Institutional unevenness in the development of instrument making in G20 countries

Abstract

A study of institutional factors influencing the uneven development of the instrument industry in the G20 countries is presented. The relevance of the topic is due to the fact that instrument engineering is classified as a high-tech sector of the economy and plays a key role in innovative development. The aim of the work is to identify the “anatomies” of success and failure in the instrument industry using the example of the G20 countries, and to show how institutional conditions determine the heterogeneity of its development. The study is based on a comparative analysis of statistical data from 2020-2025 for the G20 countries, on a review of modern literature and strategic documents. The methods of structural and statistical analysis (comparison of the share of instrumentation in the economy, production volumes, exports of high-tech products), index method (for example, global innovation indices) and case analysis are used. It has been established that among the G20 countries, only a few have a powerful instrument–making complex - the USA, Germany, Japan, China, and South Korea, due to high research and development costs and developed innovation institutions. At the same time, a number of countries (Russia, South Africa, Argentina, etc.) are lagging behind: their contribution to global instrumentation and high technologies is minimal (in particular, Russia exports less than 0.5% of the world’s high-tech products). The “anatomies of success” have been identified – a combination of factors such as stable funding for science, industrial policy (for example, the Made in China 2025 strategy for the development of medical technology), and industry clustering, which have allowed a number of countries to take leading positions. Conversely, the “anatomies of failure” include the lack of necessary development institutions (in particular, this is shown by the example of Brazil, where there are no drivers of innovation), lack of cooperation and dependence on imports (for example, India’s critical dependence on imports of sensors and components). The results obtained confirm that institutional conditions directly affect the success of instrument-making industries. It is recommended that outsider countries strengthen national innovation systems, encourage the creation of production clusters and the localization of critical technologies. Conclusions are drawn about the need for international cooperation in this area, and directions for further research are outlined (for example, an in-depth analysis of the impact of individual institutional reforms on the growth of the industry).