltd
BioMedley
BioMedley
NORWAY
NORWAY
ESTONIA
ESTONIA
BIOINN
BIOINN
BCNorth Estonian
Estonian Biotechnology
Biotechnology Association
Association
BCNorth
Tartu
Tartu Biotech
Biotech Cluster
Cluster
DENMARK
DENMARK
bioTEAMsouth
bioTEAMsouth
BioMedico
BioMedico Forum
Forum
CROSS-BORDER
CROSS-BORDER EFFORTS
EFFORTS
ScanBalt
ScanBalt
Medicon
Medicon Valley
Valley Academy
Academy
NORTHERN
NORTHERN GERMANY
GERMANY
MedCoast
MedCoast Scandinavia
Scandinavia
Life
Life Sciences
Sciences SH
SH &
& HH
HH
BioCon
BioCon Valley
Valley
medRegio
medRegio Luebeck
Luebeck
The Process of Economic Development
Shifting Roles and Responsibilities
Old
Old Model
Model New
New Model
Model
•• Government
Government drives
drives economic
economic •• Economic
Economic development
development is is aa
development
development through
through policy
policy collaborative
collaborative process
process involving
involving
decisions
decisions and
and incentives
incentives government
government at at multiple
multiple levels,
levels,
companies,
companies, teaching
teaching and
and
research
research institutions,
institutions, and
and
institutions
institutions for
for collaboration
collaboration
• Competitiveness must become a bottom-up process in which many individuals,

companies, clusters, and institutions take responsibility
• Every region and cluster can take steps to enhance competitiveness
• Successful competitiveness efforts set clear priorities reflecting the specific
barriers companies face
Swedish Competitiveness 2007
• Prosperity driven by solid levels of productivity and labor mobilization

– Labor productivity still below EU-15 average but closing the gap
– Labor mobilization advantage relative to EU-15 stable after
significant drop in 1990s; little job creation in the private sector
• Strong integration into global markets, driven by core of multinationals

– Export market share broadly stable, shifting to services
– Significant presence of foreign companies
– Strong outward investment, especially in the Baltic Sea Region
• Low domestic investment rate
• High but falling patenting rate

– Universities leading in the region, but not globally
Productivity versus Working Hours
Selected Countries
Real GDP per Hour Worked, PPP adjusted, 2005
70
Norway*
60
France Ireland
50 Belgium NL
Germany United States
SWEDEN Denmark
Italy UK
40 Finland
Switzerland Canada Australia
Iceland
Greece Spain Japan
30 New Zealand
Hungary Portugal Slovenia
Czech Republic S Korea
20 Poland Slovakia
Estonia
Lithuania
Latvia
Russia*
10 Mexico
0
500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Hours worked per Capita, 2005
Note: Affected by oil revenues
Source: Groningen Growth and Development Centre and The Conference Board (2006), authors’ calculations
Long-Term Trends in Labor Productivity
GDP per hour worked
US-$, PPP-adjusted
60
Catch-Up Stagnation New Growth

50
40
30
Sweden
United States
20
EU-15
10
0
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Long-Term Trends in Labor Mobilization
Gap in %,
Sweden versus EU-15
Sweden versus EU-15
35%
30%
Unemployment
Net Gap
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
Employees as % of Population
0%
-5% Hours per Employee
-10%
-15%
-20%
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
G
re
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
ec
e
I
Po tal
Source: NUTEK (2007)

rtu y
g
Sweden Globalization Council 2007 04-17-07.ppt

Po a l
Labor Force, 2005
C l en
yp
er
C S n
Share of Entrepreneurs in the
ze pa
ch Ire in
R lan
ep d
Li ubl
th i c
ua
n
M ia
H al t
un a
Be gar
lg y
Sl ium
ov
ak
19
ia
Au UK
s
Fi tri a
N nl
et an
he d
G rlan
Entrepreneurship
er d
m
a
Fr ny
a
Sw nc
ed e
e
La n
Lu Slo tvia
xe ve
m nia
b
D ou
en rg
m
Es ark
to
N nia
or
wa
y
Copyright 2007 © Professor Michael E. Porter
Sweden
Cluster Export Portfolio, 1997-2005
8%
Forest Products
7%
Sweden’s world export market share, 2005
6% Change In Sweden’s Overall

World Export Share: -0.05%
5%
Furniture
Communications Equipment
4%
Business Services
Communications Services
3% Biopharmaceuticals
2% Medical Devices Power and Power

Sweden’s Average World
Generation Equipment
Export Share: 1.44%
Construction Aerospace Engines Fishing and
1% Services Financial Fishing Products
Publishing and Printing
(1.32%,-4.37%) Services
Aerospace Vehicles and Defense

0%
-3.5% -2.5% -1.5% -0.5% 0.5% 1.5% 2.5%
Change in Sweden’s world export market share, 1997 – 2005 Exports of US$2 Billion =
Source: Prof. Michael E. Porter, International Cluster Competitiveness Project, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School;
Richard Bryden, Project Director. Underlying data drawn from the UN Commodity Trade Statistics Database and the IMF BOP statistics.
Sweden
Cluster Export Portfolio, 1997-2005 (continued)
2.5%
Change In Sweden’s Overall
World Export Share: -0.05%
Prefabricated Enclosures and Structures Production Technology
2.0% Metal Mining and

Sweden’s world export market share, 2005
Manufacturing
Automotive
Motor Driven Products Heavy Machinery

Transportation Sweden’s Average World
1.5% and Logistics Export Share: 1.44%
Building Fixtures and Equipment
Plastics
Lighting and Construction Materials
Electrical Equipment Processed Food Marine
Analytical Instruments Equipment
Hospitality
1.0%
and Tourism
Entertainment and
Publishing and Printing Oil and Gas Products Reproduction Equipment
Sporting, Recreational and Children's Goods
Chemical Products
0.5% Textiles Leather and Related Products
Agricultural Products
Apparel
Information Technology
Footwear
Jewelry, Precious Metals and Collectibles
Tobacco
0.0%
-0.5% -0.3% -0.1% 0.1% 0.3% 0.5%
Change in Sweden’s world export market share, 1997 – 2005 Exports of US$2 Billion =
Richard Bryden, Project Director. Underlying data drawn from the UN Commodity Trade Statistics Database and the IMF BOP statistics.
Foreign Direct Investment
Stock of Foreign
Direct Investment, in Selected Countries
% of GDP, 2005
140%
Belgium
120%
Ireland
100%
Estonia
80%
Chile
Netherlands
60% Hungary
New Zealand
SWEDEN
Denmark Switzerland Czech Republic
40% Thailand UK
Slovakia
Australia Finland
Germany Iceland
20% US
Italy China
Japan
India
0%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
Inflows of Foreign Direct Investment, in % of Domestic Capital Formation, 2001 - 2005

Source: World Investment Report (2006), author’s analysis.
Capital Investment Intensity
Selected Countries
Gross Investment
in % of GDP, 2005
31%
29% S Korea Iceland Estonia

India
Latvia
27% Ireland
Australia
25%
New Zealand
Japan
23%
Singapore Chile Lithuania
Denmark
21% Canada
Taiwan Brazil
Norway
19% Poland Finland
Russia
Germany SWEDEN
17%
US
15%
-4% -2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%
Growth Rate of Real Gross Investment, CAGR, 2000 - 2005
Source: EIU (2006), author’s analysis.

Innovation Performance
Patenting in the United States
Patents per 1000 Capita, 2005
300
Japan
250
Taiwan
200 United States
150 Israel
SWEDEN Switzerland Finland
100 Canada South Korea

Germany
Singapore
Denmark
Austria
50 France NL Iceland
UK Norway Australia China (.3, +27%)
Ireland Hong Kong
Italy New Zealand India (.3, +22%)
South Africa Russia Spain Hungary Malaysia
0
-10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15%
Growth of Patents per Capita, CAGR, 2000-2005
Source: USPTO (2006), author’s analysis.

Sweden in the Business Competitiveness Index
Key Observations
• Sweden ranks 7 on the Business Competitiveness Index and has been

consistently among the top 10 in most years
Changes over time

• Sweden has in the medium-term lost ground on critical competitiveness
factors relative to its peers, despite the positive current results
Wages
• Swedish wages are broadly in line with the level of competitiveness but
wage growth has recently been stronger than the speed of
competitiveness upgrading
Challenges
• Sweden continues to suffer from an imbalance between sound
macroeconomic policies and strong companies on the one hand and a
weaker business environment conditions on the other
• Key weaknesses are educational quality, government efficiency, and
infrastructure
Medium-Term Dynamism in Competitiveness
BCI Value, 2006

High-income
High Middle-income
Low-income
United States
Germany
Finland Switzerland
SWEDEN Japan Hong Kong

Australia Iceland Norway
Ireland Malaysia
New Zealand
Estonia
Spain Chile India
Portugal
South Africa Thailand
Italy Slovenia Slovak Republic
Greece Lithuania
Jordan Mauritius Turkey
Brazil
Colombia Uruguay El Salvador
China Trinidad Pakistan
Peru
Dominican Rep. Russia
Vietnam Argentina Nigeria
Ukraine Mali
Malawi Mozambique Nicaragua
Zimbabwe Honduras
Bolivia Bangladesh
Paraguay Ethiopia
Chad
Low
Below average Average Above average
Dynamism Score, 2002 - 2006

Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2006)
Locational Value: Competitiveness and Wages
Hourly Wage in
Manufacturing, 2004
$40
Denmark
Belgium
$35 Norway Germany
Netherlands
Austria Switzerland Finland
$30 Iceland SWEDEN
France UK
$25 Australia
Italy Ireland United States
Japan
$20 Canada
Spain
$15 Greece
Cyprus Israel New Zealand
Korea
Slovenia
$10 Malta Portugal Singapore
Hungary
Slovakia Czech Republic Taiwan
Poland Hong Kong
$5 Estonia
Mexico Lithuania
Bulgaria Latvia Brazil
Romania
$0 Sri Lanka
Low Business Competitiveness Index 2004 High
Source: Global Competitiveness Report 2006, Eurostat, Bureau of Labor Statistics

Factor
Factor
(Input)
(Input) Factor (Input) Conditions
Conditions
Conditions Sweden’s Relative Position 2006
Competitive Advantages Competitive Disadvantages
Relative to GDP per Capita Relative to GDP per Capita
Country Ranking, Arrows Country Ranking, Arrows
indicate a change of 5 or more indicate a change of 5 or more
ranks since 2001 ranks since 2001
University/industry research collaboration 3 Quality of math and science education 35

Local equity market access 3 Reliability of police services 26
Ease of access to loans 5 Quality of public schools 25
Efficiency of legal framework 6 Quality of management schools 25
Venture capital availability 9 Air transport infrastructure quality 23
Quality of scientific research institutions 9 Quality of electricity supply 18
Financial market sophistication 10 Overall infrastructure quality 17
Availability of scientists and engineers 10
Telephone/fax infrastructure quality 11
Railroad infrastructure development 12
Port infrastructure quality 14
Note: Rank versus 121 countries; overall, Sweden ranks 7th in Business Competitiveness and 18th in 2005 PPP adjusted GDP per capita.
Source: Global Competitiveness Report 2006-2007.
Context
Contextfor
for
Firm Strategy
Firm Strategy
and
Context for Firm Strategy and Rivalry
andRivalry
Rivalry
Sweden’s Relative Position 2006

Efficacy of corporate boards 2 Centralization of economic policymaking 65

Prevalence of trade barriers 4 Decentralization of corporate activity 25
Intellectual property protection 8 Cooperation in labor-employer relations 18
Business costs of corruption 9
Intensity of local competition 11
Favoritism in decisions of government 11
officials
Effectiveness of antitrust policy 14
Demand
Demand
Conditions
Conditions Demand Conditions

Stringency of environmental regulations 5 Laws relating to ICT 18

Presence of demanding regulatory 5 Government procurement advanced 18
standards technology products
Buyer sophistication 16
Related
Relatedand
and
Supporting
Supporting Related and Supporting Industries
Industries
Industries Sweden’s Relative Position 2006


Local supplier quality 7

Local availability of specialized research 9
and training services
Local availability of process machinery 10
Local supplier quantity 11
Action Priorities
• Further strengthen physical and communication infrastructure to

connect better to the neighborhood and the world
• Educate the public on the benefits of globalization for Sweden
• Sustain focus on education and skill upgrading
• Increase attractiveness for human capital from abroad
• Create a better environment for entrepreneurship
• Achieve world-class in science areas tied to cluster strengths
• Integrate the environmental and competitiveness agendas
• Create a strategy for economic integration of immigrant groups
• Pursue deep integration in the Baltic Sea Region
Moving Towards a New Model for Sweden
Key Themes
• Sound macroeconomic • Strong microeconomic

policies, solid institutions, foundations and regional
and high skills are the basis specialization add critical
of competitiveness strengths to competitiveness
• Capital-intensive • Knowledge-intensive
multinationals drive the clusters of entrepreneurs
economy drive the economy
• Innovation is based on large • Innovation emerges in open

company R&D, drawing on networks of academia and
university research firms of all sizes
• National government • Policy design and execution

defines and executes policy in triple helix partnership
Competitiveness Councils
Finnish Science
and Technology
Council
Internal coordination Public debate of

of government sources of
policies competitiveness
Danish
Globalization
Council
Encourage U.S. Council on

Competitiveness
collaboration and
consensus across
public and private
sectors
Background Data
Comparative Economic Performance
Selected Countries
$45,000
U.S.
Norway
$40,000
Denmark Ireland
Switzerland Iceland
$35,000 Austria
NL
SWEDEN
$30,000 Japan France Finland
Germany Spain
GDP per Italy
capita New Zealand
$25,000 Australia,
(PPP Greece
adjusted) Canada, Slovenia
in US-$, S Korea
2005 $20,000 U.K. Czech Rep.
Portugal Hungary
$15,000 Slovakia Estonia
Poland Latvia
Lithuania
$10,000 Mexico
Turkey
$5,000 China
India
$0
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9%
Compound annual growth rate of real GDP per capita, 1998-2005
Source: Groningen Growth and Development Centre and The Conference Board (2006), authors’ calculations
Long-Term Trends in Labor Mobilization
Annual hours worked
per capita
1200
1000
United States
800
Sweden
600 EU-15
400
200
0
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
In
d
Ch ia
So R ina
ut u s
h si
Sl Ko a
ov
Factor, 2005
a k B rea
Re raz
Purchasing Power
p u il
b

La lic
tv
C ia
Hu h i
n le
Es gar
y
Li ton
t h ia
Source: IMF (2006), authors’ calculations

ua
M nia
Cz e
ec P xic
h ol o
Re an
pu d
Ta blic
Sl iwa
ov n
G e nia
r
Po e ec
Ho rtu e
ng g
Ko Sp a l
ng ain
Un SA
ite R
38
d Ita
St ly
a
Ne Ca te s
w na
Ze da
Au ala
n
Si stra d
n
Lu g lia
xe ap
m ore
bo
Ire urg
l
Au an d
s
Ne Be tria
th lgiu
er m
Domestic Purchasing Power
G lan
er d s
Un m
ite F an
d ra y
Ki n
ng ce
d
Fi om
nl
Normalized Purchasing Power Across Countries
Sw an
d
De ed
nm n e
Ic ark
el
a
Ja nd
p
Sw No an
itz rwa
er y
la
nd
Sweden’s Export Performance
World Export Market Shares
World export
share in %
1.8%
1.6%
1.4%
1.2%
1.0% Goods
Services
0.8% Total
0.6%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Source: WTO (2006)

Sweden
Leading Goods Export Industries, 2005
World Change in
Export Share, Export Value
Industry Cluster Share 1997-2005 (in US$1,000)
1 Passenger transport vehicles Automotive 1.72% 0.19% $8,122,269
2 Miscellaneous medicaments Biopharmaceuticals 3.18% -2.49% $5,321,590
3 Petroleum Oils Oil and Gas Products 1.58% 0.01% $5,095,941
4 Parts for telecommunication equipment Communications Equipment 4.47% -4.10% $4,693,454
5 TV, radio transmitters Communications Equipment 3.06% -10.94% $4,242,399
6 Flat-rolled products of alloy steel Metal Mining and Manufacturing 8.74% 1.09% $3,532,018
7 Wood of conifer, sawn Furniture 12.63% -0.69% $2,808,103
8 Line telephone or telegraph equipment Communications Equipment 6.21% 3.48% $2,182,022
9 Miscellaneous paper and paperboard, coated Forest Products 10.66% 1.31% $2,051,603
10 Kraft paper and paperboard, uncoated Forest Products 20.19% -0.83% $1,726,457
11 Paper and paperboard, uncoated Forest Products 8.48% 1.08% $1,678,481
12 Chemical wood pulp, soda, bleached Forest Products 9.65% 0.38% $1,580,115
13 Other parts for motor vehicles Automotive 1.32% -1.09% $1,562,860
14 Internal combustion engines for vehicles Automotive 2.81% -0.23% $1,443,783
15 Road tractors, semi-trailers Automotive 6.14% 1.49% $1,240,373
16 Iron Ore and Concentrates Metal Mining and Manufacturing 4.18% -1.68% $1,123,839
17 Iron or steel bars, rods, angles, shapes and sections Metal Mining and Manufacturing 2.24% -0.94% $1,120,379
18 Medicaments containing hormones Biopharmaceuticals 5.57% -1.04% $1,100,424
19 Other parts of vehicle bodies Automotive 2.52% -0.67% $1,085,385
20 Newsprint, rolls, sheets Forest Products 9.99% -1.74% $938,702
21 Motor vehicle bodies Automotive 15.43% -1.00% $868,325
22 Fish, fresh, chilled, or frozen Fishing and Fishing Products 2.77% 1.68% $850,010
23 Polymers of ethylene Plastics 2.19% 2.02% $788,119
24 Work trucks, tractors, and parts Production Technology 6.54% 0.87% $778,778
25 Other plastics in primary forms Plastics 1.26% 0.70% $764,654
Richard Bryden, Project
Sweden Globalization Director.
Council 2007 04-17-07.ppt 40
Underlying data drawn from the UN Commodity Trade Statistics Database and the IMF BOP statistics. Copyright 2007 © Professor Michael E. Porter
Sweden
Leading Goods Export Industries, 2005 (continued)
World Change in
Export Share, Export Value
Industry Cluster Share 1997-2005 (in US$1,000)
26 Insulted wire, cable and conductors Communications Equipment 1.45% -0.51% $752,156
27 Ball or roller bearings Production Technology 3.85% -0.72% $726,793
28 Flat-rolled iron, not clad, plated or coated Metal Mining and Manufacturing 1.17% -0.49% $722,591
29 Electric current Power and Power Generation Equipment 3.35% 3.35% $719,514
30 Miscellaneous goods vehicles Automotive 0.93% 0.65% $716,505
31 Paper and paperboard, coated, other Forest Products 7.51% 2.42% $654,918
32 Other medical instruments Medical Devices 1.61% -0.66% $650,456
33 Industrial washing, bottling machinery Production Technology 3.99% 0.00% $616,407
34 Motor vehicle chassis Automotive 20.92% 7.14% $612,510
35 Spirits Agricultural Products 3.85% 1.87% $592,975
36 Miscellaneous articles of pulp, paper and paperboard Forest Products 4.49% 0.20% $589,734
37 Other recorded media Entertainment and Reproduction Equipment 2.47% 1.26% $584,794
38 Parts of jet, gas turbine engines Aerospace Engines 1.60% -1.11% $568,076
39 Seamless tubes, pipes and hollow profiles of iron or steel Metal Mining and Manufacturing 2.52% -1.46% $521,242
40 Construction, mining machinery Heavy Machinery 11.62% -1.27% $515,621
41 Miscellaneous machinery with individual functions Production Technology 1.40% 0.05% $512,652
42 Builders joinery and carpentry of wood Furniture 4.51% -2.60% $498,075
43 Gear boxes Automotive 1.99% -0.49% $496,631
44 Artificial aids, disabled Medical Devices 2.10% -2.47% $489,379
45 Color television receivers Entertainment and Reproduction Equipment 0.93% 0.46% $481,866
46 Paints, varnishes Plastics 3.19% 0.52% $481,749
47 Miscellaneous parts of civil engineering machinery Heavy Machinery 1.62% 1.60% $480,504
48 Instruments for analysis, measuring viscosity, expansion Analytical Instruments 2.60% -0.35% $479,735
49 Electric, laser or plasma arc soldering, welding, brazing machines Production Technology 5.86% -0.34% $467,533
50 Miscellaneous articles of iron or steel Metal Mining and Manufacturing 1.61% 0.01% $465,437
Top 50 Industries as % of Sweden’s total goods exports: 58.3%

Richard Bryden, Project
Sweden Globalization Director.
Council 2007 04-17-07.ppt 41
Underlying data drawn from the UN Commodity Trade Statistics Database and the IMF BOP statistics. Copyright 2007 © Professor Michael E. Porter
FDI Inflows over Time
FDI Inflows as % of Gross
Domestic Investment
160%
Inward FDI Stock as % of GDP, 2006
SWEDEN: 47.8%
140%
European Union: 33.5%
120% World: 22.7%
U.S.: 13.0% SWEDEN
100%
80%
European Union
60%
40%
20%
World
U.S.
0%
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Source: UNCTAD (2006), author’s analysis.

Regional Integration
Foreign Direct Investment Flows
Share of inward FDI from other
BSR countries, 1999 - 2004
80%
70% Source country

Sweden
60% Finland
Denmark
50% Estonia
N Germany
40% Norway
Latvia
30% Iceland
BSR average Lithuania
20% NW Russia
N Poland
10%
0%
a
y
y
nd
d
a
ia
d
en
ni
an
wa
ar
an
si
an
n
la
ed
ua
us
m
to
m
nl
or
el
Po
Es
en
Sw
th
R
Fi
er
Ic
N
Li
G
D
W
N
N
Source: UNCTAD, national statistical offices, author’s calculations
Prosperity
GDP per Capita, Euro European Regions
(PPP adjusted), 2002
70,000
Sweden
Swedish regions
Other EU-15 regions
60,000 EU accession country regions
50,000
40,000
Stockholm
30,000
Sweden
20,000
10,000
0
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10%
Annual Growth Rate of GDP per Capita (PPP adjusted), CAGR, 1995 – 2002
Source: Eurostat, 2005
Composition of the Traded Economy
Stockholm Cluster Portfolio
Share in National
Cluster Employment, Change in Stockholm’s overall share of
2003 National Cluster Employment: -0.5%
60%
Financial Services
Biopharmaceuticals
50%
Communication Equipment Business Services
40% Publishing & Printing

Tourism
Information Technology
Transportation & Logistics
Distribution Services
30%
Stockholm
Analytical Share of
Education & Knowledge Creation Instruments National
Cluster
20% Heavy Construction Services
Employment,
2003: 22.9%
10%
0%
-15% -10% -5% 0% 5%
Change of Share in National Cluster Employment, 1995-2003
Note: Bubble size is proportional to employment levels
Source: Statistics Sweden (2005), author’s calculations
Global Competitiveness Report 2006-07
Sweden
Rank
1
5
3
7 7
2005
10
2006
11
15
20
Global Competitiveness Index Business Competitiveness Index
Sweden’s Profile in the Global Competitiveness Report
Rank
1 Global Competitiveness Index Business Competitiveness Index
2 2
5 3
5
7 7
10 8
15
20
GCI Efficiency Innovation Basic BCI Company Business
Enhancers Drivers Requirments Operations & Environment
Sophistication Quality
Global Competitiveness Index
Sweden
Rank
1
10
15
20
e
s
n
gy
ns
s
ts
ss
s
ts
ur
er
er
io
tio
tio
ic
en
ke
tio
lo
e
riv
ct
at
nc
om
ca
ca
sin
no
irm
ru
itu
ar
ov
D
ha
du
du
on
M
st
ch
Bu
st
n
n
qu
En
fra
,E
In
rE
io
In
ec
Te
Re
at
In
ro
lth
y
he
ov
nc
ac
sic
ea
ig
n
ie
M
H
H
In
Ba
fic
Ef

Country Context

Business Competitiveness Index 2006
Top
Top 25
25 Country Change
11 United States 0
22 Germany 0
33 Finland 0
44 Switzerland +4
55 Denmark -1
66 Netherlands +1
77 SWEDEN +4
88 United Kingdom -3
99 Japan 0
10
10 Hong Kong SAR +7
11
11 Singapore -5
12
12 Austria 0
13
13 Iceland +3
14
14 Norway +5
15
15 Canada -1
16
16 France -6
17
17 Belgium +1
18
18 Australia -5
19
19 Israel +3
20
20 Malaysia +3
21
21 Taiwan -6
22
22 Ireland -1
23
23 New Zealand -3
Note: Constant sample
24
24 Estonia +3
of countries 25
25 Korea, Rep. -1
Business Competitiveness Index 2006
2005 GDP per Capita Relationship with GDP Per Capita
(Purchasing Power Adjusted)
45,000
Norway
Variation in BCI score explains more United States
40,000 than 80% of variation in GDP per capita
Iceland Denmark
35,000 Canada
Ireland Switzerland
Qatar
Finland
Australia Germany
30,000
Italy UAE
Taiwan SWEDEN
Singapore
Spain
25,000 New Zealand
Slovenia Israel
Greece
S Korea
Cyprus
20,000 Bahrain
Estonia
Trinidad & Tobago
15,000 Argentina South Africa
Chile
Malaysia
10,000
Turkey Thailand Brazil
China
5,000 Jordan Indonesia
Jamaica India
0
Low High
Business Competitiveness Index
Source: Global Competitiveness Report 2006
Economic Sustainability of Current Prosperity
BCI Value, 2006
Untapped potential Sustainability in question
High-income
United States Middle-income
Germany Low-income
Finland
SWEDEN
Iceland Norwa
Malaysia y
Ireland
Estonia
Tunisia Chile Spain
India
U.A.E.
Qatar
Indonesia Italy
Greece
Kenya
Tanzania Argentina
-15000 -10000 -5000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000

GAP (Actual – Expected GDP per Capita), 2006
Business Competitiveness Ranking Over Time
Sweden
Rank
1
BCI
NBE
COS
10
15
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Estimated absolute gap in hourly
wage in manufacturing, US-$, 2004
Be
lg
-$20
-$15
-$10
-$5
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
iu
m
N Ita
D or w ly
en a
m y
A u ar

N Ic str k
et e ia
he l a
G rla nd
er nd
m
G an s
re y
S w F ec
Source: Business Competitiveness Index, 2006

itz ran e
e ce
Fi rlan
nl d
a
S p nd
Ire ain
U C la
ni
te S yprnd
d w u
Wages higher than
Ki ed s
ng e
n
Podom
la
justified by competitiveness
n
Sl Ma d
ov l t
54
C en a
a
Bu na ia
d
Au lga a
Sr st ria
Sl r
ov Ri La alia
ak om nk
R an a
e
Ko H pubia
re ung lic
a, a
r
M Repy
ex .
U P Ja ico
C nit o pa
ze ed rt n
Wage Differentials by Country
ch S ug
Re tat al
pu es
b
Li Isr lic
th a
N u e
ew an l
B i
Ze ra a
al zil
La and
Wage advantage
E
Si st tvia
H ng on
given competitiveness
on
g Tapo ia
Ko a re
ng iwa
SA n
R
Company Operations and Strategy

Willingness to delegate authority 1

Reliance on professional management 1
Capacity for innovation 2
Breadth of international markets 3
Extent of staff training 3
Company spending on research and 5
development
Extent of regional sales 5
Extent of incentive compensation 5
Nature of competitive advantage 7
Production process sophistication 7
Value chain presence 9
Degree of customer orientation 9
Control of international distribution 9
Extent of marketing 10
Source: Global Competitiveness Report 2006-2007. 55
Sweden Globalization Council 2007 04-17-07.ppt Copyright 2007 © Professor Michael E. Porter
Wage gap 2004: Wage Gap – EU data
Actual versus expected wage
20
15 Belgium Italy
10
Wages above
productivity level Austria Changed sign
indicated by BCI since 2001
Greece Denmark France
5
SWEDEN Netherlands
Germany Iceland
Poland Spain
0 Malta
Bulgaria Slovenia Finland
UK
Romania
Slovakia
-5 Changed sign Portugal Hungary
since 2001
Wages rising more quickly
Lithuania Czech Republic than productivity growth
-10
indicated by BCI
Latvia
-15 Estonia
-20
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
Change in wage gap 2001 - 2004
Note: Countries in the grey area have changed their sign between 201 and 2004
Source: Global Competitiveness Report 2006 and Eurostat
Business Environment and Company Sophistication
Germany United States

SWEDEN
Japan Switzerland
Finland
France
Stronger on company sophistication Hong Kong
S Korea Ireland Singapore
Indonesia India Australia
New Zealand
Costa Rica Estonia
Brazil U.A.E.
Mexico Portugal
Philippines Qatar
Nigeria
Malta
Venezuela Jordan Cyprus
Zimbabwe Morocco
Botswana
Bulgaria
Algeria Stronger on business environment quality
Zambia
Chad
High-income
Middle-income
Low-income
Source: Global Competitiveness Report 2006

Patenting Intensity: 1996 – 2005
U.S. Patents per Selected Countries
1000 Capita
350
United States
Japan
Taiwan
300
Finland
Israel
Switzerland
250
Sweden
Germany
S Korea
200
Canada
Singapore
Iceland
150
Denmark
Norway
Estonia
100
Russia
Lithuania
Latvia
50
Poland
Brazil
India
0
China
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
U.S. Patents by Sweden-based Institutions
Patentor Number of patents, 2000-04
1 TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON 1698
2 SANDVIK AKTIEBOLAG 226
3 ASEA BROWN BOVERI AB 179
4 SCA HYGIENE PRODUCTS AB 164
5 ASTRAZENECA AB 142
6 TETRA LAVAL HOLDINGS & FINANCE S.A. 121
7 SIEMENS ELEMA AB 90
8 AKTIEBOLAGET ASTRA 88
9 VOLVO LASTVAGNAR AB 75
10 AB VOLVO 74
11 AKTIEBOLAGET ELECTROLUX 64
12 KVAERNER PULPING AKTIEBOLAG 64
13 AKZO NOBEL NV 57
14 SCANIA CV AKTIEBOLAG 56
15 PHARMACIA AKTIEBOLAG 51
16 VALMET FIBERTECH AKTIEBOLAG 50
16 VOLVO CAR CORPORATION AB 50
18 ALLGON AB 49
18 VOLVO PERSONVAGNAR AB 49
20 DELAVAL HOLDING AB 48
21 ALFA-LAVAL AB 47
22 AUTOLIV DEVELOPMENT AB 43
22 SECO TOOLS AB 43
24 PACESETTER AB 39
25 ERICSSON, Inc. 38
Knowledge Creation
Top Universities in the Baltic Sea Region

Copyright © 2005 Institute of Higher Education,60Shanghai Jiao Tong University Copyright 2007 © Professor Michael E. Porter
Doing Business 2006 Ranking
Sweden
Category Rank
Enforcing Contracts 2
Registering Property 7
Trading Across Borders 9
OVERALL 13
Closing a Business 17
Dealing with Licenses 17
Starting a Business 20
Getting Credit 33
Paying Taxes 39
Protecting Investors 46
Employing Workers 94
Source: World Bank – Doing Business (2007), author’s analysis.

Index of Economic Freedom
1996 - 2006
Free
Hong Kong
Singapore
Ireland
Iceland
UK
Estonia
Denmark
United States
Canada
Finland
Chile
Switzerland
Germany
Sweden
Lithuania
Japan
Norway
Spain
Slovakia
Taiwan
Slovenia
Latvia
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Poland
Source: Index of Economic Freedom (2006), author’s analysis.
Business Competitiveness
Effectiveness of Public Spending, Selected Countries
Positive
34
Negative
a
y
il
d
na
le
es
ia
k
n
a
nd
n
Sw a
d
en
az
ni
wa
an
ar
an
pa
tio
ni
di
an
tv
hi
at
hi
la
ed
ua
In
m
Br
to
La
m
ra
Ja
nl
or
el
C
St
Po
Es
en
th
Fi
er
de
Ic
Li
d
G
D
Fe
te
ni
an
U
si
us
R
Note: Number refers to rank among 124 countries
Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2006), author’s analysis.
Business Competitiveness
Incentive Effect of Taxation, Selected Countries
Positive
111
Negative
a, i a
er y
ng n
il
C ny
R nd
M da
La e
es
N via
Li xico
k
Ic ng
U Es nd
te Ta ia
Sw sia
Ire re
Fi nd
m
St ia
ng nd
Po p.
en n
az
G rwa
Ki wa
ar
D de
r e an
hi
d
te ton
do
e
o
a
at
a
a
la
Ko
la
Si el a
us
In
m
Br
ap
R
C
m
an
nl
Ko thu
e
e
i
o
g
d
on
d
H
ni
ni
U
Note: Number refers to rank among 124 countries

Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2006), author’s analysis.

Global Is at Ion Council Sweden

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Global Is at Ion Council Sweden

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Competitiveness in the Global Economy:

Professor Michael E. Porter

• Fewer barriers to trade and investment

• Productivity increasingly determines success

• Sweden is one of the primary beneficiaries of globalization

• Other countries are catching up, exposing remaining weaknesses in

20,000 United States

Countries that have surpassed Sweden

1970s: Canada, Iceland, Norway

• Successful economic development is a process of successive economic upgrading, in which

Share of Employment 29.3%

Average Wage $49,367

Relative Productivity 144.1

Patents per 10,000 23.0

Number of SIC Industries 590

Tobacco Agricultural Analytical Aerospace

• Competitiveness must become a bottom-up process in which many individuals,

• Prosperity driven by solid levels of productivity and labor mobilization

• Strong integration into global markets, driven by core of multinationals

• Low domestic investment rate

• High but falling patenting rate

Catch-Up Stagnation New Growth

-5% Hours per Employee

Source: NUTEK (2007)

Sweden Globalization Council 2007 04-17-07.ppt

6% Change In Sweden’s Overall

2% Medical Devices Power and Power

Aerospace Vehicles and Defense

Prefabricated Enclosures and Structures Production Technology

2.0% Metal Mining and

Motor Driven Products Heavy Machinery

Inflows of Foreign Direct Investment, in % of Domestic Capital Formation, 2001 - 2005

29% S Korea Iceland Estonia

Growth Rate of Real Gross Investment, CAGR, 2000 - 2005

Source: EIU (2006), author’s analysis.

200 United States

100 Canada South Korea

Source: USPTO (2006), author’s analysis.

• Sweden ranks 7 on the Business Competitiveness Index and has been

Changes over time

BCI Value, 2006

SWEDEN Japan Hong Kong

Below average Average Above average

Dynamism Score, 2002 - 2006

Source: Global Competitiveness Report 2006, Eurostat, Bureau of Labor Statistics

University/industry research collaboration 3 Quality of math and science education 35

Competitive Advantages Competitive Disadvantages

Efficacy of corporate boards 2 Centralization of economic policymaking 65

Competitive Advantages Competitive Disadvantages

Stringency of environmental regulations 5 Laws relating to ICT 18

Competitive Advantages Competitive Disadvantages

Country Ranking, Arrows Country Ranking, Arrows

Local supplier quality 7

• Further strengthen physical and communication infrastructure to

• Sound macroeconomic • Strong microeconomic

• Innovation is based on large • Innovation emerges in open

• National government • Policy design and execution

Internal coordination Public debate of

Encourage U.S. Council on

Compound annual growth rate of real GDP per capita, 1998-2005

Sweden Globalization Council 2007 04-17-07.ppt

Source: IMF (2006), authors’ calculations

Source: WTO (2006)