South Africa’s Economic Diplomacy

Published on February 2017 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 22 | Comments: 0 | Views: 112
of 11
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

Department of International Relations and Cooperation Annual Conference on Closing the Gap between Domestic and Foreign Policies. Southern Sun, Pretoria, South Africa on 5-6 November 2009

The Changing Nature of South Africa’s Economic Diplomacy: The experience of international scientific and technological cooperation Vuyani Lingela Department of Science and Technology, Private Bag X 894, Pretoria 0001, South Africa Tel: +27 12 843 6517, Fax: +27 86 681 0051, Email: [email protected] Abstract Science and technology (S&T) is recognised globally as a cornerstone to promote knowledge production, technological innovation and industrial competitiveness. S&T is also an important tool for countries to promote economic diplomacy and positively position themselves as world leaders in some research areas to promote international S&T partnerships. South Africa has actively used international S&T cooperation to advance its economic diplomacy since 1993. The results presented in this paper represent the first attempt to assess the objectives and rationale for the S&T cooperation agreements concluded between South Africa and partner countries from 1993 to 2009. The results show that the Government of South Africa and partner countries have given the highest priority (44%) to the protection and ownership of intellectual property (IP) rights created within the framework of the international S&T cooperation agreement. On the other hand the results show that, when the effect of population size and the number of researchers per country has been discounted, South Africa together with Argentina, Romania, Poland, Hungary, Slovak, Russia and Spain have filed low numbers of patent applications to the USPTO per thousand of researches. The fact that commercialisation of research results and licensing of IP are given low priority (6%) in 17 agreements reviewed in this paper might stem from the fact that South Africa currently files relatively low number of patent applications per thousand of researches. However, it is not clear why conservation of biological resources and materials were also given low priority (3%) in all 17 agreements. This might be seen to be flying against what is stated in the Ten Year Innovation Plan, published by the Department of Science and Technology in 2008, that South Africa’s biodiversity should be used to attract research and development (R&D) from multinational pharmaceutical companies. South Africa’s vision as stated in this plan includes being one of the top three emerging economies in the global pharmaceutical industry, based on an expansive innovation system using the nation’s indigenous knowledge and rich biodiversity. 1. Introduction In their report, commissioned by The Presidency of South Africa as an input into the Fifteen Year Review of the progress towards Government’s objectives derived from the constitution and successive electoral mandates, Vickers and Ajulu (2008) define the concept of South Africa’s economic diplomacy. They define it as policies and activities that promote trade, foreign direct investment (FDI), tourism, and technology transfers to South Africa, and positively position the country in the world through imaging, branding, marketing and public diplomacy (domestic and international). They stress that the pursuit of South Africa’s political and economic diplomacy should collectively support national economic growth and development. Science and technology (S&T) is recognised globally as a cornerstone to promote knowledge production, technological innovation and industrial competitiveness. S&T is also an important tool for countries to promote economic diplomacy and positively position themselves as world leaders in some research areas to promote international S&T partnerships. Sir David King (2004), the Chief Scientific Adviser to the British Government from 2000 to 2007, concluded that a strong science base need not lead directly to wealth generation. He explained that a strong national scientific base 1

Department of International Relations and Cooperation Annual Conference on Closing the Gap between Domestic and Foreign Policies. Southern Sun, Pretoria, South Africa on 5-6 November 2009

has additional benefits for individual nations, and for the world as a whole. From the spread of disease to the dangers of global warming, the world is increasingly facing the sorts of threats for which governments everywhere will need to turn to their scientists. The purpose of this paper is to assess the objectives and rationale for the S&T cooperation agreements concluded between South Africa and partner countries from 1993 to 2009. South Africa has actively used international science and technology cooperation to advance its economic diplomacy since 1993. This is illustrated by the growing number of international S&T cooperation agreements signed by the Department of Science and Technology and the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (previously known as the Department Foreign Affairs) on behalf of the Government of South Africa. Although the list of 38 international S&T cooperation agreements examined in this paper is not exhaustive, the role of international science and technology cooperation in promoting South Africa’s economic diplomacy is discussed effectively. 2. Data and Methods In this paper we analyse S&T cooperation agreements concluded between South Africa and all the countries listed in Appendix 1. All the cooperation agreements analysed in this paper were concluded over the period from 1993 to 2009. These agreements remain in force for a period of five years unless an agreement is denounced by either Party giving written notice to the other at least six months prior to termination of the agreement. At the end of each five year period, these agreements are automatically extended for another five years. Although some agreements were not analysed in this paper, the information obtained from the available agreements is sufficient to illustrate the experience of international S&T cooperation in promoting South Africa’s economic diplomacy. One of the methods used in this paper to indicate the intention of the South African Government to use international S&T cooperation to advance South Africa’s economic diplomacy was to examine the objectives stated in some cooperation agreements concluded with countries listed in Appendix 1. The reasons for the Government of South Africa to conclude these agreements are captured in their preambles. They all state what motivated South Africa and partner countries to conclude the agreements and what they were expecting to achieve as a result of their cooperation in S&T. Another method used was to analyse the frequency of use of relevant keywords extracted from the text of some of the agreements. The frequency of use of the following keywords was determined: biological resources, materials, commercialisation, licensing, non-disclosure, domestic laws and intellectual property (IP) related words, including patents and copyrights. The choice of indicator keywords above is based on the following rationale. Conservation of biological resources and materials might indicate South Africa’s intention to protect its biological or natural resources from exploitation by international S&T partners at the expense of the country. Non-disclosure of information might indicate South Africa’s intention to protect against exploitation, by actors outside the cooperation agreement, the IP or information generated through the efforts of actors involved in the international S&T cooperation and/or with the financial contribution of the two cooperating countries. Commercialisation of research results and licensing of IP might indicate the expectation of the South African Government to improve technological innovation capability and industrial competitiveness through international S&T cooperation. Compliance with domestic laws might indicate South Africa’s intention to enforce compliance with all appropriate national laws by all actors participating in the international S&T cooperation. Protection and ownership of IP might indicate the intention of South Africa to protect the IP generated with the contribution of the South African citizens participating in the S&T partnership and/or with the financial contribution of the Government of South Africa. Finally, this paper 2

Department of International Relations and Cooperation Annual Conference on Closing the Gap between Domestic and Foreign Policies. Southern Sun, Pretoria, South Africa on 5-6 November 2009

compares the performance of countries that have concluded the S&T cooperation agreements with South Africa. Data used for these comparative analyses were obtained from the Main Science and Technology Indicators database published by the OECD (2009). Corresponding data on the number of researchers in South Africa which was not available in the OECD database was obtained from the 2006/07 National Survey of Research and Experimental Development published by the Department of Science and Technology in 2008. 3. Objectives of the scientific and technological cooperation agreements A total number of 38 S&T cooperation agreements concluded by the South African Government and partner countries, as well as their annual cumulative numbers from 1993 to 2009, are illustrated in Figure 1. These data show that South Africa concluded between one to four agreements per year from 1993 to 2009. When concluding these agreements the South African Government is generally represented by the Department of Science and Technology (DST), with the exception of some agreements where the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) represented the Government, and in almost all agreements the DST is designated as the authority responsible for the implementation of the cooperation agreement on behalf of the South African Government. These agreements are concluded within the framework of the General Agreement for economic, trade, investment and technology cooperation between the two Governments.
Total (Annual) Total (Cumulative)

40 35

Number of agreements

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Year

Figure 1. International science and technology cooperation agreements According to the information obtained from the 17 S&T cooperation agreements listed in this paper in Appendix 1, under the column labelled Keywords, it appears that the Government of South Africa and partner countries concluded the agreements for the following four main objectives: a) To uplift and enhance the quality of life of their people; b) To promote S&T for the development of their national economies; c) To promote S&T for the improvement of their socio-economic standard of life; and d) To promote the development of existing friendly relations between the two countries. 3

Department of International Relations and Cooperation Annual Conference on Closing the Gap between Domestic and Foreign Policies. Southern Sun, Pretoria, South Africa on 5-6 November 2009

As illustrated in Figure 2, the frequency of use of the keywords extracted from the agreements mentioned above suggest that the Government of South Africa and partner countries have given the highest priority (44%) to the protection and ownership of IP rights created within the framework of the international S&T cooperation agreement. Some agreements state that complementary agreements between institutions, for example between government agencies, companies, research organisations and universities, shall ensure adequate and effective protection and fair allocation of IP rights of any propriety nature resulting from the cooperative activities under the S&T agreement, including provisions on the acquisition, protection, sharing, transfer and licensing of IP rights. Some agreements state that a Party shall own the IP rights in respect of any technological, product and service development that was solely developed by that Party.
Bio. Res. & Materials
50 45

Comm. & Licensing

Non-disclosure

Domestic Law

IP

Cumulative number of keywords

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1993 1995 1997 1999 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Year

Figure 2. The frequency of use of the keywords The second highest priority is given to compliance with domestic law (25%) and non-disclosure of information (22%). Some agreements state that arrangements on protection and sharing of IP rights generated from the joint projects would be concluded in accordance with the domestic law in force in the territory of the relevant party before projects commence. Some agreements state that, subject to applicable national law, the parties shall encourage the exchange of books, newspapers, magazines, periodicals and all other types of published material. Some state that, subject to national law, the parties shall cooperate in the field of copyright protection and any other related rights. Some state that, each party shall, subject to the domestic law in force in its country, secure for the visiting functionaries of the other party who stay in its territory all assistance and facilities for the fulfilment of the tasks they are entrusted with, according to the provisions of the S&T Agreement. On the aspect of non-disclosure of information, some agreements state that no party shall divulge S&T information obtained by it or its personnel through cooperation activities carried out under the S&T cooperation agreement to any third party without the specific written consent of the other 4

Department of International Relations and Cooperation Annual Conference on Closing the Gap between Domestic and Foreign Policies. Southern Sun, Pretoria, South Africa on 5-6 November 2009

party. Some agreements state that, S&T results and any other information derived from cooperation activities under the S&T agreement, shall be announced, published or commercially exploited with the consent of both parties according to the international law relating to IP. Some agreements also state that the S&T communities of both countries shall have access to the information resulting from cooperation activities related to the S&T agreement, unless it is stipulated otherwise in the complementary agreement between institutions. Commercialisation of research results and licensing of IP, conservation of biological resources and materials received the least priority (6% and 3% respectively) in all 17 agreements reviewed in this paper. One agreement states for example that S&T cooperation shall include promoting the commercialisation of S&T achievements and promoting of knowledge and technology transfer. It also state that technical achievements and economic benefit arising from joint research and development initiatives within the framework of an agreement, including IP rights such as patents, know-how and copyrights, shall be shared by the parties. Another agreement states that, should the research activities utilize biological materials, the complementary agreements between institutions shall adopt the agreed principles under the Convention on Biological Diversity. It also state that parties will share information on best practices in technology transfer, engage on IP rights issues, with special relevance to the protection of biodiversity and traditional knowledge. The low priority given to commercialisation of research results and licensing of IP was unexpected. This is because transforming IP into commercial products and services that are traded on the market requires vast resources and different types of skills than those required to create IP. One of the most important basic constraints to industrialisation in most developing countries lies in the inadequate capacity of firms to generate and exploit IP. In developed countries, innovation strategies are based on a massive body of knowledge grounded on centuries of knowledge production (Schumpeter, 1934, p. 88; Lingela, 2009). South Africa’s National Industrial Policy Framework (NIPF) aims to promote further development of pockets of technologies in which South Africa had a potential advantage and provide stronger support for product development and the commercialisation of IP to promote private sector investment in South Africa (Department of Trade and Industry, 2007). The low priority given to commercialisation and IP licensing was also unexpected because the South African Government has established several support programmes to promote technology commercialisation. The Innovation Fund, for an example, provides funding for near-market and end-stage research that will result in new IP, commercial enterprises and the expansion of existing industrial sectors (www.innovationfund.ac.za). The South African Government recently approved the Intellectual Property Rights from Publicly Financed Research and Development Act, No. 51 of 2008 (The Presidency, 2008). The purpose of this Act is to provide for more effective utilisation of IP emanating from publicly financed research and development; establish the National Intellectual Property Management Office and the IP Fund; and provide for the establishment of offices of technology transfer at public institutions; and to provide for matters connected therewith. The low priority given to conservation of biological resources and materials was also unexpected. This is because the White Paper on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of South Africa’s Biological Diversity (Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, 1997) indicates that over 10,000 plant and animal species, almost 15% of the coastal species known worldwide, are found in South African waters, with about 12% of these occurring nowhere else. The White Paper also states that South Africa is one of six countries in the world with an entire plant kingdom within its national confines. The Cape Floral Kingdom has the highest-recorded species diversity for any similar-sized temperate or tropical region in the world. One-third of the world’s succulent plant species are found in South Africa. Based on these facts, this paper expected the South African Government to give high priority to conservation of biological resources. 5

Department of International Relations and Cooperation Annual Conference on Closing the Gap between Domestic and Foreign Policies. Southern Sun, Pretoria, South Africa on 5-6 November 2009

4. Relative performance of countries cooperating with South Africa In this section, this paper compares the performance of countries that are listed both in Appendix 1 as well as in the OECD (2009) database. Listing in the OECD database is a decisive factor in this selection process because the OECD provides S&T indicators for 30 OECD Member countries as well as nine non-member economies, including South Africa, which conforms to the same data quality standards. In all cases this section of the paper refers to year 2006, because relevant data for subsequent years is missing for some countries, including South Africa. Considering the high priority given by the South African Government and partner countries to the protection and ownership of IP rights, created within the framework of the international S&T cooperation agreement, this section of the paper applies data obtained from the OECD database and the Department of Science and Technology (2008) to compare the frequency of patent applications by countries involved in S&T cooperation with South Africa. Table 1. Relative performance of countries Country Total number of Total number Population GDP per capita patent applications of researchers (Thousands) (million current to the USPTO PPP$) 20 18,816 5,391 97,145 143 32,786 10,071 181,588 29 30,122 21,588 234,814 231 39,591 48,283 433,700 117 53,537 39,134 468,462 98 96,374 38,132 565,953 19,301 126,168 22,877 641,203 21,685 256,598 48,297 1,114,868 844 193,024 44,068 1,300,892 3,274 137,163 58,942 1,736,609 412 388,939 143,221 1,881,061 7,176 262,421 63,195 1,962,532 76,839 874,690 127,770 4,080,728

1. Slovak 2. Hungary 3. Romania 4. South Africa 5. Argentina 6. Poland 7. Chinese Taipei1 8. Korea 9. Spain 10. Italy 11. Russia 12. France 13. Japan

This paper considers only patent applications filed by residents from countries listed in Appendix 1, under the column labelled Performance, to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in 2006. Patent applications to the USPTO are considered because empirical data is available in the OECD (2009) database, whereas patents granted or patent applications to the European and Japanese Patent and Trademark Offices are based on the OECD Secretariat estimate or projection based on national sources. The economic reality is that not all IP can be developed into commercial products or services and it is often not possible to foresee with certainty IP that can be developed to create commercially viable products and services. Despite these uncertainties, the IP granted to residents of a particular country represents the intensity of R&D as well as economic potential for that country (Lingela and Buys, 2007). Table 1 presents a wide range of patent applications filed to the USPTO by countries that have concluded S&T cooperation agreements with South Africa. These data show a clear pattern that can be classified into the following categories of countries. The first category includes countries that have filed the lowest number of patent applications (<1,000) to the USPTO, have low number of
1

It was the intention of this paper to use only the total number of researchers in China, unfortunately this number is missing in the OECD (2009) database. The only available number of researchers is for Chinese Taipei.

6

Department of International Relations and Cooperation Annual Conference on Closing the Gap between Domestic and Foreign Policies. Southern Sun, Pretoria, South Africa on 5-6 November 2009

researchers (<100,000) and have small populations (<50 million). This category includes countries such as Slovak, Hungary, Romania, South Africa, Argentina and Poland. The second category includes countries that have filed more than 1,000 but less than 10,000 patent applications to the USPTO, have a high number of researchers (>100,000) and have large populations (>50 million). This category includes countries such as Italy and France.
Total number of researchers (Thousands) Gross Domestic Product (Billion current PPP$) Population (Thousands) 4,500 4,000 Number of researchers & Gross domestic product 3,500 3,000 2,500 80,000 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 Chinese Taipei South Africa Argentina Hungary Slovak Romania Russia Poland France Japan 0 Spain Italy 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 160,000 140,000 120,000 Population 100,000

Figure 3. Relative performance of countries The third category includes countries that have filed a high number of patent applications (>19,000) to the USPTO, have a high number of researchers (>100,000) and have small populations (<50 million). This category includes countries such as Chinese Taipei and Korea. Spain is unique because its number of patent applications and population size is similar to countries in the first category, yet its number of researchers is closer to countries in both the second and third categories. Another unique country is Japan, it has filed a very high number of patent applications (76,000), has a very high number of researchers (>800,000) and has a large population (>100 million). Russia on the other hand, a country that has about the same number of researchers and population size as Japan, has filed the same number of patent applications as countries in the first category. This paper also analysed the relationship between the size of economies (Gross Domestic Product), the number of researchers and the population size of countries listed in Table 1. As expected, the results show a high and statistically significant correlation (R=0.829, P=0.000) between population size and gross domestic products (GDP) of countries presented in Figure 3. These results suggest that countries with small populations tend to have small economies and countries with large 7

Korea

Department of International Relations and Cooperation Annual Conference on Closing the Gap between Domestic and Foreign Policies. Southern Sun, Pretoria, South Africa on 5-6 November 2009

populations tend to have large economies. A very high and statistically significant correlation (R=0.952, P=0.000) was also observed between the number of researchers and the GDP of countries presented in Figure 3. These results suggest that countries with small number of researchers tend to have small economies and countries with large number of researchers tend to have large economies. These results also show that countries with large populations tend to have large number of researchers than countries with smaller populations.
Number of researchers per million of population Number of patent applications to the USPTO per thousand of researchers 8,000 7,000 Number of researchers 6,000 5,000 4,000 80 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 60 40 20 Chinese Taipei Argentina South Africa Hungary Slovak Romania Russia Poland France Korea Japan 0 Italy Spain 180 160 140 120 100 Patent applications

Figure 4. Relative performance of countries Another approach used in this paper to compare the frequency of patent applications by countries involved in S&T cooperation with South Africa was to normalise data presented in Table 1, to offset the effect of population size and the number of researchers when comparing the performance of countries, as illustrated in Figure 4. This method creates a common ground for comparative analyses across countries. On the basis of this method it is possible to respond to the following two questions: the first question is, how many researchers a country has per million of population; and the second question is, how many patent applications are filed to the USPTO per thousand researchers per country. The results suggest that South Africa has the lowest number of researchers per million of population compared to all the countries presented in Figure 4. These results also suggest that South Africa has not yet been able to capitalise on its relatively large population size to increase the number of researchers in the country in line with its S&T partner countries, such as Slovak, Hungary, Romania, Chinese Taipei, Poland, Argentina, Spain as well as Korea. Although these countries have smaller population sizes relative to South Africa, they have 8

Department of International Relations and Cooperation Annual Conference on Closing the Gap between Domestic and Foreign Policies. Southern Sun, Pretoria, South Africa on 5-6 November 2009

higher numbers of researchers per million of population compared to South Africa. Another observation based on these results is that South Africa has not yet been able to capitalise on its relatively large population size to improve its national economy in line with its S&T partner countries, such Argentina, Poland, Chinese Taipei, Korea and Spain that have smaller populations but have larger economies than South Africa. Another observation made from these results is the fact that all the countries in the first category, including South Africa, Argentina, Romania, Poland and Hungary and Slovak, together with Russia and Spain have filed the lowest number of patent applications (<6) to the USPTO per thousand of researches. Italy and France on the other hand have filed more patents than the first category countries (24 and 27 respectively) including Russia and Spain but significantly lower number than Korea, Chinese Taipei and Japan. Korea, Chinese Taipei and Japan have attained the highest levels of efficiency (>80) in filing patent applications. Based on these results it can be concluded that not only does South Africa need to improve its efficiency in filing patent applications but it also has a very high potential to mobilise its human resource to increase the number of researchers in the country and consequently the number of researchers per million of population in the country. 5. Conclusions The results presented in this paper represent the first attempt to assess the objectives and rationale for the S&T cooperation agreements concluded between South Africa and partner countries from 1993 to 2009. The results presented in this paper show that the Government of South Africa and partner countries have given the highest priority (44%) to the protection and ownership of IP rights created within the framework of the international S&T cooperation agreement. On the other hand the results show that, when the effect of population size and the number of researchers per country has been discounted, South Africa together with Argentina, Romania, Poland, Hungary, Slovak, Russia and Spain have filed low numbers of patent applications to the USPTO per thousand of researches. These countries represent 62% of the 13 countries reviewed in this paper. It is clear from the text of the S&T agreements that South Africa and its partner countries recognise the importance of IP to promoting knowledge production, technological innovation and industrial competitiveness. The fact that commercialisation of research results and licensing of IP are given low priority (6%) in 17 agreements reviewed in this paper might stem from the fact that South Africa currently files relatively low number of patent applications per thousand of researches. However, it is not clear why conservation of biological resources and materials were also given low priority (3%) in all 17 agreements. This might be seen to be flying against what is stated in the Ten Year Innovation Plan (Department of Science and Technology, 2008), that South Africa’s biodiversity should be used to attract research and development (R&D) from multinational pharmaceutical companies. South Africa’s vision as stated in this plan includes being one of the top three emerging economies in the global pharmaceutical industry, based on an expansive innovation system using the nation’s indigenous knowledge and rich biodiversity. This paper illustrated that South Africa’s international cooperation in S&T includes a wide range of countries representing a wide range of social and economic conditions. Based on this fact, it can also be concluded that the diversity of the South African international S&T partnerships will not necessarily lead directly to wealth generation, but these partnerships have a potential to promote South Africa’s economic diplomacy. In the context of international S&T cooperation, this includes promoting technology transfer to and from South Africa, positively positioning the country in the world through international S&T partnerships and promoting friendly relations with partner countries. The fact that some South African scientists are world leaders in their research fields

9

Department of International Relations and Cooperation Annual Conference on Closing the Gap between Domestic and Foreign Policies. Southern Sun, Pretoria, South Africa on 5-6 November 2009

means that the world can count on South Africa’s S&T expertise when a need arises to mobilise resources globally to combat the spread of diseases, poverty and the dangers of global warming. Disclaimer Vuyani Lingela is the Chief Director: International Research in the Department of Science and Technology in South Africa. He wrote this paper in his personal capacity. References Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (1997). White Paper on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of South Africa’s Biological Diversity. http://www.environment.gov.za/ PolLeg/WhitePapers/Biodiversity/Contents.htm [Accessed on 23 March 2009]. Department of Science and Technology (2008). Innovation towards a Knowledge-Based Economy: Ten-Year Plan for South Africa (2008 – 2018). Department of Science and Technology, Pretoria. Department of Science and Technology (2008). National Survey of Research and Experimental Development 2006/07. Department of Science and Technology, Pretoria. Department of Trade and Industry (2007). National Industrial Policy Framework. Department of Trade and Industry, Pretoria. King, A. David (2004). The scientific impact of nations: What different countries get for their research spending. Nature, Vol. 430, pp. 311-316. Lingela V. (2009). The South African Industrial Innovation Capability: historical and future perspective. Ideas that Work: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, Vol. 1, pp. 50-59. Lingela V. and Buys, A. (2007). An Innovation Management Framework to Improve National Competitiveness in Developing Countries. The 16th International Conference on Management of Technology. Miami Beach, Florida, USA, May 13-17, 2007. OECD (2009). Main Science and Technology Indicators. OECD, Paris. Schumpeter, J.A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. The Presidency (2008). Intellectual Property Rights from Publicly Financed Research and Development Act, No. 51 of 2008. Government Gazette, Vol. 522, No. 3174522, December 2008. Republic of South Africa, Cape Town. Vickers Brendan and Ajulu Che (2008). South Africa’s Economic Diplomacy: trade and investment promotion. Report prepared for The Presidency’s Fifteen Year Review. Institute for Global Dialogue, March 2008.

10

Department of International Relations and Cooperation Annual Conference on Closing the Gap between Domestic and Foreign Policies. Southern Sun, Pretoria, South Africa on 5-6 November 2009

Appendix 1. Countries that have concluded international science and technology cooperation agreement with South Africa Country 1. Argentine 2. Australia 3. Belarus 4. Brazil 5. Bulgaria 6. China 7. Croatia 8. Cuba 9. Flanders 10. France 11. Germany 12. Hellenic Republic 13. Hungary 14. IBSA 15. India 16. India 17. Indonesia 18. Italy 19. Japan 20. Malaysia 21. Mexico 22. Netherlands 23. Norway 24. Oman 25. Pakistan 26. Poland 27. Iran 28. Korea 29. Romania 30. Russia 31. Saudi Arabia 32. Slovak 33. Spain 34. Sweden 35. Switzerland 36. Ukraine 37. United Kingdom 38. United States of America Date and Place (City) 16 May 2006, Pretoria 18 October 2006, Canberra 22 November 2002, Minsk 08 November 2003, Pretoria 20 November 1995, Sofia 30 March 1999, Pretoria 18 November 1996, Pretoria 29 March 2001, Havana 28 October 1996, Pretoria 28 February 2008 12 June 1996, Bonn 30 October 2006 24 November 1997, Pretoria 01 June 2005 19 July 1995, Pretoria 01 March 2001 22 August 2005 15 January 1998, Pretoria 28 August 2003 02 September 2003, Putrajaya 23 September 1998 30 September 1996, Pretoria 29 May 2002, Oslo 12 March 2007 09 March 1999 25 November 1999 31 May 2000 24 February 2004, Seoul 15 September 2004, Bucharest 20 September 1993, Cape Town 25 February 2009, Cape Town 15 May 2006, Pretoria 12 May 2003, Barcelona 23 November 1999, Cape Town 07 December 2007 23 November 1998, Pretoria 27 February 2007, Cape Town 05 December 1995, Pretoria Keywords Performance X X X X X

X X X X X X

X

X

X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X

11

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close