Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Mexico 2009 Oecd

Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Mexico 2009
Oecd download
https://ebookbell.com/product/oecd-reviews-of-innovation-policy-
mexico-2009-oecd-6771114
Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.
Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Russian Federation 2011 Oecd
russian-federation-2011-oecd-2263650
Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Kazakhstan 2017 Organization For
Economic Cooperation And Development
kazakhstan-2017-organization-for-economic-cooperation-and-
development-6685996
Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Costa Rica 2017 Oecd
https://ebookbell.com/product/oecd-reviews-of-innovation-policy-costa-
rica-2017-oecd-6686002
Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Norway 2017 Volume 2017 Organization
For Economic Cooperation And Development
norway-2017-volume-2017-organization-for-economic-cooperation-and-
development-6686004

Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Finland 2017 Volume 2017
Organization For Economic Cooperation And Development
finland-2017-volume-2017-organization-for-economic-cooperation-and-
development-6686012
Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Luxembourg 2016 Edition 2016 Oecd
Organisation For Economic Cooperation And Development
luxembourg-2016-edition-2016-oecd-organisation-for-economic-
cooperation-and-development-6730182
Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Sweden 2016 Edition 2016 Volume 2016
Oecd Organisation For Economic Cooperation And Development
sweden-2016-edition-2016-volume-2016-oecd-organisation-for-economic-
cooperation-and-development-6730184
Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Malaysia 2016 Organization For
Economic Cooperation Development
malaysia-2016-organization-for-economic-cooperation-
development-6730188
Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Lithuania 2016 Oecd
lithuania-2016-oecd-6730192

XXXPFDEPSHQVCMJTIJOH
MEXICO
OECD
Reviews
of
Innovation
Policy
OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy
MEXICO
How are a country’s achievements in innovation defined and measured, and how do they relate
to economic performance? What are the major features, strengths and weaknesses of a nation’s
innovation system? How can government foster innovation?
The OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy offer a comprehensive assessment of the innovation system
of individual OECD member and non-member countries, focusing on the role of government. They
provide concrete recommendations on how to improve policies that affect innovation performance,
including RD policies. Each review identifies good practice from which other countries can learn.
Over the past decade, Mexico has made significant progress towards macroeconomic stability and
has undertaken important structural reforms to further open the economy to trade and investment,
and improve the functioning of markets for goods and services. However, potential gross domestic
product (GDP) growth remains much too low to reduce widespread poverty and bridge the wide
gap in living standards with wealthier OECD countries. One important reason for this is that public
and private decision makers in Mexico have been slower than those in many competing newly
industrialising economies to realise the importance of investment in innovation as a driver of
growth and competitiveness. In recent years, a number of policy initiatives have been developed to
accelerate the transition toward an innovation-fuelled growth path, but their impact has so far been
too limited.
This book assesses the current status of Mexico’s innovation system and policies, and identifies
where and how the government should focus its efforts to improve the country’s innovation
capabilities.
More information about the OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy series is available at
www.oecd.org/sti/innovation/reviews.
The full text of this book is available on line via this link:
www.sourceoecd.org/scienceIT/9789264075979
Those with access to all OECD books on line should use this link:
www.sourceoecd.org/9789264075979
SourceOECD is the OECD online library of books, periodicals and statistical databases.
For more information about this award-winning service and free trials ask your librarian, or write to us
at SourceOECD@oecd.org.
ISBN 978-92-64-07597-9
92 2009 05 1 P -:HSTCQE=UZ^^:
OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy
MEXICO
922009051cov.indd 1 28-Sep-2009 3:40:17 PM

OECD Reviews of
Innovation Policy:
Mexico
2009

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION
AND DEVELOPMENT
The OECD is a unique forum where the governments of 30 democracies work together to
address the economic, social and environmental challenges of globalisation. The OECD is also at
the forefront of efforts to understand and to help governments respond to new developments and
concerns, such as corporate governance, the information economy and the challenges of an
ageing population. The Organisation provides a setting where governments can compare policy
experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good practice and work to co-ordinate
domestic and international policies.
The OECD member countries are: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic,
Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea,
Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic,
Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Commission of
the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD.
OECD Publishing disseminates widely the results of the Organisation’s statistics gathering and
research on economic, social and environmental issues, as well as the conventions, guidelines and
standards agreed by its members.
ISBN 978-92-64-07597-9 (print)
ISBN 978-92-64-07599-3 (PDF)
ISSN 1993-4203 (print)
ISSN 1993-4211 (online)
Corrigenda to OECD publications may be found on line at: www.oecd.org/publishing/corrigenda.
© OECD 2009
You can copy, download or print OECD content for your own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and multimedia
products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable acknowledgment of OECD as source
and copyright owner is given. All requests for public or commercial use and translation rights should be submitted to rights@oecd.org. Requests for
permission to photocopy portions of this material for public or commercial use shall be addressed directly to the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC)
at info@copyright.com or the Centre français d’exploitation du droit de copie (CFC) at contact@cfcopies.com.
This work is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The
opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official
views of the Organisation or of the governments of its member countries.

FOREWORD – 3
OECD REVIEWS OF INNOVATION POLICY: MEXICO – ISBN 978-92-64-07597-9 © OECD 2009
Foreword
This review of Mexico’s innovation policy is part of a series of OECD country
reviews.1
It was requested by the Mexican authorities, represented by the National
Council for Science and Technology (CONACYT), and was carried out by the OECD
Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry (DSTI) under the auspices of the
Committee for Scientific and Technological Policy.2
It took place concurrently with
another study, OECD Reviews of Regional Innovation: 15 Mexican States; the two are
complementary and provide Mexico with a coherent package of recommendations for
both national and sub-national levels to work together effectively to support sustainable
innovation-led economic growth throughout the country.
This study draws on a background report commissioned by the Mexican authorities,3
and on the results of a series of interviews with major stakeholders in Mexico’s
innovation system. The review was drafted by Daniel Malkin (consultant to the OECD),
and Gernot Hutschenreiter and Michael Keenan (Country Review Unit, DSTI, OECD),
with contributions from and under the supervision of Jean Guinet (Head, Country Review
Unit, DSTI, OECD).
The review owes much to officials from National Council on Science and Technology
(CONACYT), particularly Leonardo Rios Guerrero and Victor Reyes Peniche, and
members of the Mexican Association of Directors of Applied Research and Techno-
logical Development (ADIAT), particularly Leopoldo Rodríguez Sánchez, for providing
guidance on the issues to be examined, organising interviews, presenting interim results
in Mexico,4
and feedback on early drafts of the review.
1. See www.oecd.org/sti/innovation/reviews.
2. The review has benefited from a peer review process within the OECD. The two examiners were Luis Sanz,
Professor at CSIC (Spain) and Chair of the OECD Committee on Scientific and Technological Policy
(CSTP), and Patrick Vock, Director of CEST (Switzerland) and Chair of the CSTP Working Party on
Technology and Innovation Policy (TIP).
3. The background report was prepared by the National Council on Science and Technology (CONACYT) in col-
laboration with ADIAT. Fausto Alzati co-ordinated the work with the support of Leopoldo Rodríguez Sánchez,
Leonardo Rios Guerrero, Efraín Aceves Piña and Fernando Guillén Guzmán, drawing on a draft prepared by
Gabriela Dutrénit (coordinator), Mario Capdevielle, Juan Manuel Corona Alcantar, Martín Puchet Anyul,
Fernando Santiago and Alexandre Vera-Cruz.
4. An interim version of the review’s overall assessment and recommendations was presented at the “Forum on
Innovation for the Competitiveness of Mexico” organised by CONACYT and NAFIN in Mexico City on
12 January 2009.

TABLE OF CONTENTS – 5
Table of Contents
Overall Assessment and Recommendations........................................................................................7
Fostering innovation to boost Mexico’s socio-economic development............................................... 7
Mexico’s innovation system: main policy challenges.......................................................................... 9
Recommendations.............................................................................................................................. 20
Concluding remarks ........................................................................................................................... 30
Notes .................................................................................................................................................. 32
Évaluation générale et recommandations............................................................................................ 33
Encourager l’innovation pour stimuler le développement socioéconomique du Mexique ................ 33
Le système d’innovation mexicain : principaux défis pour les pouvoirs publics............................... 35
Recommandations .............................................................................................................................. 48
Conclusions........................................................................................................................................ 60
Notes................................................................................................................................................... 62
Chapter 1. Economic Performance and Framework Conditions for Innovation .......................... 63
1.1. Economic performance ............................................................................................................... 63
1.2. International trade and foreign direct investment........................................................................68
1.3. Economic structure and structural change................................................................................... 74
1.4. Framework conditions for innovation......................................................................................... 78
1.5. The role of innovation in Mexico’s economic development....................................................... 90
1.6. Performance in science, technology and innovation in an international comparison.................. 91
Notes ................................................................................................................................................ 108
Chapter 2. Main Actors of Innovation............................................................................................. 111
2.1. Business sector.......................................................................................................................... 111
2.2. Public research centres.............................................................................................................. 129
2.3. Higher education institutes........................................................................................................ 139
2.4. Human resources....................................................................................................................... 146
Notes ................................................................................................................................................ 157
Chapter 3. The Role of Government................................................................................................ 159
3.1. The evolution of Mexico’s ST and innovation policies ......................................................... 160
3.2. Institutional setting and governance.......................................................................................... 164
3.3. Financing, priority setting and policy mix ................................................................................ 166
3.4. The portfolio of instruments and programmes: a critical assessment ....................................... 174
3.5. Moving towards more efficient innovation policy.................................................................... 199
Notes ................................................................................................................................................ 206
References........................................................................................................................................... 211

OVERALL ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS – 7
Overall Assessment and Recommendations
Fostering innovation to boost Mexico’s socio-economic development
Over the past decade, Mexico has made significant progress towards macroeconomic
stability and has launched important structural reforms to open the economy further to
trade and investment and improve the functioning of markets for goods and services.
However, potential GDP growth remains much too low to bridge the wide gap in living
standards with wealthier OECD countries and reduce widespread poverty. Mexico
increasingly struggles to compete with many other large emerging economies, which are
building their capabilities to harness the benefits of globalisation at a much faster pace.
One important reason is that Mexico’s public and private decision makers have been
slow to realise the importance of investment in innovation as a driver of growth and
competitiveness. Losing competitiveness in knowledge-based activities can become a
self-reinforcing process that is increasingly hard to reverse because weak innovation
capabilities limit the opportunities offered by international spillovers from competitors’
rising investment in knowledge. To provide the Mexican economy with stronger,
sustainable growth, renewed efforts at reform are needed on a broad front, motivated by a
sense of urgency and vision and backed by strong political commitment and leadership.
The current global economic crisis should not preclude or weaken these efforts.
“Strong innovation performance is more important than ever in the current context.
Stimulus packages should be designed in a way that supports innovation” (“OECD
Strategic Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis: Contributions to the Global
Effort”, OECD, 2009).
To create an innovative Mexico able to meet citizens’ growing needs and aspirations
(higher standard of living, improved health, better security and environment, enriched
cultural life, etc.), the government should commit to setting its policies in line with this
objective. It should back business strategies and civil society initiatives in order to
stimulate all forms of individual and collective creativity and innovation. Boosting
investment in human capital, particularly in education, and fostering innovation in the
business sector will be crucial to achieving this goal. The recently approved Special
Programme for Science, Technology and Innovation (PECITI) is a positive initial step in
that direction. It needs to be consolidated, supported by adequate budgetary commitments
and complemented by governance reforms in the institutional setup that shape the design,
funding, implementation and evaluation of policies.

8 – OVERALL ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Recent economic performance and new challenges
Mexico has benefited significantly from reforms undertaken over the past two
decades to liberalise its economy and improve macroeconomic management. It has made
considerable progress in achieving macroeconomic stability. Since the 1995 peso crisis
Mexico’s GDP growth has averaged a reasonable 3.6% a year. Yet, in recent years
growth has been weaker than that of Latin America’s more dynamic economies, such as
Brazil and Chile, and economic growth has not been sufficient to help move per capita
output to the level of the more advanced OECD economies. In fact, Mexico’s labour
productivity growth has been one of the lowest among OECD countries since 2000. A
key objective of Mexico’s economic policy is therefore to foster productivity gains and
put the economy on a sustainable path of higher growth.
One of the main drivers of economic growth has been Mexico’s opening to
international trade and investment. Largely owing to the opportunities provided by the
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Maquila/Pitex programmes,
Mexico has recorded high growth in manufacturing exports, mainly to the United States.
The share of trade in gross domestic product (GDP) has doubled over the last 20 years,
with the share of manufacturing rising from 20% to about 85% and an increasing export
specialisation in sectors or products integrated in global value chains. However, in spite
of the sizeable initial positive effects induced by technology imports and factor
reallocation within and across sectors related to trade integration and increased foreign
direct investment (FDI), Mexico’s recent trade performance can be attributed more to
comparatively low labour costs than to high and rising productivity and innovative
capacity.
At the sectoral and firm level, the preference for imported technology over the
development of domestic innovation capacity – and a resulting lack of absorptive
capacities in Mexican firms – has limited technology diffusion and transfer through
increased intra-industry trade and FDI flows. In Mexico, industries classified as high-
technology do not invest significantly more in research and development (RD) and
innovation (in relation to their value added) than those in lower technology categories.
Accordingly, they do not play a driving role in the dissemination of knowledge and
technology throughout the business sector or in the formation of technology-based value
chains.
The absence of robust productivity growth and the low overall innovative
performance of the business sector (as measured, for example, by innovation inputs and
outputs as well as the creation of technology-based firms), along with the rise of
Mexico’s relative unit labour costs since the late 1990s, have tended to erode Mexico’s
international competitiveness, especially vis-à-vis emerging economies such as China
which, as of 2003, overtook Mexico as the United States’ second largest trading partner
after Canada and has significantly boosted its investment in science, technology,
innovation and human capital over the last decade.1

An increasing role for innovation and innovation-related policies in achieving
sustainable high growth
Achieving higher growth of GDP per capita is the key policy challenge and a
necessary basis for alleviating the high incidence of poverty. Innovation can play a
leading role by boosting productivity growth. It is also necessary in order to maximise the
benefits of Mexico’s integration in the global economy by increasing Mexican firms’
capacity to absorb and adapt technologies developed abroad and raise their international
competitiveness.
OECD countries’ experience shows that the performance of innovation systems does
not rest only on dedicated policies aimed at fostering science, technology and innovation.
It is predicated upon various factors or conditions that are far from being met effectively
in Mexico:
x political recognition of the importance of knowledge-related investments along
with appropriate budgetary allocations;
x sound governance arrangements that ensure the involvement of stakeholders in
the definition of policy orientations and priorities as well as efficient management
of policy implementation;
x a policy mix that fits the challenges faced by the innovation system and
institutional flexibility that allows adaptive policy responses;
x existence of framework conditions for the business environment which affect
positively firms’ incentives and capacity to innovate (e.g. access to capital,
competition and intellectual property regimes);
x physical and ICT infrastructure which facilitates the location and development of
knowledge and innovation investment platforms;
x a well-educated workforce and sustained to develop skilled human capital.
Mexico has to advance on all these fronts to ensure that increased public and private
investment in knowledge will actually contribute both to raising the innovative capacity
of its economy and to meeting the main social challenges faced by its population.
Mexico’s innovation system: main policy challenges
With the adoption of the 1999 and 2002 science and technology (ST) laws, the new
CONACYT Organic Law and the approval of the 2001-06 Special Programme for
Science and Technology (PECYT), a number of initiatives were taken to improve the
design and implementation of Mexico’s science, technology and innovation (STI) policy.
While some positive achievements must be recognised, overall the goals set have not
been reached and structural weaknesses continue to affect the performance of the
innovation system. Drawing upon past policy successes and failures the 2008-12 PECITI
constitutes a welcome effort to address these structural weaknesses by taking advantage
of untapped opportunities offered by Mexico’s social and economic endowments (see the
following table).

Summary table: SWOT analysis of the Mexican national innovation system
Strengths Weaknesses
x A set of top-quality universities (both public and private)
and public research centres
x A sizeable pool of qualified scientists
x A relatively large domestic market
x A set of globalised, internationally competitive firms
x Regional and sectoral clusters of excellence
x Attractiveness for FDI inflows into specific sectors
x The accumulated experience of some public agencies for
the promotion of STI and economic development
x Good natural resources endowment
x Cultural diversity as a source of creativity
x Inefficient governance of the National Innovation System
(NIS)
x Unbalanced policy mix
x Low budget allocation and weak political commitment to
STI policy
x Bureaucratic management of support programmes
x A very low level of public/private co-operation; low
mobility of human resources in ST
x Poor performance of the education system; low
qualification of the labour force
x Insufficient technological infrastructure
x Low technological absorptive capacity of the vast
majority of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)
x Weak IPR culture
x Little competition in some sectors; barriers to enterprise
creation; deficient corporate governance in the publicly
owned industrial sector
x Premium on imported technology
x Financial markets ill-adapted to innovation-related
investment
Opportunities Threats
x A young population
x Geographical proximity to the United States
x Incipient development of a significant pool of engineers
x Growing demand for knowledge-intensive social goods
x Insertion in global knowledge networks and technological
platforms
x Diversification of production and trade towards goods
and services with higher knowledge content
x Engagement of SMEs in more innovation-driven
strategies
x Technology diffusion around multinational enterprises in
line with the development of innovation-based global
value chains
x Biodiversity as a potential economic asset
x Growing competition from emerging economies
x Accelerated expansion of the scientific and technological
frontier
x Intensifying global competition for talent
x High economic and technological dependence on
low-growth economies
x Poor linkages with dynamic emerging regions
experiencing rapid economic, scientific and technological
development
x Regional concentration of innovation capabilities

Institutional and structural weaknesses continue to affect the innovation system
Efficient governance practices have not developed as anticipated, and this has
hindered a clear policy focus on the priority actions defined in the PECYT. The
coordination authority formally entrusted to the National Council for Science and
Technology (CONACYT) in the 2002 ST Law could not be effectively exerted in the
preparation of the ST budget and the definition of policy orientation. The distinction
between political bodies responsible for policy design and administrative bodies in charge
of policy implementation has remained blurred. Moreover, the multiplication of poorly
funded support instruments catering to various constituencies and burdened by
bureaucratic management has diluted government action, so that a de facto policy mix has
had limited impact on the performance of the Mexican innovation system.
Resources devoted to RD activities have fallen short of stated objectives. In terms
of innovation inputs and outputs, Mexico’s STI system lags that of other OECD countries
and some important emerging economies. The ratio of RD expenditures to GDP is the
second lowest among OECD countries and, despite growing RD investment by
industry, most RD is still performed by the public sector. Patenting activity per capita
or unit of RD is among the lowest in the OECD area. The technological balance of
payments shows a very large and persistent deficit, with exports covering less than 10%
of imports, and technology licensing agreements among Mexican institutions are
extremely rare.
Despite recent progress, the training of human resources for science and technology
remains insufficient, and the low propensity of firms to hire such resources discourages
their further development. This adversely affects the diffusion of knowledge and the
innovative capacity of the business sector.
Notwithstanding valuable efforts to strengthen the technological infrastructure and
improve access to technological services, the vast majority of Mexican small and
medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) still lack the capacity to introduce and manage
innovative activities, owing in part to the low level of qualifications of their workforce
and their management.
Finally, industry-science relationships are very weak both in terms of knowledge
flows – including those embodied in human capital – and of collaboration on innovation
projects which draw on academic knowledge.
Positive but limited impact of some recent policy initiatives
In recent years, a number of policy initiatives have been developed or tested with
some – albeit limited – success. Some have had a relatively positive impact on innovation
performance and need to be pursued. The management and/or financing of those that
have contributed to strengthening innovative capacities need to be reviewed with a view
to increasing their impact.
A more proactive role for public research centres
In recent years two parallel changes in the governance and financing of public
research centres (PRCs) have led them to take a more proactive approach to strategic
decisions. The institution of “performance agreements” established a governance
mechanism that includes appraisals and accountability to increase transparency and
induce the centres to give priority to research and technological activities or programmes

with acknowledged social or economic relevance. Concomitant changes in funding
allocations have driven most PRCs to increase the share of self-financing in their overall
budget.2
These changes have led PRCs to change the orientation and organisation of their
activities with a view to increasing their co-operation with the private sector and other
entities to which they provide RD and technological services. Another factor that has
favoured this evolution has been the priority given to projects involving co-operation
between PRCs and enterprises in submissions for financial support to CONACYT and
other funding bodies such as the Ministry of Economy.
Fostering business investment in innovative activities
From 2000 to 2006, the period covered by the PECYT, several initiatives involving
direct and indirect support measures helped to foster business investment in innovation-
related activities. These initiatives have led to a significant increase of both the volume of
business RD and the shares of total RD financed or performed by the productive
sector which still remain low by OECD standards.
Among these support measures figures prominently the fiscal incentive put in place
by CONACYT in 2002, which represented more than 75% of total support in 2006.
However, beyond its noteworthy quantitative effect on innovation-related business
investment, this measure raises questions relating to the efficiency of its management, the
distortion effects linked to the concentration of beneficiaries, and the disproportionate
role of fiscal incentives with respect to other, more direct, support measures.
With some exceptions, direct support measures implemented by the Mexican
administration in order to enhance business investment in innovative activities have met
with limited success. As in the case of sectoral funds, their efficiency has too often been
hampered by a limited focus, a multiplicity of eligibility criteria, burdensome
management and co-ordination problems. Among the exceptions are the programmes
managed and funded by a single institution: the incipient CONACYT AVANCE
programme for new technology-based firms, the PROSOFT programme, funded by the
Ministry of Economy, for ICT applications, and the SME Fund of the Ministry of
Economy’s section on innovation and technological development which supports
entrepreneurial initiatives backed by intermediary institutions acting as brokers.
In the most advanced states of the Federation local governments have also played a
dynamic role in promoting the development of specialized clusters and strengthening
their scientific and technological infrastructure. In most instances successful programmes
have benefited not only from good co-ordination between federal and local governments
and institutions, but also from strong participation by business associations and inter-
mediary organisations, including provision of funding.

Supply of highly skilled human resources for science and technology
Mexico still lags most other OECD countries and emerging economies such as Brazil,
Chile and China in the production of highly skilled human resources for ST (HRST).
However, in spite of Mexico’s unstable STI policy over the last two decades, CONACYT
has maintained its efforts to develop these, at least in terms of the share of its budget.
The postgraduate scholarship programme started in the early 1980s is currently the
most important source of funding for Mexicans interested in pursuing postgraduate
studies either in Mexico or abroad. It has benefited more than 150 000 students to date.
While overall efforts to promote the supply of these resources need to be maintained,
they need to be complemented by measures to support demand from the private sector, as
envisaged by the PECITI’s IDEA programme. Moreover, in light of the evolving
structure of demand for highly skilled resources, more discipline-based criteria should be
introduced for awarding scholarships.
Scientific and technological infrastructure
The development and maintenance of advanced scientific and technological
infrastructure has long suffered from low priority and limited sources of funding, in part
owing to severe budgetary restrictions. In comparison with more advanced OECD
countries, Mexico under-invests in ST equipment and infrastructure per unit of RD
expenditures or number of qualified researchers.
Only recently has this situation begun to be addressed, with a doubling of federal
investment between 2002 and 2006. This investment has helped to facilitate the
decentralisation of ST capacities; in a number of instances, state governments have
added their funding contribution to that of the federal investment effort.3
Outstanding
challenges
In spite of the positive results of some institutional reforms and other policy
initiatives in the PECYT framework, only limited progress has been made in overcoming
the chronic structural weaknesses of Mexico’s innovation system. These continue to
hinder the emergence of a virtuous dynamic in which the production of knowledge and its
diffusion and use are mutually reinforcing and yield benefits in economic growth and
social well-being. Overcoming them represents outstanding challenges for the design,
governance, funding and implementation of Mexico’s ST and innovation policy in the
coming years.
Raising public investment in ST and RD activities
No country has advanced decisively up the ladder of innovative economic
performance without sustained public investment in tangible and intangible ST assets.
In Mexico increasing the volume of public resources devoted to RD and developing the
absorptive capacities to put them to use efficiently are a prerequisite for engaging in a
virtuous dynamic in which public and private investment in innovation complement each
other to ensure rising social returns to investment in knowledge.
In this regard, and in spite of the 1% objective of the RD-to-GDP ratio for 2006 set
by the 2002 ST Law, Mexico’s performance only reached 0.49% in 2007, the second
lowest among OECD countries.4
Worse, while this ratio increased moderately from 0.4%

in 2002 – mainly owing to the business sector – federal budget expenditure on ST has
remained practically unchanged in constant value over the past six years. This has meant
a reduction in the share of the federal budget and of GDP. Indeed, by international
standards, the government devotes very few resources to its public research system. Yet
international comparisons show that in better-performing countries, the business sector’s
share in total RD expenditures does not increase sustainably when absolute public RD
expenditures decline.
The evolution of private and public expenditures is certainly an impediment to the
strengthening of Mexico’s innovation system. More articulation and collaboration between
the private and public sectors requires interaction between two dynamic partners. It
cannot be achieved if the volume of resources allocated to one of them stagnates or
decreases.
Against this rather gloomy background, the budget appropriations for ST increased
by 16.2% in 2008 over 2007. This is a welcome and encouraging signal.5
Consolidation of support programmes and policy co-ordination
Despite PECYT’s well-meant efforts to better focus the objectives of STI policy and
implement support measures more coherently, the management of direct support
programmes has too often suffered from major governance weaknesses, notably problems
of co-ordination, dilution of responsibilities and fragmentation. Indeed, during the period
covered by the PECYT, support programmes were organised less according to policy
objectives than as a result of compromises between CONACYT and sectoral ministries
regarding management and funding responsibilities. This has resulted in the development
of an unusually large number of poorly endowed support programmes, with many
eligibility criteria and very cumbersome decision-making procedures. Alone or in co-
ordination with other federal government or state bodies, CONACYT manages over
60 funds or support programmes. This leads to significant inefficiencies due to
transaction costs, administrative rivalries and bureaucratic delays.
A striking example of these inefficiencies is the 17 sectoral funds jointly financed and
operated by CONACYT and sectoral ministries to promote STI capabilities according to
the “strategic needs” of the participating “sector”. Their budgetary endowments are quite
small, averaging less than USD 100 million a year. Moreover, the selection criteria often
define granting priorities at a very detailed level;6
this distorts the selection process.
Rejection rates are high. Possible reasons include strong demand for relatively limited
available funding, poor qualifications of applicants, weak project relevance, bureaucratic
conflicts, and/or unclear criteria. Given the amount of support these funds can offer
individual proposals, high rejection rates are likely to mean very high administrative costs
for project selection.
For the sake of efficiency, there may be a case for replacing sectoral funds focused on
applied research7
by sectoral priority programmes with increased ex ante contributions
from ST budgets of sectoral ministries funded on a competitive basis. This would be in
line with practices increasingly observed in other OECD countries, in which the
definition of priorities is accompanied by the setting of a budget of pooled resources
allocated competitively by a “means agency” with oversight responsibility.
The 32 mixed funds, jointly administered by CONACYT and state government
bodies and progressively developed since 2001, were meant to foster research and/or

innovation capacity at the regional level and to help articulate federal and regional STI
policies and support programmes.
Although they constitute in principle a valuable means of federal/state co-ordination,
the present record of mixed funds is not wholly satisfactory:
x In many cases they have suffered from a lack of well-defined demand on the part
of the states owing in part to inefficient co-ordination among stakeholders,
especially in less developed states. On the whole they have been of greater benefit
to the narrowly defined ST interests of locally established research centres and
higher education institutions (HEIs).
x The amounts allocated have generally been quite small8
and have supported a
narrow base of projects with limited spillovers to regional innovative capacity9
.
x Their management and effectiveness have often suffered from lengthy selection
and disbursement processes and from a number of states’ weak capacity to
develop and submit adequate RD and innovation projects.
Countries that have implemented funds that are co-financed and managed by different
government bodies have more often than not encountered implementation problems.
Mexico is no exception and, apart from more substantial resource requirements, it needs
clearer and more efficient rules for managing the schemes. Among beneficiaries there
seems to be widespread consensus that, in addition to their limited endowment, sectoral
and mixed funds suffer from inefficient management and delayed disbursement of funds
to selected projects.
In contrast with these mixed outcomes, the Mexican administration has developed
other instruments to support RD, innovative activities or technological development
which have proved more efficient in terms of management and co-ordination, and more
successful in terms of outcomes. As noted above, prominent among these are the
CONACYT AVANCE programme and the PROSOFT programme and the SME Fund
financed and managed by the Ministry of Economy. With important nuances, there is also
the RD fiscal incentive system managed by CONACYT in co-ordination with the
Ministries of Finance, of Economy and of Education.
Enhancing the performance of the academic research system and fostering public
research linkages with industry
Over the last decade, in a context of nearly stagnant resources, the productivity of
Mexico’s science system, as measured by scientific performance and relevance, has
improved notably. The volume of scientific production has increased significantly10
and
its quality has also improved to some extent.11
This is largely due to the National System
of Researchers (SNI). Since its inception in 1984, it has played a positive role in the
development of a community of qualified researchers selected, promoted and rewarded
(with non-taxable complements to their remuneration) according to criteria based on the
volume and excellence of their scientific production.
However, public research in Mexico’s higher education institutions continues to
present weaknesses which limit their capacity to generate knowledge and train an
adequate supply of highly skilled personnel able to contribute efficiently to addressing
social challenges and strengthening the innovation capacity of the productive sector.
Moreover, as academic research remains highly centralised, this hinders knowledge
spillovers.

The SNI’s reward system is biased towards the evaluation of individuals and
published scientific results; it acts as a disincentive to undertake long-term projects and
multidisciplinary research on challenging problems that offer potential benefits in terms
of innovation. Technological achievements are not recognised on a par with published
scientific results. This hinders co-operation with industry and institutional mobility of
researchers between academia and industry. In addition, the combined effect of the SNI’s
remuneration and pension systems on retirement decisions is likely to be an ageing of the
scientific community. This could dangerously affect its future productivity in terms of
output, novelty and quality.
A major factor in the coherence and dynamism of an innovation system is the depth
and breadth of knowledge exchanges between science and industry. In recent years, a
number of PRCs and some HEIs have stepped up their co-operation with the enterprise
sector via joint research activities on product and process development and the provision
of technological services. Similarly, there are successful, albeit limited, initiatives by
enterprises or social sectors to source knowledge in research institutions to strengthen
their innovative activities. Yet, one of the major weaknesses of Mexico’s innovation
system remains the low level of knowledge exchange between science and industry.
Various factors account for this:
x On the demand side, the scarcity of highly skilled labour in a large majority of
firms and the weakness of technology transfer schemes lessen possibilities to
absorb knowledge from, and effectively interact with, research institutions in the
initial stages of product or process innovation. In this context the recently
introduced IDEA programme to encourage the insertion of highly skilled ST
personnel in enterprises is certainly a valuable initiative. The programme should
be extended and its implementation be made more flexible and decentralised.
x On the supply side, given the SNI’s bias towards rewarding scientific publica-
tions, researchers lack incentives to engage in collaboration with firms and
restrictions on inter-institutional mobility reinforce existing disincentives. At the
institutional level co-operation is increasing slowly, as the move towards more
self-financing by research centres drives them to seek opportunities for collabora-
tion. The growing importance of science-based innovation is starting to define the
research agendas of PRCs and advanced HEIs such as Cinvestav and to foster
collaboration with enterprises with research capabilities. Strengthening public
research institutions’ capacity to develop, protect and manage intellectual property
would also contribute to that objective.
x On the institutional side, despite initiatives by public or private intermediary
institutions, such as Infotec, Cenam, Impi, Fumec or Produce, technology
diffusion mechanisms remain weak and access to technological information and
services poorly supported. The scarcity of private intermediary institutions and
certification bodies also hinders technology diffusion and collaboration.
An apparent paradox is that most current policy instruments in support of RD,
innovation and technological development include collaboration by public and private
institutions as one criterion of project selection. Unfortunately, this has not yielded the
expected results, which suggests that a more direct approach or incentives specifically
focused on strengthening science-industry linkages are in order.

Rather than being a secondary objective of support programmes with different
primary objectives, industry-science relationships would be more efficiently fostered in
the framework of well-funded dedicated programmes or instruments designed with the
involvement of all relevant stakeholders. A prominent example is the public/private
partnerships for research and innovation which have been set up in a number of OECD
countries. Mexico has recently emulated this approach with the launch of the Strategic
Alliances and Innovation Networks for Competitiveness (AERIs) which constitute an
improvement over the Consorcio programme launched at the beginning of the decade.
Other types of actions, which do not necessarily require funding, are based on
incentives provided by institutional reforms, such as those concerning the mobility of
researchers and the development of technology transfer or licensing offices (TTOs and
TLOs) in research institutions receiving public funding. In this respect the IMPI/
CONACYT Fund is a welcome initiative which should facilitate the development of such
offices.
Policy mix and programme implementation
Against the general background of limited budgetary resources devoted to ST,
governance issues concerning the respective roles of CONACYT and various ministries
and their co-ordination in the design and implementation of STI policy have strongly
affected – and to a large extent distorted – the policy mix of programmes and instruments
in support of STI. This is reflected in:
x the multiplicity of poorly funded programmes;
x a mismatch between the level of resources allocated to various instruments and
the nature of the problems or type of market or systemic failures they are meant to
address;
x the frequent multiplicity of eligibility criteria attached to funding instruments,
which may hinder the attainment of their stated priority objective;
x the problems posed by the dilution or conflicts of funding and management
responsibilities among co-ordinating agencies which often result in inadequate
design and complexities in the implementation of some instruments.
Support to business RD and innovation: an unbalanced policy mix in need of
reform
Until very recently Mexico stood out among OECD countries in terms of the very
high share of fiscal incentives in total support to business RD and innovation (about
75%). This imbalance was compounded by the high level of tax relief provided through
this incentive when compared with other countries with similar schemes. Moreover, in
Mexico, fiscal incentives were poorly adapted to supporting the innovation projects of the
vast majority of firms. Many do not engage in RD activity in order to innovate and
therefore cannot, in principle, benefit from this type of support. Instruments that should
address the needs of such firms, such as matching grants or subsidised or conditional
loans, were much less well endowed than fiscal incentives.

It is clear that a streamlining of support programmes, a rebalancing of their respective
endowments, and a simplification of management structures was in order:
x Fiscal incentives. On the basis of the experience of the other 20 OECD countries
that have implemented fiscal incentives, there still seems to be a rationale for this
type of support instrument in Mexico, provided its design, management and
eligibility criteria are revised in line with best practices in other countries. The
changes should of course be envisaged in the light of the new corporate tax
reform instituting the single rate corporate tax (IETU). They should reduce the
budgetary costs of fiscal incentives, raise their efficiency and facilitate a transition
to a more balanced policy mix.
x Promoting innovation in SMEs. The Economía-CONACYT Technological
Innovation Fund is the main instrument for fostering innovation in SMEs. Beyond
its relatively small endowment, its impact is limited by excessive eligibility
criteria and co-ordination problems which complicate its management. In other
OECD countries, as well as in advanced Latin American countries such as Brazil,
Argentina and Chile, funds involving matching grants to SMEs are usually better
endowed and managed by dedicated agencies, which are distinct from, but
accountable to, financing ministries. In Mexico another factor that weakens the
management efficiency of the Economía-CONACYT Fund’s operation is its
relatively weak capacity to assess the potential return on investment in RD and
innovation of the project proposals submitted for funding.
x Stimulating innovation in strategic areas. In spite of the explicit identification of
strategic priority sectors and technology areas in the 2001-06 PECYT, no fully
fledged dedicated programmes to foster relevant research and innovation were
implemented. Projects supported by the sectoral funds do not really fill this gap.
The 2007-12 PECITI also includes sectoral and technological priorities that
should be pursued through specific dedicated programmes, notably in terms of
support to public/private co-operation. It is to be hoped that the PECITI will be
able to deliver what the PECYT did not.
x Support to new technology-based firms. This is another weak point in the
Mexican policy mix. Only AVANCE and, to a lesser extent, the business
accelerators initiative funded by the Ministry of Economy, support the
development of research-based innovation activities in high-technology firms.
These programmes fulfil an important mission but are underfunded and provide
few opportunities for researchers from public research institutions to create high-
technology firms or spin-offs. In this regard, more attention and support should be
given to the development of financial and prudential products (e.g. seed and
venture capital, guarantee schemes) adapted to the creation and growth of this
category of firms.

Support to public research: improving funding modes, incentives and governance
Resources allocated to public research should increase, but allocation procedures and
criteria should meet various criteria to ensure that funded activities contribute efficiently
to the generation of knowledge, the training of highly skilled personnel, and the
strengthening of the innovation capacity of the productive sector through a leveraging
effect on private investment. The criteria should be reflected in the modes of financing
research activities, the incentives provided to researchers and research teams, and
evaluation mechanisms. They should be aligned with the evolution of the mix of funding
mechanisms and the governance structure that support public research institutions.
A better balance should be struck between institutional funding, competitive funding
and other sources of funding. A growing share and volume of resources should be
devoted to competitive funding through the restructuring of sectoral funds that support
basic and applied research. These are presently financed and managed by CONACYT in
co-ordination with SEP and other sectoral ministries.
x Institutional funding. In line with recognised best practices in other countries, the
volume and allocation of institutional funding should be based on the results of
periodic evaluations, with emphasis on the quality of research according to
academic standards. They should also be based on criteria pertaining to the
contribution of researchers and other highly qualified ST resources to
innovation (e.g. patents and relations with industry). Moreover, increases in
institutional funding should continue to be examined in light of the need to further
decentralise academic research activities.
x Competitive funding. CONACYT should be solely responsible for this type of
funding. One part should be devoted to research projects selected on the basis of
criteria of research excellence irrespective of scientific discipline, with an
emphasis on collaborative projects. The other part should fund research projects
submitted in the framework of research and innovation priority programmes as
defined in the PECITI. The source of finance for such projects could be a
consolidated fund endowed with the resources previously available under the
sectoral funds. In particular, this fund would finance medium-term research and
innovation programmes based on public/private partnerships such as those
launched in the framework of the AERIs.
x Other sources of finance for public research should be actively sought, in
particular for international co-operation under CONACYT agreements. Public
research institutions should also be encouraged to develop their own international
collaboration networks, and regulatory obstacles that hinder such developments
should be removed or lessened.
Another important aspect of policy relating to public research institutions is the
training of highly skilled human resources. In this regard, the CONACYT scholarship
programme and various recent initiatives to support doctoral programmes and post-
doctoral activities seem to go in the right direction and should be maintained.
Finally, there is little doubt that allocations from the federal level should continue to
seek a more balanced spatial distribution of the scientific and technological infrastructure.
Here, the trend to link the granting of increased institutional resources to PRCs and HEIs
at least in part to a regionalisation of their facilities should be maintained if not
reinforced.

Reforming the SNI: a long-term challenge
Without the SNI, centrally managed by CONACYT and financed on its budget, the
level of excellence of Mexico’s research activities and the number and diversity of
internationally recognised researchers would not be what they are presently.
Today, this idiosyncratic system, which ensures against brain drain, also presents, as
currently operated, both disincentives to increased collaboration with the private sector in
innovative activities and longer-term risks relating to the evolution of the age structure of
the Mexican research community. While the SNI’s role in developing a quality research
base and ensuring the attractiveness of research careers should be preserved, reforms
should be undertaken to address these challenges. In the longer term, this could lead to
the adoption by research institutions of remuneration patterns based on nationally defined
standards, but increasingly managed internally, and to institutions’ responsibility for the
quality and relevance of their research platforms.
Recommendations
Strategic objectives
In an increasingly global competitive environment, in order to maintain productivity
growth, alleviate poverty and better respond to pressing social needs, Mexico must pursue
sound macroeconomic policies and deepen the structural reforms that have been engaged.
To close the gap in income per capita with the more developed countries and, in the
shorter term, to avoid being overwhelmed by the most dynamic emerging economies,
Mexico must harness the potential of science and technology. In addition to the urgent
improvement of some key framework conditions for innovation (especially in education,
competition and basic infrastructure), it needs to pursue political, economic and social
objectives:
x Build a more powerful, firm-centred innovation system by significantly
increasing public (financial and other) support to innovation which can then
leverage private investment in market-pulled innovation.
x Ensure that basic and mission-oriented research is supported only in areas in
which critical mass and excellence can be achieved, and use regulatory reform
and competitive funding more effectively to strengthen public research on well-
defined priority socio-economic needs.
x Pursue the decentralisation of innovation policy while reinforcing state-level
management capabilities and carry out strict evaluations, based on a consistent
national model, of programmes using federal resources.
Political commitment and social impact
Reaping the economic and social benefits of investment in science and technology
takes time. Therefore, sustained political commitment and the visibility of the benefits to
the economy and society as a whole are essential to a successful ST and innovation
policy. There are no examples of developed or emerging countries that have succeeded in
putting knowledge and innovation at the core of their development strategy without such
a long-term commitment.

In Mexico, this commitment has too often not been sustained. The objective of a ratio
of RD to GDP of 1%, to be achieved by the end of the previous administration, was not
reached. It may have been unrealistic in the first place, but for the main stakeholders it
was at best a missed opportunity, at worst a lack of political commitment. The present
administration has made a similar commitment in the PECITI, and in 2008, the ST
budget was increased significantly. This commitment needs to be maintained over time
by the executive and legislative branches of government, and the scientific, economic and
social outcomes of increased public investment should be brought out in due course in the
public arena.
Political commitment also involves consensus building when determining national
priorities and setting oversight processes to ensure that these are effectively addressed in
the design of innovation policies and reflected both in budgetary appropriations and
institutional arrangements for policy implementation.
Policy efficiency
Efficient use of public funds to meet economic and social challenges is a principle of
sound budgetary management. Public resources for scientific and technological
development compete with other current or investment expenditures in areas which are
often perceived as having higher or more immediate priority. Resources to alleviate
poverty and develop social and economic infrastructure put strong pressure on the budget.
While fiscal reform and additional revenues stemming from energy price increases can
open new margins of manoeuvre, the opportunity costs of public resources devoted to
ST policies and the legitimacy of the use of these resources to address market and
systemic failures must still be justified by appropriate accounting of expected economic
and social returns and ex post evaluations.
Improving the overall level of skills while developing HRST
A qualified human resource base is a cornerstone of any innovation-based strategy for
socio-economic development. Mexico has a pool of qualified scientists and engineers as a
result of efforts over the past two decades, notably the scholarship programmes, .but it is
insufficient in light of the country’s size and economic potential. The bulk of the labour
force is largely unskilled or low-skilled, and in a large majority of firms the lack of
managerial skills hinders their capacity to absorb technology and makes them unwilling
to take the risks associated with innovation. This is one source of the low demand for
highly skilled human resources for ST. Mexico thus faces both a supply and demand
problem in this respect. Along with the issue of educational attainment, which raises
concerns that go beyond innovation policy, addressing the mismatch relating to HRST
should be high on the ST policy agenda. In this regard, measures considered in the
framework of the PECITI deserve to be financed at an appropriate level and in a sustained
manner.
Linking science to innovation
One of the main challenges for Mexico’s ST policy is to foster synergies between
curiosity-driven science and market-led innovation through favourable institutional
settings and incentive structures. While curiosity-driven research should continue to be
supported as a public good, more social accountability should be required, especially
when the research aims to solve specific problems. Resource limitations encourage

entrenched behaviour by vested interests and hinder collaboration. An increase in
resources for ST should be made largely conditional on an increase in co-operative
behaviour. With the development of consortia and AERIs, the emphasis on co-operation
in a number of support programmes, the increased emphasis on competitive funding and
self-financing of research institutions, Mexico is moving in that direction. This evolution
needs to be pursued and strengthened.
As is increasingly the case in other OECD countries, STI policy should give more
emphasis to well-endowed research and innovation programmes that support public/
private partnerships for collective goods in priority areas such as health, environment,
energy and communication as well as sectors in which Mexico enjoys comparative
advantages based on its natural resources. In such programmes the scientific and business
communities should share management responsibilities.
In co-operation with state or municipal governments which already have valuable
initiatives in this direction, increased emphasis should be given to the promotion of
technology or sectoral competitive advantages around clusters that pool scientific,
infrastructure and managerial resources and foster innovation through knowledge
spillovers and technology diffusion.
Engaging lagging SMEs in innovative activities
Beyond a set of globalised, high-performance domestic or foreign enterprises and a
growing but still limited number of smaller innovative ones, Mexico has an
overwhelming majority of firms, mostly SMEs, which lack the capacity to make
knowledge management and technological development part of their competitive
strategy. In many sectors, these firms constitute an untapped mine of productivity, growth
and employment, and no lasting success can be expected from innovation policy if this
structural duality is not overcome. Notwithstanding the valuable contribution of some
existing programmes, essentially those of the Ministry of Economy, with the support of
intermediary institutions, and, to a lesser extent, of CONACYT and its PRCs and sectoral
ministries, the reinforcement of measures in favour of SMEs must be a strategic objective
of Mexico’s STI policy, notably in areas such as the development of human resources and
the upgrading of technological infrastructures and services.
Guiding principles
The strategic orientations of the 2001-06 PECYT responded to a valid diagnosis of
the main weaknesses of the Mexican STI system. However, its largely unfulfilled
expectations point to failures, as well as partial successes, from which to draw lessons for
guiding principles in the design, governance, funding and implementation of STI policies
in the PECITI. These principles should be inspired by best practices in more advanced
countries, taking into account the specificities of the Mexican situation.
x Effective governance. A prerequisite is political commitment at the highest
executive levels of government regarding adequate budgetary appropriations in
support of STI activities. This commitment should be reflected in the operation of
the governance structure entrusted with the steering of STI policy and its co-
ordination with major stakeholders, including ministerial departments whose
actions impinge on the framework conditions that affect the performance of the
innovation system.

x Clear and transparent priority setting should be achieved through the involvement
of all major stakeholders, that is, the scientific and business communities and the
civil sector. Outcomes should be reflected in planning and budget documents
submitted by the government to the legislative branch and widely disseminated to
the public upon approval.
x Dynamic balance between public and private resources devoted to RD and
innovation. A condition for improved innovation performance by the private
sector is access to and collaboration with the public research system. Such
collaboration should be funded on the basis of criteria of excellence and the
relevance of research activities.
x Clarification of functional responsibilities. Following international best practices,
the political bodies responsible for defining priorities and for policy design should
be distinct from agencies in charge of policy implementation, with the latter
accountable to the former.
x Single agent management. While co-ordination of various government bodies or
different levels of government is necessary for policy design and/or programme
funding, single body management of implementation is generally preferable to
arrangements involving joint management and funding. These usually entail high
transaction costs and complicated or even antagonistic decision-making processes.
x Critical mass and lean procedures in the delivery of government support.
Multiplication of programmes should be avoided. This is often the result of
opacity in policy design, response to vested interests and/or overlapping
responsibilities among government agencies. Moreover it often involves high
administrative costs, inefficiencies in delivery and it can lead to fragmentation
and programmes of less than critical mass.
x Balanced policy mix. The policy mix should reflect the importance of various
policy priorities and the critical mass necessary for effective programmes. For
support to business RD and innovation, the policy mix should strike an
appropriate balance between direct (e.g. matching funds) and indirect support
measures and sectoral support; it should also take account of the types of market
or systemic failures these measures can address. In the case of support to public
research institutions, it should strike an appropriate balance between institutional
and competitive funding while encouraging access to external resources.
x Balance between top-down and bottom-up approaches. Stakeholders such as
intermediary institutions and state bodies should contribute to the definition and
implementation of programmes that benefit their constituencies. Good practices
already adopted (e.g. technological infrastructure, technological clusters, AERIs)
should be generalised when appropriate.
x Evaluation and accountability. Regular evaluation of support programmes and
institutions receiving public support should become the norm, with practical
consequences for further rounds of support. However, a balance must be struck
between the need for periodic adjustments based on evaluations and the stability
of support programmes in order to ensure their long-term impact on the behaviour
of beneficiaries. Regular audits should also check that budgetary appropriations
earmarked for ST are effectively spent in that area.

Improving governance structures
Given Mexico’s institutions and government structure, there is no silver bullet to
improve the governance of the STI system.
The creation of a Ministry of Science and Technology (or of Higher Education,
Science and Technology), a common practice in OECD countries, would in principle be
worth considering. It would be in charge of policy design and entrusted with the power to
co-ordinate the whole of the ST budget and oversee government agencies responsible
for policy implementation. CONACYT legitimately aspired to fulfil that function but has
not been given the means, and has not been in an institutional position, to do so.
However, the creation of a new ministry seems unrealistic at the present time.
Moreover it is politically unlikely that the power that was denied to CONACYT for
implementing the PECYT would now be ensured by the granting of ministerial status,
especially since it has recently been decided to make the Minister of Economy chairman
of the CONACYT Board.
The creation of a new ministry remains nevertheless a valid option to be considered in
the future. For the shorter term the most feasible option is an inter-ministerial council
chaired by the president and including ministers with management and budgetary
responsibility for ST programmes or institutions.
An effective ST inter-ministerial council
An ST council at ministerial level could be entrusted with defining national
priorities and ensuring interdepartmental co-ordination of ST policy orientation and
national support programmes. It would be involved in the preparation of the ST budget.
While such a council formally exists – the General Council of Scientific Research and
Technology Development – in the framework of the ST Law, it had fewer prerogatives
and essentially did not function under the previous administration.12
The current revision of the ST Law, which extends its scope to innovation, maintains
the formal existence of the Council and contains provisions which may help to ensure its
more effective functioning, notably the creation of an Intersectoral Committee on
Innovation.
The Council should have real influence – or at least a consultative say – on resource
appropriations (including all ST resources beyond those of Chapter 38), and possibly on
resource transfers between the federal and state levels. Its oversight responsibilities
should also encompass regulatory policies that impinge upon the performance of the STI
system, via legislative proposals or a consultative role regarding the impact on innovation
of key framework conditions such as competition policy or labour regulations. In this
respect it would seem important for the Council to be in a position to review the
provisions of existing laws and regulations (e.g. the Law on Parapublic Entities, the Law
on Public Procurement and the Labour Law) which may presently hinder the efficiency of
public research institutions and, more generally, adversely affect the performance of the
innovation system.
The Council could be assisted by a tripartite ST Consultative Board composed of
representatives of the scientific and business communities and intermediary institutions.
The existing Advisory Forum for Science and Technology (FCCT) instituted by the ST
Law could in principle perform the functions of such as body, but its role and
composition should be reconsidered. One the one hand, its membership should be better

balanced between representatives of the academic and the industrial sectors;13
on the
other, it should better manage its dual role of advocacy for ST and innovation and
consensus building among the stakeholders it represents.
The Council would be expected to meet at ministerial level at least once a year to
address strategic issues concerning ST policy and their consequences in terms of
budgetary appropriations and legislative or regulatory action. More frequent meetings at
lower levels would be devoted to inter-ministerial co-ordination and monitoring of policy
implementation.
In addition, and in order to acknowledge and enhance the role of ST and innovation
in Mexico’s social and economic development, CONACYT could also become a full
member of the Government’s Restricted Cabinet which deals with economic matters and
competitiveness.
In this institutional setting, ST planning and budgeting would be distinguished from
financing and implementation of competitive programmes, with the latter performed by
“means” or financing agencies. However, non-competitive forms of financing would
continue to be the responsibility of sectoral ministries, for example mission-oriented STI
programmes or projects carried out in the research institutions under their authority, or
the institutional funding of basic research by the Ministry of Education.
CONACYT and the Ministry of Economy would have particular responsibilities as
the main government bodies responsible for policy implementation and programme
funding and because of the complementarity of their actions to support RD and
innovation. The question of their respective roles is therefore important for the
governance of the STI system.
An evolving role for CONACYT
In order to ensure stability and avoid disruptions associated with the current practice
of rotating chairmanships, the Minister of Economy should chair the CONACYT Board
on a more permanent basis. In addition to CONACYT’s role in the overall co-ordination
of ST policy, which could be strengthened if its director general reported directly to the
president, CONACYT would evolve into a “means agency” with the following main
responsibilities:
x Management of competitive funds to finance RD-intensive projects or
programmes including:
The Basic Science Fund for non-oriented research performed by public
research institutions.
A limited number of sectoral funds in areas corresponding to national
technological or sectoral STI priorities and devoted to the financing of
medium-term applied RD and innovation programmes submitted by public
research institutions and/or industrial associations. While CONACYT would
be responsible for managing these funds, ministries with administrative
responsibilities for priority sectors would be involved in programme
definition and evaluation of outcomes. Part of the resources allocated to these
funds would be explicitly devoted to the medium-term financing of public/
private research and innovation partnerships (consortia and AERIs). The
effective management of these funds would require streamlining bureaucratic
decision and disbursement procedures.

The AVANCE institutional fund, whenever projects are presented in colla-
boration with public research institutions.
x Management of the interface with sub-federal entities for the development of STI
capacities:
Programming and co-financing of mixed funds according to national and
regional priorities with particular attention to the development of ST
infrastructure for regional innovation systems and technological clusters and
increased devolution of project selection and management to the states.
x Public research centres
CONACYT would continue to oversee and fund the institutional component
of its research centres while encouraging the centres’ greater management
autonomy (including further progress towards self-financing), closer links
with HEIs, or even possible partial or total privatisation for those that
primarily provide services.
x Fiscal incentives
CONACYT should jointly manage the reformed fiscal incentives instrument
with the Ministry of Finance, with particular responsibility for information
dissemination, procedural support, ex post control and monitoring and
evaluation.
Finally, CONACYT would also keep its oversight and financing responsibilities for
the programmes aimed at enhancing international scientific co-operation (FONCICYT)
and developing the supply of HRST (e.g. postgraduate scholarship and IDEA programmes).
The role of the Ministry of Economy in the promotion of innovation for
competitiveness
The Ministry of Economy plays an important role in fostering competitiveness and,
like ministries with similar responsibilities in most OECD countries, it should move
towards greater emphasis on the promotion of enterprises’ innovation capacity building
and technological infrastructure. Its actions could be organised along the following lines.
Technological Innovation Trust Fund
This fund would cover the missions presently attributed to the Economía-CONACYT
Technological Innovation Fund and support innovation projects submitted by firms,
essentially SMEs. Support would be granted through matching funds or grants. Eligible
investment expenditures would include RD costs and technological infrastructure
(e.g. ICT, logistics, metrology, certification, IPR). Projects should be assessed on the
basis of expected returns and supported irrespective of sectors or technological area.
Eligibility should be conditional on a market or systemic failure which hinders the
development of economically viable innovative activities.14
The only discriminating
factor among projects would be preferential treatment for those carried out in co-
operation with PRCs or HEIs.
The fund would develop links with the financial sector through its contribution to the
development of venture and seed capital funds and guarantee funds in co-operation with
NAFIN. Like innovation agencies in various OECD countries, it could also provide

special incentives for the creation of new technology-based firms. Possibly, this fund
could become an autonomous innovation agency able to participate financially in firms it
supports. In this case, it would have to receive endowments from the public sector and
financial institutions.
Technological infrastructure and diffusion
In liaison with institutions such as INFOTEC, CENAM and IMPI, the Ministry of
Economy should develop or strengthen its support for technological infrastructure and
diffusion programmes submitted by intermediary institutions or industry associations,
notably with a view to the development of innovation clusters and productive networks.
This important area of promotion of regional innovation capacities will require strong co-
ordination with CONACYT.
Finally, the Ministry of Economy should be endowed with adequate resources for
emulating the PROSOFT programme in other priority technology areas, provided that the
support is complemented by funding from other sources, including firms, intermediary
institutions and local governments, and contributes to the development of sectoral and
regional clusters.
Improving the articulation between the federal and state levels
Governance reforms should also concern the design, management and financing of
policies and programmes that aim at strengthening STI capacities at state and local levels.
This raises several questions.
Co-ordination mechanisms between the federal and state levels that involve
CONACYT and state ST councils should be reinforced with a view to identifying
projects that correspond to national priorities, and therefore call for a larger share of
federal funding, and those that correspond to state priorities, and therefore imply
differentiated funding shares, especially in light of the fiscal reform that increases
resource transfers. The more strategic approach currently adopted by CONACYT in the
definition and design of projects selected for funding is a good step in that direction
which deserves to be developed further.
As noted above, the management and effectiveness of mixed funds have quite often
been impaired by lengthy selection and disbursement processes, and, in a number of
states, by weak capacity to develop and submit adequate RD and innovation proposals.
The supply/demand balance of mixed funds should be modified to give states more
management responsibility for funds allocated to institutions located in their territorial
jurisdiction. Decentralisation of policy should be accompanied by decentralisation of
management15
and, to a larger extent than is now the case, by decentralisation of
resources. This would greatly reduce the administrative burden borne by CONACYT, as
mixed funds would eventually merge with, or contribute to, the state ST budget for
financing projects presented or led by local institutions. The shifting balance of
management and financing responsibilities between the federal and state levels would
obviously not be the same for all states.
As concerns the strengthening of ST capacities of less developed states, a
mechanism similar to the European Union’s Structural Funds for overcoming regional
disparities in terms of infrastructure would deserve consideration by the Congress.

Evaluation
Finally, good governance implies regular evaluation exercises with feedback on
policy design and financing. In Mexico an embryonic culture of evaluating outcomes has
to be further developed, as too many policy assessments tend to be simply a description
of resource allocation, a check that procedures have been respected, and sometimes
consideration of the quality of management. Too often issues of the effectiveness of the
policy instrument vis-à-vis its stated objectives and its cost effectiveness are not
addressed. Following practices increasingly implemented in other countries, CONACYT
and other ministries responsible for the funding of ST and innovation programmes or
projects should develop monitoring and assessment systems based on qualitative and
quantitative information and indicators. The rationale of support programmes as well as
the expected outputs and outcomes should be highlighted at the outset. Monitoring and
ex post assessments should provide feedback on policy design and funding.
Specific recommendations
Improve the policy mix in support of business RD and innovation
x Reduce the ceiling on budgetary resources devoted to the fiscal incentive system,
shift granting decisions from discretionary to automatic procedures and institute a
cap per beneficiary enterprise. Eliminate the multiplicity of selection and
eligibility criteria by restricting them to RD and innovation-related activities
without discrimination among sectors or firms. Consider a dual volume/increment
system to provide better incentives to innovative SMEs, and a preferential tax
credit rate for SMEs. Reduce compliance costs so as not to deter smaller firms.
Establish a joint CONACYT/Ministry of Finance Commission entrusted with the
definition and implementation of new operating rules for the reformed fiscal
incentive system. This should reduce the budgetary cost in terms of foregone
revenues.
x In parallel with the reduction of indirect support provided by fiscal incentives,
increase the volume of direct support to firms through existing (or reformed)
competitive support schemes by providing resources in the form of matching
funds, subsidised loans or, in certain cases, grants. Give a bonus to collaborative
projects. Streamline eligibility criteria. Increase support for developing new
technology-based firms, reduce obstacles to their creation and facilitate their
access to capital markets. Part of this increase should be financed by the savings
incurred by the reform of the fiscal incentive system.16
x Link the management of direct support schemes to the strengthening of
contributions from the financial sector (guarantees, venture and seed capital),
notably its public component (NAFIN). Strengthen project assessment capacity in
support programme management structures.
x Increase the leverage of public research on private investment in RD in national
priority areas through public/private partnerships for research and innovation
(AERIs).
x Consider sectoral support programmes that require matching resources from
firms, intermediary institutions and regional governments; use this instrument to

support the development of clusters. Emulate the PROSOFT programme in other
priority areas.
x Develop an innovation-friendly public procurement policy, based on international
good practices and compatible with international agreements, to support innova-
tion in sectors with high social demand (health, energy, transport, environment,
education). This would probably require a modification of the public procurement
law (Ley de adquisiciones).
x Support SMEs’ demand for, and access to, technological services (metrology,
certification) and information, and encourage the development of a competitive
public and private supply of these services. Strengthen technology diffusion
programmes by encouraging collaboration between public institutions and
industry associations.
x Strengthen the mission of IMPI with respect to the diffusion of technological
information through easier access to its patent information base and the provision
of services to facilitate patent application and filing procedures.
Strengthen public research and encourage its contribution to innovation
x Consolidate non-competitive institutional funding of HEIs, expanding it to cover
infrastructure costs. Evaluate outcomes of institutional funding regularly. Use
institutional funding to advance the decentralisation of research capacities.
x Increase the volume and share of competitive funding, in both basic research and
applied RD and innovation programmes in national priority areas. Give
preferential treatment to collaborative research.
x Use the planned IMPI/CONACYT Fund to foster the systematic creation of, or
affiliation with, technology licensing and transfer offices in public research insti-
tutions, including HEIs, in order to promote the diffusion of research results.
x Streamline rules and procedures for contractual agreements between public
research organisations and the private sector.
x Consolidate the evaluation criteria used by the SNI to better account for
researchers’ innovation-related output.
x Initiate a consultative process involving the administration and the scientific
community on the long-term future of the SNI.
x Adopt common governance structures and accountability requirements in all
public research centres; in particular extend performance agreement schemes to
research centres overseen by sectoral ministries. Review the established
performance agreements in the light of other OECD countries’ experiences and
draw lessons for Mexico.
x Strengthen the move towards greater management autonomy of PRCs in terms of
investment and personnel. Remove management constraints stemming from the
Law on Parapublic Entities that hinder the pursuit of ST activities, in particular
those conducted in collaboration with the private sector. Consider increasing
levels of self-financing or even the possibility of privatisation of those more
involved in technology development and transfer.

x Entrust the Science Consultative Council and/or the Mexican Academy of
Science with the preparation of annual reports on ways in which the scientific
community can best address Mexico’s social and economic challenges.
Foster the development, insertion and mobility of highly skilled human resources
x Adopt a more strategic approach in the Postgraduate Scholarship Programme by
introducing some degree of selectivity in awards.
x Facilitate temporary hiring of postgraduates in PRCs for secondment in industry.
x Strengthen existing programmes that facilitate the insertion of highly skilled
personnel in the business sector and remove obstacles to the institutional mobility
of researchers.17
Strengthen regional STI capacity
x In consultation with state ST councils, develop a medium- to long-term master
plan for federal/state co-operation on the development of ST infrastructure.
x Strengthen regional ST infrastructures through institutional funding of HEIs
and PRCs.
x Consider the establishment of a “structural fund” specifically dedicated to the
development of ST infrastructure in less developed states.
x Use sectoral funds to foster the development of regional innovation clusters with
matching resources from the states, local governments and industry associations.
x Increase states’ management autonomy for deciding allocation and disbursement
of joint federal/state funds for research and innovation projects.
Concluding remarks
This report argues that Mexico has moved too slowly towards an innovation-fuelled
growth path, which, in the short term, would enhance the country’s knowledge-based
competitiveness and allow it to reap benefits from globalisation similar to those reaped by
dynamic emerging economies. In the longer term, such a path would allow Mexico to
bridge the wide gap in living standards with wealthier OECD countries.
The report suggests that, as part of a wide and ambitious “national innovation
agenda”, the Mexican government should urgently increase the priority given to reforms
and policies that can enhance capabilities throughout the economy and drive innovation.
It first reiterates the call of other recent OECD reports for reforms in policies that
shape framework conditions for innovation, with emphasis on education and competition
policies (OECD, 2006a, 2007a, 2007b, 2009a).
Focusing on the role of science, technology and innovation policy stricto sensu,
whose primary and explicit objective is to enhance innovation capabilities in the public
and private sectors, it proposes the following prioritisation and sequencing of government
initiatives.

In the short term, the government’s increased commitment to fostering innovation
should result in:
x Improved governance structures to ensure more effective leadership and
coherence in the formulation, implementation and evaluation of relevant policies
at federal and state level.
x Sustained budgetary spending in support of RD and innovation through better
designed and managed programmes. In particular, the overall budgetary effort in
support of business innovation (defined as the sum of foregone tax revenues and
the cost of direct support) should be at least maintained, but a new balance should
be found between tax incentives and grants, to the benefit of the latter.
In a longer term perspective, the government should initiate or contemplate other
changes in the infrastructure and incentive structures of the Mexican innovation system.
As well as the future of the SNI, the position of public research centres and universities in
an increasingly firm-centred Mexican innovation system should be re-examined.

Notes
1. See OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: China (OECD, 2008a).
2. The share of self-financing by CONACYT centres reached 35% in 2006.
3. As in the case of the National Laboratory of Genomics for Biodiversity (LANGEBIO) in Guanajuato.
4. And behind countries such as China (1.43), Brazil (1.0), South Africa (0.9) and Chile (0.7).
5. With 20% growth for CONACYT appropriations.
6. 15 sectoral priorities for the Economía-CONACYT Fund.
7. All sectoral funds except SEP-CONACYT and Economía-CONACYT.
8. 4.2% of the CONACYT budget for 2002-06.
9. However, funding increased in 2008 with MXN 350 million allocated to so-called “strategic projects”,
with MXN 30 million minimum per project.
10. Between 1997 and 2006 Mexico’s share in the world total scientific production grew from 0.52%
to 0.75%.
11. As measured by the number of citations per scientific article.
12. It met only three times in six years.
13. Presently the Forum is composed of 14 representatives of the academic sector and three members
of industry.
14. These constraints can be diverse: access to finance, access to proprietary technology, availability
of qualified personnel, etc.
15. This, as well as federal/state co-ordination, would be facilitated by more homogeneous state admini-
strative structures regarding the administrations responsible for ST policy and programmes.
16. The calculation of these savings should take into account the residual costs of tax credits.
17. This may involve a reform of the labour law as it applies to the statute of public research institute
personnel.

ÉVALUATION GÉNÉRALE ET RECOMMANDATIONS – 33
Évaluation générale et recommandations
Encourager l’innovation pour stimuler le développement socioéconomique
du Mexique
Ces dix dernières années, le Mexique a beaucoup progressé vers la stabilité macro-
économique et a lancé d’importantes réformes structurelles pour ouvrir davantage son
économie aux échanges et à l’investissement, et pour améliorer le fonctionnement des
marchés de biens et de services. Cela étant, le potentiel de croissance du PIB est bien trop
faible pour combler le large écart de niveau de vie qui existe entre le Mexique et les pays
de l’OCDE les plus riches, et pour remédier à une pauvreté encore largement répandue.
Le pays est confronté à une concurrence accrue de la part d’autres grandes économies
émergentes qui sont en train de renforcer plus rapidement que lui leurs capacités pour
tirer parti de la mondialisation.
L’une des principales causes de cette situation est que les décideurs mexicains –
publics et privés – ont mis du temps à prendre pleinement conscience que l’investisse-
ment dans l’innovation était un important moteur de la croissance et de la compétitivité.
Or, la perte de compétitivité dans les activités fondées sur le savoir peut être à l’origine
d’un cercle vicieux de plus en plus difficile à enrayer, car la faiblesse des capacités
d’innovation limite les retombées internationales de la hausse des investissements des
concurrents dans le savoir. Pour obtenir une croissance économique plus forte et plus
durable, le gouvernement mexicain doit montrer une volonté sans faille dans la poursuite
de son travail de réforme sur un large front, motivé par un sentiment d’urgence et inspiré
par une vision mobilisatrice.
La crise économique mondiale ne doit pas décourager ou amoindrir ces efforts. “Une
forte performance en matière d’innovation est plus importante que jamais dans le contexte
actuel. Les plans de relance doivent être conçus de façon à stimuler l’innovation”.
(« Réponse stratégique de l’OCDE à la crise financière et économique : Contributions à
l’effort global », OCDE, 2009).
Pour permettre au pays de s’engager plus résolument sur la voie de l’innovation et
ainsi de mieux répondre aux besoins et aspirations croissants de sa population (hausse du
niveau de vie, amélioration de la santé, renforcement de la sécurité et préservation de
l’environnement, enrichissement de la vie culturelle, etc.), il doit orienter l’ensemble de
ses politiques dans ce sens et apporter son soutien aux initiatives des entreprises privées
et de la société civile afin d’encourager toutes les formes de créativité et d’innovation,
tant individuelles que collectives. Augmenter l’investissement dans le capital humain – en
particulier dans l’éducation – et favoriser l’innovation dans le secteur privé seront
indispensable pour atteindre cet objectif. Le programme spécial pour la science, la
technologie et l’innovation (PECITI), qui a été approuvé récemment, est une étape
positive dans cette direction. Il devra toutefois bénéficier de moyens budgétaires adaptés
et être complété par des réformes de gouvernance portant sur la structure institutionnelle

34 – ÉVALUATION GÉNÉRALE ET RECOMMANDATIONS
chargée de la conception, du financement, de la mise en œuvre et de l’évaluation des
politiques.
Performances économiques récentes et nouveaux défis
La situation du Mexique a considérablement évolué depuis les réformes entreprises
au cours des vingt dernières années pour libéraliser l’économie et améliorer la gestion
macroéconomique. Le pays a beaucoup progressé vers la stabilité macroéconomique :
depuis la crise du peso en 1995, son PIB a enregistré une croissance raisonnable, de
l’ordre de 3.6 % par an en moyenne. Ces dernières années, en revanche, la croissance
mexicaine a été plus faible que celle des économies les plus dynamiques d’Amérique
latine (le Brésil et le Chili), et elle n’a pas été suffisante pour amener le PIB par habitant
au même niveau que celui des économies de l’OCDE les plus avancées. En fait, depuis
2000, la hausse de la productivité du travail mexicaine est l’une des plus faibles de tous
les pays de l’OCDE. C’est pourquoi une priorité vitale de la politique économique du
Mexique doit être de favoriser les gains de productivité et de créer les conditions d’une
croissance accrue et durable de l’économie.
L’un des principaux moteurs de la croissance économique du Mexique a été
l’ouverture du pays au commerce international et à l’investissement étranger. C’est en
grande partie grâce aux débouchés créés par l’Accord de libre-échange nord-américain
(ALENA) et les programmes Maquila/Pitex que le Mexique a pu enregistrer une forte
augmentation de ses exportations de produits manufacturés, principalement à destination
des États-Unis. La proportion des échanges dans le PIB (produit intérieur brut) a doublé
en 20 ans, avec une hausse de la part du secteur manufacturier (qui est passée de 20 à près
de 85 %) et une spécialisation accrue des activités d’exportation dans les secteurs (ou les
produits) qui sont intégrés dans les chaînes de valeur mondiales. Toutefois, malgré les
effets positifs initiaux des importations de technologies et de la réallocation des facteurs
de production parmi et entre les secteurs concernés par l’intégration commerciale et
l’augmentation des investissements directs étrangers (IDE), les récentes performances
commerciales du Mexique s’expliquent davantage par des coûts de main-d’œuvre
relativement faibles que par une productivité et une capacité d’innovation élevées et
croissantes.
La préférence pour les technologies importées au détriment des innovations
nationales – qui s’est traduite par une capacité d’absorption insuffisante de la part des
sociétés mexicaines – a limité la diffusion et le transfert de technologie via les échanges
intrabranches et les IDE. Au Mexique, les secteurs dits de pointe n’investissent pas
beaucoup plus (en proportion de leur valeur ajoutée) dans la R-D et l’innovation que les
secteurs à faible intensité technologique. Ils n’ont, par conséquent, pas de rôle moteur
dans la propagation du savoir et des technologies dans l’ensemble des entreprises, ou la
constitution de chaînes de valeur fondées sur la technologie.
La croissance fragile de la productivité et la faible performance globale du secteur
des entreprises en matière d’innovation (mesurée, par exemple, par les indicateurs
d’investissement dans l’innovation, ainsi que par la création de sociétés tournées vers la
technologie), mais aussi la hausse des coûts unitaires relatifs de la main-d’œuvre
mexicaine depuis la fin des années 90, ont eu tendance à éroder la compétitivité
internationale du Mexique, en particulier par rapport aux économies émergentes telles
que la Chine : celle-ci a, dès 2003, remplacé le Mexique en tant que deuxième partenaire
commercial des États-Unis derrière le Canada, et a considérablement accru ses

investissements dans la science, la technologie, l’innovation et le capital humain au cours
des dix dernières années1
.
L’importance croissante de l’innovation et des politiques de promotion de
l’innovation pour une croissance élevée et durable
La hausse du PIB par habitant est le plus gros défi stratégique car il est la condition
indispensable pour réduire l’ampleur de la pauvreté. L’innovation peut, à cet égard, jouer
un rôle très important en favorisant l’amélioration de la productivité. Elle est également
une condition essentielle pour retirer le maximum d’avantages de l’intégration du
Mexique dans l’économie mondiale, car elle augmente la capacité des entreprises
mexicaines à absorber et à adapter les technologies provenant de l’étranger, ainsi qu’à
affirmer leur compétitivité sur le marché mondial.
L’expérience des pays de l’OCDE montre que les performances des systèmes
d’innovation ne dépendent pas uniquement de la mise en œuvre de politiques spécifiques
axées sur la promotion de la science, de la technologie et de l’innovation (STI), mais
qu’elles dépendent aussi de conditions plus générales qui sont loin d’être réunies au
Mexique :
x reconnaissance politique de l’importance des investissements dans le savoir, et
affectation d’enveloppes budgétaires en conséquence ;
x dispositifs de gouvernance qui permettent la participation des parties prenantes à
la définition des orientations et des priorités, ainsi qu’une mise en œuvre efficace
des politiques correspondantes ;
x assortiment de mesures permettant de relever les défis du système d’innovation, et
flexibilité institutionnelle assurant l’adaptabilité de cet assortiment ;
x existence de conditions-cadres définissant l’environnement des entreprises et
influant de manière positive sur les incitations et les capacités de ces dernières à
innover (par exemple, accès aux capitaux, réglementation de la concurrence et
régime de propriété intellectuelle) ;
x infrastructure physique et des TIC facilitant l’implantation et le développement de
plateformes d’investissement dans l’innovation et le savoir ;
x dernier aspect, mais non le moindre, disponibilité d’une main-d’œuvre bien
formée, et efforts continus pour accroître le stock de capital humain qualifié.
Le Mexique doit progresser sur tous ces points pour qu’une augmentation de
l’investissement (public et privé) dans le savoir contribue réellement à la fois à améliorer
la capacité d’innovation de son économie, et aussi à résoudre les principales difficultés
sociales de la population mexicaine.
Le système d’innovation mexicain : principaux défis pour les pouvoirs publics
Comme l’attestent l’adoption des lois de 1999 et 2002 sur la science et la technologie
(S-T) et de la nouvelle loi organique du CONACYT (Conseil national de la science et de
la technologie), ainsi que l’approbation du Programme spécial 2001-06 pour la science et
la technologie (PECYT), un certain nombre d’initiatives ont été prises pour améliorer la
conception et la mise en œuvre de la politique mexicaine de STI. Bien que quelques

résultats positifs soient à noter, les objectifs n’ont dans l’ensemble pas été atteints, et des
lacunes structurelles continuent d’altérer le fonctionnement du système d’innovation.
Tenant compte des précédents échecs et succès de la politique, le PECITI de 2008-12 est
le signe encourageant d’une volonté de résoudre ces faiblesses structurelles en mettant à
profit les atouts inexploités dont dispose le Mexique sur le plan social et économique
(voir le tableau récapitulatif ci-contre).
Des lacunes structurelles et institutionnelles continuent de nuire au système
d’innovation
L’amélioration des pratiques de gouvernance n’a pas été suffisante pour permettre
une mise en œuvre efficace des actions prioritaires définies dans le PECYT. Le pouvoir
de coordination conféré officiellement au CONACYT dans la loi sur la science et la
technologie de 2002 n’a pas pu être exercé effectivement, que ce soit dans le cadre de la
préparation du budget de la science et de la technologie ou dans celui de la définition des
orientations. La distinction entre les organes politiques chargés de l’élaboration de la
politique et les organes administratifs chargés de sa mise en œuvre est restée floue. La
multiplication d’instruments de soutien mal financés, au service de communautés divisées
et gérés de façon trop bureaucratique, ont dilué l’action gouvernementale, qui n’a donc pu
avoir qu’un effet positif limité sur les performances du système d’innovation mexicain.
Les ressources consacrées aux activités de R-D sont restées en deçà des objectifs
déclarés. Selon les indicateurs d’innovation disponibles, le système scientifique,
technologique et d’innovation du Mexique est en retard par rapport aux autres pays de
l’OCDE et certaines des économies émergentes importantes. Le Mexique se situe à
l’avant-dernier rang des pays de l’OCDE pour le pourcentage des dépenses de R-D par
rapport au PIB. Malgré l’augmentation des investissements de R-D par le secteur
industriel, la RD est restée pour l’essentiel l’apanage du secteur public. Le nombre de
dépôts de brevets par habitant ou par unité de R-D figure parmi les plus faibles de la zone
OCDE. La balance des paiements technologiques affiche un déficit énorme et persistant –
les exportations représentent moins de 10 % des importations – et les accords de licences
technologiques entre les institutions mexicaines sont extrêmement rares.
Malgré de récents progrès, la formation des ressources humaines dans le domaine des
sciences et des technologies demeure insuffisante, et la faible propension des entreprises à
recruter ce type de personnel dissuade d’en former davantage. Cela constitue un obstacle
sérieux à la diffusion du savoir et à la capacité d’innovation du secteur des entreprises.
En dépit des efforts méritoires qui ont été déployés pour renforcer l’infrastructure
technologique et améliorer l’accès aux services correspondants, la grande majorité des
petites et moyennes entreprises (PME) mexicaines n’ont toujours pas les moyens de
mettre en place et de gérer des activités novatrices, en partie à cause du faible niveau de
qualification de leur main-d’œuvre et de leur personnel d’encadrement.
Enfin et surtout, les relations entre l’industrie et la communauté scientifique
demeurent très peu développées, à la fois en termes de flux de savoir – y compris
lorsqu’ils se matérialisent dans le capital humain – et de collaboration concernant les
projets d’innovation fondés sur des connaissances universitaires.

Tableau récapitulatif : Analyse SWOT du système d’innovation mexicain
Points forts Points faibles
x Ensemble d’universités (à la fois publiques et privées) et
de centres de recherche publics de première qualité
x Réserve importante de scientifiques qualifiés
x Marché intérieur relativement vaste
x Ensemble d’entreprises mondialisées et faisant preuve
de compétitivité internationale
x Pôles d’excellence régionaux et sectoriels
x Attraits de certains secteurs pour les IDE
x Vaste expérience de certains organismes publics en ce
qui concerne la promotion de la STI et le développement
économique
x Ressources naturelles importantes
x Diversité culturelle source de créativité
x Gestion peu efficiente du système d’innovation national
x Ensemble de mesures déséquilibré
x Faiblesse de l’enveloppe budgétaire et de l’engagement
politique à l’égard de la STI
x Gestion bureaucratique des programmes de soutien
x Très faible coopération entre les secteurs public et privé ;
faible mobilité des ressources humaines dans le domaine
des sciences et technologies
x Mauvaises performances du système éducatif ;
main-d’œuvre peu qualifiée
x Infrastructure technologique insuffisante
x Faible capacité d’absorption technologique pour la
grande majorité des petites et moyennes entreprises
(PME)
x Mauvaise connaissance des droits de propriété
intellectuelle
x Concurrence peu développée dans certains secteurs ;
obstacles à la création d’entreprises ; mauvaise gestion
des entreprises du secteur industriel public
x Priorité aux technologies importées
x Marchés financiers inadaptés à l’investissement axé sur
l’innovation
Possibilités Risques
x Jeunesse de la population
x Proximité géographique avec les États-Unis
x Développement naissant d’une importante réserve
d’ingénieurs
x Demande croissante de biens sociaux à forte technicité
x Participation à des réseaux de connaissances et des
plateformes technologiques d’envergure mondiale
x Diversification de la production et du commerce vers les
biens et les services présentant une plus grande
technicité
x Stratégies des PME davantage axées sur l’innovation
x Diffusion technologique autour des entreprises
multinationales, conformément aux chaînes de valeur
mondiales de l’innovation
x La biodiversité comme possible atout économique
x Concurrence accrue de la part des économies
émergentes
x Expansion de plus en plus rapide de nouveaux horizons
scientifiques et technologiques
x Intensification de la concurrence mondiale des cerveaux
x Grande dépendance économique et technologique à
l’égard des pays à faible croissance
x Rareté des liens avec les régions émergentes
dynamiques connaissant un développement
économique, scientifique et technologique rapide
x Concentration des capacités d’innovation au niveau
régional

Effets positifs mais limités de certaines initiatives récentes
Au cours des dernières années, un certain nombre d’initiatives ont été prises ou
expérimentées avec un certain degré de succès, quoique limité. Certaines ont eu des effets
relativement positifs sur les performances en matière d’innovation, et doivent à ce titre
être poursuivies. D’autres ont contribué à renforcer les capacités d’innovation mais
doivent être repensées au niveau de la gestion et/ou du financement afin de gagner en
efficacité.
Un rôle plus proactif pour les centres de recherche publics
Ces dernières années, les réformes simultanées de la gouvernance et du financement
des centres de recherche publics a conduit ces derniers à adopter une approche plus
proactive en ce qui concerne les décisions stratégiques. La mise en œuvre « d’accords de
performances » a institué un système de gouvernance qui est fondé sur l’évaluation et
l’obligation d’accroître la transparence, et qui oblige les centres à accorder la priorité à la
recherche et aux activités technologiques, ou aux programmes présentant une utilité
sociale ou économique reconnue. Dans le même temps, la réforme du financement a
obligé la plupart des centres de recherche publics à accroître leur part d’autofinancement
dans leur budget global2
.
Ces aménagements ont conduit les centres de recherche publics à modifier
l’orientation et l’organisation de leurs activités en intensifiant leur coopération avec le
secteur privé et avec d’autres entités auxquelles ils fournissent des services techno-
logiques et de R-D. Un autre facteur ayant contribué à cette évolution a été le fait que les
projets supposant une coopération entre les centres de recherche publics et les entreprises
se sont vus souvent accorder la priorité pour l’octroi d’aide financière par la CONACYT
et d’autres organismes publics tels que le ministère de l’Économie, dans le cadre de
programmes ayant un autre objectif premier.
Encourager les entreprises à investir dans les activités d’innovation
Pendant la période de mise en œuvre du PECYT (2001-06), plusieurs initiatives
incluant des mesures de soutien directes et indirectes ont contribué à encourager
l’investissement du secteur privé dans les activités d’innovation. Ces initiatives ont
entraîné une forte augmentation à la fois du volume des activités de R-D des entreprises
ainsi que du pourcentage de la R-D totale financé ou assuré par le secteur productif,
pourcentage qui reste toutefois toujours inférieur à la moyenne de l’OCDE.
Parmi ces mesures de soutien, la plus importante a été l’incitation fiscale mise en
place par le CONACYT en 2002, qui a représenté plus de 75 % de l’aide totale en 2006.
Toutefois, au-delà de ses effets positifs significatifs sur l’investissement privé dans
l’innovation, l’efficience de cette mesure a été discutable, notamment en ce qui concerne
sa gestion, la concentration de ses bénéfices, ou encore son poids disproportionné par
rapport à d’autres mesures de soutien plus directes.
Malgré quelques exceptions, les mesures de soutien directes mises en œuvre par
l’administration mexicaine pour stimuler l’investissement privé dans les activités
d’innovation ont eu un succès limité. Dans un trop grand nombre de cas, comme par
exemple celui des fonds d’investissement sectoriel, l’efficacité des mesures a été réduite
par leur ciblage restreint, la multiplicité des critères d’obtention, les lourdeurs de gestion
et les problèmes de coordination. Au titre des exceptions, il convient de mentionner les

programmes qui ont été gérés et financés par une seule institution, comme le récent
programme AVANCE du CONACYT – qui s’intéresse aux nouvelles entreprises à
vocation technologique – le programme PROSOFT qui, financé par le ministère de
l’Économie, concerne les applications des TIC, et enfin le fonds pour les PME du
ministère de l’Économie qui, via son volet sur l’innovation et le développement
technologique, finance les initiatives entrepreneuriales soutenues par des institutions
intermédiaires intervenant comme négociateurs.
Dans les États les plus avancés économiquement de la République fédérale mexicaine,
les autorités locales ont également joué un rôle actif en promouvant le développement des
pôles d’activités spécialisés et en renforçant l’infrastructure scientifique et technologique
devant servir à les soutenir. Dans la plupart des cas, les programmes qui ont été
couronnés de succès sont ceux qui ont bénéficié non seulement d’une approche bien
coordonnée entre les autorités et les institutions locales et fédérales, mais aussi d’une
forte participation des associations professionnelles et des organisations intermédiaires, y
compris dans l’apport d’un financement.
Disponibilité de ressources humaines très qualifiées dans le domaine des sciences
et des technologies
Le Mexique n’a toujours pas rattrapé son retard par rapport à la plupart des pays de
l’OCDE et des économies émergentes comme le Brésil, le Chili et la Chine en ce qui
concerne la disponibilité de ressources humaines très qualifiées dans le domaine des
sciences et des technologies. Il faut toutefois reconnaître que, malgré l’instabilité de la
politique en matière de science, de technologie et d’innovation menée par le Mexique au
cours des vingt dernières années, le CONACYT a eu le mérite de ne pas relâcher ses
efforts, tout au moins au plan budgétaire, pour développer ces ressources.
Le programme de bourses de l’enseignement supérieur qui a été lancé au début des
années 80 est aujourd’hui la principale source de financement pour les Mexicains
souhaitant suivre des études de troisième cycle dans leur pays ou à l’étranger. Ce
programme a bénéficié à ce jour à plus de 150 000 étudiants.
Bien que l’ensemble des efforts doivent être poursuivis, les initiatives mettant
l’accent sur l’offre doivent être complétées par des mesures visant à intensifier la
demande du secteur privé, comme cela est actuellement prévu par le programme IDEA du
PECITI. Il conviendrait par ailleurs, compte tenu de l’évolution de la structure de la
demande de ressources hautement qualifiées, de prévoir pour l’attribution des bourses des
critères de sélection davantage fondés sur les disciplines.
Infrastructure scientifique et technologique
La mise en place et l’entretien d’une infrastructure scientifique et technologique
élaborée ont longtemps été relégués au dernier rang des priorités, y compris en termes de
financement, en raison notamment de sévères restrictions budgétaires. Contrairement aux
pays de l’OCDE plus avancés, le Mexique n’investit pas suffisamment dans l’équipement
et l’infrastructure des sciences et technologies, que ce soit en proportion des dépenses de
R-D ou du nombre de chercheurs qualifiés.
Cette situation n’a commencé à se débloquer que récemment, avec la multiplication
par deux des investissements fédéraux entre 2002 et 2006, qui a permis d’amorcer la
décentralisation des capacités scientifiques et technologiques. Dans un certain nombre de

cas, les administrations des États ont ajouté leur contribution à celle de l’administration
fédérale3
.
Défis à relever
Malgré les quelques résultats positifs des réformes institutionnelles et autres
initiatives engagées dans le cadre du PECYT, la correction des lacunes structurelles
chroniques du système d’innovation mexicain n’a guère progressé. Ces lacunes continuent
de faire obstacle à la création d’un cercle vertueux dans lequel la production de savoir
ainsi que sa diffusion et son utilisation se renforcent mutuellement et génèrent des effets
positifs en termes de croissance économique et de bien-être social. L’élimination de ces
lacunes représente le défi essentiel à relever en ce qui concerne la conception, la
gouvernance, le financement et la mise en œuvre de la politique future du Mexique en
matière de S-T et d’innovation.
Augmenter l’investissement public dans la science, la technologie et les activités
de R-D
Aucun pays n’a réussi à améliorer de façon décisive ses performances économiques
en matière d’innovation sans un investissement public constant dans les actifs
scientifiques et technologiques corporels et incorporels. Au Mexique, l’augmentation du
volume des ressources publiques consacrées à la R-D et le développement des capacités
d’absorption (pour permettre une utilisation efficace de ces ressources) sont deux
conditions indispensables pour enclencher un cercle vertueux dans lequel les
investissements publics et privés en faveur de l’innovation se complètent et garantissent
une meilleure rentabilité sociale des investissements dans le savoir.
À cet égard, et malgré l’objectif fixé par la loi sur la science et la technologie de
2002 – à savoir, que les dépenses de R-D représentent 1 % du PIB en 2006 –, les
performances du Mexique demeurent extrêmement faibles, avec un ratio de 0.49 % en
2007, ce qui place le pays à l’avant-dernier rang du classement OCDE4
. Bien que ce taux
traduise un léger progrès par rapport à 2002 (0.4 %) – principalement grâce au secteur des
entreprises – les dépenses fédérales consacrées à la science et à la technologie sont restées
pratiquement inchangées en valeur constante depuis les six dernières années, ce qui
signifie que leur part dans le budget fédéral et le PIB a baissé. En fait, par rapport aux
autres pays, le gouvernement mexicain affecte très peu de ressources à son système de
recherche public. Pourtant, une comparaison internationale montre que dans les pays les
plus performants, la part du secteur privé dans les dépenses totales de R-D n’augmente
pas de façon durable quand les dépenses publiques de R-D diminuent en valeur absolue.
Cette évolution des dépenses publiques et privées constitue certainement un obstacle
à la consolidation du système d’innovation mexicain. Le renforcement des liens et de la
collaboration entre les secteurs public et privé suppose la mise en place d’interactions
entre deux partenaires dynamiques. Or, cela n’est pas possible si le volume des ressources
attribuées à l’un des deux stagne ou diminue.
Dans ce contexte relativement morose, l’on ne peut que se réjouir du signal
encourageant que représentent les enveloppes budgétaires allouées récemment à la
science et à la technologie, dont le montant a augmenté de 16.2 % entre 2007 et 20085
.

Renforcer les programmes de soutien et la coordination des politiques
Malgré les bonnes intentions du PECYT – dont le but était de faire en sorte que la
politique scientifique, technologique et d’innovation soit plus clairement orientées dans
ses objectifs et plus cohérente dans la mise en œuvre des mesures de soutien – la gestion
des programmes d’aide directe a trop souvent pâti de sérieuses défaillances de la
gouvernance, notamment le manque de coordination, la dispersion des responsabilités et
la fragmentation. En fait, au cours de la période de mise en œuvre du PECYT, les
programmes de soutien ont été organisés moins en fonction des objectifs d’action que des
compromis qui avaient été conclus entre le CONACYT et les ministères des différents
secteurs au sujet des responsabilités en termes de gestion et de financement. Le résultat a
été un nombre anormalement élevé de programmes de soutien insuffisamment financés,
avec des critères d’obtention trop nombreux et des procédures décisionnelles extrême-
ment lourdes. Que ce soit seul ou en collaboration avec d’autres organismes (de
l’administration fédérale ou des États), le CONACYT s’est retrouvé à gérer plus de
60 fonds ou programmes de soutien. Cette situation est à l’origine d’un important manque
d’efficacité dû aux coûts de transaction, aux rivalités administratives et aux retards causés
par l’excès de bureaucratie.
L’exemple le plus flagrant de ce manque d’efficacité est l’existence de 17 fonds
d’investissement sectoriel qui sont financés et gérés conjointement par le CONACYT et
les ministères des différents secteurs afin de développer les capacités scientifiques,
technologiques et innovantes en fonction des « besoins stratégiques » du « secteur »
participant. Les crédits qui leur sont affectés sont relativement faibles, avec une moyenne
de moins de 100 millions USD par an au total. Par ailleurs, les priorités de financement
sont souvent définies avec un très grand niveau de détail6
, ce qui fausse le processus de
sélection.
Le taux de rejet est élevé, ce qui peut s’expliquer par le nombre de demandes trop
élevé par rapport aux fonds disponibles, le peu de qualification des candidats, la faible
pertinence des projets, les conflits administratifs et/ou le manque de clarté des critères.
Compte tenu des sommes restreintes que ces fonds peuvent allouer à chacun projet
individuel, le taux élevé de refus semble impliquer que la sélection des projets est
extrêmement coûteuse sur le plan administratif.
Pour des besoins d’efficience, on pourrait légitimement remplacer les fonds
d’investissement sectoriel dédiés à la recherche appliquée7
par des programmes
prioritaires par secteur, financés sur une base concurrentielle à l’aide de crédits d’un
montant plus élevé prélevés sur les budgets de science et de technologie des ministères
correspondants. Cela se rapprocherait des pratiques qui sont de plus en plus observées
dans les autres pays de l’OCDE, où la définition des priorités s’accompagne de la
constitution d’un budget dont les ressources provenant de plusieurs sources sont allouées
aux propositions les plus intéressantes par une « agence de moyens » ayant une mission
de gestion.
Les 32 fonds mixtes, qui sont gérés conjointement par le CONACYT et les organismes
publics des États et qui se sont développés progressivement depuis 2001, ont été conçus
pour aider à dynamiser la recherche et/ou l’innovation au niveau régional, ainsi qu’à créer
un lien entre les politiques scientifiques, technologiques et d’innovation et les
programmes de soutien fédéraux et régionaux.

Bien que ces fonds représentent en principe un bon moyen de coordination entre le
gouvernement fédéral et les États, leur bilan n’est à ce jour pas très satisfaisant :
x Ils ont souvent pâti de l’absence d’une demande clairement articulée de la part des
États, en raison en partie d’une coordination inefficace entre les parties prenantes,
en particulier dans les États moins développés. Ils ont dans l’ensemble été plus
utiles pour les centres de recherche et les établissements d’enseignement supérieur
installés au niveau local, dont les intérêts scientifiques et technologiques sont bien
ciblés.
x Les sommes allouées étaient généralement assez faibles8
et ont servi à financer un
nombre réduit de projets ayant peu d’effets sur la capacité d’innovation régionale.9
x Leur gestion et leur efficacité ont souvent été compromises par la lenteur des
processus de sélection et de décaissement des crédits, ainsi que par l’incapacité
d’un certain nombre d’États à concevoir et proposer des projets de R-D et
d’innovation intéressants.
La plupart des pays qui ont mis en place des fonds cofinancés et gérés par des
organismes publics différents se sont le plus souvent heurtés à des problèmes de mise en
œuvre. Le Mexique ne fait pas exception à la règle, et outre des ressources plus
abondantes, ce sont des règles de gestion plus claires et plus efficaces qui sont requises.
Les bénéficiaires sont généralement d’accord sur le fait qu’en plus de leurs finances
restreintes, les fonds mixtes et les fonds d’investissement sectoriel ont pour inconvénients
une gestion peu efficiente et une lenteur dans le versement des sommes aux projets
sélectionnés.
Contrairement aux résultats mitigés des fonds mixtes et des fonds d’investissement
sectoriel, les autres instruments mis en place par l’administration mexicaine pour
encourager la R-D, l’innovation ou le développement technologique se sont avérés plus
efficients sur le plan de la gestion et de la coordination, et plus efficaces en termes de
résultats. Comme cela a été indiqué plus haut, les exemples les plus représentatifs sont
notamment le programme AVANCE du CONACYT, le programme PROSOFT et le
fonds pour les PME – qui sont tous les deux financés et gérés par le ministère de
l’Économie – et, avec certaines réserves toutefois, le système d’incitation fiscale à la R-
D, qui est géré par le CONACYT en collaboration avec les ministères des Finances, de
l’Économie et de l’Éducation.
Améliorer les performances de la recherche universitaire et favoriser les liens
entre les centres de recherche publics et l’industrie
Au cours des dix dernières années, dans un contexte de quasi-stagnation des
ressources, la productivité du système scientifique mexicain – mesurée par les
performances et la pertinence des activités scientifiques – s’est nettement améliorée. La
production scientifique a considérablement gagné en volume10
ainsi que, dans une
moindre mesure, en qualité11
. Cela est dû en grande partie au SNI qui, depuis sa création
en 1984, a joué un grand rôle dans la création d’une forte communauté de chercheurs
qualifiés dont la sélection, la promotion et les récompenses (sommes non imposables
s’ajoutant à leur rémunération) dépendent de critères fondés sur la quantité et la qualité de
leurs travaux scientifiques.
Cela étant, la recherche publique menée dans les établissements d’enseignement
supérieur mexicains présente toujours d’importantes lacunes qui limitent sa capacité à

générer du savoir et à former un nombre suffisant de professionnels hautement qualifiés
pouvant contribuer efficacement à la résolution des problèmes sociaux et au renforcement
de la capacité d’innovation du secteur productif. De surcroît, la recherche universitaire est
encore très centralisée, ce qui empêche les transferts de connaissances.
Le système d’incitations pécuniaires instauré par le SNI s’appuie sur l’évaluation des
personnes et le décompte des publications de travaux scientifiques. Il n’incite pas à mener
des projets à long terme ou des travaux de recherche pluridisciplinaires sur des questions
difficiles qui peuvent s’avérer bénéfiques en termes d’innovation. Les réalisations
technologiques ne bénéficient pas de la même reconnaissance que les résultats
scientifiques publiés, ce qui n’encourage pas la coopération avec l’industrie et fait
obstacle à la mobilité des chercheurs entre l’université et le secteur industriel. Par ailleurs,
l’effet combiné des systèmes de rémunération du SNI et de pension sur les décisions de
départ à la retraite sera probablement un vieillissement de la communauté scientifique,
qui pourrait s’avérer extrêmement nuisible à sa productivité future en termes de
rendement, d’originalité et de qualité.
Dans un système d’innovation, l’un des principaux facteurs de cohérence et de
dynamisme est l’intensité et l’ampleur des échanges de connaissances entre le monde
scientifique et l’industrie. Ces dernières années, de nombreux centres de recherche
publics et quelques établissements d’enseignement supérieur ont renforcé leur coopération
avec le secteur des entreprises via des travaux de recherche conjoints consacrés au
développement de produits et de processus, et via la prestation de services technolo-
giques. D’un autre côté, des initiatives concluantes, quoique d’ampleur limitée, ont été
lancées par des entreprises ou des secteurs sociaux pour se procurer du savoir auprès des
organismes de recherche dans le but de renforcer leurs activités d’innovation. Il n’en
demeure pas moins que le faible niveau d’échange de connaissances entre le monde
scientifique et l’industrie est l’une des principales lacunes du système d’innovation
mexicain. Cette situation peut s’expliquer par un certain nombre de facteurs :
x Du côté de la demande, le manque de personnel hautement qualifié dans une
grande majorité d’entreprises, ainsi que la fragilité des dispositifs de transfert de
technologies constituent des obstacles à l’absorption du savoir des organismes de
recherche – et à une interaction efficace avec eux – pendant les premières étapes
de développement des produits ou des processus. À cet égard, le programme
IDEA, qui a été lancé récemment pour encourager l’insertion dans les entreprises
de professionnels des S-T très qualifiés, est une initiative très utile. Le programme
mérite d’être étendu en prévoyant un assouplissement et une décentralisation de
sa mise en œuvre.
x Du côté de l’offre, le fait que le SNI récompense essentiellement les publications
scientifiques n’incite pas les chercheurs à instaurer une collaboration avec les
entreprises, et les obstacles à la mobilité de ces chercheurs d’une institution à une
aggrave les conséquences. Au niveau institutionnel, la coopération se met
progressivement en place, encouragée par exemple dans le cas des centres de
recherche publics par la tendance à l’autofinancement croissant. L’importance
prise par l’innovation fondée sur la science commence à influencer les programmes
de recherche des centres publics et des établissements d’enseignement supérieur
avancés tels que le Cinvestav, et à encourager la collaboration avec les entreprises
dotées de moyens de recherche. Le renforcement de la capacité des organismes de
recherche publics à développer, protéger et gérer la propriété intellectuelle
permettrait également accélérer cette évolution.

x Sur le plan institutionnel, malgré les initiatives des institutions intermédiaires
publiques ou privées telles qu’Infotec, Cenam, Impi, Fumec ou Produce, les
mécanismes de diffusion de la technologie restent peu développés, et l’accès aux
informations et aux services technologiques est trop rarement facilité. Le manque
d’institutions intermédiaires et d’organismes de certification privés constitue un
autre frein à la diffusion de la technologie et à la collaboration.
Pourtant, la plupart des instruments d’action qui encouragent aujourd’hui au Mexique
la R-D, l’innovation et le développement technologique prévoient notamment comme
critère de sélection des projets celui de la collaboration entre les secteurs public et privé.
Malheureusement, le traitement préférentiel réservé aux projets de collaboration n’a pas
donné les résultats escomptés, ce qui laisse à penser que des approches plus directes ou
des mesures d’incitation conçues spécifiquement pour renforcer les liens entre le monde
scientifique et l’industrie sont nécessaires.
Au lieu de faire des relations entre la science et l’industrie un objectif secondaire
commun de programmes de soutien aux objectifs principaux différents, un moyen plus
efficace de les promouvoir serait de les inclure dans des programmes ou des instruments
spécialisés bénéficiant d’un financement adéquat et conçus en collaboration avec les
parties prenantes. Les exemples les plus représentatifs de ces types de programmes sont
les partenariats public-privé qui se sont mis en place dans le domaine de la recherche et
de l’innovation dans un certain nombre de pays de l’OCDE. Cette approche a été
récemment imitée au Mexique, avec la création des Alliances stratégiques et Réseaux
d’Innovation pour la Compétitivité (AERI), qui représentent un progrès par rapport au
programme Consorcio lancé au début de la décennie.
D’autres types d’actions, qui ne nécessitent pas nécessairement de mise financière,
consistent en des réformes institutionnelles, notamment celles relatives à la mobilité des
chercheurs et à la mise en place de bureaux de transfert de technologie ou de délivrance
de licences dans les organismes de recherche bénéficiant de fonds publics. À cet égard, le
fonds IMPI-CONACYT est une excellente initiative qui devrait faciliter l’instauration de
ces bureaux.
Assortiment de mesures et mise en œuvre des programmes
Dans un contexte général marqué par la faiblesse des budgets affectés à la science et à
la technologie, les problèmes de gouvernance concernant le rôle respectif du CONACYT
et de divers ministères ainsi que la coordination de leurs actions respectives ont affecté
défavorablement l’assortiment et la qualité individuelle des mesures prises en faveur de la
STI, comme en témoignent :
x le très grand nombre de programmes dotés d’un financement insuffisant ;
x l’inadéquation entre le volume de ressources affecté à certains instruments et la
nature des problèmes ou des défaillances systémiques ou du marché auxquels ils
sont sensés remédier ;
x la multiplicité des critères d’éligibilité qui peuvent nuire à la réalisation des
objectifs prioritaires déclarés de nombreux programmes ;
x la dilution ou l’antagonisme des responsabilités en matière de gestion et de
financement entre les organismes de coordination qui ne peuvent qu’aboutir à des
instruments mal conçus et difficiles à mettre en œuvre.

Soutien à la R-D et à l’innovation dans le secteur privé : une panoplie de mesures
déséquilibrée qui a besoin d’être réformée
Jusqu’à une date récente, le Mexique se distinguait des autres pays de l’OCDE par le
pourcentage très élevé des incitations fiscales (environ 75 %) dans le coût budgétaire de
l’ensemble des mesures visant à encourager la R-D et l’innovation dans les entreprises.
Ce déséquilibre était dû au fait que ces allégements fiscaux en faveur de la R-D étaient
nettement plus généreux que ceux observés dans les autres pays ayant instauré des
dispositifs similaires. Par ailleurs, les mesures d’incitation fiscale instaurées par le
Mexique étaient peu adaptées à la situation de la plupart des entreprises. Un grand
nombre d’entre elles n’investissent en effet pas dans la R-D pour innover et ne peuvent
donc pas, en principe, bénéficier de ce type de soutien. En revanche, les instruments qui
permettraient de mieux répondre à leurs besoins – par exemple, les subventions, ou
encore les prêts conditionnels ou subventionnés – étaient en fait beaucoup moins bien
financés que les incitations fiscales.
De toute évidence, une rationalisation des programmes de soutien, un rééquilibrage de
leur financement et une simplification des structures de gestion était nécessaire :
x Incitations fiscales. Au vu de l’expérience des 20 autres pays de l’OCDE qui ont
mis en place des mesures d’incitation fiscale, l’utilisation de ce type d’instrument
au Mexique semble toujours pertinente, à condition que sa conception, sa gestion
et les critères d’obtention soient modifiés en tenant compte des pratiques
exemplaires internationales. Les changements nécessaires devront évidemment
être envisagés dans le cadre de la nouvelle réforme sur la fiscalité des entreprises,
qui a institué l’impôt à taux unique (IETU). Ils devront permettre de réduire le
coût budgétaire des incitations fiscales, d’accroître leur efficience et de faciliter la
transition vers un assortiment de mesures plus équilibré.
x Promouvoir l’innovation dans les PME. Le fonds pour l’innovation technologique
Economía-CONACYT est le principal instrument de soutien utilisé pour stimuler
l’innovation dans les PME. Outre ses ressources relativement faibles, ce fonds
pèche par manque d’efficacité en raison des trop nombreux critères d’obtention et
des problèmes de coordination qui compliquent sa gestion. Dans les autres pays
de l’OCDE, de même que dans les pays d’Amérique latine les plus avancés
(Brésil, Argentine et Chili), les fonds versant des subventions aux PME sont
généralement mieux dotés en ressources et sont gérés non pas par les ministères
financeurs mais par des organismes spécialisés travaillant sous leur responsabilité.
Au Mexique, l’autre facteur qui empêche actuellement une gestion efficiente du
fonds Economía-CONACYT est la capacité relativement faible de ce dernier à
évaluer la possible rentabilité des investissements en matière de R-D et
d’innovation qui sont prévus dans les projets pour lesquels un financement est
sollicité.
x Stimuler l’innovation dans les domaines stratégiques. Bien que les secteurs
stratégiques et les domaines technologiques prioritaires aient été indiqués
explicitement par le PECYT de 2001-06, aucun programme ciblé de grande
envergure n’a été mis en œuvre pour favoriser la recherche et l’innovation dans
les secteurs en question. Les projets financés par les fonds d’investissement
sectoriel ne compensent pas vraiment ce manque. Le PECITI de 2007-12 recense
lui aussi les priorités sectorielles et technologiques qui devront faire l’objet de
programmes spécifiques et ciblés, notamment en ce qui concerne la coopération

entre les secteurs public et privé. Il faut espérer que le PECTI réussira là où le
PECYT a échoué.
x Aider les nouvelles entreprises tournées vers la technologie. C’est là un autre
point faible de la panoplie d’instruments. Seuls le programme AVANCE et, dans
une moindre mesure, l’initiative de pépinières d’entreprises financée par le
ministère de l’Économie, contribuent au développement des activités d’innovation
et de recherche dans les entreprises de haute technologie. Ces dispositifs jouent un
rôle important mais ils ne sont pas suffisamment financés et ne permettent pas
vraiment aux chercheurs des organismes de recherche publics de créer des
entreprises de haute technologie ou des sociétés-rejetons (spin-offs). Il convient, à
cet égard, de consacrer plus d’attention et de ressources au développement de
produits financiers et d’outils de gestion des risques (par exemple, fonds
d’amorçage, capital risque, systèmes de garantie) qui soient adaptés à la création
et à la croissance de ce type de société.
Soutien à la recherche dans le secteur public : amélioration des modes de
financement, des incitations et de la gouvernance
Les ressources allouées à la recherche publique doivent certes être augmentées, mais
il faut aussi que les procédures et les critères d’attribution satisfassent à plusieurs
conditions pour que les activités financées puissent, grâce à un effet de levier sur
l’investissement privé, contribuer efficacement à l’accroissement du capital de
connaissances socialement utiles, à la formation d’un personnel hautement qualifié et au
renforcement de la capacité d’innovation du secteur productif. Ces conditions ont trait
notamment aux modes de financement des activités de recherche, aux incitations fournis
aux chercheurs et aux équipes de recherche, ainsi qu’aux systèmes d’évaluation. Elles
doivent évoluer de pair avec l’assortiment des dispositifs de financement ainsi qu’avec la
structure de gouvernance des organismes de recherche publics.
Un meilleur équilibre doit être trouvé entre les différents modes de financement :
institutionnel, concurrentiel et autres. Un pourcentage et un volume de ressources
croissants devraient être consacrés au financement concurrentiel grâce à la restructuration
des fonds d’investissement sectoriel (finançant la recherche fondamentale et appliquée),
qui sont actuellement financés et gérés par le CONACYT en collaboration avec le SEP
(Secrétariat pour l’enseignement public) et d’autres ministères sectoriels.
x Financement institutionnel. Conformément aux pratiques exemplaires mises en
œuvre dans d’autres pays , le volume et l’attribution du financement institutionnel
devraient dépendre des résultats des évaluations périodiques, en privilégiant les
travaux de recherche de qualité (selon les normes universitaires en vigueur) et en
tenant compte de critères tels que la contribution des chercheurs et des autres
professionnels hautement qualifiés aux performances en matière d’innovation (par
exemple, brevets déposés et relations avec l’industrie). D’autre part,
l’augmentation du financement institutionnel doit continuer d’être envisagée en
gardant à l’esprit la nécessité de décentraliser davantage les activités de recherche
universitaires.
x Financement concurrentiel. Ce type de financement devrait être placé sous la
seule responsabilité du CONACYT. Une partie serait consacrée aux projets de
recherche satisfaisant au critère de l’excellence des travaux – quelle que soit la
discipline scientifique concernée – la priorité étant accordée aux projets menés en

collaboration. L’autre partie financerait des projets de recherche rentrant dans le
cadre des programmes de recherche et d’innovation prioritaires, tels que définis
par le PECITI. La source de financement utilisée pour ces projets pourrait être un
fonds consolidé doté des ressources qui servaient auparavant à alimenter les fonds
d’investissement sectoriel. Ce fonds financerait en particulier les programmes de
recherche et d’innovation à moyen terme, et plus spécialement les partenariats
public-privé tels que ceux mis sur pied dans le cadre des AERI.
x D’autres sources de financement de la recherche publique devraient également
être recherchées activement, en particulier du côté de la coopération internationale
instituée par les accords du CONACYT. Les organismes de recherche publics
devraient en outre être encouragés à créer leurs propres réseaux de collaboration
internationale, et les réglementations qui font obstacle à de telles initiatives
devraient être supprimées ou assouplies.
Un autre aspect important de la politique relative aux organismes de recherche
publics est la formation de ressources humaines hautement qualifiées. À cet égard, le
programme de bourses du CONACYT et les diverses initiatives qui ont été prises
récemment pour encourager les études aux niveaux doctorat et post-doctorat semblent
aller dans la bonne direction et doivent être maintenus.
Enfin, il est clair que les aides fédérales doivent continuer à favoriser une distribution
géographique plus équilibrée de l’infrastructure scientifique et technologique. En
l’occurrence, la tendance à conditionner – tout au moins en partie – l’augmentation du
financement institutionnel des centres de recherche publics et des établissements
d’enseignement supérieur à la régionalisation de leurs installations devra être confirmée,
voire renforcée.
Réforme du SNI : un défi à long terme
Sans le SNI, géré et financé par le CONACYT, la qualité des travaux de recherche
menés au Mexique ainsi que le nombre et la variété des chercheurs mexicains jouissant
d’une reconnaissance internationale ne seraient pas ce qu’ils sont aujourd’hui.
À ce jour, ce système si particulier qui offre une protection contre la fuite des
cerveaux comporte aussi, dans son fonctionnement actuel, à la fois des obstacles au
renforcement de la collaboration avec le secteur privé pour les activités de recherche, et
des risques à long terme liés à l’évolution de la pyramide des âges des chercheurs
mexicains. Si le rôle du SNI – constitution d’un réservoir de chercheurs de premier ordre
et préservation de l’attractivité des métiers de la recherche – doit être maintenu, un
processus de réforme doit toutefois être engagé pour relever les deux défis précités. À
longue échéance, cette réforme pourrait conduire à l’adoption de recherche de barèmes de
rémunération fixés selon des normes nationales mais administrés de plus en plus par les
organismes eux-mêmes, qui il incombe in fine la responsabilité de veiller à la qualité et la
pertinence de leurs plates-formes de recherche.

Recommandations
Objectifs stratégiques
Dans un environnement concurrentiel de plus en plus mondialisé, s’il veut continuer
d’accroître sa productivité économique, de réduire la pauvreté et d’apporter de meilleures
réponses aux besoins urgents de la société, le Mexique n’a d’autre choix que de mener
des politiques macroéconomiques responsables et d’approfondir les réformes structurelles
qui ont été amorcées.
Pour aligner son revenu par habitant sur celui des pays plus développés et, à plus
court terme, pour éviter d’être distancé par les économies émergentes les plus
dynamiques, le Mexique doit mettre à profit le potentiel de la science et de la technologie.
Outre les améliorations urgentes qu’il doit apporter à certaines conditions-cadres
essentielles pour l’innovation (en particulier dans le domaine de l’éducation, de la
concurrence et de l’infrastructure de base), le pays doit s’efforcer d’atteindre plusieurs
objectifs politiques, économiques et sociaux :
x mettre en place un système d’innovation plus puissant et centré sur les entreprises
en augmentant sensiblement l’aide publique (financière et autre) en faveur de
l’innovation, d’une façon qui stimule l’investissement privé dans l’innovation
répondant aux signaux du marché.
x s’assurer que le soutien à la recherche fondamentale et d’intérêt public n’a lieu
que dans les domaines où l’on peut atteindre à la fois la masse critique et
l’excellence, et faire un usage plus effectif de la réforme de la réglementation et
du financement concurrentiel pour renforcer la recherche publique axée sur des
besoins socioéconomiques prioritaires bien définis.
x poursuivre la décentralisation de la politique STI tout en consolidant les capacités
de gestion au niveau des États, et soumettre les programmes bénéficiant de
ressources fédérales à des évaluations strictes, suivant une méthodologie unifiée
au plan national.
Volonté politique et impact social
Les bienfaits socioéconomiques de l’investissement dans la science et la technologie
sont longs à concrétiser. C’est pourquoi le succès d’une politique scientifique,
technologique et d’innovation dépend d’une volonté politique durable et de la visibilité
des avantages pour l’économie et la société dans son ensemble. Il n’existe aucun exemple
de pays développé ou émergent qui ait réussi à placer le savoir et l’innovation au cœur de
sa stratégie de développement sans un tel engagement à long terme.
Au Mexique, la volonté politique a trop souvent fait défaut. L’objectif que s’était fixé
la précédente administration pour la fin de son mandat – à savoir des dépenses de R-D
représentant 1 % du PIB – n’a pas été atteint. Cet objectif était peut-être au départ
irréaliste, mais pour les principales parties prenantes, ce fut au mieux une occasion
manquée, au pire le signe d’un manque d’engagement. L’administration actuelle a affirmé
une volonté similaire au travers du PECITI et en 2008 le budget consacré à la science et à
la technologie a été considérablement augmenté. Cet engagement doit être maintenu sans
relâche par les organes exécutifs et législatifs, et les répercussions scientifiques,

Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content

pronounce it shall have no part in the world to come. Once a year
only, on the day of Atonement, was the high priest allowed to
whisper the word, even as at the present day the word is
whispered in Masonic lodges. The Hebrew Jehovah dates only from
the Massoretic invention of points. When the Rabbis began to insert
the vowel-points they had lost the true pronunciation of the sacred
name. To the letters J. H. V. H. they put the vowels of Edonai or
Adonai, lord or master, the name which in their prayers they
substitute for Jahveh. Moses wanted to know the name of the god of
the burning bush. He was put off with the formula I am that I am.
Jahveh having lost his name has become I was but am not. When
Jacob wrestled with the god, angel, or ghost, he demanded his
name. The wary angel did not comply (Gen. xxxii. 29.) So the father
of Samson begs the angel to say what is his name. And the angel of
the Lord said unto him, why asketh thou thus after my name seeing
it is secret (Judges xiii. 18). All this superstition can be traced to the
belief that to know the names of persons was to acquire power over
them.
In process of time the priest displaces the sorcerer, while still
retaining certain of his functions. The gods of a displaced religion
are regarded as devils and their worship as sorcery. Much of the
persecution of witchcraft which went on in the ages when
Christianity was dominant was really the extirpation of the surviving
rites of Paganism. It is curious that it is always the more savage
races that are believed to have the greatest magical powers. Dr. E.
B. Tylor says: In the Middle Ages the name of Finn was, as it still
remains among seafaring men, equivalent to that of sorcerer, while
Lapland witches had a European celebrity as practitioners of the
black art. Ages after the Finns had risen in the social scale, the
Lapps retained much of their old half-savage habit of life, and with it
naturally their witchcraft, so that even the magic-gifted Finns
revered the occult powers of a people more barbarous than
themselves.
The same writer continues*: Among the early Christians, sorcery
was recognised as illegal miracle; and magic arts, such as turning

men into beasts, calling up familiar demons, raising storms, etc., are
mentioned, not in a sceptical spirit, but with reprobation. In the
changed relations of the state to the church under Constantine, the
laws against magic served the new purpose of proscribing the rites
of the Greek and Roman religion, whose oracles, sacrifices and
auguries, once carried on under the highest public sanction, were
put under the same ban with the low arts of the necromancer and
the witch. As Christianity extended its sway over Europe, the same
antagonism continued, the church striving with considerable success
to put down at once the old local religions, and the even older
practices of witchcraft; condemning Thor and Woden as demons,
they punished their rites in common with those of the sorceresses
who bewitched their neighbors and turned themselves into wolves or
cats. Thus gradually arose the legal persecution of witches which
went on through the Middle Ages under ecclesiastical sanction both
Catholic and Protestant.
* Encyclopedia Britannica, article Magic.
But the religion of Christendom contained scarcely less elements
of magical practices than that of Paganism. In the early Christian
Church a considerable section of its ministry was devoted to the
casting out of devils. Regulations concerning the same were
contained in the canons of the Church of England. The magical
power of giving absolution and remission of sins is still claimed in
our national Church. Throughout the course of Christianity, indeed,
magical effects have been ascribed to religious rites and consecrated
objects.
Viktor Rydberg, the Swedish author of an interesting work on The
Magic of the Middle Ages, says (p. 85): Every monastery has its
master magician, who sells agni Dei, conception billets, magic
incense, salt and tapers which have been consecrated on Candlemas
Day, palms consecrated on Palm Sunday, flowers besprinkled with
holy water on Ascension Day, and many other appliances belonging
to the great magical apparatus of the Church.

Bells are consecrated to this day, because they were supposed to
have a magical effect in warding off demons. Their efficacy for this
purpose is specifically asserted by St. Thomas Aquinas, the greatest
doctor of the Church, who lays it down that the changeableness of
the weather is owing to the constant conflict between good and bad
spirits.
Baptism is another magical process. There are people still in
England who think harm will come to a child if it is not christened. In
Christian baptism we have the magical invocation of certain names,
those of the ever-blessed Trinity. The names of Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost, were used as spells to ward off demons. The process is
supposed to have a magical efficacy, and is as much in the nature of
a charm as making the sign of the cross with holy water, or the
unction with holy oil, as a preparation for death. So important was it
considered that the saving water should prevent demoniac power,
that holy squirts were used to bring magical liquid in contact with
the child before it saw the light!
The doctrine of salvation through blood is nothing but a survival of
the faith in magic. Volumes might be written on the belief in the
magical efficacy of blood as a sacrifice, a cementer of kinship, and a
means of evoking protecting spirits. Blood baths for the cure of
certain diseases were used in Egypt and mediæval Europe.
Longfellow alludes to this superstition in his Golden Legend:
The only remedy that remains
Is the blood that flows from a maiden's veins,
Who of her own free will shall die,
And give her life as the price of yours!
This is the strangest of all cures,
And one I think, you will never try.
The changing of the bread and wine of the Christian sacrament
into the body and blood of God is evidently a piece of magic,
dependent on the priestly magical formula. The affinities of the
Christian communion with savage superstition are so many that they
deserve to be treated in a separate article. Meanwhile let it be
noticed that priests lay much stress upon the Blessed Sacrament, for

it is this which invests them with magical functions and the awe and
reverence consequent upon belief therein.
Formulated prayers are of the nature of magical spells or
invocations. A prayer-book is a collection of spells for fine weather,
rain, or other blessings. The Catholic soldier takes care to be armed
with a blessed scapular to guard off stray bullets, or, in the event of
the worst coming, to waft his soul into heaven. The Protestant
smiles at this superstition, but mutters a prayer for the self-same
purpose. In essence the procedure is the same. The earliest known
Egyptian and Chaldean psalms and hymns are spells against sorcery
or the influence of evil spirits, just as the invocation taught to
Christian children—
Matthew, Mark, Luke And John
Bless The Bed That I Lie On.
The belief in magic, though it shows a survival in Theosophy, as
ghost belief does in Spiritism, is dying slowly; and with it, in the long
run, must die those religious doctrines and practices founded upon
it. No magic can endure scientific scrutiny. Almost expelled from the
physical world, it takes refuge in the domain of psychology; but
there, too, it is being gradually ousted, though it still affords a
profitable area for charlantanry.
Lucian has a story how Pancrates, wanting a servant, took a door-
bar and pronounced over it magical words, whereon he stood up,
brought him water, turned a spit, and did all the other tasks of a
slave. What is this, asks Emerson, but a prophecy of the progress of
art? Moses striking water from the rock was inferior to Sir Hugh
Middleton bringing a water supply to London.
Jesus walking on the water was nothing to crossing the Atlantic by
steam. The only true magic is that of science, which is a conquest of
the human mind, and not a phantasy of superstition.

TABOOS.
Viscount Amberley, in his able Analysis of Religious Belief points
out that everywhere the religious instinct leads to the consecration
of certain actions, places, and things. If this instinct is analysed, it is
found at bottom to spring from fear. Certain places are to be
dreaded as the abode of evil spirits; certain actions are calculated to
propitiate them, and certain things are dangerous, and are therefore
tabooed.
From Polynesia was derived the word taboo or tapu, and the first
conception of its importance as an element lying at the bottom of
many of our religious and social conventions; though this is not as
yet by any means sufficiently recognised.
The term taboo implies something sacred, reserved, prohibited by
supernatural agents, the breaking of which prohibition will be visited
by supernatural punishment. This notion is one of the most widely
extended features of early religion. Holy places, holy persons, and
holy things are all founded on this conception. Prof. W. Robertson
Smith,* says: Rules of holiness in the sense just explained, i.e., a
system of restrictions on man's arbitrary use of natural things
enforced by the dread of supernatural penalties, are found among all
primitive peoples.
* Religion of the Semites, p. 142.
The holy ark of the North American Indians was deemed so
sacred and dangerous to be touched that no one except the war
chief and his attendant will touch it under the penalty of incurring
great evil. Nor would the most inveterate enemy touch it in the
woods for the very same reason.*
* Adair, History of the American Indians, p. 162.

In Numbers iv. 15 we read of the Jewish ark, The sons of Kohath
shall come to bear it; but they shall not touch any holy thing lest
they die. In 2 Sam. vi. 6, 7, we are told how the Lord smote Uzzah
so that he died, simply for putting his hand on the ark to steady it.
So the Lord punished the Philistines for keeping his ark, and smote
fifty thousand and seventy men of Bethshemesh, because they had
looked into the ark of the Lord (1 Sam. v. 6).
Disease and death were so constantly thought of as the penalties
of breaking taboo that cases are on record of those who, having
unwittingly done this, have died of terror upon recognising their
error. Mr. Frazer, in his Golden Bough, instances a New Zealand chief,
who left the remains of his dinner by the way side. A slave ate it up
without asking questions. Hardly had he finished when he was told
the food was the chief's, and taboo. No sooner did he hear the fatal
news than he was seized by the most extraordinary convulsions and
cramp in the stomach, which never ceased till he died, about
sundown the same day.
All the old temples had an adytum, sanctuary, or holy of holies—a
place not open to the profane, but protected by rigid taboos. This
was the case with the Jews. It was death to enter the holy places, or
even to make the holy oil of the priests. Even the name of the Lord
was taboo, and to this day cannot be pronounced.
Take off your sandals, says God to Moses, for the place whereon
you stand is taboo. The whole of Mount Horeb was taboo, and we
continually read of the holy mountain. The ideas of taboo and of
holiness are admitted by Prof. Robertson Smith to be at bottom
identical.
Some taboos are simply artful, as the prohibition of boats to South
Pacific women, lest they should escape to other islands. When
Tamehameha, the King of the Sandwich Islands, heard that
diamonds had been found in the mountains near Honolulu, he at
once declared the mountains taboo, in order that he might be the
sole possessor.

In Hawai the flesh of hogs, fowls, turtle, and several kinds of fish,
cocoa-nuts, and nearly everything offered in sacrifice, were reserved
for gods and men, and could not, except in special cases, be
consumed by women* Some taboos of animals being used for food
seem to have been dictated by dread or aversion, but others had a
foundation of prudence and forethought. Thus there is little doubt
that the prohibition of the sacred cow in India has been the means
of preserving that animal from extermination in times of famine.
Various reasons have been assigned for the taboos upon certain
kinds of food found in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. As we have these
laws they seem to represent a rough attempt at classifying animals it
was beneficial or hurtful to eat. Some ridiculous mistakes were made
by the divine tabooist. The hare, a rodent, was declared to chew
the cud (Lev. xi. 6, Deut. xiv. 7). The camel was excluded because it
does not divide the hoof; yet in reality it has cloven feet. But
doubtless it was seen it might be disastrous to kill the camel for
food. Mr. Frazer is of opinion that the pig was originally a sacred
animal among the Jews.
The cause of the custom of tabooing certain kinds of food, which
was in existence long before the Levitical laws were written, perhaps
arose partly from reverence, partly from aversion. It may, too, have
been connected with the totemism of early tribes. No less than one
hundred and eighty Bible names have a zoological signification.
Caleb, the dog tribe; Doeg, the fish tribe; may be instanced as
specimens.
Touching the carcass of a dead animal was taboo, and the taboo
was contagious. In Lev. xi. 21—25 we find rigorous laws on the
subject. Whoever carries the carcass of an unclean animal must
wash his garments. The objects upon which a carcass accidentally
falls, must be washed, and left in water till the evening, and if of
earthenware the defilement is supposed to enter into the pores, and
the vessel, oven, or stove-range must be broken.
Touching a corpse was taboo among the Greeks,* Romans,**
Hindoos,*** Parsees,**** and Phoenicians.(v) If a Jew touched a
dead body—even a dead animal (Lev. xi. 89)—he became unclean,

and if he purified not himself, that soul shall be cut off from Israel
(Num. xix. 13). So those who have defiled themselves by touching
a dead body are regarded by the Maoris as in a very dangerous
state, and are sedulously shunned and isolated.(v*) Doubtless it
was felt that death was something which could communicate itself,
as disease was seen to do.
* Eurip. Alcest, 100.
** Virgil Æn., vi. 221; Tacit. Annal., 162.
*** Manu, y. 59, 62, 74-79.
**** Vendid iii. 25-27.
(v) Lucian Dea Syr., 523
(v*) J. Gk Frazer, Golden Bough, vol. i., p. 169.
When iron was first discovered it was invested with mystery and
held as a charm. It was tabooed. The Jews would use no iron tools
in building the temple or making an altar (Ex. xx. 25, 1 Kings vi. 7).
Roman and Sabine priests might not be shaved with iron but only
with bronze, as stone knives were used in circumcision (Ex. iv. 25,
Josh. v. 2). To this day a Hottentot priest never uses an iron knife,
but always a sharp splint of quartz in sacrificing an animal or
circumcising a boy. In the boys' game of touch iron we may see a
remnant of the old belief in its charm. When Scotch fishermen were
at sea and one of them happened to take the name of God in vain,
the first man who heard him called out Cauld airn, at which every
man of the crew grasped the nearest bit of iron and held it between
his hand for a while.*
* E. B. Guthrie, Old Scottish Customs, p. 149. Charles
Rogers, Social Life in Scotland, iii. 218.
Women were especially tabooed after childbirth and during
menstruation (Lev. xii. and xv.) Among the Indians of North America,
women at this time are forbidden to touch men's utensils, which
would be so defiled by their touch that their subsequent use would
be attended with misfortune. They walk round the fields at night
dragging their garments, this being considered a protection against

vermin. Among the Eskimo, of Alaska, no one will eat or drink from
the same cup or dishes used by a woman at her confinement until it
has been purified by certain incantations.
In the Church of England Service, what is now called the
Thanksgiving of Women after Childbirth, commonly called the
Churching of Women, was formerly known as The Order of the
Purification of Women, and was read at the church door before the
unclean creatures were permitted to enter the holy building. This
should be known by all women who think it their duty to be
churched after fulfilling the sacred office of motherhood.
In Hebrew the same word signifies at once a holy person, a harlot
and a sodomite—sacred prostitution having been common in ancient
times. Mr. Frazer, noticing that the rules of ceremonial purity
observed by divine kings, priests, homicides, women in child-births,
and so on, are in some respects alike, says: To us these different
classes of persons appear to differ totally in character and condition;
some of them we should call holy, others we might pronounce
unclean and polluted. But the savages make no such moral
distinction between them; the conceptions of holiness and pollution
are not yet differentiated in his mind. To him the common feature of
all these persons is that they are dangerous and in danger, and the
danger in which they stand and to which they expose others is what
we should call spiritual or supernatural—that is, imaginary.*
Few would suspect it, but it is likely that the custom of wearing
Sunday clothes comes from certain garments being tabooed in the
holy places. Among the Maoris A slave or other person would not
enter a wahi tapu, or sacred place, without having first stripped off
his clothes; for the clothes, having become sacred the instant they
entered the precincts of the wahi tapu, would ever after be useless
to him in the ordinary business of life.** According to the Rabbins,
the handling of the scriptures defiles the hands—that is, entails a
washing of purification. This because the notions of holiness and
uncleanness are alike merged in the earlier conception of taboo.
Blood, the great defilement, is also the most holy thing. Just as with

the Hindus to this day, the excrements of the cow are the great
means of purification.
* Golden Bough, vol. i., p. 171.
** Shortland's Southern Districts of New Zealand, p. 293.
Dr. Kalisch says, Next to sacrifices purifications were the most
important of Hebrew rituals.* The purpose was to remove the stain
of contact either with the holy or unclean taboos. A holy, or taboo
water—or, as it is called in the Authorised Version, water of
separation—was prepared. First, an unblemished red heifer was
slain by the son of the high priest outside the camp, then burnt, and
as the ash mingled with spring water, which was supposed to have a
magical effect in removing impurities when the tabooed person was
sprinkled with it on the third and again on the seventh day. It was
called a purification for sin (Num. xix. 9), and was doubtless good
as the blood of the Lamb, if not equal to Pear's soap.
* Leviticus, pt. ii., p. 187.
In the ninth edition of the Encylopedia Britannica, Mr. J. G. Frazer
says: Amongst the Jews the vow of the Nazarite (Num. vi. 1—21)
presents the closest resemblance to the Polynesian taboo. The
meaning of the word Nazarite is 'one separated or consecrated,' and
this is precisely the meaning of taboo. It is the head of the Nazarite
that is especially consecrated, and so it was in the taboo. The
Nazarite might not partake of certain meats and drinks, nor shave
his head, nor touch a dead body—all rules of taboo. Mr. Frazer
points out other particulars in the mode of terminating the vow.
Secondly that some of the rules of Sabbath observance are identical
with the rules of strict taboo; such are the prohibitions to do any
work, to kindle a fire in the house, to cook food and to go out of
doors.
We still have some remnant of the Sabbath taboo, and many a
child's life is made miserable by being checked for doing what is
tabooed on the Lord's Day. Other taboos abound. We must not, for
instance, question the sacred books, the sacred character of Jesus,

or the existence of the divine being. These subjects are tabooed. For
reverence is a virtue much esteemed by solemn humbugs.

BLOOD RITES.
Without shedding of blood is no remission,
—Heb. ix. 22.
There is a fountain filled with blood
Drawn from Immanuel's veins,
And sinners plunged beneath that flood
Lose all their guilty stains.
Judaism was a religion of blood and thunder. The Lord God of
Israel delighted in blood. His worshippers praised him as a god of
battles and a man of war. All his favorites were men of blood. The
Lord God was likewise very fond of roast meat, and the smell thereof
was a sweet savor unto his nostrils. He had respect to Abel and his
bloody offering, but not to Cain and his vegetables. He ordered that
in his holy temple a bullock and a lamb should be killed and hacked
to pieces every morning for dinner, and a lamb for supper in the
evening. To flavor the repast he had twelve flour cakes, olive oil, salt
and spice; and to wash it down he had the fourth part of a hin of
wine (over a quart) with a lamb twice a day, the third part of a hin
with a ram, and half a hin with a bullock (Exodus xxix. 40, Numbers
xv. 5-11, xxviii. 7). But his great delight was blood, and from every
victim that was slaughtered the blood was caught by the priest in a
bason and offered to him upon his altar, which daily reeked with the
sanguine stream from slaughtered animals. The interior of his
temple was like shambles, and a drain had to be made to the brook
Oedron to carry off the refuse.* Incense had to be used to take
away the smell of putrifying blood.
* Smith's Bible Dictionary, article Blood.

The most characteristic customs of the Jews, circumcision and the
Passover, alike show the sanguinary character of their deity. Because
Moses did not mutilate his child, the Lord met him at an inn and
sought to kill him (Exodus iv. 25). The Passover, according to the
Jews' own account, commemorated the Lord's slaying all the first-
born of Egypt, and sparing those of the Jews upon recognising the
blood sprinkled upon the lintels and sideposts of the doors; more
probably it was a survival of human sacrifice. God's worshippers
were interdicted from tasting, though not from shedding, the sacred
fluid; yet we read of Saul's army that the people flew upon the
spoil, and took sheep and oxen and calves, and slew them on the
ground, and the people did eat them with the blood (1 Sam, xiv.
32), much as the Abyssinians cut off living steaks to this day.
Christianity is a modified gospel of gore. The great theme of the
Epistle to the Hebrews is that the blood and sacrifice of Christ is so
much better than that of animals. The substitutionary sacrifice of
Jesus Christ is the great inspiration of emotional religion. Revivalists
revel in the blood, the precious blood:
Just as I am, without one plea,
But that thy blood was shed for me,
And that thou bidd'st me come to thee,
Oh! Lamb of God, I come, I come!
Chorus—Jesus paid it all,
All to him I owe;

Sin had left a crimson stain;
He washed it white as snow.
Jesus Christ says, He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood
dwelleth in me, and I in him, and the most holy sacrament of the
Christian Church consists in this cannabalistic communion.
To understand this fundamental rite of communion, or, indeed, the
essence of any other part of the Christian religion, we must go back
to those savage ideas out of which it has evolved. It is easy to
account for savage superstitions in connection with blood. The life of
the savage being largely spent in warfare, either with animals or his
fellow men, the connection between blood and life is strongly
impressed upon his mind. He sees, moreover, the child formed from
the mother, the flow of whose blood is arrested. Hence the children
of one mother are termed of the same blood. In a state of
continual warfare the only safe alliances were with those who
recognised the family bond. Those who would be friends must be
sharers in the same blood. Hence we find all oyer the savage world
rites of blood-covenanting, of drinking together from the same
blood, thereby symbolising community of nature. Like eating and
drinking together, it was a sign of communion and the substitution of
bread and wine for flesh and blood is a sun-worshipping refinement
upon more primitive and cannibalistic communion.
Dr. Trumbull, in his work on The Blood Covenant, has given many
instances of shedding blood in celebrating covenants and blood
brotherhood. The idea of substitution is widespread in all early
religions. One of the most curious was the sacrament of the natives
of Central America, thus noticed by Dr. Trumbull:
Cakes of the maize sprinkled with their own blood, drawn from
'under the girdle,' during the religions worship, were 'distributed and
eaten as blessed bread.' Moreover an image of their god, made with
certain seeds from the first fruits of their temple gardens, with a
certain gum, and with the blood of human sacrifices, were partaken
of by them reverently, under the name, 'Food of our Soul.'
Here we have, no doubt, a link between the rude cannibal theory
of sacrifice and the Christian doctrine of communion.

Millington, in his Testimony of the Heathen, cites as illustration of
Exodus xxii. 8, the most telling passages from Herodotus in regard
to the Lydians and Arabians confirming alliances in this fashions. The
well-known case of Cataline and his fellow conspirators who drank
from goblets of wine mixed with blood is of course not forgotten, but
Dr. Trumbull overlooks the passage in Plutarch's Life of Publicola, in
which he narrates that the conspirators (against Brutus) agreed to
take a great and horrible oath, by drinking together of the blood,
and tasting the entrails of a man sacrificed for that purpose. Mr.
Wake also in his Evolution of Morality, has drawn attention to the
subject, and, what is more, to its important place in the history of
the evolution of society. Herbert Spencer points out in his
Ceremonial Institutions, that blood offerings over the dead may be
explained as arising in some cases from the practice of establishing
a sacred bond between living persons by partaking of each other's
blood: the derived conception being that those who give some of
their blood to the ghost of a man just dead and lingering near, effect
with it a union which on the one side implies submission, and on the
other side, friendliness.
The widespread custom of blood-covenanting illustrates most
clearly, as Dr. Tylor points out, the great principle of old-world
morals, that man owes friendship, not to mankind at large, but only
to his own kin; so that to entitle a stranger to kindness and good
faith he must become a kinsman by blood.* That any sane man
seated at a table ever said, Take eat, this is my body, and Drink,
this is my blood, is ridiculous. The bread and wine are the fruits of
the the Sun. Justin Martyr, one of the earliest of the Christian
fathers, informs us that this eucharist was partaken in the mysteries
of Mithra. The Christian doctrine of partaking of the blood of Christ is
a mingling of the rites of sun-worshippers with the early savage
ceremony of the blood covenant.
* The origin of the mystery of the Rosy Gross may have been
in the savage rite of initiation by baptism with arms
outstretched in a cruciform pool of blood. See Nimrod, vol.
ii.

SCAPEGOATS.
In the sixteenth chapter of Leviticus is found a description of the
rites ordained for the most solemn Day of Atonement. Of these, the
principal was the selection of two goats. And Aaron shall cast lots
upon the two goats; one lot for the Lord and the other for the
scapegoat—(Heb. Azazel). The goat on whom Jahveh's lot fell was
sacrificed as a sin offering, but all the iniquities of the children of
Israel were put on the head of Azazel's goat, and it was sent into the
wilderness. The parallelism makes it clear that Azazel was a separate
evil spirit or demon, opposed to Jahveh, and supposed to dwell in
the wilderness. The purification necessary after touching the goat
upon whose head the sins of Israel were put corroborates this.* Yet
how often has Azazel been instanced as a type of the blessed Savior!
And indeed the chief purpose to which Jesus is put by orthodox
Christians at the present day is that of being their scapegoat, the
substitute for their sins.
* Azazel appears to mean the goat god. The goat, like some
other animals, seems to have had a sacred character among
the Jews. (See Ex. xxiii. 19, Lev. ix. 3-15, x. 16, xvii.
17, Jud. vi. 19, xiii. 15, 1 Sam. xix 18-16, 2 Chron. xi. 15.)
The doctrine of the transference of sin was by no means peculiar
to the Jews. Both Herodotus and Plutarch tells us how the Egyptians
cursed the head of the sacrifice and then threw it into the river. It
seems likely that the expression Your blood be on your own head
refers to this belief. (See Lev. xx. 9-11, Psalms vii. 16, Acts xviii. 6.)
At the cleansing of a leper and of a house suspected of being
tainted with leprosy, the Jews had a peculiar ceremony. Two birds
were taken, one killed in an earthern vessel over running water, and
the living bird after being dipped in the blood of the killed bird let
loose into the open air (Lev. xiv. 7 and 53). The idea evidently was
that the bird by sympathy took away the plague. The Battas of

Sumatra have a rite they call making the curse to fly away. When a
woman is childless a sacrifice is offered and a swallow set free, with
a prayer that the curse may fall on the bird and fly away with it. The
doctrine of substitution found among all savages flows from the
belief in sympathetic magic. It arises, as Mr. Frazer says, from an
obvious confusion between the physical and the mental. Because a
load of stones may be transferred from one back to another, the
savage fancies it equally possible to transfer the burden of his pains
and sorrows to another who will suffer then in his stead. Many
instances could be given from peasant folk-lore. A cure current in
Sunderland for a cough is to shave the patient's head and hang the
hair on a bush. When the birds carry the hair to the nests, they will
carry the cough with it. A Northamptonshire and Devonshire cure is
to put a hair of the patient's head between two slices of buttered
bread and give it to a dog. The dog will get the cough and the
patient will lose it.
Mr. Frazer, after showing that the custom of killing the god had
been practised by peoples in the hunting, pastoral, and agricultural
stages of society, says (vol. ii., p. 148): One aspect of the custom
still remains to be noticed. The accumulated misfortunes and sins of
the whole people are sometimes laid upon the dying god, who is
supposed to bear them away for ever, leaving the people innocent
and happy. He gives many instances of scapegoats, of sending
away diseases in boats, and of the annual expulsion of evils, of
which, I conjecture, our ringing-out of the old year may, perhaps, be
a survival. Of the divine scapegoat, he says:
If we ask why a dying god should be selected to take upon
himself and carry away the sins and sorrow of the people, it may be
suggested that in the practice of using the divinity as a scapegoat,
we have a combination of two customs which were at one time
distinct and independent. On the one hand we have seen that it has
been customary to kill the human or animal god in order to save his
divine life from being weakened by the inroads of age. On the other
hand we have seen that it has been customary to have a general
expulsion of evils and sins once a year. Now, if it occurred to people

to combine these two customs, the result would be the employment
of the dying god as scapegoat. He was killed not originally to take
away sin, but to save the divine life from the degeneracy of old age;
but, since he had to be killed at any rate, people may have thought
that they might as well seize the opportunity to lay upon him the
burden of their sufferings and sins, in order that he might bear it
away with him to the unknown world beyond the grave.*
* Golden Bough, vol. ii., p. 206.
The early Christians believed that diseases were the work of
devils, and that cures could be effected by casting out the devils by
the spell of a name (see Mark ix. 25-38, etc.) They believed in the
transference of devils to swine. We need not wonder, then, that they
explained the death of their hero as the satisfaction for their own
sins. The doctrine of the substitutionary atonement, like that of the
divinity of Christ, appears to have been an after-growth of
Christianity, the foundations of both being laid in pre-Christian
Paganism. Both doctrines are alike remnants of savagery.

A BIBLE BARBARITY.
The fifth chapter of the Book of Numbers (11—31) exhibits as
gross a specimen of superstition as can be culled from the customs
of any known race of savages. The divine law of jealousy, to which
I allude, provides that a man who is jealous of his wife may, simply
to satisfy his own suspicions, and without having the slightest
evidence against her, bring her before the priest, who shall take
holy water, and charge her by an oath of cursing to declare if she
has been unfaithful to her husband. The priest writes out the curse
and blots it into the water, which he then administers to the woman.
The description of the effects of the water is more suitable to the
pages of the holy Bible than to those of a modern book. Sufficient to
say, if faithful, the holy water has only a beneficial effect on the lady,
but if unfaithful, its operation is such as to dispense with the
necessity of her husband writing out a bill of divorcement.
The absurdity and atrocity of this divine law only finds its parallel
in the customs of the worst barbarians, and in the ecclesiastical laws
of the Dark Ages, that is of the days when Christianity was
predominant and the Bible was considered as the guide in
legislation.
A curious approach to the Jewish custom is that which found place
among the savages at Cape Breton. At a marriage feast two dishes
of meat were brought to the bride and bridegroom, and the priest
addressed himself to the bride thus:
Thou that art upon the point of entering the marriage state,
know that the nourishment thou art going to take forebodes the
greatest calamities to thee if thy heart is capable of harboring any ill
design against thy husband or against thy nation; should thou ever
be led astray by the caresses of a stranger; or shouldst thou betray
thy husband or thy country, the victuals in this vessel will have the
effect of a slow poison, with which thou wilt be tainted from this

very instant. If, on the other hand, thou art faithful to thy husband
and thy country, thou wilt find the nourishment agreeable and
wholesome.*
* Genuine Letters and Memoirs Relating to the Isle of Cape
Breton. By T. Pichon. 1760.
This custom manifestly was, like the Christian doctrine of hell,
designed to restrain crime by operating upon superstitious fear. It
was devoid of the worst feature of the Jewish law—the opportunity
for crime disguised under the mask of justice. For this we must go to
the tribes of Africa.
Dr. Kitto, in his Bible Encyclopedia (article Adultery), alludes thus
to the trial by red water among African savages, which, he says, is
so much dreaded that innocent persons often confess themselves
guilty in order to avoid it.
The person who drinks the red water invokes the Fetish to
destroy him if he is really guilty of the offence of which he is
charged. The drink is made by an infusion in water of pieces of a
certain tree or of herbs. It is highly poisonous in itself; and if rightly
prepared, the only chance of escape is the rejection of it by the
stomach, in which case the party is deemed innocent, as he also is
if, being retained, it has no sensible effect, which can only be the
case when the priests, who have the management of the matters,
are influenced by private considerations, or by reference to the
probabilities of the case, to prepare the draught with a view to
acquittal.*
* In like manner Maimonides, the great Jewish commentator,
said that innocent women would give all they had to escape
it, and reckoned death preferable (Moreh Nevochim, pt. iii.,
ch. xlix.)
Dr. Livingstone says the practice of ordeal is common among all
the negro natives north of the Zambesi:
When a man suspects that any of his wives have bewitched him,
he sends for the witch-doctor, and all the wives go forth into the
field, and remain fasting till the person has made an infusion of the
plant called 'go ho.' They all drink it, each one holding up her hand

to heaven in attestation of her innocence. Those who vomit it are
considered innocent, while those whom it purges are pronounced
guilty, and are put to death by burning.
In this case, be it noticed, there is no provision for the woman
who thinks her husband has bewitched her, as in the holy Bible there
is no law for the woman who conceives she has cause for jealousy;
nor, although she is supernaturally punished, is there any indication
of any punishment falling on the male culprit who has perhaps
seduced her from her allegiance to her lord and master.
Throughout Europe, when under the sway of Christian priests,
trials by ordeal were quite common. It was held as a general maxim
that God would judge as to the righteousness or unrighteousness of
a cause. The chief modes of the Judicium Dei, as it was called, was
by walking on or handling hot iron; by chewing consecrated bread,
with the wish that the morsel might be the last; by plunging the arm
in boiling water, or by being thrown into cold water, to swim being
considered a proof of guilt, and to sink the demonstration of
innocence. Pope Eugenius had the honor of inventing this last
ordeal, which became famous as a trial for witches.
Dr. E. B. Tylor, whose information on all such matters is only
equalled by his philosophical insight, says of ordeals:
As is well known, they have always been engines of political
power in the hands of unscrupulous priests and chiefs. Often it was
unnecessary even to cheat, when the arbiter had it at his pleasure to
administer either a harmless ordeal, like drinking cursed water, or a
deadly ordeal, by a dose of aconite or physostigma. When it comes
to sheer cheating, nothing can be more atrocious than this poison
ordeal. In West Africa, where the Oalabar bean is used, the
administers can give the accused a dose which will make him sick,
and so prove his innocence; or they can give him enough to prove
him guilty, and murder him in the very act of proof. When we
consider that over a great part of that great continent this and
similar drugs usually determine the destiny of people inconvenient to
the Fetish man and the chief—the constituted authorities of Church

and State—we see before us one efficient cause of the
unprogressive character of African society.
Trial by ordeal was in all countries, whether Pagan or Christian,
under the management of the priesthood. That it originated in
ignorance and superstition, and was maintained by fraud, is
unquestionable. Christians, when reading of ordeals among savages,
deplore the ignorance and barbarity of the unenlightened heathen
among whom such customs prevail, quite unmindful that in their
own sacred book, headed with the words And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying, occurs as gross an instance of superstitious ordeal
as can be found among the records of any people.

BIBLE WITCHCRAFT.
Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live (Ex. xxii. 18).
If there had been no witches, such a law as this had never
been made. The existence of the law, given under the
direction of the Spirit of God, proves the existence of the
thing... that witches, wizards, those who dwelt with
familiar spirits, etc., are represented in the sacred
writing as actually possessing a power to evoke the dead, to
perform supernatural operations, and to discover hidden or
secret things by spells, charms, incantations, etc., is
evident to every unprejudiced reader of the Bible.—Dr.
Adam Clarice, Commentary on the above passage.
Thus wrote the great Methodist theologian. His master, John
Wesley, had previously declared, It is true that the English in
general, and, indeed, most of the men of learning in Europe have
given up all accounts of witches and apparitions as mere old wives'
fables. I am sorry for it, and I willingly take this opportunity of
entering my solemn protest against this violent compliment which so
many that believe the Bible pay to those who do not believe it. I owe
them no such service. They well know (whether Christians know it or
not) that the giving up witchcraft is in effect giving up the Bible.*
* Journal, May 25, 1768, p. 308? vol. iii., Works, 1856. The
earlier volumes of the Methodist Magazine abound with tales
of diabolical possession.
That Wesley was right is a fact patent to all who have eyes. From
the Egyptian magicians, who performed like unto Moses and Aaron
with their enchantments, to the demoniacs of the Gospels and the
sorcerers of the fifteenth verse of the last chapter of Revelation,
the Bible abounds in references to this superstition.
Matthew Henry, the great Bible commentator, writing upon our
text, at a time when the statutes against witchcraft were still in
force, said: By our law, consulting, covenanting with, invoking, or
employing, any evil spirit to any intent whatsoever, and exercising
any enchantment, charm, or sorcery, whereby hurt shall be done to

any person whatsoever, is made felony without benefit of clergy;
also, pretending to tell where goods lost or stolen may be found, or
the like, is an iniquity punishable by the judge, and the second
offence with death. The justice of our law herein is supported by the
law of God here.
The number of innocent, helpless women who have been legally
tortured and murdered by this law of God is beyond computation.
In Suffolk alone sixty persons were hung in a single year. The
learned Dr. Zachary Grey states that between three and four
thousand persons suffered death for witchcraft from the year 1640
to 1660.*
* Note on Butler's Hudibras, part ii., canto 8, line 143.
In Scotland the Bible-supported superstition raged worse than in
England. The clergy there had, as part of their duty, to question their
parishioners as to their knowledge of witches. Boxes were placed in
the churches to receive the accusations, and when a woman had
fallen under suspicion the minister from the pulpit denounced her by
name, exhorted his parishioners to give evidence against her, and
prohibited any one from sheltering her.* A traveller casually notices
having seen nine women burning together in Leith, in 1664.
Scotch witchcraft, says Lecky, was but the result of Scotch
Puritanism, and it faithfully reflected the character of its parent.**
On the Continent it was as bad. Catholics and Protestants could
unite in one thing—the extirpation of witches and infidels. Papal
bulls were issued against witchcraft as well as heresy. Luther said: I
would have no compassion on these witches—I would burn them
all.*** In Catholic Italy a thousand persons were executed in a
single year in the province of Como.
* See The Darker Superstitions of Scotland, by Sir John
Graham Dalyell, chap. xviii. Glasgow, 1835.
** History of the Rise and Influence of Rationalism in
Europe, vol. i., p. 144.
*** Colloquia de Fascinationibus.

In one province of Protestant Sweden 2,500 witches were burnt in
1670. Stories of the horrid tortures which accompanied witch-
finding, stories that will fill the eyes with tears and the heart with
raging fire against the brutal superstition which provoked such
barbarities, may be found in Dalyell, Lecky, Michelet, and the
voluminous literature of the subject. And all these tortures and
executions were sanctioned and defended from the Bible. The more
pious the people the more firm their conviction of the reality of
witchcraft. Sir Matthew Hale, in hanging two men in 1664, took the
opportunity of declaring that the reality of witchcraft was
unquestionable; for first, the Scripture had affirmed so much; and,
secondly, the wisdom of all nations had provided laws against such
persons.
Witch belief and witch persecutions have existed from the most
savage times down to the rise and spread of medical science, but
nothing is more striking in history than the fact of the great
European outburst against witchcraft following upon the Reformation
and the translations of God's Holy Word, This was no mere
coincidence, but a necessary consequence. It was not until after the
Reformation that there was any systematic hunting out of witches,
says J. R. Lowell.*
* Among my Books, p. 128. Macmillan, 1870.
If the Bible teaches not witchcraft, then it teaches nothing.
Science and scepticism having made Christians ashamed of this
biblical doctrine, as usual they have sought a new interpretation.
They say it is a mistranslation; that poisoners are meant, and not
witches. Now, in the first place, poisoners were really dealt with by
the command, Thou shalt not kill. In the second place, not a single
Hebrew scholar of repute would venture to so render the word of
our text. Its root, translated witch, is given by Gesenius as to use
enchantment. Fuerst, Parkhurst, Frey, Newman, Buxtorf, in short, all
Hebrew lexicographers, agree. Not one suggests that poisoner
could be considered an equivalent. The derivatives of this word are
translated with this meaning wherever they occur. Thus Exodus vii.

11, the wise men and the sorcerers. Deuteronomy xviii., 10,11,
There shalt not be found among you anyone that useth divination,
or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or
a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard or a necromancer. 2
Kings ix. 22, her witchcrafts. 2 Chronicles xxxiii. 6, Manesseh used
enchantments, and used witchcraft, and dealt with a familiar spirit
and with wizards. Isaiah xlvii. 9 and 12, thy sorceries. Jeremiah
xxvii. 9, your sorcerers. Daniel ii. 2, the magicians, and the
astrologers, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans. Micah v. 12,
And I will cut off witchcrafts, and thou shalt have no soothsayers.
Nahum iii. 4, witchcrafts. Malachi iii. 5, I will be a swift witness
against the sorcerers. The only pretence for this rendering of
poisoner is the fact that Josephus (Antiquities, bk. iv., ch. viii., sec.
34) gives a law against keeping poisons. As there is no such law in
the Pentateuch, Whiston tried to kill two difficulties with one note,
by saying that what we render a witch meant a poisoner. The
Septuagint has also been appealed to, but Sir Charles Lee Brenton,
in his translation of the Septuagint, has not thought proper to render
our text other than, Ye shall not save the lives of sorcerers.
But apart from texts (of which I have only given those in which
occurs one word out of the many implying the belief), the thing itself
is woven into the structure of the Bible. Not only do the Egyptian
enchanters work miracles and the witch of Endor raise Samuel, but
the power of evil spirits over men is the occasion of most of the
miracles of Jesus. The very doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible,
so cherished by Protestant Christians, is but a part of that doctrine
of men being possessed by spirits, good and evil, which is the
substratum of belief in witchcraft.
Even yet this belief is not entirely extinct in England; and Dr.
Buckley says that in America a majority of the citizens believe in
witchcraft. The modern Roman Catholic priest is cautioned in the
rubric concerning the examination of a possessed patient not to
believe the demon if he profess to be the soul of some saint or
deceased person, or a good angel. As late as 1773 the divines of
the Associated Presbytery passed a resolution declaring their belief

in witchcraft, and deploring the scepticism that was general. In the
Church Catechism, explained by the Rev. John Lewis, minister of
Margate in Kent—a work which went through many editions, and
received the sanction of the Society for Promoting Christian
Knowledge—a copy of which lies before me, published in 1813,
reads (p. 18): Q. What is meant by renouncing the Devil?—A. The
refusing of all familiarity and contracts with the Devil, whereof
witches, conjurors, and such as resort to them are guilty.
Let it never be forgotten that this belief which has not only been
the cause of the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent women,
but has sent far more into the worst convulsions of madness and
despair, is the evident and unmistakable teaching of the Bible.

SAUL'S SPIRITUALIST STANCE AT
ENDOR.
Our own time has revived a group of beliefs and practices which
have their roots deep in the very stratum of early philosophy, where
witchcraft makes its first appearance. This group of beliefs and
practices constitutes what is now commonly known as
Spiritualism.—Dr. E. B. Tylor, Primitive Culture vol. i., p. 128.
The oldest portion of the Old Testament scriptures are imbedded
in the Book of Judges and the Books of Samuel. Few indeed of these
narratives throw more light on the early belief of the Jews than the
story of Saul and the witch of Endor. It is hardly necessary to
recount the story, which is told with a vigor and simplicity showing
its antiquity and genuineness. Saul, who had incurred Samuel's
enmity by refusing to slay the king Agag, after the death of the
prophet, found troubles come upon him. Alarmed at the strength of
his enemies, the Philistines, he inquired of the Lord. But the Lord
was not at home. At any rate, he answered him not, neither by
dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets. The legitimate modes of
learning one's fortune being thus shut up, Saul sought in disguise
and by night a woman who had an ob. or familiar spirit. Now Saul
had done his best to suppress witchcraft, having put away those
who had familiar spirits, and the wizards out of the land. So when
he said to the witch, I pray thee divine unto me by the familiar
spirit and bring him up whom I shall name unto thee, the woman
was afraid, and asked if he laid a snare for her. Saul swore hard and
fast he would not hurt her, and it is evident from his question he
believed in her powers of necromancy by the aid of the familiar
spirit. This alone shows that the Jews, like all uncivilised people, and
many who call themselves civilised, believed in ghosts and the
possibility of their return, but, as we shall see, it does not imply that

they believed in future rewards and punishments. Saul's
expectations were not disappointed. He asked to see Samuel, and
up Samuel came. He asked what she saw, and she said Elohirn, or
as we have it, gods ascending out of the earth. In this fact that the
same word in Hebrew is used for ghosts and for gods, we have the
most important light upon the origin of all theology.
The modern Christian of course believes that Samuel as a holy
prophet dwells in heaven above, and may wonder, if he thinks of the
narrative at all, why he should be recalled from his abode of bliss
and placed under the magic control of this weird, not to say
scandalous, female. But Samuel came up, not down from heaven, in
accordance, of course, with the old belief that Sheol, or the
underworld, was beneath the earth.
Christian commentators have resorted to a deal of shuffling and
wriggling to escape the difficulties of this story, and its endorsement
of the superstition of witchcraft. The Speakers' Commentary
suggests that the Witch of Endor was a female ventriloquist, but,
disingenuously, does not explain that ventriloquists in ancient times
were really supposed to have a spirit rumbling or talking inside their
bodies. As Dr. E. B. Tylor says in that great storehouse of savage
beliefs, Primitive Culture, To this day in China one may get an
oracular response from a spirit apparently talking out of a medium's
stomach, for a fee of about twopence-halfpenny.
Some make out, because Saul at first asked the woman what she
saw, that, as at many modern seances, it was only the medium, who
saw the ghost, and Saul only knew who it was through her, else why
should he have asked her what form Samuel had?—which elicited
the not very detailed reply of an old man cometh up; and he is
covered with a mantle—that is, we suppose, with the ghost of a
mantle. She did the seeing and he the hearing. But it says Saul
perceived it was Samuel, and prostrated himself, which he would
hardly have done at a description. Indeed, the whole narrative is
inconsistent with the modern theory of imposture on the part of the
witch. Had this been the explanation, the writer should have said so
plainly. He should have said her terror was pretended, that the

apparition was unreal, and that Saul trembled at the woman's
words, whereas it is plainly declared that he was sore afraid
because of the words of Samuel. Moreover, and this is decisive, the
spirit utters a prophecy—not an encouraging, but a gloomy one—
which was exactly fulfilled.
All this shows the writer was saturated in supernaturalism. He
never uses an expression indicating a shadow of a ghost of a doubt
of the ghost. He might easily have said the whole thing was deceit.
He does not, for he believed in witchcraft like the priests who
ordered Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. One little
circumstance shows his sympathy. Samuel says: Why hast thou
disquieted me to bring me up? This is quite in consonance with
savage belief that spirits should not be disturbed. Here was Samuel
quietly buried in Ramah, some fifty miles off, taking his comfortable
nap, may be for millenniums in Sheol, when the old woman's
incantations bustle him out of his grave and transport him to Endor.
No wonder he felt disquieted and prophesied vengeance to Saul and
to his sons, because thou obeyedst not the voice of the Lord nor
executedest his fierce wrath upon Amalek.
Matthew Henry and other commentators think that the person
who presented himself to Saul was not Samuel, but Satan assuming
his appearance. Those who believe in Satan, and that he can
transform himself into an angel of light (2 Cor. xi. 14), cannot refuse
to credit the possibility of this. Folks with that comfortable belief can
credit anything. To sensible people it is scarcely necessary to say
there is nothing about Satan in the narrative, nor any conceivable
reason why he should be credited with a true prophecy. The words
uttered are declared to be the words of Samuel.*
* The seventeenth verse stupidly reads, The Lord hath done
to him as he spake by me. The LXX and Vulgate more sensibly
reads to thee.
Much is said of Saul's wickedness, but the only wickedness
attributed to him is his mercy in not executing God's fierce wrath. If
it was wicked to seek the old woman, it is curious God should grant
the object he was seeking, by raising up one of his own holy

servants. Why did the Lord employ such an agency? It looks very
much like sanctioning necromancy. And further, if a spirit returned
from the dead to tell Saul he should die and go to Sheol—where
Samuel was, for he says to-morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with
me—why should not spirits now return to tell us we are immortal?
If the witch of Endor could raise spirits, why not Lottie Fowler or Mr.
Eglinton? Such are the arguments of the spiritists. We venture to
think they cannot be answered by the orthodox. To us, however, the
fact that the beliefs of the spiritists find their countenance in the
beliefs of savages like the early Jews is their sufficient refutation.
Spiritism, as Dr. Tylor says, is but a revival of old savage animism.

Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.
More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge
connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and
personal growth every day!
ebookbell.com

Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Mexico 2009 Oecd

More Related Content

Similar to Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Mexico 2009 Oecd (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Oecd Reviews Of Innovation Policy Mexico 2009 Oecd