Connect with us

Technology

Global Stars: The Most Innovative Countries, Ranked by Income Group

Published

on

| 172,938 views

Can I share this graphic?
Yes. Visualizations are free to share and post in their original form across the web—even for publishers. Please link back to this page and attribute Visual Capitalist.
When do I need a license?
Licenses are required for some commercial uses, translations, or layout modifications. You can even whitelabel our visualizations. Explore your options.
Interested in this piece?
Click here to license this visualization.

The Most Innovative Countries, Ranked by Income Group

Innovation can be instrumental to the success of economies, at macro and micro scales. While investment provides powerful fuel for innovation—the relationship isn’t always straightforward.

The 2020 ranking from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) reveals just that.

The above map breaks down the most innovative countries in each World Bank income group, based on data from WIPO’s Global Innovation Index (GII), which evaluates nations across 80 innovation indicators like research and development (R&D), venture capital, and high-tech production.

While wealthier nations continue to lead global innovation, the GII also shows that middle-income countries—particularly in Asia—are making impressive strides.

Fueling Innovation

The economic and regulatory spheres within countries can have an enormous impact on their level of innovation—and vice versa, as innovation in turn becomes an economic driver, stimulating further investment.

The positive feedback loop between investment and innovation results in the success of some of the top countries in the table below, which shows the three most innovative countries in each income group.

Income GroupGroup RankCountry (Overall Rank)
High1🇨🇭 Switzerland (#1)
High2🇸🇪 Sweden (#2)
High3🇺🇸 United States of America (#3)
Upper Middle1🇨🇳 China (#14)
Upper Middle2🇲🇾 Malaysia (#33)
Upper Middle3🇧🇬 Bulgaria (#37)
Lower Middle1🇻🇳 Vietnam (#42)
Lower Middle2🇺🇦 Ukraine (#45)
Lower Middle3🇮🇳 India (#48)
Low1🇹🇿 Tanzania (#88)
Low2🇷🇼 Rwanda (#91)
Low3🇲🇼 Malawi (#111)

Switzerland, Sweden, and the U.S. are the top three in the high-income group. Considering that Switzerland has the second-highest GDP per capita globally, it is not a surprise leader on this list.

Upper middle-income countries are led by China, Malaysia, and Bulgaria. Note that China far surpasses other nations in the upper-middle-income group ranking, reaching 14th spot overall in 2020. Others in the income group only appear in the overall ranking after 30th place.

Below are several income group leaders, and some of their key areas of output:

  • Switzerland: First in Knowledge Creation, second in Global Brand Value
  • U.S.: First in Entertainment and Media, Computer Software Spending, Intellectual Property Receipts
  • China: First in Patents Registered
  • Vietnam: Second in High-Technology Net Exports
  • India: First in Information and Communication Technology Services Exports
  • Tanzania: 23rd in Printing and Other Media

Shining a Light on Global Innovators

Since 2011, Switzerland has led the world in innovation according to this index, and the top five countries have seen few changes in recent years.

Sweden regained second place in 2019 and the U.S. moved into third—positions they maintain in 2020. The Netherlands entered the top two in 2018 and now sits at fifth.

Here’s how the overall ranking shakes out:

RankCountryScoreIncome Group
1Switzerland66.1High
2Sweden62.5High
3United States of America60.6High
4United Kingdom59.8High
5Netherlands58.8High
6Denmark57.5High
7Finland57.0High
8Singapore56.6High
9Germany56.6High
10South Korea56.1High
11Hong Kong, China54.2High
12France53.7High
13Israel53.6High
14China53.3Upper Middle
15Ireland53.1High
16Japan52.7High
17Canada52.3High
18Luxembourg50.8High
19Austria50.1High
20Norway49.3High
21Iceland49.2High
22Belgium49.1High
23Australia48.4High
24Czech Republic48.3High
25Estonia48.3High
26New Zealand47.0High
27Malta46.4High
28Italy45.7High
29Cyprus45.7High
30Spain45.6High
31Portugal43.5High
32Slovenia42.9High
33Malaysia42.4Upper Middle
34United Arab Emiratesx42.4High
35Hungary41.5High
36Latvia41.1High
37Bulgaria40.0Upper Middle
38Poland40.0High
39Slovakia39.7High
40Lithuania39.2High
41Croatia37.3High
42Viet Nam37.1Lower Middle
43Greece36.8High
44Thailand36.7Upper Middle
45Ukraine36.3Lower Middle
46Romania36.0Upper Middle
47Russian Federation35.6Upper Middle
48India35.6Lower Middle
49Montenegro35.4Upper Middle
50Philippines35.2Lower Middle
51Turkey34.9Upper Middle
52Mauritius34.4Upper Middle
53Serbia34.3Upper Middle
54Chile33.9High
55Mexico33.6Upper Middle
56Costa Rica33.5Upper Middle
57North Macedonia33.4Upper Middle
58Mongolia33.4Lower Middle
59Republic of Moldova33.0Lower Middle
60South Africa32.7Upper Middle
61Armenia32.6Upper Middle
62Brazil31.9Upper Middle
63Georgia31.8Upper Middle
64Belarus31.3Upper Middle
65Tunisia31.2Lower Middle
66Saudi Arabia30.9High
67Iran (Islamic Republic of)30.9High
68Colombia30.8Upper Middle
69Uruguay30.8High
70Qatar30.8High
71Brunei Darussalam29.8High
72Jamaica29.1Upper Middle
73Panama29.0High
74Bosnia and Herzegovina29.0Upper Middle
75Morocco29.0Lower Middle
76Peru28.8Upper Middle
77Kazakhstan28.6Upper Middle
78Kuwait28.4High
79Bahrain28.4High
80Argentina28.3Upper Middle
81Jordan27.8Upper Middle
82Azerbaijan27.2Upper Middle
83Albania27.1Upper Middle
84Oman26.5High
85Indonesia26.5Lower Middle
86Kenya26.1Lower Middle
87Lebanon26.0Upper Middle
88United Republic of Tanzania25.6Lower I
89Botswana25.4Upper Middle
90Dominican Republic25.1Upper Middle
91Rwanda25.1Lower I
92El Salvador24.9Lower Middle
93Uzbekistan24.5Lower Middle
94Kyrgyzstan24.5Lower Middle
95Nepal24.4Lower I
96Egypt24.2Lower Middle
97Paraguay24.1Upper Middle
98Trinidad and Tobago24.1High
99Ecuador24.1Upper Middle
100Cabo Verde23.9Lower Middle
101Sri Lanka23.8Upper Middle
102Senegal23.8Lower Middle
103Honduras23.0Lower Middle
104Namibia22.5Upper Middle
105Bolivia (Plurinational State of)22.4Lower Middle
106Guatemala22.4Upper Middle
107Pakistan22.3Lower Middle
108Ghana22.3Lower Middle
109Tajikistan22.2Lower I
110Cambodia21.5Lower Middle
111Malawi21.4Lower I
112Côte d’Ivoire21.2Lower Middle
113Lao People’s Democratic Republic20.7Lower Middle
114Uganda20.5Lower I
115Madagascar20.4Lower I
116Bangladesh20.4Lower Middle
117Nigeria20.1Lower Middle
118Burkina Faso20.0Lower I
119Cameroon20.0Lower Middle
120Zimbabwe20.0Lower Middle
121Algeria19.5Upper Middle
122Zambia19.4Lower Middle
123Mali19.2Lower I
124Mozambique18.7Lower I
125Togo18.5Lower I
126Benin18.1Lower I
127Ethiopia18.1Lower I
128Niger17.8Lower I
129Myanmar17.7Lower Middle
130Guinea17.3Lower I
131Yemen13.6Lower I

Nordic countries like Sweden, Denmark, and Finland continue their strong showing across innovation factors—like Knowledge Creation, Global Brand Value, Environmental Performance, and Intellectual Property Receipts—leading to their continued presence atop global innovators.

But the nations making the biggest moves in GII ranking are found in Asia.

China, Vietnam, India, and the Philippines have risen the most of all countries, with all four now in the top 50. China broke into the top 15 in 2019 and remains the only middle-income economy in the top 30.

In 2020, South Korea became the second Asian economy to enter the top 10, after Singapore. As the first Asian country to move into the global top five, Singapore joined the leaders in 2018, and now sits at 8th place.

In another first for 2020, India has now broken into the top 50.

Innovation Input & Output: The Overachievers

While annual rankings like these confirm the importance of a robust economy and innovation investment, variations in the relationship between input and output are not uncommon.

The correlation between wealth and innovation isn’t always straightforward, and neither is the connection between innovation input and output.

Below is an overview of the GII inputs and outputs, as well as several of the world’s overall leaders in each pillar.

Input variables can be characterized as factors that foster innovation—everything from the quality of a country’s university institutions to its levels of ecological sustainability.

Input PillarsInput ExamplesInput Leaders
Institutions
Human Capital & Research
Infrastructure
Market Sophistication
Business Sophistication
University Institutions
Regulatory Environment
Intangible Assets
Entrepreneurship
R&D Spending
Venture Capital Deals
Researchers
1. Singapore
2. Switzerland
3. Sweden
4. U.S.
5. Denmark
6. U.K.
7. Hong Kong, China
8. Finland
9. Canada
10. South Korea

Output factors include innovation indicators like the creation of new businesses, and even the number of Wikipedia edits made per million people.

Output PillarsOutput TypesOutput Leaders
Knowledge & Technology
Creative
Registered patents
Creative goods and services
Scientific publications
National feature films
Entertainment and media
High-tech manufacturing
1. Switzerland
2. Sweden
3. United Kingdom
4. Netherlands
5. U.S.A.
6. China
7. Germany
8. Finland
9. Denmark
10. South Korea

Countries with impressive innovation outputs compared to input levels include:

  • China: 26th in inputs, but sixth in overall innovation outputs
  • Netherlands: 11th in innovation input, but fourth across outputs
  • Thailand: 48th in overall input, first in business R&D
  • Malaysia: 34th in overall input, first in high-tech net exports

Innovation Fuel Reductions Up Ahead?

Although financial markets have ignited, the economy as a whole has not fared well since lockdowns began. This begs the question of whether a steep decline in innovation capital will follow.

In response to the 2020 pandemic, will spending on R&D echo the 2009 recession and aftermath of 9/11? Will venture capital flows continue to decline more than they have since 2018?

Because innovation is so entwined with the economic growth strategies of companies and nations alike, the WIPO notes that the potential decline may not be as severe as historical trends might suggest.

No Stopping Human Innovation

Thankfully, innovation opportunities are not solely contingent on the level of capital infused during any given year. Instead, the cumulative results of continuous innovation stimuli may be enough to maintain growth, while strategic cash reserves are put to use.

What the GII ranking shows is that inputs don’t always equal outputs—and that innovative strides can be made with even modest levels of capital flow.

Subscribe to Visual Capitalist

Thank you!
Given email address is already subscribed, thank you!
Please provide a valid email address.
Please complete the CAPTCHA.
Oops. Something went wrong. Please try again later.
Click for Comments

Technology

Ranked: The Most Popular Paid Subscription News Websites

Many consumers are reluctant to pay for their news, but those that do turn to trusted sources. Here’s a look at the most subscribed to news websites.

Published

on

Ranked: The Most Popular Subscription News Websites

While paywalls are becoming increasingly more popular among news websites, most consumers still aren’t willing to pay for their online news.

In fact, a recent survey by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism reveals that only 20% of Americans pay for digital news, and of those that do, the majority subscribe to only one brand.

This begs the question—which news outlets are audiences willing to pay for?

Using data from FIPP and CeleraOne, this graphic looks at the most popular news websites across the globe, based on their total number of paid subscriptions.

*Note: This report relies on publicly available data, and should not be considered an exhaustive list.

The Full Breakdown

With 7.5 million subscriptions, The New York Times (NYT) takes the top spot on the list. 2020 was an exceptionally strong year for the outlet—by Q3 2020, the NYT had generated the same amount of revenue from digital subscriptions as it had for the entire year of 2019.

RankPublicationPaid Subscriptions
1🇺🇸 The New York Times7,500,000
2🇺🇸 The Washington Post3,000,000
3🇺🇸 The Wall Street Journal2,400,000
4🇺🇸 Game Informer2,100,000
5🇬🇧 Financial Times1,100,000
6🇺🇸 The Athletic1,000,000
7🇬🇧 The Guardian790,000
8🇯🇵 Nikkei769,000
9🇬🇧 The Economist516,000
10🇨🇳 Caixin510,000
11🇩🇪 Bild494,000
12🇬🇧 The Sunday Times337,000
13🇬🇧 The Telegraph320,000
14🇺🇸 The Atlantic300,000
15🇮🇹 Corriere Della Sera300,000
16🇫🇷 Le Monde300,000
17🇺🇸 The Boston Globe270,000
18🇦🇷 La Nacion260,000
19🇦🇷 Clarin260,000
20🇫🇷 L'equipe259,000
21🇺🇸 Los Angeles Times253,000
22🇸🇪 Aftonbladet250,000
23🇺🇸 The New Yorker240,000
24🇵🇱 Wyborcza240,000
25🇧🇷 Folha de S.Paulo236,000
26🇸🇪 Dagens Nyheter208,000
27🇺🇸 Business Insider200,000
28🇫🇷 Mediapart170,000
29🇳🇴 VG150,000
30🇺🇸 Wired142,000
31🇨🇦 The Globe and Mail139,000
32🇩🇪 Welt132,000
33🇳🇴 Aftenposten119,000
34🇫🇷 Le Figaro110,000
35🇺🇸 Chicago Tribune100,000
36🇺🇸 Star Tribune100,000
37🇳🇴 Dagbladet100,000
38🇫🇮 Helsingin Sanomat100,000

The Times is the most popular by a landslide—it has over double the number of subscriptions than the second outlet on the list, The Washington Post. Yet, while WaPo is no match for NYT, it still boasts a strong following, with approximately 3 million paid subscriptions as of Q4 2020.

Japanese outlet Nikkei ranks number one among the non-English news websites. It’s the largest business newspaper in Japan, mainly focusing on markets and finance, but also covering politics, sports, and health.

Legacy Papers: Which Websites Come From Traditional Media?

Most of the websites on this list stem from traditional media. Because of this, they’ve had years to establish themselves as trusted sources, and win over loyal readers.

Interestingly, more than half of the outlets included in this ranking are at least 100 years old.

PublicationYear LaunchedAge (Years)
🇬🇧 The Guardian1821200
🇬🇧 The Sunday Times1821200
🇫🇷 Le Figaro1826195
🇸🇪 Aftonbladet1830190
🇬🇧 The Economist1843178
🇺🇸 Chicago Tribune1847173
🇺🇸 NYT1852169
🇬🇧 The Telegraph1855166
🇺🇸 The Atlantic1857164
🇳🇴 Aftenposten1860160
🇸🇪 Dagens Nyheter1864157
🇺🇸 Star Tribune1867154
🇳🇴 Dagbladet1869152
🇦🇷 La Nacion1870151
🇺🇸 The Boston Globe1872149
🇮🇹 Corriere Della Sera1876145
🇺🇸 Washington Post1877144
🇯🇵 Nikkei.com1876144
🇺🇸 LA Times1881140
🇬🇧 Financial Times1888133
🇺🇸 Wall Street Journal1889132
🇫🇮 Helsingin Sanomat1889132
🇧🇷 Folha de S.Paulo1921100
🇺🇸 The New Yorker192596
🇨🇦 The Globe and Mail193685
🇫🇷 Le Monde194477
🇦🇷 Clarin194576
🇳🇴 VG194576
🇫🇷 L'equipe194675
🇩🇪 Welt194675
🇩🇪 Bild195269
🇵🇱 Wyborcza198932
🇺🇸 Game Informer199130
🇺🇸 Wired199328
🇺🇸 Business Insider200714
🇫🇷 Mediapart200813
🇨🇳 Caixin200912
🇺🇸 The Athletic20165

Yet, undeterred by these well-established outlets, a few scrappy websites made the cut despite a shorter history. Four out of the 38 websites are less than 20 years old.

The Athletic is the newest outlet to make the ranking. Established in 2016, the outlet’s target demographic is die-hard sports fans who miss the days of in-depth, quality sports writing.

The Need For Trusted Sources

Amidst the global pandemic, issues involving misinformation and fake news have helped reaffirm the important role that trusted news sources play in the dissemination of public information.

With this in mind, it’ll be interesting to see what the future holds for digital media consumption. With paywalls becoming increasingly more common, will consumers jump on board and eventually be more willing to pay for their news?

Continue Reading

Energy

Visualizing the Power Consumption of Bitcoin Mining

Bitcoin mining requires significant amounts of energy, but what does this consumption look like when compared to countries and companies?

Published

on

Visualizing the Power Consumption of Bitcoin Mining

Cryptocurrencies have been some of the most talked-about assets in recent months, with bitcoin and ether prices reaching record highs. These gains were driven by a flurry of announcements, including increased adoption by businesses and institutions.

Lesser known, however, is just how much electricity is required to power the Bitcoin network. To put this into perspective, we’ve used data from the University of Cambridge’s Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index (CBECI) to compare Bitcoin’s power consumption with a variety of countries and companies.

Why Does Bitcoin Mining Require So Much Power?

When people mine bitcoins, what they’re really doing is updating the ledger of Bitcoin transactions, also known as the blockchain. This requires them to solve numerical puzzles which have a 64-digit hexadecimal solution known as a hash.

Miners may be rewarded with bitcoins, but only if they arrive at the solution before others. It is for this reason that Bitcoin mining facilities—warehouses filled with computers—have been popping up around the world.

These facilities enable miners to scale up their hashrate, also known as the number of hashes produced each second. A higher hashrate requires greater amounts of electricity, and in some cases can even overload local infrastructure.

Putting Bitcoin’s Power Consumption Into Perspective

On March 18, 2021, the annual power consumption of the Bitcoin network was estimated to be 129 terawatt-hours (TWh). Here’s how this number compares to a selection of countries, companies, and more.

NamePopulation Annual Electricity Consumption (TWh)
China1,443M6,543
United States330.2M3,989
All of the world’s data centers-205
State of New York19.3M161
Bitcoin network -129 
Norway5.4M124
Bangladesh165.7M70
Google-12
Facebook-5
Walt Disney World Resort (Florida)-1

Note: A terawatt hour (TWh) is a measure of electricity that represents 1 trillion watts sustained for one hour.
Source: Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, Science Mag, New York ISO, Forbes, Facebook, Reedy Creek Improvement District, Worldometer

If Bitcoin were a country, it would rank 29th out of a theoretical 196, narrowly exceeding Norway’s consumption of 124 TWh. When compared to larger countries like the U.S. (3,989 TWh) and China (6,543 TWh), the cryptocurrency’s energy consumption is relatively light.

For further comparison, the Bitcoin network consumes 1,708% more electricity than Google, but 39% less than all of the world’s data centers—together, these represent over 2 trillion gigabytes of storage.

Where Does This Energy Come From?

In a 2020 report by the University of Cambridge, researchers found that 76% of cryptominers rely on some degree of renewable energy to power their operations. There’s still room for improvement, though, as renewables account for just 39% of cryptomining’s total energy consumption.

Here’s how the share of cryptominers that use each energy type vary across four global regions.

Energy SourceAsia-PacificEuropeLatin America
and the Caribbean
North America
Hydroelectric65%60%67%61%
Natural gas38%33%17%44%
Coal65%2%0%28%
Wind23%7%0%22%
Oil12%7%33%22%
Nuclear12%7%0%22%
Solar12%13%17%17%
Geothermal8%0%0%6%

Source: University of Cambridge
Editor’s note: Numbers in each column are not meant to add to 100%

Hydroelectric energy is the most common source globally, and it gets used by at least 60% of cryptominers across all four regions. Other types of clean energy such as wind and solar appear to be less popular.

Coal energy plays a significant role in the Asia-Pacific region, and was the only source to match hydroelectricity in terms of usage. This can be largely attributed to China, which is currently the world’s largest consumer of coal.

Researchers from the University of Cambridge noted that they weren’t surprised by these findings, as the Chinese government’s strategy to ensure energy self-sufficiency has led to an oversupply of both hydroelectric and coal power plants.

Towards a Greener Crypto Future

As cryptocurrencies move further into the mainstream, it’s likely that governments and other regulators will turn their attention to the industry’s carbon footprint. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, however.

Mike Colyer, CEO of Foundry, a blockchain financing provider, believes that cryptomining can support the global transition to renewable energy. More specifically, he believes that clustering cryptomining facilities near renewable energy projects can mitigate a common issue: an oversupply of electricity.

“It allows for a faster payback on solar projects or wind projects… because they would [otherwise] produce too much energy for the grid in that area”
– Mike Colyer, CEO, Foundry

This type of thinking appears to be taking hold in China as well. In April 2020, Ya’an, a city located in China’s Sichuan province, issued a public guidance encouraging blockchain firms to take advantage of its excess hydroelectricity.

Continue Reading

Subscribe

Join the 240,000+ subscribers who receive our daily email

Thank you!
Given email address is already subscribed, thank you!
Please provide a valid email address.
Please complete the CAPTCHA.
Oops. Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Popular