Sustainable development and competitiveness cannot be achieved in our highly competitive global society without innovations. Innovations are typically the result of a financially demanding research process generating intellectual property assets, namely patented inventions or ideas for the digital setting and protected by copyright or otherwise. The EU is aware of it and its current strategy, Europe 2020, states that 3% of GDP should be allocated to R&D by 2020 at the latest and this should boost innovation levels and make the EU a top global economic leader. Undoubtedly, innovation is indispensable and needs to be financed. However, the relation of involved factors and the related dynamic are unclear and have not received sufficient scientific and academic attention. To make an initial step to address this vacuum, three research questions are addressed. Firstly, what fraction of GDP goes towards R&D, expressed by GERD, and what is the GERD trend in the EU and selected EU member states? Secondly, how many European patent applications were filed and patents granted, what was the success rate and how has digitalization been progressing in the EU and selected EU member states and what are the trends? Thirdly, can the possibility of a relationship be implied? These three questions are answered based on multi-disciplinary research employing hard data sources, such as Eurostat and EPO databases, official and/or legislative documents, such as Europe 2020, academic literature along with direct observation, field search and the own experience of the author. Such a conglomerate of diversified and multi-disciplinary data is to be processed by a myriad of appropriately matching methods, both of a quantitative and qualitative nature, and dominated by the holistic Meta-Analysis. Indices and indicators, such as GERD, EPO statistics and DESI, are comparatively employed while observing their time evolution in the entire EU and selected EU members. Their selection is made by the motivation to be representative and to face the (alleged) cliche about EU member states labeled as “good” (DE, FR), “lazy” PIGS (PT, IT, GR, SP), leaving (GB), particular Scandinavian (DK, FI, SW) and central (AT, CZ, PL). This highly original study answers all three questions – (i) the 3% threshold is not met in the larger part of the EU, (ii) the number of patent applications and granted patents keep growing along with digitalization, and (iii) the possibility of a relationship between these factors and trends exists, but is not conclusive or dramatically strong. This generates a set of original suggestions, such as that the differences between EU member states regarding innovations do not vanish and that although the Europe 2020 3% threshold is not met, the number of patented inventions and the practical digitalization can still grow across the EU. Further and deeper research is needed and should help the EU to change its approach to innovations and make it more effective and efficient.

中文翻译：

---

欧盟和部分成员国的研发支出和创新

没有创新，在我们竞争激烈的全球社会中就无法实现可持续发展和竞争力。创新通常是需要大量资金才能进行的研究过程的结果，这些过程产生了知识产权资产，即专利发明或用于数字环境的创意，并受到版权或其他方式的保护。欧盟已意识到这一点，其当前的战略（欧洲2020年）指出，最迟应在2020年之前将GDP的3％用于研发，这将提高创新水平并使欧盟成为全球领先的经济领导者。毫无疑问，创新是必不可少的，需要资助。但是，涉及因素与相关动力学之间的关系尚不清楚，还没有得到足够的科学和学术关注。为了迈出解决这一真空的第一步，解决了三个研究问题。首先，由GERD表示，GDP的多少用于研发，以及欧盟和部分欧盟成员国的GERD趋势如何？其次，欧盟和选定的欧盟成员国提交了多少欧洲专利申请并获得了专利授权，成功率是多少，数字化进展如何，趋势如何？第三，可以暗示存在关系的可能性吗？这三个问题是基于多学科研究得出的，这些研究使用了硬统计数据源（例如，欧盟统计局和EPO数据库），官方和/或立法文件（例如，Europe 2020），学术文献以及直接观察，实地搜索和自身的经验。作者。这样的多元化和多学科数据的综合体将通过无数定量和定性的适当匹配方法进行处理，并以整体Meta分析为主导。在观察整个欧盟和部分欧盟成员国的时间演变时，比较采用了GERD，EPO统计和DESI等指标和指标。他们的选择是出于有代表性和面对欧盟成员国（被指称）的陈词滥调的动机，欧盟成员国分别标记为“良好”（DE，FR），“懒惰” PIGS（PT，IT，GR，SP），离开（GB ），尤其是斯堪的纳维亚（DK，FI，SW）和中部（AT，CZ，PL）。这项非常原始的研究回答了所有三个问题–（i）欧盟大部分地区未达到3％的门槛，（ii）专利申请和授权专利的数量随着数字化的发展而不断增长，并且（iii）这些因素与趋势之间存在联系的可能性存在，但不是决定性的或非绝对的。这产生了一系列原始建议，例如，欧盟成员国之间在创新方面的分歧不会消失，并且尽管未达到欧洲2020年3％的门槛，但专利发明的数量和实用数字化仍可以在整个欧盟范围内增长。需要进一步深入的研究，这将有助于欧盟改变其创新方法，使其更加有效和高效。例如，欧盟成员国之间在创新方面的差异不会消失，并且尽管未达到欧洲2020年3％的门槛，但专利发明的数量和实用数字化仍可以在整个欧盟范围内增长。需要进一步深入的研究，这将有助于欧盟改变其创新方法，使其更加有效和高效。例如，欧盟成员国之间在创新方面的差异不会消失，并且尽管未达到欧洲2020年3％的门槛，但专利发明的数量和实用数字化仍可以在整个欧盟范围内增长。需要进一步深入的研究，这将有助于欧盟改变其创新方法，使其更加有效和高效。