This chapter presents the overall assessment and key recommendations of the review. The assessment follows the structure of the review, beginning with an overview of Egypt’s innovation system, current landscape, and future challenges. It then offers an in-depth analysis of business sector R&D and innovation, along with the production, circulation, and diffusion of knowledge between industry and academia. Subsequently, it explores ways to strengthen strategic international co-operation, improve research performance in higher education and public research institutions, and enhance governance of science, technology, and innovation policies to create a more coherent and effective innovation system. A SWOT analysis table highlights Egypt’s core strengths, structural weaknesses, emerging opportunities, and internal and external threats. The recommendations directly address the key challenges identified throughout the assessment.
OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: Egypt 2026
Abstract
1.1.1. Overall performance of the Egyptian innovation system and challenges for the future
Egypt is striving to improve macroeconomic stability
In the recent past, Egypt’s growth outperformed many peers in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), as well as emerging economies Brazil and Malaysia as GDP per capita growth averaged 2.9% annually between 2019–2023, including positive growth during the COVID-19 pandemic (see Figure 2.1 in Chapter 2). It has accelerated to 4.4% in FY 2024/2025 according to the IMF.
Macroeconomic pressures are gradually easing, including inflation which has fallen to 11.8% in December 2025, down from 35.7% in 2022/23 according to the IMF. The current account deficit is 5.4 percent of GDP in 2023/24, while public debt eased to 86.8% of GDP by mid-2025. To stabilise the economy, the government expanded its International Monetary Fund (IMF)-backed Extended Fund Facility in 2024 to USD 8 billion, adopting a flexible exchange rate, fiscal consolidation for debt reduction, and targeted poverty alleviation measures.
Demographics present both opportunities and risks. Egypt’s population reached 118 million in 2025 and is expected to grow to 162 million by 2050. While the share of youth from 0-14 years of age is declining (32% in 2024 compared to 40.2% in 1990), the large working-age population offers potential for economic gains before the dependency ratio rises. Indeed, youth aged 18–29 reached 21.6 million, representing 21% of the total population and 27.4% of the total labour force, according to data from the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS).
As far as the gender perspective is concerned, Egypt exemplifies the “MENA paradox”: while enrolment in universities reached near parity in 2023/24, with females representing 49.5% of all enrolments, women continue to stagnate in participation in the labour force, with only 18% being active in 2023, compared to 73% for men (World Bank, 2025[1]). This phenomenon, commonly referred to as the “MENA paradox”, reflects a trend seen across many countries in the region where educational gains for women do not translate into proportional increases in workforce involvement.
Foreign direct investment holds potential for growth
Foreign direct investment (FDI) has significantly increased in recent years thanks to macroeconomic stabilisation and reforms in favour of the investment climate, but more must be done to enhance it in knowledge-driven sectors. Inflows remain concentrated in construction and green energy projects, and manufacturing. Notable successes have been observed with GENNVAX Egypt, a large state-of-the-art vaccine facility, the investments in significant industrial capacity for the production of smartphones, tablets, and optical fibre (see Chapter 2, Section 2.2 for more information). Nevertheless, investment in higher value-added sectors such as ICT remains modest. Special economic zones (SCZone, GTZone) have been established to attract investment with streamlined procedures, tax incentives, and strategic port access, including new initiatives such as a green fuel cluster.
Despite large recent government efforts, more can be done in creating a more attractive, innovation-friendly investment climate. Investors interviewed during field visits in 2024 cited inconsistent law enforcement, foreign-exchange shortages, and skill gaps as barriers. While many of these issues have been addressed in the meantime, a February 2026 assessment by the IMF recognizes improvement in the macroeconomic situation but also notes uneven progress on deeper structural reforms in favour of the private sector’s growth and a reduction of the state’s economic footprint To address this, Egypt has launched a 2025–2030 FDI strategy aligned with its Industrial Development and Trade Enhancement Strategy, prioritising sectors such as ICT, renewables, chemicals, agribusiness, textiles, tourism, and logistics, while targeting aspirational industries like green hydrogen, pharmaceuticals, and automotive. A recent policy step allows ICT and service start-ups to establish headquarters in free zones, signalling stronger efforts to channel investment into high-value and knowledge-intensive sectors. MSMEDA has completed the preparation of the National Strategy for Handicrafts with the Ministry of social solidarity and a number of relevant authorities. The ramp up of investment reforms since 2023 resulted in an increase in FDI to USD 9.8 billion in FY 2024/25 (July 2024-March 2025), with non-oil FDI rising to USD 9.1 billion, with a target of USD 12-15 billion until the end of 2025 (see Chapter 2, section 2.2 for more information).
Egypt’s economy is slowly diversifying
Egypt’s industry mix has shifted over recent decades, with agriculture’s role declining and manufacturing, extractives, and services expanding. Medium- and high-technology manufacturing exports grew from 21.7% in 2013 to 25.4% in 2023, largely driven by fertilisers and, to a lesser extent, metals, electrical machinery, and vehicles (please refer to Chapter 2, section 2.3).The value added of high-tech exports is growing and represented 1.73% in 2022, well below those of peer economies. Egypt’s economic complexity rankings have shown little progress, with exports dominated by petroleum products and fertilisers. The government is prioritising ICT development through the ICT 2030 Strategy, which emphasises capacity building, electronics manufacturing, and technology parks. Despite some progress, there is still a lot of room for growth in ICT services which represent only ~5% of services exports compared to India’s 46% (see Section 2.3 in chapter 2).
Pharmaceuticals and ICT sectors are promising, where a shift towards higher value-added activities is observed. In ICT, software, mobile applications, and technical support are growing, while the share of call centre services declined. New investments in cloud and data centres linked to smart cities aim to push the sector further up the value chain. The government is also targeting pharmaceuticals, leveraging Egypt’s position as MENA’s largest pharma market (USD 56.6 billion) and one of Africa’s few vaccine exporters. With the establishment of Gypto Pharma (“City of Medicine”) in 2021, pharmaceutical and medical device exports have grown from USD 700 million in 2021 to nearly USD 1 billion in 2023, mainly through generics, with exports expected to grow by 30% annually. The new Gennvax facility is meant to become the biggest full production cycle vaccines facility in the MENA region.
The government is committed to sustainable development
Since hosting COP27 in 2022, Egypt has accelerated its climate and energy transition agenda, committing to raising the share of renewables in the energy mix from 6% in 2022 to 42% by 2035. The 2022 National Climate Change Strategy 2050 sets a roadmap for expanding renewable energy, reducing reliance on fossil fuels, improving energy efficiency, and encouraging sustainable consumption. Early measures include installing electric vehicle (eV) charging infrastructure and enabling private-to-private green energy provision.
However, several planned reforms are still pending, such as biofuel incentives for transport, solar thermal adoption in industry, stricter green building codes, and support for local manufacturing of renewable components. To reinforce the transition, Egypt has launched ambitious megaprojects, including domestic electric vehicle production, green hydrogen development, and initiatives to boost agricultural productivity. Together, these efforts signal a shift toward a greener, more sustainable economy, though consistent policy implementation will be key to achieving long-term targets.
Skills development is progressing, but significant gaps remain
Egypt’s education system faces persistent skill gaps. Student performance ranks low internationally at the secondary level, with a significant gap in science results and very large class sizes (see Chapter 2, section 2.5 for more information). The Ministry of Education is taking steps to address class congestion through the addition of 98 000 classrooms in the 2024/25 academic year, a presidential directive to hire 30 000 teachers annually, striving to reduce class sizes below 50 (Ahram Online, 2025[2]). University graduates face unemployment rates double the national average. A range of policy initiatives seek to closer link post-secondary and university education to local industry demands, Examples include the Next Technology Leaders initiative targeted at skills development in information and communications technologies (ICT) and electronics, the Digital Freelancing Placement Programme that promote freelance careers in advanced digital skills, and the Train to Hire for Electronics Qualifying for Employment (Q4E) programme that seeks to expand the talent pool in the semiconductor industry.
Higher education has expanded rapidly, with universities nearly doubling from 53 in 2018 to 100 in 2023 a rapidly increasing number of higher education graduates, and growing presence in global rankings (28 in Times Higher Education, 15 in QS). Still, relative to population size, Egypt lags regional peers. We also observe growing enrolment in the share of postgraduate students, mostly in certificate programmes but also in Master's and PhD programmes with implications for the research workforce. Reforms promote closer collaboration between education and industry to reduce skills mismatches and support innovation and with technological universities and technical vocational training to broaden the range of post-secondary education options.
Continuous growth in innovation input and output metrics
Egypt’s research and development (R&D) spending rose sharply from 0.24% of GDP in 2005 to 1.02% in 2022 – well below the OECD average (2.7%) but higher than India, Indonesia, and some OECD Member countries. However, researchers’ salaries remain low, which pushes many academics to seek complementary income outside the research sector. In 2024, the government introduced a fiscal package to raise wages for university and research staff alongside doctors and nurses.
Research outputs have expanded fivefold since 2009, with Egypt surpassing South Africa in absolute terms, though per capita levels remain modest. Research quality has improved significantly: the share of Egyptian publications in the world’s top 10% cited journals rose from 6.6% in 2014 to 11% in 2022 – outperforming many emerging economies and even surpassing the OECD average. Incentives such as salary bonuses for high-impact publications have supported this progress.
1.1.2. Business sector R&D and innovation
Egypt’s business innovation performance remains below its potential, indicating significant room for improvement
Businesses investment and innovation performance need to catch up. At 0.2% of GDP in 2022, the business expenditure for R&D (BERD) would need to expand tenfold to catch up with the OECD average (see Chapter 3, Figures 3.1 and 3.2). The percentage of Egyptian innovative firms also needs very significant increase to match regional and global benchmarks (see Chapter 3, Figure 3.3).
While exports of high-tech manufactured goods have progressed, there is room for improvement The fraction of high-tech goods remains below benchmark countries, such as Indonesia, Morocco, Tunisia, and Viet Nam, among others. The data suggest a pressing need for policies and initiatives to stimulate innovation across all sectors and firm sizes, focusing on addressing the large innovation gap between SMEs and large firms.
There is room for improvement in researcher employment in the business sector. The number of researchers in Egypt's business sector per million inhabitants has significantly increased over the years, but it still represents only 1/8th of the level observed in Türkiye and 1/40th-1/20th of the level observed in Korea or Western Europe. The issue of brain drain is further reducing the pool of available researchers within the country (see Chapter 2).
Patenting activity is low and stagnant. The number of Patent Cooperation Treaty applications in Egypt per million inhabitants is 1/30th-1/20th of the level observed in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, and it has shown no growth over the past decade (see Chapter 3, Figure 3.5). Egypt's modest patent activity is concentrated in medical technology and pharmaceuticals (see Chapter 3, Figure 3.7). This aligns with Egypt's research strengths but also indicates a need to diversify R&D efforts into other high-tech fields. To motivate the patenting activity, Egypt has initiated reforms of the intellectual property (IP) system, including the launch of the National Intellectual Property Strategy and the establishment of the Egyptian Authority for Intellectual Property.
Egypt’s private sector has a dual structure: It is building a vibrant start-up ecosystem…
Egypt’s start-up ecosystem is one of the largest in MENA’s entrepreneurial scene. Egypt boasts three unicorns (start-ups with a market capitalisation exceeding USD 1 billion) and holds a significant position within the MENA region in terms of the number of deals and volume of funding received by start-ups. The fintech sector is particularly developed and accounts for about half of this investment (see Chapter 3, Section 3.2). In contrast, the deep-tech sector, characterised by firms that perform R&D rather than those whose business model is based solely on technology, remains underdeveloped, as reflected in low levels of patent activity (see Recommendation R8.5.).
Egyptians are eager to start-up companies, but innovation is not a major driver, and sustainability is an issue. Although Egyptian adults demonstrate strong entrepreneurial intentions in terms of both opportunity-based and needs-based entrepreneurship, significantly fewer engage in total early-stage entrepreneurial activity than in comparable emerging economies and even fewer start their business with new products or services or intend to expand globally. Funding for early-stage entrepreneurship is also limited. Resilience is low as measured by a low rate of start-ups continuing their businesses for a certain period and an exit rate which is higher than the start-up rate itself.
The Egyptian government recognises the significance of Micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) and entrepreneurs and has been developing policies to support their growth. Law No. 152/2020 (“MSME Development Law”) is a central initiative in this regard, with the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Agency (MSMEDA) leading its implementation. MSMEDA is currently proposing to add a chapter to Law No. 152/2020 specifically for start-up companies. MSMEDA has also completed the preparation of the National Strategy for Handicrafts with the Ministry of social solidarity and a number of relevant authorities.
In parallel, efforts are under way to improve the coordination and effectiveness of start‑up support policies. To this end, Egypt has established the Ministerial Group on Entrepreneurship, chaired by the Ministry of Planning and Economic Development (MPED) and composed of key ministries, to align and harmonise the various start‑up programmes implemented across different institutions. Its central outcome is the development of the Egypt Startup Charter, a national roadmap designed to comprehensively strengthen the country’s start‑up ecosystem by streamlining incentives, legal frameworks and administrative procedures. In addition, the MPED is in the process of establishing the Entrepreneurship and Innovation Program, which aims to create job opportunities for youth and to integrate Egyptian companies into global value chains.
… but the bulk of the business sector needs more attention from policymakers
High regulatory and administrative burdens hinder business. Several reports and fieldwork by the OECD review team have highlighted various administrative challenges in Egypt that hinder businesses in the country. These issues include, for example, the administrative burden of tax payments, trading across borders, enforcing contracts, tariff and non-tariff barriers, substandard connectivity and logistics, cumbersome customs clearance procedures and low levels of domestic competition. The recent package of tax reforms implemented in taxes and customs administration for corporates and SMEs has reduced bureaucratic challenges. A second package is expected in 2025. Continued efforts to streamline regulatory procedures and enhance transparency are essential to creating a more conducive environment for business innovation (see Recommendation R8.3).
Competitive pressures in the Egyptian market remain low and provide little incentives for firms to innovate. The population's low purchasing power makes it difficult for imported products to compete, and entry barriers for domestic firms are relatively high due to lengthy, cumbersome licensing procedures and the dominance of established large companies, including state-owned enterprises (SOEs). Therefore, incumbent businesses have low incentives to innovate to thrive. (see Recommendation R8.2).
The government is addressing unfair competition from firms in the informal sector. Informal enterprises account for more than half of all businesses and contribute approximately one-third of GDP. They are less likely to invest in skills and training, and do not have sufficient access to finance, leading to a low level of productivity and innovation. Avoiding taxes and labour standards gives them a cost advantage over other formal SMEs and start-ups. A special tax regime is being introduced for SMEs to encourage transition to formality as part of recent fiscal reforms. At the time of writing, a national strategy is being drafted to integrate the informal economy into the formal economy, with completion expected by the end of 2025.
Government is reducing the role of SOEs in the economy in order to empower private firms and boost incentives for innovation and R&D. Created in 2022 the Supreme Committee for the Promotion of Competition Policy and Competitive Neutrality is mandated to identify sectors from which the state will exit in the next three to five years and to improve transparency by providing open access to SOEs’ financial data as well as data on the subsidies received. The SOP Implementation Status Report, as well as the State ownership policy document performance indicator is an important step in order to analyse the specific causes of suboptimal performance and facilitate effective policymaking and assessment of the innovation landscape across different types of enterprises (see Recommendation R8.2).
Access to finance needs to be further bolstered to realise Egypt’s full potential for innovation. Compared to MENA and OECD averages, a larger proportion of Egyptian companies relies on internal funds, as bank credit interest rates stood at 24% in August 2025, and government subsidies for innovation are solely provided for incubation for early-stage entrepreneurship, with no innovation grants or R&D tax credits as defined by the OECD Frascati Manual available for innovation in mature firms. While growing, the venture capital market in Egypt also remains focused primarily on specific sectors, such as fintech (see Recommendation R8.1).
1.1.3. Knowledge exchange between the industrial and scientific sectors
Commercialisation of research results in a “science-push” mode
Egypt’s science-industry links are still in early stages. Co-operation between business and academia for innovation is very low, with only 7% of innovation-active SMEs (and 3% of large firms) co-operating with academia for their innovation activities (Chapter 4, Figure 4.1). A common perception is that engaging in science-industry linkages bears high transaction costs and financial costs, while relevant results may not emerge.
Domestic firms in Egypt have potential to boost their innovation performance. Available data show that Egyptian firms overly rely on legacy products, show limited interest in engaging with knowledge partners, including research centres and universities. Moreover, the employment of PhD holders in industry is very low, resulting in a low level of capacity to absorb and commercialise knowledge (see Recommendations R7.4 and R7.5). To address this, MOHESR launched a series of local and international research and funding calls in early 2026 to boost innovation and strengthen the connection between scientific research and industry in line with national strategic goals.
Research centres and universities are called upon to make greater efforts to commercialise research results. Researchers are encouraged to explore market applications and develop market-ready products and services. Technology innovation and commercialisation offices (TICOs) offer support with patent registration and commercialisation. Nevertheless, very few ideas make it to the market due to the inherent issues with the science-push approach, where industrial partners are not involved in the early stages of ideation, while researchers may not understand the market needs and may not have access to market studies and business support services from the TICOs.
Ongoing policy efforts hold the potential to develop more comprehensive support
Public investment in science-industry linkages has slowed, with the expectation of greater private investment to boost open innovation. Egypt’s Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) programme, which started in 2007 and ended in 2018, was a promising kickstart for science-industry linkages. Since its termination, the pace of public investment has slowed, and efforts are focused on encouraging private investment to be more prominent in open innovation. There are promising developments around corporate venture capital that could help prioritise public investment in developing effective support services.
Intellectual property (IP) rights legislation merits improvement. Ownership, management, and exploitation of intellectual property could be better defined in legislation. Further efforts are needed to clearly define roles and incentives for the researcher/inventor, the employing public institution, the funding agency that provided funding to create the research output/invention, and private-sector involvement. The current financial and legal support for researcher inventors needs to be developed, and Law 23/2018, which foresees the establishment of companies by research centres and universities could be further improved by allowing researchers to become entrepreneurs with full regulated control of the company. Furthermore, it will be important to strengthen the role of research centres and universities in assisting researchers in securing and enforcing their IP rights.
Support for science-industry collaboration now spans three clusters: research-to-market and technology-transfer programmes; ICT-focused initiatives such as the Information Technology Industry Development Agency (ITIDA’s) Information Technology Academia Collaboration (ITAC) and the nationwide Creativa Innovation Hubs; and sector-based industrial clusters and science parks. Programmes such government-sponsored incubators (e.g. StartIT and the National Program for Technological Incubators INTILAC), and university incubators foster entrepreneurship and co-creation, while long-standing hubs such as SRTA City and newer sites like Electronics Research Institute (ERI) Science Park provide labs and incubation space, though they remain largely publicly funded and underused by industry. Strengthening links with universities, securing sustained funding, and ensuring applied research meets industrial needs will be critical to realising the potential of these initiatives.
…with encouraging new developments towards co-creation
Academic spin-out companies are now allowed. Since 2018, research centres and universities can register a company individually or jointly, and researchers can participate as shareholders upon ministerial approval. This is a positive development, but further incentives are needed to encourage researchers to become entrepreneurs.
More emphasis is needed on providing tailor-made support for researchers wanting to start-up an enterprise. Existing activities could be scaled through greater co-ordination and collaboration of existing services and strengthened with regard to IP rights management and access to financing. Efforts in this area exist and should be strengthened.
Co-creation needs sustained investment and more professional support in higher education institutions and Research Centres, including stronger technology-transfer services and targeted assistance for academic entrepreneurs. Existing initiatives include Technology Innovation and Commercialisation Offices in universities and Research Centres, which have achieved modest results in patenting research outputs. At the system level, improved co-ordination and evaluation can identify good practice; at the institutional level, closer understanding of industry needs is essential. Programmes such as Knowledge and Technology Alliances, STDF centres of excellence and ASRT’s TTPD-DLM are promising but require greater industry participation and stable, long-term funding.
The new Alliance and Development initiative has potential if implemented in line with international good practice. The Presidential initiative, with a budget of EGP 1 billion (Egyptian pounds) (~USD 20.4 million), supports regional alliances between universities, government research centres, industry, investors, and government agencies. Those are focusing on both improving alignment between higher education and the labour market and promoting research collaboration. The initiative can build on the experience of Knowledge Technology Alliances, which have demonstrated the potential to deliver market-ready products in priority sectors of the Egyptian economy, notably during the COVID-19 pandemic.
1.1.4. Enhancing strategic international co-operation in science, technology, and innovation (STI)
Egypt can build on a rich legacy of international co-operation in science, both bilaterally and multilaterally
International collaboration, as defined by scientific publication co-authorship and patents with foreign co-inventors, is relatively high. The level of international collaboration, with regard to Egypt’s scientific publications, is higher than in EU and OECD countries (see Chapter 5, Figure 5.1). Similarly, the percentage of patents with foreign co-inventor(s) is also higher than in the European Union and the United States (see Chapter 5, Figure 5.3).
Egypt has established significant bilateral collaborations with leading nations in science and technology. There are currently 13 bilateral co-operation agreements, of which co-operation with the United States and the European Union is the most significant. Bilateral collaboration, measured by bilateral co-publication intensity, is highest with Middle Eastern states (Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Jordan), followed by the European Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Saudi Arabia is Egypt’s main bilateral partner, followed by the European Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Collaboration with India and the People’s Republic of China (hereafter, “China”) has grown rapidly in recent years (see Chapter 5, Figure 5.2). Collaboration with Saudi Arabia is largely directly funded by Saudi universities, while national and European funding agencies mostly fund co-publications with the European Union and the United States (see Recommendation R12.4).
Egypt is actively involved in numerous multilateral research networks. Egypt collaborates with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR), and Synchrotron-light for Experimental Science and Applications in the Middle East (SESAME), the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). In addition, there are significant collaborations at the institutional level, in particular memoranda of understanding by the National Research Centre (NRC), (see Recommendation R12.3).
Efforts to strengthen international cooperation in the private sector especially for start-ups are increasing. At the time of writing, the MGE is discussing reforms to remove remaining barriers, particularly those concerning hiring foreign employees and managers. Protective measures, including work permit requirements and local employee quotas, limit the influx of foreign talent and knowledge diffusion, highlighting the need for regulatory reforms to facilitate greater international collaboration in innovation (see Recommendation R12).
Egypt can further develop its strong STI collaboration with the European Union and its role in MENA and the African Union
Collaboration between the European Union and Egypt has been a key driver of the development of the Egyptian National Innovation System (NIS), with a science and technology co-operation agreement established in 2005 focusing on food security and the water-food-energy nexus. The RDI programme supported academia-business projects, and under Horizon 2020, Egypt collaborated on 51 projects across sectors like water, energy, agriculture and health. The Academy of Scientific Research and Technology (ASRT) followed up after its phase-out in 2018. However, ASRT programmes appear to have less funding available, and sustainability falls short of expectations.
Co-operation with the European Union does not sufficiently focus on research and innovation. In March 2024, Egypt and the European Union elevated their relationship to a strategic level, with the European Union committing up to EUR 5 billion (euros) in investment for renewable energy, digitalisation, and other fields. Nevertheless, no significant envelope is dedicated to RDI as was the case between 2008 and 2017. Rather, the main novelty is Egypt’s Associate status in Horizon Europe, which was announced in April 2025. However, this status requires a significant financial contribution from Egypt, and the volume of grants obtained is unlikely to exceed that contribution. The other vehicles are the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA) and Erasmus+, potential accession to Horizon Europe and the Digital Europe Programme, and consideration of an EU-Egypt University initiative.
Egypt plays a key role in the MENA region and Africa but could be further developed. In 2020, Egypt contributed approximately one-quarter of the research output for both areas. Egypt co-chaired the Union for the Mediterranean with France from 2008 to 2012, emphasising research and innovation, and, from 2018 to 2021, co-chaired PRIMA, investing EUR 30 million. It is also a leader in renewable energy in the MENA region. It participates in international scientific and public health initiatives, including CERN, SESAME, IIASA and the Eastern Mediterranean Health Network (EMPHNET), to strengthen the public health system and promote scientific research. Nevertheless, there is room for improvement in co‑operation with sub-Saharan Africa and championing an international infrastructure on its own territory (such as SESAME in Jordan).
There is room for improvement in Egypt's international STI co-operation. The draft National Policy for Sustainable Innovation recognised a shortage of local and international collaboration in certain developmental technological research areas, such as advancing specific industries. It identified gaps in partnership management within the Arab and African regions as an issue that needs to be addressed. Emerging changes in the MENA region pose significant challenges, including political and economic shifts, conflicts, and economic pressures.
International collaboration is only partly addressed in current strategic documents, and a holistic STI Internationalisation Strategy is needed. The draft National Policy for STI, in its Executive Plan, aims to develop academic leadership in innovation and technology through international institutions and to enhance partnerships with global universities and research centres. The Blueprint for Sustainable STI encourages faculty participation in international projects. However, this scope falls short of that of OECD Member countries, which have detailed internationalisation strategies with clear roles, responsibilities, and resources. For instance, Korea’s strategies, such as the International Collaboration R&D Investment Strategy and the International R&D Promotion Strategy, include a funding plan, a global R&D map and an interministerial committee to support international R&D efforts (see Recommendation R12.1).
Reliable and more granular data on international collaboration are needed. While Egypt publishes useful information on development partnerships, projects and some financing volumes through several national platforms, the available information appears to remain dispersed across initiatives and sectors and is provided mainly in descriptive and aggregate form. It does not yet seem to constitute a sufficiently integrated and systemic dataset covering bilateral agreements and participation in multilateral collaborations, for example by partner country, discipline, project type, funding volume and trend over time. Strengthening the structuring and accessibility of such data, including more comprehensive tracking of financing flows and the development of impact assessment approaches, would support improved monitoring and policy learning (see Recommendation R12.2 and Recommendation R12.5).
1.1.5. Strengthening scientific research in Egypt
Egypt has a rich and diverse landscape of research centres and universities. Efforts to promote public-private partnerships have led to the establishment of so-called centres of excellence in priority sectors of the economy, with a strong focus on applied research and industry involvement. There are several research sites of wider regional/global relevance, including ecological field stations, astronomical observatories, and biosafety-level laboratories. Egypt promotes interdisciplinary research on complex societal questions in health, climate change, renewable energy, and other priority fields. One of the flagship projects is the Egyptian and Ancient Egyptian Genome Project. There is room for greater collaboration among research centres and universities.
Egypt’s research output is growing
Egypt has made notable progress in highly cited scientific publications. The portfolio of scientific topics is broad, and several fields have high relative specialisation. All research centres and universities have increased their publication outputs. Egypt’s publications cover a broad portfolio of scientific topics, and in several fields of research, performance is above the world average of excellence (set at 10%), for example, pharmacology, toxicology, and pharmaceutics (20%) and veterinary medicine (14%). Focus on specialisation, international collaboration, and incentives for researchers to publish in high-impact international journals have contributed to an increase in Egypt’s share of the world's top 10% most-cited publications from 6.2% in 2008 to 11% in 2022, catching up with the OECD average (see Chapter 6, section 6.1.3 for a detailed discussion).
Publication bonus payments have stimulated output, which, in turn, has heightened the need to safeguard research integrity. Researchers in Egypt’s research centres and universities who publish internationally in a top-cited journal are eligible for a publication bonus payment, which can be equivalent to several months of salary. Several research centres and universities introduced guidelines and training to promote research integrity. These efforts could be strengthened through concerted efforts across the sector to raise awareness of research misconduct, provide training and support for researchers, and put in place measures that encourage researchers to report cases of research misconduct and protect whistleblowers.
There are promising developments in making scientific publishing more accessible and in making research in Arabic more visible. Egypt has taken on a pioneering role in publishing open-access journals in emerging economies. Noteworthy is the Egyptian Knowledge Bank, created in 2015 as the country's largest digital library and online knowledge hub, which recently launched the Arabic Citation Index, the first mapping of Arabic scholarly literature.
Egypt needs to enhance efforts in developing its human resource base for R&D
There is room for improvement in developing human resources for research and development. With 829 full‑time‑equivalent (FTE) per million inhabitants, Egypt has a relatively small human resource base for R&D, which is tenfold smaller than that of Korea and Denmark, the countries with the largest research workforces in 2022. For more than a decade, Egypt has been implementing a hiring freeze in the public sector, which has affected government research centres and, to a lesser extent, universities. This has potentially significant implications for the research workforce, including reduced recruitment of new talent, an impact on age composition and skill diversity, and the potential to adversely affect existing staff, who may face increased workloads without the support of new hires.
Most researchers are employed in the higher education sector and are challenged with finding sufficient time for research (52.6% FTE in 2022). Time officially dedicated to research in higher education ranges between 35% for professors and assistant professors and 40% for lecturers, assistant lecturers, or teaching assistants. Finding sufficient time for research can be challenging, as teaching loads are high, particularly for early-career researchers in large universities (several of which have 300 000 students), and student numbers in classes tend to be high. Furthermore, salaries are low, and researchers often depend on multiple income sources to make a decent living, which further limits the time available for research. Dedicated research support services could boost research activities in universities.
Doctoral education remains a small part of postgraduate education in Egypt. High costs for self-funded students, outdated curricula, modest research infrastructure, challenges in supervision and bureaucratic hurdles prompt many postgraduates to study abroad. Recruitment practices in government universities, where top undergraduates are nurtured into academic roles and sent abroad, further narrow the pool of new researchers, also as there is little emphasis on promoting industry careers. Recent reforms and hiring in newly established universities are beginning to diversify academic recruitment.
The private sector shows low advanced R&D skills. According to latest available data, the share of researchers employed in business enterprises is low, 22.6% in 2022. Most business‑sector researchers have a bachelor’s degree. Several skills development initiatives are underway in the private sector, including industry-recognised credentials and tailored degree programmes.
There is a shortage of qualified laboratory workers and technicians. A critical challenge for firm-level innovation in Egypt is the shortage of qualified laboratory workers and technicians. This is compounded by current enrolment trends and educational pathways: in 2020, around 40% of students were enrolled in social sciences, compared to 12% in engineering, and 2% in natural sciences. To meet industry demand, a legal framework was put in place in 2019 to establish technological universities, a new type of higher education provider whose offer is tailored to meet the immediate needs of industry for technicians. Several technological universities are already operative, and while in this early stage, average enrolment rates are comparatively low, with rates of less than 10 000 students, the plan is to establish a technological university in each governorate.
Egypt needs to step up efforts in developing its human resource base for R&D. Developing Egypt’s workforce in STI is a policy priority for the country. Several challenges need to be addressed, including the implications of the hiring freeze in the public sector, the relatively small size of doctoral education, and the need to create attractive education pathways into fields with high demand for skilled labour (see Recommendation R11.2).
Resource constraints continue to be a bottleneck for scientific research
There are promising developments in research infrastructure, but resource constraints persist. Egypt has made notable progress in research infrastructure, including individual laboratories, large research facilities, archives, and databases. Efforts underway to achieve greater co-ordination and shared use of national research infrastructure should be strengthened. However, major bottlenecks remain, including issues with funding and difficulties in sourcing equipment; scientific research is vulnerable to supply‑chain disruptions and importing equipment is hindered by customs delays. The previous economic challenges and currency devaluation have exacerbated these challenges.
Changes are expected in the allocation of public research funding. The Unified Budget Law No. 6 of 2022, when rolled out, is expected to result in a transition to performance and programme-based budgeting with the aim of increasing the efficiency of public spending and overall budget performance (see Section 6.2).
The translation of research priority areas into resource allocation needs to be strengthened
Research priorities are aligned with high-level strategies, but implementation plans should be established. The ASRT, through its Specialised Scientific Councils (SSCs), plays a central role in the development of research in priority areas. SSCs involve outstanding scientists in Egypt and abroad in the preparation of roadmaps. Research centres and universities’ strategic plans are aligned with these roadmaps, which themselves are based on the National Development Strategy Egypt 2030 and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. While roadmaps have the potential to further develop and leverage research capabilities, there is a risk that they remain purely strategic tools whose implementation remains to be developed. An analysis of the available information on existing roadmaps suggests that, while these are linked to broader strategic priorities, they would need to include quantifiable targets, milestones, and metrics for monitoring and evaluation needed for sustained resource allocation.
A systematic process is needed to identify and adequately resource high-priority research areas. This involves foresight exercises, stakeholder consultations, and the development of effective governance mechanisms (see the subsequent section on Egypt’s STI governance system) (see Recommendation R11.1).
Egypt’s government research centres have untapped development potential
Research centres have developed rapidly over the past 70 years. The NRC, founded in 1956 with Soviet assistance, was the first public research institute, initially focused on applied research and some basic research areas. Part of the NRC later spun off to become independent research centres. Egypt now has numerous public R&D centres across various scientific disciplines: 12 are affiliated with the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research (MHESR), 15 with other ministries, and over 100 within universities. Additionally, there are international research centres, such as the Theodor Bilharz Centre, and around 300 private-sector research centres listed by MHESR.
The research centres in Egypt have demonstrated strong research performance, but do not fulfil the role of technology diffusion. While government research centres in Egypt show strong performance in scientific publications in the Arab region, they lag in commercialising research outputs and collaborating with industry. Egypt’s research centres were originally set up more as government labs developing basic and applied research in specific areas and had little collaboration with industry. A notable exception is SRTA City and the Central Metallurgical Research and Development Institute, which both have been set up with some capacity to collaborate with industry. However, collaboration with industry is largely funded by the government.
The mission of research centres could evolve towards that of research and technology organisations (RTOs) whose mission is to enhance firm-level innovation activities. It will be essential to revise their mandates to align with specific objectives. This can be achieved by categorising some centres as RTOs, which focus on transferring technology to industry in alignment with the national industrial strategy. This approach fosters innovation and strengthens the connection between research and practical applications in the market. Conversely, other centres should be established as government laboratories with a clear mandate to develop specific domains of science and technology. These laboratories can focus on critical areas such as renewable energy, biotechnology, and information technology, which are vital for national development.
Research centres could also contribute to the resolution of societal challenges, including demography, health, environment, and climate adaptation. Setting clear, mission-driven objectives – focusing on solving urgent problems, fostering innovation, and driving economic growth – will be essential for guiding research centres' activities. Measurable goals are needed to evaluate impact and adjust strategies accordingly, and sufficient funding is necessary to ensure that research centres operate efficiently and meet their objectives. This should build upon community services, which are an integral part of the work of research centres and universities in Egypt and cover a wide range of activities from healthcare services to citizens to collaboration with industry to boost innovation (see Recommendation R11.6).
There is room to improve the governance and co-ordination of government research centres. The National Council for Research Centres only co-ordinates activities among a subset of government research centres, namely those under the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research. There is an ongoing policy discussion on reform needs, funding mechanisms, and better cross-ministerial collaboration. Some interviewees suggest that establishing a council to co-ordinate all research centres would be useful. Furthermore, the private sector and civil society play a relatively marginal role in research centre governance. A larger representation of the private sector and civil society on the board could help align their research activities with industrial needs. The societal relevance of R&D related to water management, desertification, and wider questions of climate change also warrants more effective involvement of civil society organisations in the governance and funding of (applied) scientific research (see Recommendation R4.4).
Collaboration among research centres and universities could be increased. Government efforts to promote collaboration and interdisciplinary research have not fully materialised, with few large multidisciplinary projects addressing societal challenges. Although institutions like the NRC are signing co‑operation agreements with universities, tangible co-operation is yet to be developed. Collaboration tends to be personal rather than organisational. Effective collaboration requires mobilising large research infrastructures and creating consortia, a common practice in OECD Member countries (see Recommendation R7.7).
1.1.6. Transforming STI governance and enhancing the national foresight system
Egypt’s STI governance system is comprehensive, yet cohesiveness could be improved
Egypt has developed a four-tiered structure, similar to that observed in OECD Member countries (see Figure 1.1). Strategic orientation is provided by high-level councils, followed by policy formulation in ministries, and policy implementation in agencies. This structure governs the production of research and innovation, with universities, research centres, and incubators directly delivering innovation outcomes. However, the strategic orientation layer needs to be strengthened to create synergies and avoid policy duplication across ministries.
At the strategic co-ordination level, the recent establishment of the National Council for Education, Research, and Innovation (NCERI) and a Ministerial Committee for Entrepreneurship represent a promising step but require collaboration between the two bodies. In an encouraging development, in May 2024, the Council of Ministers approved the creation of the National Committee for Education, Research and Innovation (NCERI), affiliated with the President and chaired by the Prime Minister, with relevant ministers, prominent experts, and representatives of the private sector as members. The NCERI will be responsible for co-ordinating policies and initiatives across Egypt’s education, research, and innovation sectors, advising the government on strategic matters, and proposing legislative changes to support national development. Going forward, the NCERI should be realigned with international models so it can arbitrate across ministerial programmes (see Recommendation R4.1). The Ministerial Group for Entrepreneurship (MGE), chaired by the Minister of Planning, provides a co-ordination mechanism for the implementation of policies through cross-ministerial working groups aimed at aligning efforts to meet market needs and enhance Egypt’s regional position in innovation and entrepreneurship. The co-ordination among MGE and NCERI is essential to guarantee impact, in particular in the area of innovation, which seems to be partially overlapping, clearly defined legal authority, stable resources and systematic information-sharing across government. Further co-ordination of the MGE and NCERI will be necessary to achieve co-creation between academia and industry (see Recommendation R6.1). A well-resourced secretariat similar to Korea’s Science and Technology Policy Institute (STEPI) or the Korea Institute of S&T Evaluation and Planning (KISTEP) should be established to provide the evidence base and analytical support needed to make such co-ordination routine (see Recommendation R4.2).
Note: Acronyms: AIC: Applied Innovation Centre, ASRT: Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, CBE: Central Bank of Egypt, EEIC: Egypt Entrepreneurship and Innovation Centre, FEI: Federation of Egyptian Industries, GAFI: General Authority for Investment and Free Zones, ICTI: Industrial Council for Technology and Innovation, IDA; Industrial Development Authority, IMC: Industrial Modernisation Centre, INTILAC: National Program for Technology Incubators, ISF: Innovators Support Fund, ITI: Information Technology Institute, ITIDA: Information Technology Industry Development Agency, MCIT: Ministry of Communication and Information Technology, MHESR: Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, MIC: Ministry of Investment, MPED: Ministry of Planning and Economic Development, MI: Ministry of Industry, MOF: Ministry of Finance, MSMEDA: Egyptian Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Agency, NRC: National Research Centre, NCERI: National Council for Education, Research and Innovation, MI: Ministry of Industry, SCSRC: Supreme Council of Scientific Research Centres and Bodies, SCPU: Supreme Council for Public Universities, SCPU*: Supreme Council for Private Universities, SCH: Supreme Council of Hospitals, SCTE: Supreme Council for Technological Education, SCNU Supreme Council of National Universities, SCIU: Supreme Council of Branches of International Universities, STDF: Science, Technology and Innovation Funding Authority, SOE: State-owned enterprises, SME: Small and medium-sized enterprises, TICOs: Technology Innovation Commercialisation Offices, TICs: Technology Innovation Centres, TIEC: Technology Innovation and Entrepreneurship Centre, TTOs: Technology Transfer Offices.
Source: Author’s elaboration based on fieldwork.
At the policy formulation level, the key ministries (MHESR, the Ministry of Industry, and the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology) define national priorities and allocate funding for STI initiatives. Other ministries, such as Health, Agriculture, Electricity, and Planning, contribute through sectoral research centres and programmes. Within MHESR, the Supreme Councils reflect Egypt’s preference for collective governance, bringing together senior officials, academics, and research leaders. While these bodies are tasked with aligning research with national priorities, their effectiveness is low due to overlap in their mandates, and there is more needs to be done in developing KPIs and a systematic monitoring system. As a result, accountability needs improvement, and their capacity to steer research toward meaningful national or global outcomes needs to be further developed.
The policy implementation level, which provides funding for Egypt’s STI system, is implemented across several agencies under the MHESR. A major reform in 2007 created the Science, Technology, and Innovation Funding Authority (STDF), which assumed the role of principal funding agency, financing both basic and applied research projects of national importance. The ASRT, originally established in 1971 and repositioned under MHESR in 1986, continues to act as Egypt’s national think tank. It provides strategic studies, supports applied research, and bridges upstream scientific activity with downstream application, often through industrial partnerships and knowledge transfer. In 2019, the Innovators Support Fund (ISF) was established to target entrepreneurs, students, and early-stage innovators. It provides training and seed funding to transform ideas into ventures, funded in part by private university fees. Together, STDF, ASRT, and ISF address different stages of the research and innovation cycle from basic research, applied research, and entrepreneurship, but co-ordination could be improved in order to ensure better efficiency and impact.
Additional STI-related programmes across ministries. The Ministry of Communications and IT (MCIT), the Ministry of Industry, the Ministry of Planning and Economic Development (MPED), and others run their own research centres and entrepreneur support schemes. Egypt Ventures, under MPED, and the ITIDA, under the MCIT, each have their own financing instruments for entrepreneurs. A new innovation agency is currently being proposed under the Ministry of Industry, adding another STI-related agency to this complex landscape. Overall funding remains modest for each of these agencies and concentrating the resources in one or two may prove more effective.
Strategies exist, while implementation could be improved
Egypt Vision 2030 provides an overarching, unifying vision. Egypt Vision 2030 quotes STI as a driver of a “National Sustainable Development Agenda: Egypt Vision 2030” and calls for “a creative and innovative society producing science, technology and knowledge, within a comprehensive system ensuring the developmental value of knowledge and innovation using their outputs to face challenges and meet national objectives.1” It also formulates ambitious goals in terms of key performance indicators (KPIs).
Numerous sectoral strategies are being adopted under the umbrella of Egypt Vision 2030, but there is room for improvement concerning their implementation. Under the MHESR, several strategies have been adopted or are in process, including the 2019 National Strategy for Science, Technology, and Innovation 2030, the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research Strategy 4.0, the National Innovation Policy, and the Egyptian Higher Education and Scientific Research Blueprint. However, the implementation of these strategies has yet to be developed, from developing precise plans to allocating appropriate resources to accompanying them with regulatory changes and enforcement. There is room for improvement as concerns coherence and overall priorities (see Recommendations R2.1 -R2.2, R3.1-R3.2).
In September 2025, Egypt’s Ministry of Planning and Economic Development (MPED) launched Egypt’s Narrative for Comprehensive Development Reforms for Growth, Jobs and Resilience which could be more focused on knowledge-intensive economic development. The framework is aligned with Egypt Vision 2030 and recent planning and finance laws to sustain reforms, boost export-oriented sectors (tourism, ICT, manufacturing, agriculture, energy), strengthen private-sector participation, and reach by 2030 targets of 7% annual growth, total investment of 18% of GDP (with private investment at 66% of total and 11.9% of GDP) and an 82% private-sector share of GDP. It aims to continue the path of economic reform and shift the focus towards more productive, export-oriented sectors. It presents a consistent vision centred on macroeconomic consolidation, including fiscal consolidation, rationalising public investment, improving resource allocation and incentivising foreign direct investment, private sector development and economic diversification. While innovation is mentioned several times in the document, the role of science and technology as drivers of economic development is modest, and the role of universities and research centres as knowledge producers is not mentioned. In particular, the presidential “Alliance and Development” initiative, the cornerstone of an innovation-led development strategy, is not mentioned. Similarly, the contribution of Egypt’s Research Centres as research and technology organisations (RTOs), and their potential role in supporting technology transfer and industrial upgrading could be better emphasised (Recommendation 1).
A recurring challenge is ensuring long-term continuity: many projects are discontinued before they can mature, leading to repeated launches of similar initiatives and limiting systemic impact. For example, the RDI programme – designed to strengthen collaboration between academia and industry – was halted before the end of its second cycle, disrupting promising projects and momentum toward a sustainable innovation culture. Similarly, during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, although research calls were launched to address urgent health needs, significant delays occurred, and the devaluation of the Egyptian pound further constrained implementation. To mitigate such disruptions, a five-year action plan should provide phased, multi-year funding for flagship programmes (see Recommendation R3.1), and capacity-building efforts should embed programme lifecycle management skills, so projects maintain momentum across funding cycles (see Recommendation R3.3).
Enhanced monitoring, assessment and evaluation mechanisms could support the needed whole-of-government approach
While evaluation and assessment mechanisms for STI policies have been undertaken sporadically, they would need to be carried out systematically and be built into whole-of-government policies, programmes and projects. While monitoring and evaluation (M&E) mechanisms are in place across the government – for example, through MPED’s annual performance reports and policy evaluations conducted via the Egypt Impact Lab – systematic measurement and evaluation is yet to be developed within STI-specific policies, programmes, and projects. Although the ASRT is tasked with evaluating STI initiatives, the extent of implementation remains unclear. Publicly available KPIs are often not associated with mandatory reporting requirements or consequences for non-compliance. Over-reliance on global indexes without robust national evaluation systems may distort perceptions of progress. Strengthening national-level indicators, measurable through domestic sources and monitored by a collective effort by the Institute of National Planning (INP), the ASRT and the Egyptian STI Observatory (ESTIO), would support more effective strategy implementation (see Recommendation R2.3).
Nonetheless, the government is reforming legal instruments, funding mechanisms, policies, and related measures to incorporate evaluation and assessment. Egypt has recognised the need to develop mechanisms to monitor STI data and implementation status as a key challenge for evidence-based policymaking. With recent reforms in government and legislation, Egypt is addressing this issue linked to the evaluation methodology. For instance, under the new financial management law (Law No. 6/2022, the Unified Budget Law), the budget will shift to performance-based budgeting. The Ministry of Finance will receive the KPIs from entities, and the related budgeting will be given based on the KPIs; this applies to universities, indicating that universities will be assessed and evaluated based on their KPIs. This is expected to be effective from 2027/28 (see Recommendation R11.3-R11.4).
Data availability is modest, hindering the accurate assessment and evaluation of progress and implementation. Egypt’s National Innovation Policy identifies gaps in the management, integration, implementation, monitoring, and impact assessment of scientific, technological, and innovation policies as an improvement point for governance. (see Recommendation R3.2). The draft policy foresees the establishment of a National Innovation Observatory to address this gap; implementing this institute would be crucial to filling it.
Egypt is making progress in building an adequate statistical infrastructure for STI, but several gaps remain to be addressed. STIO is an active advocate of OECD and other international standards within Egypt and in the region. Examples include its engagement in the African Union’s STI Observatory (AOSTI) initiative and leading the translation of the Frascati and Oslo Manuals into Arabic. Egypt has made major strides towards putting in place structured data collection and reporting processes to meet domestic policy requirements and doing so in closer alignment with the recognised international standards proposed by the OECD (OECD, 2024[3]).
OECD analysis underscores Egypt’s continued progress in strengthening its R&D statistical system, with ongoing efforts aimed at enhancing data quality, coverage, and alignment with international standards, it also concludes that, there is significant room for improvement in their methods and practices until they reach the level of those of OECD Member countries and partners featured in its statistical databases.
Accordingly, the indicators in this report should be interpreted with due consideration, particularly in the context of international comparisons. Changes in methodologies for the collection and reporting of R&D data over time may also affect the comparability of certain trends and should therefore be considered when interpreting longitudinal analyses.
Through this review, the OECD has assisted ESTIO and its main partners, especially the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS), in adopting practices that help improve practical alignment with international best practices. Statistical capacity-building events held in Cairo on 9‑11 June 2024, and a detailed analysis of Egypt’s official STI statistics, have resulted in recommendations for ESTIO, CAPMAS, and other major stakeholders on the conduct of R&D and innovation surveys and on the use of data resulting from such efforts. The recommendations have focused on enabling measures that can help improve the participation of different sectors in data collection and ESTIO’s reporting activities, as well as on ensuring predictable, transparent access to statistical data and related outputs (see Recommendation 4).
Foresight should be systematically and uniformly implemented at all levels of policy
STI policies remain heavily shaped by traditional sectoral priorities and legacy industries, while mission-oriented approaches are yet to be developed. Egypt Vision 2030 expresses an ambition to foster a knowledge-based economy, but its sub-goals could better emphasise future-oriented, high-tech sectors. While strategies such as the National STI Strategy (2019), the National Innovation Policy (2023), and MHESR Strategy 4.0 acknowledge advanced technologies such as AI, Internet of Things (IoT), and robotics, they are more concerned with improving infrastructure and research conditions than with setting clear missions or measurable outcomes. Different parts of government pursue different objectives: those of developing new, knowledge-driven sectors which have the capacity of propelling Egypt into the 21st century while preserving the labour-intensive sectors of the past in order to maintain employment. A true foresight exercise could help make those trade-offs explicit and help make the right decisions as to the resource allocation.
Egypt’s mission-oriented policy framework could be improved through systematic foresight. Futures studies gained traction in Egypt in the 1970s and 1980s but later lost influence. Since 2019, initiatives under the Cabinet’s Information and Decision Support Centre and the ASRT have revived foresight activities, including studies on energy transitions, post-COVID futures, and socio-economic development. These efforts, however, remain piecemeal, with varying methodologies and little integration into overarching strategies like Egypt Vision 2030. Challenges experienced by foresight exercises include availability of data and trained staff as well as resistance to change.
Current flagship strategies, such as the AI Strategy (2025–2030) and the Digital Egypt paper, demonstrate ambition; however, they could be further strengthened by integrating foresight to anticipate disruptive changes and guide long-term transformation. They emphasise infrastructure, skills development, and digital services but do not mention anticipatory planning for disruptive technological shifts, ethical risks, or long-term labour market transformations. Without foresight-driven scenario planning and cross-sectoral stress testing, these strategies risk becoming outdated in a rapidly evolving global landscape.
Many countries have embedded good practices of foresight exercises into policymaking procedures, enabling them to adopt a more strategic approach to their goals. In recent years, strategic foresight has become a crucial practice among OECD Member countries, enabling governments to navigate complex and volatile policy landscapes with greater agility and resilience. A foresight system enables a country to anticipate emerging trends, identify potential challenges and adapt its policies proactively, ensuring that strategic goals remain relevant and forward-thinking (see Recommendation R2.4 and Chapter 7 for good practice examples).
This section synthesises the main challenges and proposes recommendations based on the overall assessment above. A synthetic overview is provided in Table 1.2, followed by full descriptions of the recommendations, including relevant international good practice.
Overall, there seems to be a double “Egyptian paradox” in research. The first paradox concerns research inputs. Despite strong growth in funding for R&D in Egypt, as reported in official statistics (GERD increasing from 0.24% of GDP in 2005 to 1.02% in 2022), anecdotal evidence points to resource shortages for public research, with decreasing headcounts in public research centres (e.g. the NRC, whose research staff decreased from 3 862 in 2014 to 2 866 in 2024), very low salaries for researchers, and largely outdated research equipment.
The second paradox is the causal link between inputs and outputs, whereby both the quantity and quality of scientific outputs are growing significantly despite limited resources, putting Egypt at the forefront of Arab countries in this regard and catching up with the OECD average in the percentage of highly cited publications. International collaboration in research is likewise at high levels, with significant co-operation within the Middle East and with major global powerhouses, including the European Union, the United States, the United Kingdom, and, increasingly, Asian partners such as China, Japan and Korea.
Egypt needs to take its innovation system to the next level by fostering a dynamic partnership among academia, business, and government. The Egypt Vision 2030 Strategy goes even further, requiring the STI system to contribute to resolving societal challenges. The MHESR is developing a new strategy, the Egyptian Higher Education and Scientific Research Blueprint, emphasising innovation and entrepreneurship. This comprehensive framework outlines key priorities and initiatives to modernise higher education, positioning it as a catalyst for national innovation and socio-economic growth. Through this initiative, the MHESR aims to enhance alignment between academic research and market demands, encourage entrepreneurship, and integrate civil society into Egypt’s innovation landscape to better tackle societal challenges.
The recommendations that follow may address these challenges.
Recommendation 1. Promote and implement an innovation-driven development model in Egypt’s Narrative for Comprehensive Development Reforms for Growth, Jobs and Resilience.
This could be achieved through the following:
R1. Promote an innovation-driven growth model in the Narrative. The Narrative acknowledges the importance of science, technology and innovation (STI), but more could be done to articulate a structured vision of how STI will underpin Egypt’s economic transformation. In particular, the role of innovation as the major driver of productivity growth needs to be underlined, linking it to the concept of industrial upgrading and overall enhancement of value-added activities.
The export-oriented and STI-led economic development of South Korea since the 1980’s was based on strong government co-ordination, massive human capital investment, targeted industrial policy, incentivizing export-oriented high-tech manufacturing and services, based on close collaboration between government, business and public research institutions (universities and public research centres). In particular government research centres had a strong role of adopting foreign technologies, adapting them to the domestic market and transferring the know-how to industrial companies.
Recommendation 2. Co-ordinate the implementation of existing strategies and policies across government
This could be achieved through the following:
R2.1. Develop a five-year action plan with KPIs to support the implementation of the Egyptian Higher Education and Scientific Research Blueprint 2030, with responsible (and accountable) institutions, consultation mechanisms, budget allocations, M&E, and structure budget allocations on a multi-year, milestone-phased basis to safeguard the continuity of flagship programmes.
In Japan, a systematic mechanism known as the Administrative Project Review has been implemented to evaluate government projects. Under this framework, all ministries annually conduct self-assessments of their respective initiatives, covering aspects such as project overviews, implementation status, financial flows, and progress toward KPIs. The results are disclosed using a standardised format and are reflected in the following year’s budget requests (Government of Japan, n.d.[4]).
R2.2. Enhance the skills of policymakers to enable evidence-based policy design, implementation, and M&E of STI policy. Include other policy-relevant information (e.g. impact case studies practised in the United Kingdom and Ireland) and integrate training on programme lifecycle management to ensure initiatives maintain continuity through leadership or budget changes. INP, ASRT and ESTIO could play a leading role in capacity building for STI policy.
Korea establishes a five-year Basic Plan for S&T across the whole of government and a mid- to long-term National R&D Investment Strategy based on the 25-year S&T Future Strategy. Additionally, annual implementation plans for the Basic Plan and investment strategy are developed by all ministries, and those ministries need to monitor and review the progress and outcomes of these plans. All ministerial action plans are integrated into a single overall action plan and co-ordinated with support from the high-level presidential committee and a dedicated Innovation Office with the Ministry of S&T (MSIT, 2022[5]).
Recommendation 3. Develop a new long-term development plan, Egypt Vision 2050, informed by a stock taking and a foresight exercise. Based on this, develop an STI Egypt 2050 Strategy.
This could be achieved through the following:
R3.1. Build the next long-term vision and development strategy, Egypt Vision 2050, based on the National Structural Reform Programme and Egypt’s Narrative for Comprehensive Development Reforms for Growth, Jobs and Resilience.2 Under the auspices of the MPED, a follow-up to the Egypt 2030 vision needs to be developed, built on a scenario for a desirable future for all Egyptians, and address the major societal challenges to national well-being.
R3.2. Create a sectoral STI Egypt 2050 Strategy as a strategy follow-up to the current Higher Education and Scientific Research Blueprint 2030, complementary to the Industrial Strategy, aiming to create a step change in R&D as the driver of the knowledge economy, in particular, business spending on R&D. The strategy should be based on lessons learnt from the current strategy implementation and a foresight exercise. It should set target spending on R&D, with specific targets for business, government, and higher education spending on R&D. Ensure there is an alignment in the sectoral priorities and resource allocation between both strategies. This strategy should be based on a new Egypt Vision 2050 and have a comprehensive implementation plan, complete with KPIs and responsible institutions. Such foresight should serve to design alternative futures and relies on (i) horizon scanning to detect weak signals, (ii) analysis of reliable numerical data and text mining. (iii) expert-driven technology assessment for technical and socio-economic aspects, (iv) participatory technology assessment with stakeholders to build trust and legitimacy.
In 2023, Finland set ambitious targets to raise total R&D intensity to 4% of GDP by 2030, with two-thirds of this investment expected from the private sector. To achieve this, the government planned to inject EUR 280 million annually into R&D between 2024 and 2030, increasing the state budget from EUR 2.4 billion in 2023 to EUR 4.3 billion by 2030. Key reforms included permanent tax incentives for companies, especially SMEs, to boost private R&D, as well as a focus on strategic innovation priorities. Finland’s new R&D targets build on past experience with setting R&D targets and designing financial support mechanisms, such as grants and loans provided by Tekes (now Business Finland) to de-risk private investment in R&D. Tax incentives further encouraged companies to meet these goals, while collaboration hubs facilitated partnerships between industries and universities to align innovation efforts with national priorities. By establishing these specific benchmarks and aligning policies to achieve them, Finland consistently maintained a BERD-to-GDP ratio above 2%, fostering globally competitive industries, such as ICT and renewable energy.
Source: OECD (2022[6]), OECD Economic Surveys: Finland 2022, (OECD, 2022[7]); The State Treasury of Finland (2025[8]), “The national plan to raise R&D funding”, https://www.treasuryfinland.fi/investor-relations/sustainability-and-finnish-government-bonds/the-national-plan-to-raise-rd-funding.
R3.3. In preparation for the STI Egypt 2050 Strategy and Egypt Vision 2050, commission a comprehensive audit and evaluation of the implementation of Egypt Vision 2030. While some stock taking took place during the 2023 update of the strategy, a more thorough audit is needed to assess achievements against the strategy’s objectives regarding its implementation. In particular, review the current use of GERD, audit the spending on its component parts and evaluate the impact achieved on the goals set for the country in terms of the contribution of STI to national competitiveness and resolution of societal challenges.
France’s Future Investments Programme (PIA), launched in 2010 with a EUR 57 billion budget, incorporates a comprehensive multi-level evaluation framework. Evaluations occur at three levels: individual projects (assessed during selection and monitored by steering committees), programme actions (evaluated ex post for PIA 1 and 2, and both in itinere and ex post for PIA 3 and 4), and the overall programme. Independent evaluators use defined indicators and targets to assess the impact on innovation capacity and ecosystem structuring.
Source: Service d’Information du Gouvernement (n.d.[4]), Secrétariat général pour l'investissement (SGPI) : L’évaluation du PIA, https://www.info.gouv.fr/organisation/secretariat-general-pour-l-investissement-sgpi/l-evaluation-du-pia.
R3.4. Reinforce foresight capabilities. A foresight exercise, Egypt Vision 2025, is to be led by the INP with scholars and policymakers from Egypt and abroad to create scenarios for Egypt in 2050, identify key disruptions that could lead to favourable or unfavourable scenarios for the future, and prioritise those levers for policy action. Empower INP to lead foresight activities, including horizon scanning, scenario planning, and technology road mapping. Collaborate with the Joint Research Centre, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and the OECD for capacity building. Host national foresight forums and embed foresight within NCERI’s planning cycles.
Korea formulates a 25-year-long-term S&T Future Strategy as the highest-level mid- to long-term plan in science and technology. This strategy aims to predict future societal changes and to set the direction for S&T policies and technology development accordingly. The most recent overarching S&T strategy is Innovate Korea 2045, published in 2020 (MSTI, 2021[9]).
Brazil employs the Delphi technique as a structured method for consensus-building in areas such as health technology assessment (HTA) and health literacy. In HTA, the Ministry of Health uses a modified Delphi process following a systematic review, in which experts assess each methodological step using a 5-point Likert scale; consensus is reached when 70% of responses are positive or when the interquartile range is ≤1. In health literacy, an e-Delphi method is used, starting with a scoping review and interviews, followed by three rounds of online surveys in which experts rate items for importance.
See Chapter 7 for more information.
Recommendation 4. Strengthen the co-ordination of the governance structure for the innovation system based on a whole-of-government approach
This could be achieved through the following:
R4.1. Align the mandate of MGE and NCERI with international good practice of innovation councils, allowing it to arbitrate between individual ministry programmes. Implement co-ordination between MGE and NCERI, in particular in the area of innovation, which seems to be partially overlapping, clearly defined legal authority, stable resources and systematic information-sharing across government. Co-ordination of the MGE and NCERI will be necessary, in particular, to achieve co-creation between academia and industry. These councils should have clear roles in the supervision of the implementation, co-ordination, and monitoring of the STI strategy and action plan. The involved ministries should report every two years based on the agreed-upon KPIs and seek approval and further guidance.
South Africa’s 2023 Strategic Management Model (SMM) offers a refined framework to improve co-ordination and governance within its NIS. It adopts a whole-of-government approach, establishing the Presidential STI Plenary as a central co-ordination body and clarifying institutional roles. The model promotes stakeholder integration, introduces a classification system for STI activities, and addresses previous gaps, such as fragmented budgeting. Through initiatives like the Innovation and Skills Compact, it fosters a shared vision, streamlined procurement and support for local innovation aligned with national development goals.
See Chapter 7, Box 7.2, for more information.
The Presidential Advisory Council on Science and Technology (PACST), created in 1991 and chaired by the president of Korea, is the country’s highest-level advisory body on science and technology. It sets strategic priorities, evaluates national R&D programmes, and co-ordinates policy across ministries. With members drawn from government, academia and industry, PACST ensures that Korea’s innovation policies are coherent, forward-looking and aligned with national development goals.
Finland’s Research and Innovation Council (RIC), established in 1987 and chaired by the prime minister, guides the country’s long-term research and innovation strategy. It works to ensure coherence across education, research, and economic policy and supports evidence-based decision making. Comprising ministers and representatives from academia and industry, the RIC plays a central role in aligning national investments with Finland’s broader innovation and competitiveness goals. The RIC has the concrete role of co-ordinating and monitoring the implementation of the Act on Research and Development Funding and the drafting and implementation of the multiannual plan for the use of R&D funding.
See Chapter 7, Box 7.4 for more information.
R4.2. Establish a strong secretariat to this council, capable of preparing an evidence base for policymaking.
In Korea, PACST is supported by a strong institutional framework that enhances its policy advisory role. Two key institutes – STEPI and KISTEP – serve as its core policy and analytical support. STEPI conducts strategic foresight and STI policy research, while KISTEP manages R&D evaluation, planning, and investment analysis. Together, they provide PACST with the evidence, data and policy insight needed for informed, high-level decision making, acting as a de facto professional secretariat that ensures continuity, co-ordination and policy coherence.
R4.3. Consider restructuring the Supreme Councils and/or funding agencies (STDF, ASRT and ISF), simplifying and merging them as appropriate to reduce redundancy. While Decree 167 by the Minister of Higher Education in October 2024 clarifies some competencies of the various funding agencies, the mandates of the Supreme Councils and funding agencies could be further focused to achieve synergies and avoid overlaps.
The 2023 revision of South Africa's SMM for its NIS provides a refined framework to address systemic challenges and strengthen innovation. It clearly outlines the roles of the agencies and institutions involved in its NIS, including the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Innovation, and emphasises their leadership in driving STI governance. The model highlights cohesion between government departments and science councils, fostering collaboration through a whole-of-government approach. By classifying NIS activities and analysing past failures, the SMM outlines strategies to enhance co-ordination, streamline institutional architecture, and create a more integrated, innovation-friendly environment. This model allows South Africa to approach NIS development systematically and collaboratively.
See Chapter 7, Box 7.2 for more information.
R4.4. Consider establishing a council to oversee most, if not all, research centres to promote collaboration among them, support interdisciplinary research, and gather research centres' challenges and policy needs to convey them to the government. When doing this, ensure that the substantive links to their respective ministries are maintained while grouping responsibility for horizontal issues under the Supreme Council to ensure harmonisation and synergy.
The NST in Korea is an organisation established to oversee and co-ordinate the activities of various research centres, including the Korea Institute of Science and Technology and the Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute, across several ministries. It plans the development direction of research institutes, evaluates, and supports their research performance, and promotes collaborative and convergence research among research centres. The NST also proposes policies to enhance national innovation and competitiveness and conducts internal audits to create an immersive research environment. Through these activities, NST aims to strengthen research capabilities, support national research projects, and drive the development of the knowledge industry.
See Chapter 6 for more details.
Recommendation 5. Improve the quality and use of data and evidence for STI policy and administration
R5.1. Enhance accountability and impact of STI policies through the effective and integrated design and use of data in STI administration. Egypt’s funding agencies collect and process significant troves of data as part of their mandate to allocate scarce resources to the most deserving initiatives and actors, and to ensure they are used only for the purpose for which they have been budgeted and approved. Facilitating data exchange and interoperability across and within funding agencies is key to minimising administrative burdens on researchers and their organisations, as well as to ensuring value for money to Egypt’s taxpayers (e.g. by avoiding un-coordinated or duplicated funding). Future efforts to upgrade IT infrastructures for managing applications, reviews and reporting should be co-ordinated to realise synergies and reduce overall costs.
R5.2. Develop capabilities and processes to trace and monitor investment outputs and to critically assess the quality and impact of choices made by STI funders. These capabilities could inform the redesign and optimisation of funding mechanisms and incentives by Egypt’s authorities, facilitating the necessary dialogue between funding bodies and their responsible ministries. The use of performance indicators at the individual, team, and organisational levels should be responsible and mindful of both their intended and potentially unintended effects. The integrity of data used for assessment purposes could be compromised by high-powered, career-defining incentives that focus only on specific types of actors.
R5.3. Raise the visibility of R&D and STI in the national government budget and empower key actors to assist in monitoring and assessment. Egypt’s authorities with STI policy responsibilities should co‑ordinate on implementing active, systematic steps to ensure adequate visibility of STI funding in the national budget and the tagging of all relevant governmental financial transactions. When reporting national government expenditures, the Ministry of Finance's reporting of Levels 1 and 2 of the Classification of Functions of Government under its R&D headings would be an initial step towards providing the much-needed visibility of whole-of-government R&D funding in the government budget and contributing to the public policy debate. Such visibility has been instrumental in putting STI at the centre of governmental policies in many OECD Member countries. Reforms under way towards a performance-based and project-based budgeting approach may lead to clearer insights into funding allocation, efficiency, and research outcomes.
The MPED has the potential to take a broader, more proactive approach to its mandate to monitor and evaluate government capital expenditures by recognising public R&D as a vital form of national investment, in line with international standards. By classifying public R&D expenditures as long-term investments rather than mere operational costs, the MPED could take a leading role in shaping and driving the evaluation of R&D policies across various sectors. This would enhance the visibility and importance of R&D within the national budget and ensure that these expenditures are aligned with strategic development goals. Through comprehensive evaluations, the MPED could help identify gaps in current R&D initiatives, ensure better resource allocation and foster a more innovation-driven economy. Additionally, this approach could increase accountability and lead to more informed decisions that support Egypt’s broader ambitions to build a knowledge-based economy.
R5.4. Egypt should boost its production and dissemination of official STI statistics to enable a trustworthy and impactful view of the national STI system. Official statistics on STI are an important cornerstone of STI policies, as they are compiled in accordance with basic principles that ensure minimum professional standards, independence, and objectivity, providing the best possible view of STI systems and their key defining features. These STI statistics are particularly geared towards protecting statistical confidentiality as a guarantee of trustworthy reporting and towards enabling a minimum degree of international comparability for policy learning through benchmarking with global leaders and peers with similar structural features facing similar challenges. As noted in the OECD/Eurostat Oslo Manual, the aim of official STI statistical indicators is not to assess individuals or their organisations, or to rank countries for the sake of it on a single scale, but to enable meaningful, like-for-like comparisons across multiple dimensions that reveal possible policy choices and trade-offs. The recommendations provided in OECD (2025) lay out a detailed range of actions that would enable Egypt to be on par with OECD peers and stand out as a regional leader in this area.
R5.5. Embed STI data and evidence in STI policy governance. Like several other countries at different stages of economic development, Egypt has considerable room to equip itself with an STI data and evidence system open to all actors who can contribute meaningfully, serve multiple needs and requirements, and protect privacy and statistical confidentiality to ensure trust and integrity. Following the example of several OECD Member countries, the STI data and evidence community could be systematically convened as a new component of the existing STI whole-of-government co-ordination and governance mechanisms. Potentially hosted by ASRT-ESTIO, this group could serve as the basis for experience sharing, mutual learning and co-ordination while informing data and evidence-based decisions, such as setting priorities for upcoming R&D and innovation surveys, driving participant engagement, and showcasing results. This group could also play a much-needed advisory role in informing and assessing the monitoring of Egypt’s STI strategies and plans and advising on how to address key evidence gaps.
Recommendation 6. Ensure STI systems enable achieving missions addressing societal challenges
This could be achieved through the following:
R6.1. NCERI could co-design two or three flagship national missions addressing societal challenges with academia, firms, and civil society. Each mission could bundle R&D grants, regulatory measures such as sandboxes, green potential public procurement targets, and workforce upskilling measures. It would report annually on its outcomes to parliament. Develop an STI policy mix as a set of policy interventions (subsidies, regulatory reforms, procurements, etc.) for different types of potential technological and non-technological solutions. Co-ordinate implementation across government, as missions encompass many domains, including infrastructure, research, skill development, etc.
Korea has launched several Mission-Oriented Innovation Policies (MOIPs) to prioritise technological development while addressing societal goals. Key programmes include the 3rd Comprehensive Plan to Solve Social Problems Based on Science and Technology (CP3), the National Strategic Technology Policy, and the Alchemist. These MOIPs feature strategic orientation, policy co-ordination and diverse policy implementation. They involve developing missions with stakeholders, co-ordinating across government and private sectors to identify gaps, and using various policy tools like R&D investment, skills development and regulatory sandboxes (OECD, 2025[10]).
Recommendation 7. Strengthen the diffusion of innovative technologies throughout the Egyptian innovation system
This could be achieved through the following:
R7.1. Strengthen the role of research centres as enablers of knowledge diffusion in the Egyptian innovation system. Raise awareness about the critical role that public research centres play in STI policy. Strengthening their mandate and operational capacity will enable their evolution towards an RTO model, capable of driving mission-oriented research and fostering industry-relevant innovation, aligning with Egypt’s industry strategy.
In the 1960s, the Korean government established GRIs as RTOs to drive industrialisation and economic growth. Their main objectives were to assimilate advanced foreign technologies and transfer them to the Korean private sector. This initiative helped local companies enhance their technological capabilities, supported industrial growth, and contributed to developing a skilled workforce. The close collaboration between GRIs and private companies played a crucial role in Korea’s rapid technological advancement and economic development.
See Chapter 6 for details.
R7.2. Advance the implementation of the “Alliance and Development” initiative, creating clusters centred on leading Egyptian universities and research centres to promote co-creation and stimulate science-industry linkages. Seek to ensure the commitment of industry and academic partners. This should be followed up by long-term research programmes with participatory governance structures. The amount of EGP 1 billion (USD 20 million) may need to be scaled up, since expressed as a fraction of GDP, it represents only 1/14th of the amount allocated to a comparable competitiveness clusters initiative in France.
In France, the government initiated a process in 2004 to establish competitiveness clusters, the Pôles de compétitivité, with the aim of boosting French competitiveness by fostering collaboration and synergies among academia, business, and civil society. These clusters unite businesses of all sizes, research laboratories, and educational institutions within specific regions and sectors. The first step was a call for tender for the creation of science-industry consortia.
Austria significantly increased its share of innovation-active firms involved in science-industry linkages from 10.4% in large firms and 5.4% in SMEs in 2002 to 23.9% and 13.1%, respectively, in 2016. A key stimulus was a balanced policy mix that favoured science-industry linkages with four main pillars: long-term programmes, skill development, intermediary structures (e.g. cross-institutional technology-transfer centres), and incentives for firms.
Norway takes a long-term approach to developing collaborative research between academia and industry. The Scheme for Research-Based Innovation began in 2006 to foster innovation and internationalisation, and to support long-term research and innovation projects.
Europe’s Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3) is a long-term process that recognises that regions differ due to their history and economic and social structures. The process involves a wide range of actors in an entrepreneurial discovery process supported by robust M&E mechanisms.
See Chapter 4 for further information on these examples.
R7.3. Design specific co-creation competitions to stimulate science-industry linkages, ensuring a whole-of-ecosystem approach at all stages of the process (from design to implementation), including funding allocation, preparation, and idea acceleration.
The European Social Innovation Competition encourages partnerships between universities, industry, and government to drive innovation while also integrating civil society to ensure inclusivity and societal relevance.
R7.4. Introduce innovation vouchers to stimulate SME involvement in science-industry linkages.
The Innovation Voucher in Tampere, Finland, supports SMEs, micro-companies, and start-ups by providing up to EUR 5 000 to foster innovation, internationalisation, and growth. Launched by Business Tampere, the programme focuses on areas like renewing industry, well-being, IoT, smart city solutions, and smart mobility. It has successfully created new jobs, boosted exports, and helped companies expand into new markets.
R7.5. Introduce larger matching grants for science-industry co-operation, based on specific criteria for technology and market viability, focusing on the various parts of the innovation chain, particularly at the demonstrator and proof-of-concept stages.
The US Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programmes are competitive funding initiatives designed to support innovation in small businesses and the transfer of technology from research institutions. They provide funding for small businesses' R&D activities through public procurement or grants. Specifically, the STTR programme mandates that at least 40% of the R&D be conducted by small businesses, with 30% by RIs, such as universities, ensuring technology transfer from research to the commercial phase.
The Netherlands has a similar programme called the Innovation Impact Challenge. This programme is not limited to small businesses; universities and other non-profit organisations are also eligible to participate. Although it is not as institutionalised as the STTR programme, it offers opportunities for collaboration between businesses and RIs to conduct R&D activities.
Source: SBIR (n.d.[11]), About SBIR and STTR, https://www.sbir.gov/about; The Netherlands Enterprise Agency (2024[12]), Innovation Impact Challenge, https://english.rvo.nl/topics/innovation-impact-challenge.
R7.6. Review the mandates of existing key innovation hubs and their impact; ensure participatory governance; and consider merging into regional alliances to optimise their contribution to Egypt's innovation/industrial ecosystem. Develop science parks with excellence centres to be used for co-creation between science and industry.
The EPFL Innovation Park in Lausanne exemplifies co-creation between science and industry by hosting over 300 start-ups, fostering daily collaboration among researchers, entrepreneurs and industry professionals.
See Chapter 4 for further information.
In response to a request from Serbia, the OECD helped establish a Competence Technology Centre for the biomedicine sector as an autonomous, non-profit organisation linked to a university. Governance is tripartite with representatives from academia, business, and government. Success factors were identified as: 1) a service offering adapted to the needs of SMEs; 2) a stable source of funding for operating costs; 3) a location close to a “knowledge hub”, such as a university or major research centre; 4) qualified and competent management with both academic and business experience.
The action plan was split into phases: 1) Preparatory Phase, where the necessity and feasibility of the centre were assessed through stakeholder meetings involving government, industry and academia; 2) Phase 1 focused on increasing academia-business interactions by organising networking and technology demonstration events, as well as providing matching services, in order to build mutual trust; and 3) Phase 2 was dedicated to enhancing R&D through the provision of technological development services for SMEs and hosting joint research initiatives.
Source: OECD (2013[13]), Private Sector Development Policy Handbook: Establishing a Competence Technology Centre in Serbia, unpublished, but available upon request.
R7.7. Enhance collaboration among and between research centres and universities, as well as with the private sector and universities. This can be achieved through specific calls for collaborative research, mobilising large research infrastructures and teams, necessitating collaboration between research institutions, and creating consortia. It will be important to provide incentives for collaboration.
R7.8. Consider specific incentives for knowledge-intensive FDI, particularly in the SEZs. Financial and fiscal incentives can be targeted at priority sectors with the most potential for knowledge spillovers to the Egyptian economy. Set up science parks within those zones and incentivise international research collaboration in the relevant disciplines through targeted calls, which could benefit consortia of Egyptian and international businesses and academic institutions on co-creation projects.
The Shenzhen SEZ was established in 1980 on a triple helix model that integrates research institutes, businesses, and government agencies, creating a fertile environment for leading technology companies and nurturing a highly skilled workforce through advanced education and research programmes, thus fostering innovation. The zone continues to offer specific investment incentives by industry sector. It seeks to create an open and innovative tech environment by attracting partnerships with leading international research institutions as well.
See Box 2.1 in Chapter 2 for more details.
Recommendation 8. Strengthen support for business innovation
Promoting business innovation requires a competitive, investment-friendly business environment and strategic incentives for private R&D.
This could be achieved through the following:
R8.1. Strengthening policy measures to stimulate business R&D investment. A well-balanced mix of instruments should be employed, including: 1) targeted grants for R&D in strategic sectors, 2) innovation vouchers for SMEs (see Recommendation R7.4), and 4) preferential tax treatment for R&D expenditures. It is also essential to incentivise angel investments community, by measures including the development of networking platforms for angel investors, including regional community-building initiatives.
R8.2. Continue and reinforce efforts to reduce the footprint of SOEs in the Egyptian economy, including further implementation of SOEs divestment in accordance with the SOP, and strengthening governance frameworks that guarantee decision-making autonomy for firms with government equity participation.
Under the SOP, progress has been made in advancing divestment and increasing private sector participation, with 21 transactions completed to date and further efforts planned to accelerate the divestment of SOEs. In addition, a specialised unit is being established within the Cabinet to strengthen SOE governance, with support from the World Bank and the International Finance Corporation. See Chapter 3 for Egypt’s current implementation of the SOP.
R8.3. Building on the positive developments brought up by the Startup Charter, pursue reform of regulatory and administrative procedures for all businesses, not only start-ups, that hinder innovation, such as by streamlining lengthy customs delays for high-tech components, stabilising tax regulations, easing existing restrictions on foreign board members, continuing GAFI’s initiative to improve licensing, and further implementing the IP system reform to strengthen IP protection and streamline the process (see Recommendation 9).
To create a more conducive environment for business innovation, Egypt has undertaken measures such as establishing Special Economic Zones (SEZs), introducing the Golden License scheme, and reforming the tax and customs systems.
See Chapter 3 for more details.
R8.4. Beyond the fintech sector which has provided good outcomes, consider introducing regulatory sandboxes in specific sectors (such as pharmaceuticals, building materials and others) and creating a public-private deep-tech co-investment fund.
Egypt has successfully implemented a sandbox system in the fintech sector under Decree 163 of the Financial Regulatory Authority, and the Central Bank of Egypt fintech sandbox.
Other countries have done likewise. For example, the OECD published the Regulatory Sandbox Toolkit, while Singapore has sandboxes tailored to data, energy, and healthcare industries. In Japan, the sandbox system is not limited to specific sectors; it has been successfully utilised across a wide range of industries, including mobility, IoT, fintech and healthcare.
See Box 3.6 in Chapter 3 for more details.
R8.5. Through the steady implementation and further deepening of the initiatives stipulated in the Startup Charter, strengthen access to finance for start-ups by enhancing financial backing through public-private co-investment funds, business angel incentives, and improved training for entrepreneurs and fund managers at pre-seed and seed stages. Business angels need awareness-raising campaigns to inform about the benefits and risks of angel investing in start-ups; they can be incentivised either through a matching grant scheme, as in Korea’s Tech Incubator Program for Startups (TIPS) programme, or through generous tax breaks, as in Türkiye. For the next stage, a comprehensive portfolio of seed equity and debt instruments can be deployed, similar to the Western Balkans Enterprise Development and Innovation Facility, which provides both venture capital and credit guarantees for start-ups and SMEs.
Türkiye has introduced tax incentives for angel investors, offering a 75% deduction from taxable income for investments in qualifying joint stock companies if the stock is held for at least two years, and 100% for companies whose projects are supported by the Ministry of Science, Industry and Technology. In addition, the Turkish government provides support for angel investor networks, which are subject to an accreditation process (Ministry of Treasury and Finance (Türkiye), 2018[14]).
The Tech Incubator Program for Startups (TIPS), launched by Korea in 2013, is a public-private initiative that matches government grants for R&D with private investment. Start-ups must secure initial private investment to qualify for up to KRW 500 million in government funding, with further support available for commercialisation and overseas expansion. The program provides mentorship, access to facilities, and networking opportunities. Only successful businesses repay a small royalty; there’s no equity claimed or penalty for failure. By 2022, TIPS had supported over 2 100 start-ups and attracted significant follow-on investment. In 2023, Deeptech TIPS was introduced for advanced sectors.
The European Investment Fund, in collaboration with the EBRD, has established the Western Balkans Enterprise Development and Innovation Facility, a portfolio of financial instruments to improve SMEs' access to finance in the Western Balkans (former Yugoslavia and Albania). It includes early-stage equity and expansion funds, and credit guarantees for SMEs, making it easier for SMEs that do not have collateral to access bank lending (European Investment Fund, 2019[15]).
See Chapter 3 for more details.
R8.6. Supporting the transition of SMEs into knowledge-intensive industries. Building on current activities of the Industrial Modernization Centre (IMC), increase support for business innovation in strategic sectors through awareness-raising campaigns (seminars, good practice sharing with domestic and foreign peers, study trips abroad), capacity-building programmes, and specific grant schemes targeted at the purchase of intellectual services (such as market studies or IP counselling) and equipment for both technological and non-technological innovations.
The Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), a public-private network in the United States, supports the growth and competitiveness of US manufacturers by providing the information and tools required to improve productivity, ensure consistent quality, accelerate the transfer of manufacturing technologies, and integrate innovation into both production processes and new product development.
The National Research Council of Canada Industrial Research Assistance Program (NRC IRAP) is Canada’s leading innovation support initiative specifically designed for SMEs. It provides innovation guidance, funding, and resources to help SMEs develop and commercialise new technologies. The programme also facilitates international expansion through partnerships like Eureka and supports youth employment in the R&D and technology sectors.
Germany's Mittelstand-Digital programme supports SMEs in adopting digital technologies and reskilling in an effort to drive innovation and digital transformation. Over 26 Kompetenzzentren (SME Competence Centres) offer tailored programmes to specific sectors (such as manufacturing, handicrafts, energy, and construction) and themes (including networked production, e-business standards, IT security and digital education), including AI-focused initiatives.
The Enterprise Development Grant, managed by Enterprise Singapore, provides up to 50% co-funding to support SME business growth and transformation. Eligible expenses include consultancy fees, software, equipment, and internal staff. Supported projects fall under three main pillars: strengthening business core capabilities, enhancing innovation and productivity, and expansion to international markets. To participate in the programme, companies must submit a new project proposal and undergo an evaluation process conducted by Enterprise Singapore (Enterprise Singapore, n.d.[16]).
See Box 3.8 in Chapter 3 for more details.
R8.7. Further strengthen innovation policies aligned with key national innovation strategies: the Industrial Strategy, the National Climate Change Strategy 2050, and the Digital Egypt Strategy. Enhance R&D in the green and ICT industries, leveraging global market opportunities as a driving force for innovation towards addressing societal challenges.
R8.8. Evaluate the opportunity for specific R&D tax credits or rebates if appropriate. Most OECD Member countries have introduced R&D tax credits and observed beneficial effects, including increased business R&D spending, new products and services, and job creation.
According to OECD research, the overall incremental rate resulting from tax incentives is approximately 1.4, indicating that for every unit of tax incentive granted, R&D investment increases by 1.4 units. This effect is particularly strong for companies with lower initial R&D investment, typically SMEs. Compared with direct funding, tax incentives show a similar level of impact, and the two measures are complementary. Furthermore, due to inter-company knowledge spillovers, the social return on R&D is estimated to be approximately twice the return observed at the individual company level.
Recommendation 9. Strengthen the intellectual property (IP) system and promote the utilisation of IP rights
This could be achieved through the following:
R9.1. Ramp up operations of the Egyptian Authority for Intellectual Property (EAIP) as the agency to centralise IP functions and serve as the core organisation for implementing the national IP strategy.
See Chapter 3 for the role of the EAIP as outlined in Law No. 163/2023.
R9.2. Strengthen IP rights protection and clarify the roles of research centres and universities in supporting researchers. Create a legal framework for IP sharing between researchers, institutions, and funding agencies – e.g. an Egyptian “US Bayh-Dole Act” to incentivise public research centres and universities to protect and commercialise the results of public research.
The US Bayh-Dole Act, introduced in 1980, has been widely recognised as good practice in this respect and has been adopted by many OECD Member countries. It balances the interests of researchers, institutions, and funding agencies, contributing to the right incentives for research institutions to register patents and share royalty benefits with inventors.
See the discussion in Chapter 4.
R9.3. Ensure transparency in the management of IP rights arising from joint research projects, which is essential to promote effective collaboration between academia and industry. This can include: 1) encouraging universities and research centres to publicly disclose clear IP policies; and 2) providing model agreements that can serve as a reference for both universities and companies while negotiating joint research contracts.
As an example of model agreements, the UK Intellectual Property Office provides the “Lambert Toolkit” as a template for academia-industry contracts on joint research. It contains several types of templates based on ownership and licensing conditions.
Source: Government of the United Kingdom (2022[17]), University and business collaboration agreements: Lambert Toolkit, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/university-and-business-collaboration-agreements-lambert-toolkit.
R9.4. Further strengthen the IP system to align with international standards. This can include: 1) enhancing examination capabilities; 2) strengthening enforcement measures; 3) raising public awareness of the IP system; and 4) improving the IP rights database.
Along with similar initiatives in neighbouring countries, Saudi Arabia has introduced a unified e-portal system for streamlined application processes, recognition of international IP agreements such as the Hague System, extension of design validity, and stricter trademark application requirements. Qatar has introduced patent annuity payments, simplified trademark filing procedures, and service fees.
See the discussion in Chapter 4.
R9.5. Enhance financial and procedural support for applicants, especially for individuals, SMEs, and deep-tech start-ups, to promote the registration of IP rights. This can include offering targeted grants or subsidies to cover patent application fees, reducing administrative costs for first-time filers, and establishing fast-track procedures for firms in priority sectors. Governments can also create dedicated IP support units that provide legal assistance, IP management training, and step-by-step guidance through the registration process. Additionally, partnerships with universities, incubators, and chambers of commerce can help extend outreach and build capacity among innovators with limited resources.
As an example of an initiative to encourage patent applications from SMEs, universities, and start-ups, the Japan Patent Office (JPO) offers various cost-reduction measures and provides a free accelerated examination service. Additionally, the JPO has initiated an accelerated examination using interviews for start-ups, which leads to the strategic acquisition of patent rights through interviews conducted before receiving the examination results.
Source: Japan Patent Office (n.d.[18]), Measures for Supporting Private Companies and Universities, https://www.jpo.go.jp/e/support/chusho/document/index/part3.pdf; Japan Patent Office, (2025[19]), Support Measures, Law Amendments, etc., https://www.jpo.go.jp/resources/report/statusreport/2025/document/index/0203.pdf.
Recommendation 10. Facilitate the creation of spin-offs
Spin-offs are key vehicles for deep-tech innovation that can contribute to high-value-added start-ups in the Egyptian innovation system.
This recommendation could be achieved through the following:
R10.1. Allow researchers employed in the public sector to engage in entrepreneurial activities, as an evolution of Law 23 of 2018, which currently foresees the establishment of companies by research institutions with only limited participation by researchers, rather than allowing researchers to hold majority equity stakes and be CEOs of their own companies.
In the United Kingdom, academic founders of spin-out companies retain a relatively high equity stake, with an average shareholding of 54.1%, according to the Spotlight on Spinouts 2024 report by the Royal Academy of Engineering. This founder-friendly environment reflects a broader policy shift aimed at incentivising academic entrepreneurship and accelerating the commercialisation of research. To better regulate the consolidation of the roles of entrepreneur and researcher, UK universities implement structured safeguards. These include mandatory disclosure of financial interests, formal conflict management plans, restrictions on participation in institutional decision making, and regulated use of consultancy or sabbatical leave. Such measures ensure transparency and institutional integrity while enabling researchers to actively contribute to innovation-led growth.
The US Bayh-Dole Act empowers researchers to establish start-up companies while retaining their roles as principal investigators in academia. Universities have specific policies and conflict-of-interest guidelines that need to be followed to manage such dual roles effectively and ethically.
See the discussion in Chapter 4.
R10.2 Set up comprehensive support for spin-offs in universities and research centres, including entrepreneurship training and mentoring, legal, IP, accountancy, and market research support.
Leuven R&D (Belgium) provides researchers with comprehensive support, including initial guidance on business ideas, business plan development, securing pre-seed and seed capital, legal and administrative support, establishing contacts with industrial partners, and operational support for their spin-off companies.
See more information on this example and the discussion in Chapter 4.
Recommendation 11. Further strengthen research excellence
This could be achieved through the following:
R11.1. Strengthen the process of translating research priority areas into resource allocation and research assessment, including support for research teams, regional alliances, collaboration between universities and government research centres, and inter-, trans-, and multi-disciplinary projects.
The Ministry of Science and ICT in Korea has identified 12 key national strategic technologies, such as semiconductors, secondary batteries, advanced biotechnology, AI, advanced robotics, and quantum technology. To foster these technologies, the ministry allocates approximately KRW 6.8 trillion (Korean won) in 2025, promoting collaboration among universities, research institutions, and industries to accelerate technological innovation. Additionally, in 2022, the ministry established a Special Committee on Strategic Technologies to create strategic roadmaps and specify private-government co-operation strategies.
In the Netherlands, the Top Sector initiative was introduced in 2011 and revised in 2018 as a mission-oriented policy. Research, innovation and development in these sectors are essential for national development and competitiveness. The sectors are agriculture, horticulture, logistics, high-tech systems and materials, life sciences and health, chemicals, creative industry, energy and water. This policy initiative offers insights on two aspects: 1) how to translate objectives into measurable goals; and 2) bringing key public and private actors together to develop a shared vision, identify key areas for intervention, and reflect this in the budget.
The Convergence Research and Convergence Accelerator programmes launched by the US National Science Foundation can serve as inspiration. They seek to address societal challenges and “accelerate solutions toward societal impact” by building on basic research and “integrating knowledge, methods, and expertise from different disciplines and forming novel frameworks to catalyse scientific discovery and innovation” around a specific societal problem.
See more information on these examples and the discussion in Chapter 6.
R11.2 Strengthen the human resource base for research, development, and innovation through providing research support services, and creating attractive and diversified career pathways that allow for specialisation in teaching, research, and innovation, as well as science-industry linkages more generally. There is a need to strengthen collaboration in doctoral education among universities and between universities and government research centres. It will be important to monitor the implications of the hiring freeze in the public sector for the future research workforce.
The Staffing South Africa’s Universities framework is a comprehensive approach to supporting universities in building their research capacity (Government of South Africa, 2015[20]). Since 2015, several programmes have been introduced:
The Nurturing Emerging Scholars Programme is aimed at senior undergraduate students demonstrating academic ability at junior levels for active recruitment and development.
The New Generation of Academics Programme recruits new academics in disciplinary areas of greatest need.
The Existing Academics Capacity Enhancement Programme supports interventions that address specific gaps with respect to teaching development, research development, social engagement, and academic leadership.
The Supplementary Staff Employment Programme enables universities to address specific skills gaps by recruiting new staff members for a fixed period of time.
See the discussion in Chapter 6.
R11.3. Develop systematic and regular evaluations based on KPIs for universities and research centres.
Norway allocates 32% of an institutional block grant for universities based on institutional performance on output-oriented indicators. The indicators are linked to open-ended budgets (with no ceiling on the amount of extra funding institutions can receive based on their performance) or to closed-ended budgets, where universities compete for a fixed number of resources. Research-related KPIs that are regularly evaluated include: research publication points (5%, closed-ended budget); funding from the Research Council of Norway (3%, closed-ended budget); private and public revenue (3%, closed-ended budget); and number of doctorate graduates (5%, open-ended budget) (OECD, 2021[21]).
In Korea, the evaluation system for GRIs is managed by the Ministry of Science and ICT and the NST. The system includes institutional operation and research project evaluations conducted through self-assessments and higher-level evaluations. Institutional operations evaluations are linked to the director’s term, typically every three years, while research project evaluations occur every three, five, or six years, depending on the project. Evaluation results impact performance bonuses for directors and employees and can adjust the budget for operational expenses and major project funding. Additionally, the mission and function of GRIs can be modified based on evaluation outcomes, ensuring alignment with national scientific and technology goals (MSIT, 2024[22]).
R11.4. Implement performance- and programme-based budgeting (PPBB), as foreseen by Law No. 6/2022, for block funding, based on monitoring KPIs and achieving specific objectives. This could be achieved by establishing a dedicated PPBB unit within the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research to implement PPBB at an accelerated pace, starting with a subset of the best-performing universities and research centres to showcase success stories. Such an implementation could be inspired by Luxembourg's example.
Following OECD recommendations from the 2007 Innovation Policy Review, Luxembourg introduced performance contracts for its universities and research institutes. Such contracts set targets on the number of publications in high-impact journals, the number of publications per researcher, co-publications with visiting scientists, international conferences, the number of patents, paid licences and spin-off companies (OECD, 2016[23]).
R11.5. Strengthen research integrity by providing guidance, training and support to researchers and research organisations by establishing a common framework that establishes a national code of conduct in line with international standards, and providing mechanisms for investigating and addressing misconduct through a two-fold approach whereby national authorities enact and monitor the implementation of clear regulations to prohibit misconduct malpractices, and research centres and universities raise awareness of research misconduct, provide training and support for researchers, and put in place measures that encourage researchers to report cases of research misconduct and protect whistleblowers. Careful implementation is needed, with a focus on ethical norms aims to strengthen research integrity through a set of principles for researchers, their employers and funding bodies.
The Concordat to Support Research Integrity in the United Kingdom is a national policy statement that aims to strengthen research integrity through a set of principles for researchers, their employers and funding bodies. The Concordat has led to a more joined-up and proactive approach to research integrity within institutions, supported also by a self-assessment tool.
See the discussion in Chapter 6.
R11.6. Differentiate the roles of public Research Centres as RTOs or governmental laboratories in order to enhance research excellence by focusing on developing specific domains of science and technology.
See Chapter 6, specifically Box 6.12, for more information
Recommendation 12: Further develop international co-operation in STI to facilitate technology and knowledge transfer into the domestic innovation system.
This could be achieved through the following:
R12.1. Create a system-wide Strategy for the internationalisation of STI that clearly delineates roles and responsibilities and assigns resources to support key stakeholders in accordance with the strategy. This strategy should take a whole-of-government approach, bringing together relevant ministries. As part of this strategy, prioritise specific strategic objectives in bilateral STI co-operation. Derive a comparative analysis of technological advantages between countries and identify key collaborative countries.
Korea established an international R&D promotion strategy in 2023, focusing on enhancing flexibility in research project budgets and prioritising international co-operation. It includes implementing a global R&D strategic map, particularly in national, strategic, and carbon-neutral technologies, and designing flagship projects. The strategy aims to expand opportunities for young scientists and researchers both domestically and internationally. Additionally, it plans to establish a Global R&D Hub Centre to lead global R&D co-operation and form a Global R&D Special Committee to consolidate R&D capabilities across government departments.
See Box 5.5 in Chapter 5 for more details.
R12.2. Enhance the institutional support structure for internationalisation of STI by, for example, establishing a dedicated organisation to bolster international collaboration in STI by assisting faculty with funding searches, proposal preparation, and connecting researchers, based on incentives for individuals.
The University of Florida (UF) International Centre’s Office for Global Research Engagement (OGRE) is dedicated to fostering international research partnerships and establishing co-operative agreements with foreign institutions. It supports collaborative research through joint proposals and access to global resources, and provides funding opportunities, workshops, and resources for international research. Additionally, OGRE has played a crucial role in enhancing regional healthcare and attracting global talent through active international collaboration. OGRE strengthens UF's global presence and promotes a multicultural academic environment by assisting faculty with funding searches, proposal preparation, and connecting researchers.
The Global Innovation Cluster Centre (GIC) at Hanyang University's ERICA campus in Korea exemplifies effective international collaboration. The GIC fosters industry-university co-operation by creating a robust ecosystem that promotes practical global R&D projects. It supports the development of innovative research and facilitates the dissemination of research achievements worldwide. The centre also provides educational opportunities for students and researchers, offering hands-on experience with advanced technologies and methodologies.
See Chapter 5 for more details.
R12.3. Evaluate membership in multilateral co-operation initiatives, including a developmental and practical impact assessment for membership (e.g. upgrading to associate membership in JINR, CERN, SESAME, PRIMA, EUROMED, EMPHNET and other initiatives).
Priorities for EU Member States in international STI co-operation
Multilateral research organisations are important platforms for EU Member States to advance their scientific agendas, share risks and costs, and reinforce global scientific ties. At the same time, national policies aim to maximise the benefits through strategic planning, targeted funding, and cross-ministerial co-ordination. International collaboration fosters scientific excellence and competitiveness and helps address global challenges in fields such as energy, health and space.
Intrinsic scientific objectives include sharing infrastructure and pooling resources for joint research, which no country could afford to do alone. External policy goals include science diplomacy and development co‑operation.
Member States often incorporate multilateral co-operation into their national and agency-level international STI strategies, although the extent of formalised strategic documents for extra-EU co-operation varies across countries.
Governance of these international collaborations involves multiple national actors, including ministries responsible for science, innovation, economy, and foreign affairs, with implementation roles often delegated to specialised agencies or research councils.
The European Union as a whole supports coherence in international scientific co-operation through advisory bodies like the former Strategic Forum for International S&T Cooperation (SFIC), which promoted co-ordination among Member States and the Commission on multilateral engagement. SFIC’s method is applied in three steps: 1) state of play; 2) priority setting; 3) implementation. SFIC’s mandate has now been included within the broader European Framework for Science Diplomacy.
M&E mechanisms at the national and EU level aim to assess the effectiveness and impact of participation in multilateral organisations, although data collection and performance measurement remain challenging.
Source: (Technopolis Group & Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, 2013[24])
R12.4. Build on Egypt’s position in the MENA region to assert regional leadership on the global agenda of societal challenges. Develop and enhance global co-operation programmes with Arab and African countries. Envisage the development of large, regional, scientific infrastructures with neighbouring countries to foster regional leadership (for example, the SESAME infrastructure has conferred high visibility to Jordan in the regional context)
Innovate Korea 2045 emphasises taking a global leadership role in addressing future societal challenges through STI. Recognising that issues such as pandemics and sustainability require international collaboration, Korea integrates globalisation into its STI agenda. It promotes co-operation with neighbouring countries, aligns national efforts with global goals like the SDGs, and leverages regional partnerships to build visibility and influence – an approach that may inform Egypt’s regional leadership ambitions in Arab and African STI co-operation (MSIT, 2020[25]).
See Box 5.5 for the description of SESAME in Jordan.
R12.5. Establish a reliable data system on international STI collaboration to provide systematic information about the contents and budget of international collaboration projects, including existing bilateral agreements and membership in multilateral collaborations
The Integrated R&D Information System (IRIS) in Korea aims to streamline and standardise research management across various ministries and institutions, creating a more efficient and collaborative R&D environment. It consolidates disparate regulations and guidelines into a unified system, including project management, researcher information, and fund management systems. This increases administrative efficiency and fosters a researcher-centric approach. IRIS enhances co-ordination and collaboration among researchers and institutions, supporting joint research activities and avoiding duplication of efforts.
See Box 5.6 in Chapter 5 for more details.
The evidence data platform (e-CSTI), developed by Japan’s Council for Science, Technology, and Innovation (CSTI), supports evidence-based policymaking and evidence-based management in science and technology. It enhances the efficiency and effectiveness of Japan’s science and technology policies by collecting and analysing data on research outputs, funding allocations and external fundraising. The platform includes visualisation tools to increase transparency in budgets, research capacities, and the impact of government R&D investments. Additionally, e-CSTI aids in policy formulation by providing detailed analytical functions for informed decision-making regarding funding and strategic directions.
See Box 5.7 in Chapter 5 for more details.
Recommendation 13. Address brain drain, enhance brain circulation and attract international talent to Egypt
This could be achieved through the following:
R13.1. Increase domestic incentives to reduce brain drain by revising salary scales for researchers, providing high-quality jobs in specific excellence centres and creating endowed chairs. Currently, researchers in the public research performing organisations are subject to the civil servant salary scales.
Evolution of salary scales in France’s public research institutions
Historically, researchers in France in public institutions such as the Centre National pour la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) were civil servants paid according to regulated pay scales. However, bonuses were introduced over time to reflect specific duties and expertise beyond the base civil service salary. In 2009, the doctoral and research supervision bonus was introduced via Decree No. 2009-851 (July 8, 2009). This bonus rewards exceptional research contributions or recipients of national/international scientific distinctions. In 2021, the compensation scheme for teacher-researchers was updated by decrees in December 2021 (Decree No. 2021-1895) and September 2022 (Decree No. 2022-1231). It introduced a grade-related allowance (C1), an allowance linked to specific duties/responsibilities (C2) and an individual bonus (C3) linked to quality of activities and commitment, awarded for a three-year period based on activity reports and adjudicated by institutional bodies, formalising a merit-based reward for three years following assessment.
Source: CNRS (n.d.[26]).
R13.2. Leverage Egyptian diaspora scientists as mentors and partners in research projects. To do this: 1) establish a contact database in collaboration with alumni networks, encourage networking and mentorship contacts between home researchers and diaspora; 2) invite diaspora to share knowledge through talks and lectures when in Egypt; 3) establish specific programmes for short- to medium-term visits of diaspora scientists during their sabbatical leaves; and 4) establish specific programmes for diaspora-homeland collaboration.
The Unity through Knowledge Fund in Croatia, supported by the World Bank, aims to connect Croatian researchers globally to foster innovation and development. By providing grants for competitive research projects, it encourages the Croatian diaspora to contribute their expertise and collaborate with local scientists.
R13.3. Encourage the gradual return of diaspora and attract foreign researchers with incentives such as specific, high-quality job opportunities and housing provision.
Korea’s BRAIN Pool Program serves as a good practice for attracting researchers overseas, including diaspora and excellent international scientists, encouraging brain circulation, and retaining outstanding talent. The BRAIN Pool Program is designed to attract overseas scientists to work at Korean research institutions, supporting around 81 projects across 12 National Strategic Technology fields, such as next-generation nuclear energy and semiconductors. The programme covers research material and activity costs, including housing, airfare, insurance, and relocation for long-term engagement of up to ten years, with an initial four-year period and a possible six-year extension.
See Box 5.8 in Chapter 5 for more details.
R13.4. Encourage more scholarships from the business community that require graduates to return to Egypt to work in a relevant field and capitalise on their knowledge.
The Chevening Scholarship, funded by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and administered in Egypt in partnership with the British Council, enables outstanding individuals to pursue fully funded postgraduate study in the United Kingdom. A key feature of the programme is its mandatory return requirement: scholars must return to their home country for at least two years after completing their studies. This condition is intended to ensure that the skills, knowledge, and international exposure gained abroad are reinvested in national development efforts.
Source: Chevening (2021[27]), Chevening eligibility criteria, https://www.chevening.org/resource-hub/guidance/eligibility.
References
[2] Ahram Online (2025), Egypt added 98,000 classrooms, cut public school class size to under 50 students: Minister, https://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/2/547081/Egypt/Society/Egypt-added-,-classrooms,-cut-public-school-class-.aspx.
[27] Chevening (2021), Chevening eligibility criteria, https://www.chevening.org/resource-hub/guidance/eligibility/.
[26] CNRS (n.d.), Compensation for civil servants, https://carrieres.cnrs.fr/en/remuneration-of-civil-servants/.
[16] Enterprise Singapore (n.d.), Enterprise Development Grant, https://www.enterprisesg.gov.sg/financial-support/enterprise-development-grant (accessed on 15 July 2025).
[15] European Investment Fund (2019), Western Balkans Enterprise Development, https://www.eif.org/what_we_do/resources/wbedif/index.htm.
[4] Government of Japan (n.d.), 行政事業レビュー見える化サイト(“Administrative Project Review Visualization Portal”), https://rssystem.go.jp/top (accessed on 17 April 2025).
[20] Government of South Africa (2015), Staffing South Africa’s Universities Framework: A Comprehensive, Transformative Approach to Developing Future Generations of Academics and Building Staff Capacity, https://www.justice.gov.za/commissions/feeshet/docs/2015-Staffing-SAUniversitiesFramework.pdf.
[17] Government of the United Kingdom (2022), University and business collaboration agreements: Lambert Toolkit, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/university-and-business-collaboration-agreements-lambert-toolkit.
[19] Japan Patent Office (2025), Support Measures, Law Amendments, etc., https://www.jpo.go.jp/resources/report/statusreport/2025/document/index/0203.pdf (accessed on 31 March 2025).
[18] Japan Patent Office (n.d.), Measures for Supporting Private Companies and Universities, https://www.jpo.go.jp/e/support/chusho/document/index/part3.pdf (accessed on 31 March 2025).
[14] Ministry of Treasury and Finance (Türkiye) (2018), Government’s Policies to Promote Business Angel Investing, https://ms.hmb.gov.tr/uploads/sites/2/2018/12/Governments-Policies-to-Promote-Business-Angel-Investing.pdf.
[22] MSIT (2024), Final Selection of the ‘Global TOP Strategic Research Group, https://www.bioin.or.kr/board.do?num=325094&cmd=view&bid=division.
[5] MSIT (2022), Set the Direction for Establishing the 5th Science and Technology Basic Plan (2023~2027), https://www.msit.go.kr/eng/bbs/view.do?sCode=eng&mId=4&mPid=2&bbsSeqNo=42&nttSeqNo=536&searchOpt=ALL.
[25] MSIT (2020), Innovate Korea 2045 - Challenges and Changes for the Future.
[9] MSTI (2021), , https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/science-technology-and-innovation-indicators.html.
[10] OECD (2025), “Challenges and opportunities of mission-oriented innovation policy in Korea”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 172, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d725304c-en.
[3] OECD (2024), OECD support towards STI statistical capability development in Egypt: Assessment and Recommendations.
[7] OECD (2022), OECD Economic Surveys: Finland 2022, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/516252a7-en.
[6] OECD (2022), OECD Economic Surveys: Finland 2022, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/516252a7-en.
[21] OECD (2021), “Resourcing higher education in Denmark: Thematic policy brief”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 49, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c8217325-en.
[23] OECD (2016), OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: Luxembourg 2016, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264232297-en.
[13] OECD (2013), Private Sector Development Policy Handbook: Establishing a Competence Technology Centre in Serbia.
[11] SBIR (n.d.), About SBIR and STTR, https://www.sbir.gov/about (accessed on 31 March 2025).
[24] Technopolis Group & Manchester Institute of Innovation Research (2013), Overview of international science, technology and innovation cooperation between Member States and countries outside the EU and the development of a future monitoring mechanism., https://era.gv.at/public/documents/1525/study_cooperation_countries_outside_the_eu.pdf.
[12] The Netherlands Enterprise Agency (2024), Innovation Impact Challenge, https://english.rvo.nl/topics/innovation-impact-challenge (accessed on 31 March 2025).
[8] The State Treasury of Finland (2025), The national plan to raise R&D funding, https://www.treasuryfinland.fi/investor-relations/sustainability-and-finnish-government-bonds/the-national-plan-to-raise-rd-funding/ (accessed on 31 March 2025).
[1] World Bank (2025), Breaking Barriers: Boosting Women’s Labor Force Participation in Egypt, https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2025/03/12/breaking-barriers-boosting-women-s-labor-force-participation-in-egypt.
← 1. Knowledge, Innovation & Scientific Research Pillar - Egypt 2030, http://sdsegypt2030.com/economic-dimension/2673-2/?lang=en.
← 2. .This could build on the existing Egypt National Climate Change Strategy 2050, which is centred on climate change adaptation and mitigation and has some elements of a development strategy for sustainable and low-emission growth. Nevertheless, a more comprehensive overall developmental strategy is needed as a follow-up to Egypt 2030.