This chapter examines available indicators of innovative activity in Egypt, including expenditures in research and development, registration of intellectual property rights (patents, trademarks and designs) and the share of young firms in the manufacturing sector (which can also be indicative of the country’s innovation landscape). Furthermore, the chapter examines the quality of digital infrastructure and information and communication technology skills in Egypt, which are key enabling factors for innovation. It concludes with recommendations linked to fostering innovation in Egypt, which can be a crucial driver of productivity growth in the manufacturing sector.
Productivity Review of Egypt
Focusing on the Manufacturing Sector
Abstract
Innovation is a key driver of productivity growth, contributing to economic growth and increased living standards in the long run. It leads to the emergence of new methods, technologies and data that increase efficiency and productivity, which in turn allow the formation of new products and services (De Groen et al., 2017[1]; Elgohary and Abdel‐Aziz, 2022[2]). Consequently, greater innovation in the Egyptian manufacturing sector can improve productivity and competitiveness.
This chapter examines innovation performance in Egypt, examining several indicators, including research and development (R&D) expenditure, intellectual property right (IPR) activities and business dynamics (measured by the share of firms aged 0-2). The chapter also analyses the quality of digital infrastructure and digital skills, which are enabling factors for innovation. It then identifies opportunities, gaps and scope for improvements that can promote innovation in the Egyptian economy.
The chapter’s first section analyses innovation activities in Egypt. The second examines the country’s digital infrastructure and information and communication technology (ICT) skills. Finally, based on the preceding analyses, the chapter identifies opportunities for the Egyptian government to promote innovation in the country.
This section examines indicators of innovation in Egypt, comparing Egypt’s performance with OECD countries and, when data are available, peer economies. While there is no single quantitative measure that can precisely measure innovation, there are several indicators that can serve as useful proxies, especially for comparisons across countries. This section analyses the role of R&D expenditures and IPR activities, namely patents, trademarks and designs. It also examines young businesses (aged 0-2 years old), which contribute to bringing innovation to the economy.
R&D expenditure is significantly lower than OECD countries but has increased over time, outperforming some peer economies
R&D expenditure is a well-codified measure of input to the innovation process (OECD, 2015[3]). R&D spending, as an “inventive input”, comprises creative work to increase the stock of knowledge, which can spur inventions that contribute to improvement and progress.
Egypt has increased its gross R&D expenditure over time, rising from 0.5% of GDP in 2011 to 1.0% in 2023 (World Bank, 2025[4]). Crossing the 1% threshold marks an important milestone for a lower-middle-income economy. Among African economies, Egypt stands out as a leader in R&D investment (WIPO, 2025[5]) and R&D expenditure as a share of GDP is also higher than in several peer economies, including Tunisia (0.7%), South Africa (0.6%) and Viet Nam (0.4%) (Figure 4.1). However, it is lower than the United Arab Emirates (1.5%), Türkiye (1.3%), Thailand (1.2%) and the OECD average (3.0% in 2022) (Figure 4.1), suggesting scope for further investing in R&D expenditures.
Additional evidence from the OECD Review of Innovation Policies: Egypt (OECD, 2026[6]) shows that when examining business R&D expenditure only, Egypt’s R&D spending amounted to 0.2% of GDP in 2022, a level lower than several emerging economies and the OECD average of 2%.
Fostering firms’ R&D expenditure is key to boosting productivity. Evidence for Egypt shows that firms’ R&D has a positive impact on innovation, and innovation in turn has a positive effect on productivity (El-Shala and Moustafa, 2014[7]). Moreover, the same paper shows that innovative and younger firms are more productive and that female-headed firms are more likely to invest in R&D and introduce process and product innovations than firms led by men.
R&D expenditure (% of GDP), 2011 and latest available data
Note: The graph shows the gross domestic expenditures on R&D, expressed as a share of GDP in selected economies and the OECD for the latest available year and 2011.
* Latest available year is 2022, except for Egypt (2023), United Arab Emirates (2021), Viet Nam (2021) and Tunisia (2019). R&D expenditure includes both capital and current expenditures in the four main sectors: business enterprise, government, higher education and private non-profit. R&D covers basic research, applied research and experimental development.
Source: World Bank (n.d.[8]), Research and development expenditure (% of GDP) (database), https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GB.XPD.RSDV.GD.ZS?contextual=aggregate&end=2021&locations=EG&start=2005.
Patent registration in Egypt has been relatively low compared to the OECD and peer economies over the past decades
In contrast to R&D activity, patents measure outputs of the R&D process. In fact, patents are seen as “inventive output” granting protection to technological inventions. Although patent-based indicators are imperfect proxies for technological innovation (Dechezleprêtre, Ménière and Mohnen, 2017[9]), they can still provide useful information on the innovation landscape and maturity of certain technologies (WIPO, 2023[10]).
Patents are imperfect proxies for innovation as they do not reflect all research and innovative efforts behind an invention (OECD, 2009[11]), since not all innovations are patentable or patented. Additionally, there is great heterogeneity in firms’ propensity to patent across technologies, sectors and countries (Dechezleprêtre, Ménière and Mohnen, 2017[9]). The relative importance of patenting differs both among sectors and among types of innovation (OECD, 2009[12]). Additionally, the propensity to patent depends on countries and how patent law is enforced (Dechezleprêtre, Ménière and Mohnen, 2017[9]). For instance, the structure of patent fees varies across countries (Pénin and Neicu, 2018[13]).
Patent statistics can be split according to the applicant’s and the inventor’s country of residence. This distinction differentiates between who owns the patents and where the inventors work. On the one hand, patent counts by the applicant’s country of residence (i.e. the number of patents owned by individual or entities residing in each country) reflect the innovative performance of a given country, regardless of where their research facilities are located. On the other, patent counts by the inventor’s country of residence (i.e. the number of patents by the address of the lab at which the inventor works) indicate the inventiveness of local laboratories and labour force of a given country (OECD, 2009[11]).1 The OECD Patent Statistics Manual recommends to use the inventor’s country of residence to compile patent statistics aimed at reflecting inventive activity (OECD, 2009[11]).
Figure 4.2 shows that, over the 2012-22 period, Egypt registered a lower rate of patenting compared to peer economies and significantly less than the OECD average, both when considering Egypt as an applicant or inventor country.2 Egypt registered 0.04 patents per 100 000 inhabitants as an applicant country in 2017-22, a decrease from 0.05 in 2012-16 (Figure 4.2, Panel A). Similarly, Egypt as an inventor country achieved 0.11 patents in 2017-22, a value slightly higher than 0.10 in 2012-16 (Figure 4.2, Panel B). In the recent period, Jordan, Morocco, the Philippines, South Africa, Thailand, Tunisia and Türkiye registered higher values than Egypt. Only Indonesia recorded a lower number of patents compared to Egypt. Moreover, in contrast to Egypt’s patent registration numbers over time, Morocco, Thailand, Tunisia and Türkiye have been improving their patent performance, both as applicant and inventor countries.
Trends in total patents per 100 000 inhabitants
Note: The figure shows the number of IP5 patent families (i.e. patents protected in at least two IP offices worldwide, one of which within the five IP offices (IP5), namely the European Patent Office (EPO), Japan Patent Office (JPO), United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), and National Intellectual Property Administration of the People’s Republic of China (CNIPA), priority date, per 100 000 inhabitants. The sum of the number of patents over the 2012-16 and 2017-22 periods was divided by the average population over the respective periods. Patent data for 2022 are incomplete due to reporting delays; therefore, the additional year in the second period has only a marginal effect. Panel A shows patents by applicant country, while Panel B shows patents by inventor country. OECD is the unweighted average of all OECD countries.
Source: Calculations based on OECD (n.d.[14]), Patents in OECD Selected Technologies (dataset),https://data-explorer.oecd.org/vis?tm=patent&pg=0&hc[Measure]=&snb=36&vw=tb&df[ds]=dsDisseminateFinalDMZ&df[id]=DSD_PATENTS%40DF_PATENTS_OECDSPECIFIC&df[ag]=OECD.STI.PIE&df[vs]=1.0&dq=9P50_3.A...PRIORITY...INVENTOR%2BAPPLICANT..._T&pd=2010%2C&to[TIME_PERIOD]=false&lb=nm&ly[rw]=TIME_PERIOD%2CAGENT_ROLE%2CREF_AREA; World Bank (n.d.[15]), Population, Total – World (dataset), https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=1W.
In some technology domains, Egypt shows a high revealed technology advantage
Despite a relatively low performance in patents, Egypt performs better in some technologies than the global benchmark. The revelated technology advantage (RTA) index provides an indication of the relative specialisation of a country in selected technological domains based on its patent applications.3 However, given the relatively low number of patents in Egypt, much like several developing countries, this metric should be interpreted with considerable caution.
On the one hand, Egypt shows an RTA in some fields, such as pharmaceuticals and micro- and nano-technology (On the other hand, basic communication, information technology (IT) methods and computer technology have relatively lost their advantage over time (Figure 4.3). These domains shifted from a value above 1 in the 2003-12 period to below 1 in the 2013-22 period, indicating losses of technological competitiveness relative to the world. The fall may be due to the global increase in patenting within these domains outpacing Egypt’s growth, Egypt’s slowdown in innovation in these areas, or both. For IT methods and computer technology, the decline was due to both a global increase and a decrease in Egypt’s patenting activities. Specifically, the share of IT methods in Egypt’s total patents decreased from 1.8% in 2003-12 to 0.3% in 2013-22, and the share of computer technology in Egypt’s total patents declined from 12.3% to 3.2%. In contrast, the world’s share of patents increased from 0.9% in 2003-12 to 1.3% in 2013-22 for IT methods, and 8.9% to 10.0% for computer technology. Basic communication experienced a different dynamic: both global and domestic activity slowed. Globally, the share of basic communication patents fell from 1.3% to 1.0%, while the share within Egypt plummeted from 7.1% to 0.5%.
Figure 4.3). The relative advantage of pharmaceutical technologies increased between 2003-12 and 2013-22. The improvement may suggest a growing specialisation in the area compared to the global average, as well as increasing technological competitiveness. As for micro- and nano-technology, the relative advantage decreased over the same periods, but it continued to rank among Egypt’s leading technology fields.
On the other hand, basic communication, information technology (IT) methods and computer technology have relatively lost their advantage over time (Figure 4.3). These domains shifted from a value above 1 in the 2003-12 period to below 1 in the 2013-22 period, indicating losses of technological competitiveness relative to the world. The fall may be due to the global increase in patenting within these domains outpacing Egypt’s growth, Egypt’s slowdown in innovation in these areas, or both. For IT methods and computer technology, the decline was due to both a global increase and a decrease in Egypt’s patenting activities. Specifically, the share of IT methods in Egypt’s total patents decreased from 1.8% in 2003-12 to 0.3% in 2013-22, and the share of computer technology in Egypt’s total patents declined from 12.3% to 3.2%. In contrast, the world’s share of patents increased from 0.9% in 2003-12 to 1.3% in 2013-22 for IT methods, and 8.9% to 10.0% for computer technology. Basic communication experienced a different dynamic: both global and domestic activity slowed. Globally, the share of basic communication patents fell from 1.3% to 1.0%, while the share within Egypt plummeted from 7.1% to 0.5%.
Egypt’s RTA by technology domain
Note: Data refer to IP5 patent families owned by Egypt, by technology domain (as identified using the International Patent Classification [IPC] and Technology Concordance Table developed by the World Intellectual Property Organization), using fractional counts. The RTA index in a technology field and economy is compiled as the share of patents in the technology filed by applicants in economy divided by the share of patents filed by the same economy in all technologies.
Source: OECD (n.d.[16]), Intellectual Property Statistics (database), http://oe.cd/ipstats.
Trademarks and designs are comparatively low compared to peers
In addition to patents, other IPRs, notably trademarks and industrial designs, are linked to the innovative activity of firms (Millot, 2009[17]; Galindo-Rueda and Millot, 2015[18]).4 Trademarks protect the sign that enables people to distinguish goods or services of a firm from another firm. Meanwhile, designs protect the aesthetic of a product and its appearance. They play an important role in both product innovation (e.g. when launching a new product, firms may associate it with a new brand) and marketing innovation, as they are closely related to the marketing strategies of firms (see Millot (2009[17]) and Galindo-Rueda and Millot (2015[18])). Consequently, several empirical studies prove a positive correlation between firm’s innovative activity and registration of trademarks or designs.
Unlike patent data, only registrations by applicant country are shown for trademarks and designs in Figure 4.4. This is mainly due to data availability. For trademarks, only applicant country data are available. As for designs, some offices indicate the “creator”, which is conceptually similar to an inventor; however, the coverage of such data is limited.
Figure 4.4 reports that Egypt has low numbers of registered trademarks and designs. Over the 2016-21 period, Egypt’s number of registered trademarks and designs per 100 000 inhabitants were 0.38 and 0.05 respectively. Despite a marginal increase over time in both IPRs, Egypt’s number of registered trademarks and designs remain lower than that of many peer economies, including Jordan, Morocco, South Africa, Thailand, Tunisia and Türkiye. Among comparable economies, Türkiye has relatively higher registration levels in both trademark and design. Next to Türkiye, Jordan is leading in trademarks, while South Africa is leading in designs. However, all of the countries in Figure 4.4 have large gaps in the registration of both IPs compared to the OECD average.
Moreover, over the 2016-21 period, Egypt’s number of registered trademarks and designs was only respectively 8.7% and 12.4% of the MENA average.5 In the previous period (2010-15), the share of trademarks were 1.6 percentage points higher, suggesting that Egypt lost market share in the innovation landscape (in terms of trademarks) within the MENA region over time. Meanwhile, the share of designs was 5.8% higher during the 2016-20 period compared to the 2010-15 period, reflecting improvements in Egypt’s performance in terms of designs within the MENA region.
Number of registered trademarks and designs by applicant country per 100 000 inhabitants
Note: Panel A shows the total number of trademarks for periods 2010-15 and 2016-21 in at least one of the three offices covered (EUIPO, JPO or USPTO), by date of filing and applicant location, using fractional counts. Panel B shows the total number of designs for periods 2010-15 and 2016-21 in at least one of the three offices covered (EUIPO, JPO or USPTO), by date of filing and applicant location, using fractional counts. The number of trademarks and designs are per 100 000 inhabitants. For USPTO, data refer to design patents. OECD is the unweighted average of all OECD countries.
Source: OECD calculations based on OECD (n.d.[16]), Intellectual Property Statistics (database), http://oe.cd/ipstats; World Bank (n.d.[15]), Population, Total – World (dataset), https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=1W.
There are opportunities to further strengthen policy coherence for the Egyptian IP framework
When examining the evolution of patents, trademarks and designs, it is crucial to consider a country’s IP framework as the framework shapes how innovation is protected, commercialised and incentivised. In this regard, a report from the INVESTMED project (2023[19]) identifies three main gaps in Egypt’s IPR system: i) gaps related to the legislative framework including policies and regulations; ii) those related to enforcement; and iii) those related to entrepreneur behaviour and practices.6
Table 4.1 elaborates on the respective challenges linked to each gap and highlights opportunities to enhance them. First, the Egyptian IPR framework is complex and multi-layered, and could benefit from greater policy coherence across various IPR-related policies and initiatives. Second, the presence of scattered and separate IPR offices in Egypt creates scope to enhance coordination and integration. Third, many entrepreneurs would benefit from additional guidance and awareness-raising activities on IPR protection, which could further support their ability to access and use the available IP services.
Source: Based on INVESTMED (2023[19]), Intellectual Property Rights: Major Challenges and how to Overcome Them in Egypt, Lebanon, and Tunisia, https://www.enicbcmed.eu/fr/node/33823.
To address existing challenges, Egypt gave significant attention to creating a conducive business environment and to promoting IPR through its National Intellectual Property Strategy, a part of Egypt Vision 2030. The strategy, launched in September 2022, is a five-year plan (2022-27) intended to serve as a solid basis for the establishment of an IP system in the country (SIS, 2022[20]). Its strategic goals include: i) governance of the institutional structure of IP; ii) configuring the legislative environment for IP; iii) optimising the economic return of IP in achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); and iv) raising awareness of Egyptian society on the importance of IP. The targets of each strategic goal are elaborated in Table 4.2.
Furthermore, a new Supreme Council for IPR was established in late-2025 to synchronise IPR laws and regulations, improve coherence across IPR-related policies and initiatives, and oversee the previously fragmented IPR offices. The Council is expected to enhance the effectiveness of IPR administration and support better outreach and guidance to entrepreneurs, thereby improving their understanding of and access to IP protection.
Strategic goals and targets of the National Intellectual Property Strategy (NIPS)
Source: SIS (2022[20]), National Intellectual Property Strategy, https://www.sis.gov.eg/UP/Culture/Strategic%20Book%20(E).pdf.
Egypt has a dynamic business environment with a high share of young firms, but most are informal, limiting their ability to innovate
Egypt’s manufacturing sector has a higher share of young firms than OECD countries, but around 70% are informal
The number of young firms can also be indicative of a country’s innovation landscape. In both developed and emerging economies, young firms can bring innovation to the market, contribute to job creation and increase productivity. However, only a small proportion of new surviving firms grow and create a disproportional number of jobs (Calvino, Criscuolo and Menon, 2015[21]).
According to the OECD Business Dynamics Review of Egypt that examined the Egyptian Economic Census 2022/2023, in the manufacturing sector, young firms (age 0-2) represent a higher share of firms and employment compared to OECD countries. Young Egyptian firms in manufacturing account for 15% of businesses, compared to 14% in OECD countries on average, and represent 8% of employment as opposed to 5% across OECD countries (see the OECD Business Dynamics Review of Egypt (2026[22])).7 This is in line with evidence for developing economies, which shows that young firms capture a higher share of the market than in the United States or in more developed countries (Tybout, 2000[23]).
Within the manufacturing sector, there is high variance across industries (Figure 4.5). The share of young firms ranges from more than 20% of manufacturing firms in the textile industry, to 3%, 3% and 2% respectively, in Basic pharmaceutical products and pharmaceutical preparations (21), Computer, electronic and optical products (26) and Transport equipment (29-30) industries. The latter three are lower in terms of new firm creation compared to OECD countries. For the rest of the manufacturing industries, the share of young firms is higher in Egypt than the OECD average.
However, a significant share of young firms in Egypt’s manufacturing sector is informal, except for the pharmaceuticals, computers and transport equipment industries. Based on the Economic Census 2022/2023, approximately 70% of young firms in the manufacturing sector are informal (OECD, 2026[22]), where Rubber and plastics products, and other non-metallic mineral products (22-23) and Textiles, wearing apparel, leather and related products (13-15) industries have the highest share of informal firms (Figure 4.5). Young informal firms are likely to face structural and operational challenges due to limited access to finance and public incentives, which can help them innovate and scale up. Hence, the informal status of firms may limit their ability to innovate and adopt more advanced technologies. Furthermore, young firms are systematically more vulnerable than incumbents to policy environment and national framework conditions (Calvino, Criscuolo and Menon, 2016[24]).
Moreover, based on Economic Census 2022/23, in most manufacturing industries, young firms in Egypt contribute more to total employment, compared to OECD countries, on average (Figure 4.5). However, in certain industries, such as in Chemicals (20), Pharmaceuticals (21), Computers (26) and Transport equipment (29-30), young firms are lower in their contribution to employment compared to OECD countries.
Percentage of young firms (age 0-2) and their employment contribution, 2022/23
Note: The figure shows the share of firms aged 0-2 (young firms) in each manufacturing industry using ISIC Rev.4 classification (Panel A) and the employment contribution of young firms to employment (Panel B). The graphs distinguish between formal and informal establishments in Egypt. OECD countries include Austria, Belgium, Canada, Costa Rica, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, Japan, Latvia, New Zealand, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Türkiye, United Kingdom, and the percentages are unweighted averages across the latest available period in DynEmp up to 2022 and across OECD countries. Units with total employment lower than 2 are excluded.
Sources: OECD Business dynamics review of Egypt (OECD, 2026[22]); CAPMAS (n.d.[25]), Economic Census 2022/2023 (database), https://censusinfo.capmas.gov.eg/Metadata-en-v4.2/index.php/catalog/Economic_Census; and OECD (n.d.[26]), DynEmp (database), https://www.oecd.org/en/about/projects/measuring-job-creation-by-start-ups-and-young-firms.html.
Egypt has implemented several initiatives to support young firms and address barriers to entrepreneurship
To combat existing challenges, Egypt is implementing initiatives to support young firms and entrepreneurship. For example, the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (MCIT) promotes R&D, innovation and entrepreneurship in the field of ICT to support sustainable national development and to position Egypt as a regional innovation hub (OECD, 2023[27]). To provide further support to spur innovations among young firms, the administration opened eight Creativa Innovation Hubs across the country to create an enabling environment for technology, innovation and entrepreneurship. Moreover, the Egyptian Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Agency (MSMEDA) initiated a pioneering Fund of Funds programme whose objective is to increase the supply of seed, early stage, and venture capital, which go to innovative start-ups and young SMEs with high potential for growth and job creation (MSMEDA, 2021[28]). The pilot phase was launched in 2015, followed by a full-fudged programme in 2021, in partnership with the World Bank.
A recent Egyptian Prime Ministerial Decree (No. 2878 of 2024) established the Ministerial Group for Entrepreneurship in September 2024 – chaired by the Ministry of Planning and Economic Development (MPED) – as an effort to support the startup ecosystem across multiple fronts. These include enhancing the regulatory environment, easing access to markets, coordinating government efforts, improving access to finance, retaining talent, reducing brain drain and expanding into global markets (OECD, 2026[22]; MPED, 2024[29]). The Ministerial Group consists of four working groups addressing these priorities and has been meeting since its establishment to agree on a set of key policies and actions that are crucial for the improvement of Egypt’s startup ecosystem. These initiatives are documented in a startup chapter, which will be released at the end of the 2025, alongside a bundle of immediately accessible incentives for startups, which can be applied for digitally through a startup label. Additionally, a catalytic fund initiative will leverage existing public funds to attract foreign investments and primarily promote the creation of unicorns.
More generally, MPED has made significant strides in fostering a robust innovation and entrepreneurship ecosystem in Egypt. Central to this effort is the establishment of the Orange Corners Egypt programme – delivered in collaboration with the Kingdom of Netherland government and Bank of Alexandria – which serves as a grassroots incubator with a focus on youth and women-led businesses across sectors such as agriculture, creative industries, health, and education, reaching over 120 start-ups in 2023 alone (MPED, 2024[29]). In June 2023, Egypt established the Egypt Entrepreneurship and Innovation Center (EEIC) to cultivate a culture of sustainable entrepreneurship, support start-ups and improve the quality of entrepreneurial education. The centre is also developing a national index to benchmark Egypt’s performance and enhance its international rankings in innovation and entrepreneurship. Complementing these efforts, the Ministry supports several strategic initiatives, including Egypt Ventures, a public venture capital arm that has invests in start-ups through direct funding and accelerator-backed programmes, reinforcing the start-up landscape with scalable capital (MPED, 2024[29]).
In parallel, the Ministry’s innovation agenda aligns with Egypt’s green transformation goals through the “Smart Green Initiatives”, which operationalise the national climate strategy by mobilising climate finance and cross-sector partnerships. The Ministry also promotes climate-smart entrepreneurship through the ClimaTech Run competition, launched during the 27th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP27), which integrates climate innovation into the start-up ecosystem and supports technology-driven solutions to environmental challenges. In addition, the first meeting of the Entrepreneurship Ministerial Committee was held in late-2024 headed by MPED, reflecting governmental interest in supporting the entrepreneurial community, including women-owned businesses. Collectively, these initiatives reflect the Ministry’s integrated approach to advancing inclusive, sustainable and innovation-led economic development.
Innovation is often spurred by the adoption of advanced digital technologies, which in turn depends on the availability of digital infrastructure and skills. The literature have documented a positive relationship between digitalisation and productivity in both developed and developing economies (Dutz, Almeida and Packard, 2018[30]; Gal et al., 2019[31]), including Egypt (Zaki, 2023[32]).
This section analyses the quality of digital infrastructure, as well as the development of ICT skills in Egypt. It also collates key programmes aimed at improving digital infrastructure and skills, while identifying gaps in existing initiatives.
Egypt has invested in improving digital infrastructure, but Internet speeds remain low compared to the OECD average
In the recent period, Egypt has shown substantial improvements in digital infrastructure thanks to the numerous relevant government initiatives implemented in this domain (e.g. ICT 2030 Strategy, Digital Egypt, Digital Decent Life, National Intellectual Property Strategy).8 For instance, the government continuously invests in national infrastructure that improves fixed broadband and mobile phone services.
MCIT investments in infrastructure helped increase the average fixed broadband Internet speed over sevenfold in 3 years: from 6.5 Mbps in 2019 to 46 Mbps in 2022. Subsequently, Egypt was able to achieve the fastest fixed broadband Internet speed in Africa, winning Africa’s Speedtest Award during the first phase of the MCIT fixed broadband project in the first and second quarters of 2022 (SIS, 2022[33]). According to data from the World Population Review, the median Internet speed for fixed broadband in Egypt reached 91.6 Mbps in 2025 (Figure 4.6). Egypt not only increased its speed from the previous year (76.5 Mbps), but also surpassed Türkiye (69.1 Mbps), Morocco (56.8 Mbps), South Africa (48.3 Mbps), Indonesia (43.2 Mbps) and Tunisia (18.8 Mbps) (Figure 4.6). However, Egypt’s speed remains lower than the OECD average (189.1 Mbps). It is also slower than the Philippines (108.0 Mbps), Malaysia (162.4 Mbps), Jordan (195.5 Mbps), Viet Nam (273.6 Mbps) and Thailand (275.3 Mbps). Currently, the second phase of the fixed broadband project is ongoing, involving the replacement of copper cables with fibre optic cables both in urban and rural areas. This second phase is part of the Decent Life initiative for modernising the Egyptian countryside.9 The role of the MCIT is to install fibre optic cables in 4 500 villages to allow better Internet access for 3.5 million households, serving 58% of Egypt’s population (MCIT, 2023[34]).
Egypt improved its mobile Internet speed due to faster permit issuance to mobile operators for building cell towers. The country increased its mobile Internet speed from 25.6 Mbps in 2024 to 46.2 Mbps in 2025. However, Figure 4.6 shows that the Internet speed for mobile devices in Egypt remains substantially lower than its peer economies, and it is roughly 2.5 times slower than the OECD average.
Moreover, Egypt has low average Internet speed. Looking into the mean value provides additional insights that the median value cannot, particularly the presence of extreme values (outliers). Despite a relatively high median speed, especially in fixed broadband, the mean speed is just 12.6 Mbps, only slightly higher than Tunisia (11.2 Mbps) among the comparison countries. This indicates a negatively skewed distribution, where a few extremely low values pull the average down. While most users generally experience faster Internet speeds, the relatively low mean reflects that there are some users that are experiencing a substantially slower speed.
In fact, the rural-urban divide for Internet access and speed is non-negligible, reflecting opportunities to further strengthen infrastructure in rural areas. The OECD Economic Survey of Egypt (2024[35]) finds that this divide between rural and urban households’ Internet access is six times higher in Egypt than in OECD countries. This dispersion underscores the heterogeneity in network availability, based on the area of residence. At the same time, when compared with Africa as a whole, Egypt performs relatively well: across the region, the share of individuals using Internet averages 57% in urban areas and 23% in rural areas (ITU, 2023[36]). In Egypt, the latest data from the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) show significantly higher rates, at 84% in urban areas and 63% in rural areas (ITU, 2022[37]). While these figures place Egypt above the regional average, closing the gap with OECD economies will require continued investment and targeted efforts to expand rural connectivity.
Internet download speed, 2025
Note: The bars show the median Internet download speed for fixed broadband and mobile devices in Mbps in 2025. The marker shows the mean Internet download speed in Mbps in 2024. OECD is the unweighted average of all OECD countries, excluding Iceland due to limited data availability.
Source: World Population Review (n.d.[38]), Internet Speeds by Country (database), https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/internet-speeds-by-country.
Basic digital skills have improved, but intermediate and advanced ICT skills require further development
While high-quality digital infrastructure is necessary for digital development, it needs to be accompanied by adequate digital skills. With increasing digital penetration and ubiquity of digital resources, it is vital to equip users with the appropriate digital skills to reap the benefits of nationwide digital transformation initiatives.10 Additionally, digital skills have become even more crucial following the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, as they shaped firms’ resilience to economic and social shocks (AfDB, 2020[39]). Furthermore, an increasing number of managerial positions now require digital skills (Zaki, 2023[32]).
In Egypt, most youth and adults using a computer now possess basic ICT skills, while more advanced skills remain limited. In 2022, among individuals with ICT skills, 58.3% possessed basic skills, 14.9% had intermediate skills, while 1.8% demonstrated advanced skills (Figure 4.7). The expansion of the proportion of youth and adults with basic ICT skills has been particularly notable, increasing from just 3.0% in 2014 to 58.3% in 2022. Intermediate ICT skills saw a rapid growth between 2014 and 2018, rising from 1.0% to 14.8%, but this momentum stalled, with only a marginal increase to 14.9% in 2022. In contrast, the share of people using advanced ICT skills has progressed at a slower and less consistent rate, rising only slightly from 1.4% in 2014 to 1.8% in 2022, with a temporary increase in 2018 (8.8%).11 This highlights a significant challenge in bridging the gap between foundational digital literacy and the development of higher-level ICT capabilities among Internet users.
ICT skills by type of skills (as share of individuals who used the Internet), Egypt
Note: The graph refers to the proportion of youth or adults with ICT skills, by type of skill defined as the percentage of individuals that have undertaken certain activities ICT-related activities in the last three months. Individuals can have carried out multiple activities and therefore be considered to possess several ICT skills. “Basic” ICT skill is the average of four ICT skills: connecting and installing new devices; finding, downloading, installing and configuring software; sending emails with attached files; and using copy and paste tools to duplicate or move information within a document. “Intermediate” ICT skill is the average of two ICT skills: creating electronic presentations with presentation software; and using basic arithmetic formula in a spreadsheet. “Advanced” ICT skill is the average of one ICT skill: writing a computer programme using a specialised programming language. The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) ICT SDG indicators can be found at https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/SDGs-ITU-ICT-indicators.aspx. For a complete list of type of skills and their respective proportions, refer to the data source.
Source: International Telecommunication Union (n.d.[40]), Proportion of youth and adults with ICT skills, by type of skills, https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/SDGs-ITU-ICT-indicators.aspx.
Egypt has been building digital capacity
Egypt has an opportunity to further strengthen digital training, especially in remote areas. Expanding education at all levels can strengthen digital literacy, support the creation of new content and services, and facilitate the adoption of emerging technologies. Employers note opportunities to enhance digital skills among higher education graduates to meet the needs of the ICT sector (El Baradei and Kadry, 2022[41]; IFC, 2020[42]).
The Egyptian government recognises these opportunities and has incorporated a digital upskilling pillar into the Digital Egypt initiative. This pillar aims to develop citizens’ capabilities, equipping them for the future and the demands of digital transformation (MCIT, 2023[34]). To make the development as inclusive as possible, the MCIT took into consideration providing training and building capacities across all society segments, including school and university students, graduates, professionals, women and persons with disabilities (MCIT, 2023[34]). The ministry developed an integrated strategy to build a base of digital competencies by following a hierarchical approach that starts with digital literacy, followed by intermediate technology training programmes, then by advanced technological training programmes and, finally, a specialised master’s degree through the Digital Egypt Builders Initiative (DEBI).12
Given the large scale of the strategy, the MCIT has been collaborating with various agencies in implementing digital capacity building initiatives. Table 4.3 outlines key initiatives spearheaded by relevant agencies, while Box 4.1 elaborates on some key initiatives related to digital skills and jobs.
Sources: OECD compilation based on MCIT (2024[43]), Human Development: MCIT, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/MCIT#tabM; (MCIT, 2024[44]), Human Development: ITIDA, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/ITIDA#tabM; MCIT (2024[45]), Human Development: ITI, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/ITI#tabM; MCIT (2024[46]), Human Development: NTI, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/NTI#tabM; MCIT (2024[47]), Human Development: SECC, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/SECC#tabM; MCIT (2024[48]), Human Development: ELCC, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/ELCC#tabM.
Within the digital upskilling pillar of Digital Egypt, the Egyptian government is committed to improving digital skills in the country. In this context, several initiatives have been carried out.
First, Egypt has increased the number of training courses provided. Recently, the MCIT multiplied the number of trainees, as well as budget for technology training, aiming to train 250 000 young people for EGP 1.3 billion in fiscal year 2022/23 (MCIT, 2023[49]).13 Also, the MCIT was previously successful in providing training to 2 cohorts (109 students in the first cohort and 257 students in the second cohort) of the Digital Egypt Builders Initiative (DEBI), which is a scholarship that grants a professional master’s degree in one of the following areas of specialisation: data science and artificial intelligence (AI), cybersecurity, robotics and automation, digital arts and financial technology. The ministry also launched the Digital Egypt Cubs Initiative (DECI), a scholarship geared towards upskilling younger students in both hard and soft skills from the first year of preparatory school to the second year of secondary school. Around 8 400 students joined the initiative, which includes a basic programme that was attended by nearly 4 000 students. Similar to DEBI, areas of specialisation for DECI include software development and digital arts, networks and cybersecurity, AI and data science, and robotics and embedded systems (MCIT, 2023[34]). Furthermore, the Productivity and Vocational Training Department (PVTD), in co‑operation with the private sector, has 113 training stations (training centres inside factories) that provide 13 professions, including IT software solutions for businesses, embedded systems, AI, software and industrial applications, computer programming, graphic design and web programming.14
Second, Egypt has invested in infrastructure that allows digital training. For example, the establishment of the Egypt University of Informatics (EUI) in the New Administrative Capital’s Knowledge City is a pioneering step to equip more people with a specialised knowledge in ICT. In fact, EUI is the first specialised ICT university in the African region. The MCIT also launched Mahara-Tech, an online learning platform by the Information Technology Institute (ITI). Thus far, the platform has attracted 435 000 learners. Moreover, Telecom Egypt, together with the Ministry of Education in Alexandria, Cairo, Dakahlia, Giza, Minya, New Valley and Suez, is establishing WE Schools for Applied Technology, Egypt’s first smart ICT vocational school (MCIT, 2023[34]).
Third, Egypt has promoted digital upskilling in remote areas of the country. The MCIT carries out projects to improve information infrastructure in rural villages and promote digital literacy (MCIT, 2023[50]). Within the framework of the Digital Decent Life initiative, approximately 34 960 people in 20 governorates were digitally upskilled. Almost 800 citizens, including female coaches, knowledge teachers, imams (preachers) at the Ministry of Endowments and facilitators from the National Council for Women, received training.
Finally, other sector-specific training has been provided. Another of the country’s flagship programme is the Egypt Makes Electronics (EME) initiative, which is targeted at transforming Egypt into a regional and global hub for advanced electronic design and manufacturing in Arab, African and European markets before the end of 2030 (MCIT, 2023[50]). This project has two main scopes: i) superior design and production of electronic circuits and systems with high value added backed with a high level of technology support; and ii) creation of a labour-intensive electronics manufacturing industry. In terms of developing human capital, in-depth training programmes particularly target senior officers, engineers and technicians to meet the industry needs.
Sources: MCIT (2023[49]), MCIT Achievements in 10 Years, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Media_Center/Press_Room/Press_Releases/67076; MCIT (2023[34]), Digital Egypt, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Digital_Egypt; MCIT (2023[50]), “Egypt emerges as regional electronics hub”, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Media_Center/Latest_News/News/66889.
This section provides recommendations to foster innovation in Egypt with the aim of increasing productivity, especially in the manufacturing sector. These recommendations outline general policy directions that should be complemented by those provided in the OECD Review of Innovation Policies: Egypt (OECD, 2026[6]). The section is structured into three sub-sections, each corresponding to a specific policy recommendation:
Increase firms’ R&D expenditure.
Create an enabling environment for innovation.
Support firm entry and young innovative firms (start-ups) in manufacturing industries.
Increase firms’ R&D expenditure
As discussed in this chapter, R&D expenditure in Egypt has increased but remains largely below the OECD average. Egypt can thus benefit from designing policies that foster R&D expenditure.
While R&D is an important driver of innovation and economic growth, the existence of knowledge spillovers and financing difficulties may induce firms to invest less in R&D than what would be optimal (OECD, 2020[51]). For this reason, several OECD countries and partner economy governments are making use of direct and indirect support measures in the form of subsidies and tax credits respectively. These two incentives have found to positively stimulate firms’ R&D expenditures – and more generally innovative activity – across OECD countries (OECD, 2020[51]) and middle-income economies (Zuniga, 2023[52]). Recent studies for OECD countries find that each unit of tax credit translates into at least one additional unit of R&D spending (see Box 4.2). Direct R&D subsidies are also found to have a positive effect on R&D spending and innovation, although the existing literature reviews usually acknowledge that the results are more heterogeneous than for R&D tax credits (Becker, 2014[53]; Le and Jaffe, 2016[54]). Moreover, the effectiveness of R&D support policies in encouraging additional business R&D investment has found to be larger for SMEs than for large firms in both OECD and middle-income economies.
Some initiatives already exist in Egypt. For example, the MCIT Applied Innovation Center (AIC) initiative promotes R&D activities to address various national challenges (in areas such as healthcare, agriculture, education, energy, etc), using emerging technologies and promoting collaboration between government entities, industry, universities and international partners. The AIC offers financial support to conduct such R&D projects. Additionally, Egypt collaborates with various international partners to foster innovation through collaborative projects with American institutions (U.S.-Egypt Science and Technology Joint Fund), EU and Middle East partners (Prima, SESAME, Horizon 2020) and Japan (Egypt-Japan University of Science and Technology). Finally, some large multinationals, such as Ericsson, IBM, Microsoft, Siemens, Valeo and Vodafone have established R&D centres in Egypt, due to the attractive pool of talent (OECD, 2026[6]).
However, Egypt can devote more attention to foster firms’ R&D activity which can stimulate firms’ innovation and ultimately boost productivity growth. Following other countries’ practices, Egypt can foster the use of tax credits and/or direct R&D subsidies, as well as further incentivising collaborative R&D projects with industry, academia and research institutions. Some initiatives also exist in the latter regard. For example, the Information Technology Industry Development Agency (ITIDA) provides some services and funds for private investments in R&D centres, including tax exemptions and training programmes. Moreover, the Information Technology Academia Collaboration programme managed by ITIDA offers funds to collaborative R&D projects between businesses and academic institutions. In addition to existing initiatives, the Industrial Modernisation Centre (IMC) can participate in establishing a dedicated platform to facilitate cooperation between industrial companies, universities and research centres. Such collaboration typically involves joint research projects, which can increase private and public R&D expenditure while generating innovative solutions for industrial challenges.
Importantly, increasing R&D expenditures in Egypt require expanding the supply of human capital needed to carry out research (Bloom, Van Reenen and Williams, 2019[55]). In the short run, such policies could take the form of tax incentives to hire research personnel or social contribution reduction. In the longer run, improving educational institutions will be essential. Policies aimed at increasing the supply of STEM graduates, as well as researchers, are thus key complementary policies.
Expenditure-based R&D tax credits have become a major policy tool to support businesses. In 2017, R&D tax incentives accounted for around 50% of total government support for business R&D in the OECD area, up from 30% in 2000 (OECD, 2020[51]). They have been extensively studied in the literature (Bloom, Van Reenen and Williams, 2019[55]; Becker, 2014[53]; OECD, 2020[56]) and there is now a large body of evidence in favour of their effectiveness in increasing business R&D expenditure.
The OECD distributed-microdata microBeRD project investigates the structure, distribution and concentration of business R&D and R&D funding. It also models the incidence and impact of public support for business R&D. In particular, the project focused on studying the R&D input additionality, i.e. the effectiveness of R&D support policies in encouraging additional business R&D investment compared to a counterfactual scenario without support.
The first phase (2016-19) and second phase (2020-23) of the project shows some key consistent insights (OECD, 2020[51]; 2023[57]):
The gross incrementality ratio is around 1.4 across countries, i.e. one extra unit of R&D tax support translates into 1.4 extra units of R&D.
Tax incentives increase both R&D expenditures and the level of human resources that firms report to dedicate to R&D.
The input additionality of R&D tax incentives is larger for SMEs than for large firms.
Little input additionality is found for firms in highly R&D-intensive industries (pharmaceuticals, computer manufacturing, scientific R&D), reflecting the fact that their business models are based on R&D irrespective of policy interventions.
A similar degree of input additionality for direct R&D government funding measures points to the complementarity of direct and indirect support.
Across OECD countries, R&D support is particularly high in the United Kingdom (0.38% of GDP), France (0.34% of GDP), Italy (0.28% of GDP), and the Netherlands (0.26% of GDP) (see Criscuolo et al. (2023[58])). R&D industrial policies are mainly channelled through tax expenditure across OECD countries (Criscuolo et al., 2023[58]).
Sources: Criscuolo, C. et al. (2022[59]), “Are industrial policy instruments effective? A review of the evidence in OECD countries”, https://doi.org/10.1787/57b3dae2-en; OECD (2020[51]), “The effects of R&D tax incentives and their role in the innovation policy mix: Findings from the OECD microBeRD project, 2016-19”, https://doi.org/10.1787/65234003-en; Bloom, N., J. Van Reenen and H. Williams (2019[55]), “A toolkit of policies to promote innovation”, https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.33.3.163; Becker, B. (2014[53]), “Public R&D policies and private R&D investment: A survey of the empirical evidence”, https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12074; OECD (2020[56]), “SME export policies in Brazil”, https://doi.org/10.1787/cc5feb81-en; OECD (2023[57]), “The Impact of R&D tax incentives: Results from the OECD microBeRD+ project”, https://doi.org/10.1787/1937ac6b-en; Criscuolo, C. et al. (2023[58]), “Quantifying industrial strategies across nine OECD countries”, https://doi.org/10.1787/5f2dcc8e-en.
Create an enabling environment for innovation
Improve policy coordination to support IPR protection
Egypt’s ongoing efforts to strengthen its IPR framework provide a strong foundation for future progress. Further enhancing policy coherence and reducing overlaps across existing measures would help reinforce firms’ incentives to innovate. Consequently, Egypt may consider providing co‑ordinated and consistent policies in supporting IPR protection and registration. This includes addressing institutional fragmentation of IPR offices within the country, improving data integration, enhancing co‑ordination among IPR offices and simplifying access to centralised information. While the National Strategy for Intellectual Property (2022-27) helps address some of the existing gaps in the current IPR system, the government can further improve the strategy by developing a clearer and more transparent guidelines for firms to follow in navigating and accessing IPR processes. Additionally, it is important to evaluate the required number of staff in IPR offices to effectively implement the strategy. The establishment of the Egyptian Authority for Intellectual Property (EAIP) under Law No. 163 of 2023 harmonises the different IPR types and offices.
Furthermore, Egypt can make the IP framework more inclusive by specifying policies targeted towards SMEs and start-ups. For example, policies can provide financial assistance to qualified SMEs and start‑ups to obtain IP protection. In this regard, the MSMEs Development Law No. 152 of 2020 stipulates that innovative projects are exempted from IP fees as a non-tax incentive. Such policies are likely to ease the burden of smaller firms, given the high costs a firm may incur when registering inventions. Alternatively, Egypt can also provide non-financial assistance, for instance, by providing guidance to MSMEs in understanding the IP framework. The MSMEDA can play a key role by raising awareness about the importance of intellectual property, including how to register and protect it.
Improve enabling infrastructures for innovation
Innovation relies heavily on the availability of high-quality digital infrastructure. Therefore, Egypt could improve enabling infrastructures for innovation by enhancing the quality of digital infrastructure.
As discussed in this chapter, digital infrastructure has recently improved in Egypt – thanks to the ongoing digital initiatives of the Egyptian government – but Internet speed can be further improved, particularly mobile Internet speeds. To increase the quality of digital infrastructure, Egypt could aim to reach the MENA average for median mobile connection speed (75.8 Mbps) in the shorter term and narrow the gap with the OECD average for fixed broadband (189.1 Mbps) in the medium term.15 Moreover, Egypt should focus on narrowing the gap in digital connectivity between urban and rural areas.16
Improving digital infrastructure and ICT skills is also pivotal to allow MSMEs, as well as young digital entrepreneurs, to benefit from the digital transformation. Evidence shows that Egyptian MSMEs are facing more hurdles in adopting digital technologies than larger enterprises (El-Haddad and Zaki, 2022[60]). In fact, larger firms with highly-educated owners and women, in service sectors and spending on R&D are more likely to be digitalised (Zaki, 2023[61]).17
Additionally, Egypt has scope to further improve energy efficiency amid increasing temperatures resulting from climate change and increasing consumption rates (IEA, 2022[62]; 2023[63]). According to the World Bank Enterprise Surveys 2020, the most recent wave for Egypt, more than 5% of Egyptian establishments in the manufacturing sector report electricity as the highest constraint to their activity, as opposed to only 1.6% in services (see Annex Table C.6).18 Indeed, adopting more advanced technologies often threatens stable electricity production. While technology advancements can lead to higher energy efficiency (Shabalov et al., 2021[64]; Villanthenkodath and Pal, 2024[65]; Zaghdoud, 2024[66]), it also increases energy consumption in the short run (Jin, Duan and Tang, 2018[67]). Consequently, enhancing energy efficiency is at the core of pursuing sustainable development, particularly in developing countries where economic growth is strongly correlated to higher energy consumption (Zaghdoud, 2024[66]). At the same time, improving energy efficiency goes hand in hand with diversifying the energy mix towards cleaner sources. In this front, the Egyptian government is actively implementing the Integrated Sustainable Energy Strategy 2035, which aims to increase the share of renewable energy to 42% of the country’s electricity production by 2035, while also enhancing energy sector efficiency (Egypt Energy, 2022[68]).
Support firm entry and young innovative firms (start-ups) in manufacturing industries
Having a business environment that supports young firms is critical for Egypt’s economic growth and international competitiveness. The national government can strongly consider policies that would position Egypt as an attractive hub for young firms with a friendly investment climate, particularly in light of the increasing competition from other countries in the region vying to attract start-ups.
This chapter highlights that young firms in manufacturing constitute a large share of firms and employment in Egypt compared to the OECD average. However, based on Economic Census 2022/23, around 70% of young manufacturing businesses are born in the informal sector and are not registered with the relevant authorities, which may limit their ability to innovate. Some industries even show persistently high shares of informal businesses among older firms (OECD, 2026[22]).19 Additionally, in some industries the contribution of young firms to total employment is relatively lower than the OECD average.
Apart from providing policies to support all young firms, Egypt can specifically target the most innovative ones that are more likely to survive and grow (start-ups). In this regard, the MSMEDA has already introduced measures specifically for innovative enterprises operating for fewer than seven years. Additional criteria to target support – following other country practices (Audretsch et al., 2020[69]) – could be based on innovation indicators (e.g. share of investments in R&D, registration of patents, worker’s high level of education) or upon verification of self-declarations (e.g. possession of IPR certificates). Single criteria may not be sufficient and a combination of them may be needed, for example Italy, which has introduced a comprehensive package of incentives called the Italian Startup Act that has been effective in sustaining innovative start-ups (Menon et al., 2018[70]). 20 Relevant policies could entail simplification of laws and regulations, reduction of the cost of incorporation and more tax incentives.
The recently created Ministerial Group for Entrepreneurship – discussed above – can also focus on fostering young firms in industries where their contribution to industry employment is lower than OECD countries. In manufacturing, relevant industries identified by this report are Basic pharmaceutical products and pharmaceutical preparations (21), Computer, electronic and optical products (26) and Transport equipment (29-30). In the pharmaceutical and computer industries, most of the employment is attributed to large firms (250+), more so than in OECD countries.21 Egypt may consider assessing potential barriers in the concerned industries that may hinder firms from entering and growing. By doing so, Egypt may be able to ensure that firms can operate on a level playing field, stimulating innovation and technological adoption (see the OECD Business Dynamics Review of Egypt (2026[22]) for more details).
References
[39] AfDB (2020), “The relevance of digital skills in the COVID-19 era”, African Development Bank, https://www.afdb.org/fr/news-and-events/relevance-digital-skills-covid-19-era-36244.
[72] Amoroso, S. et al. (2021), World Corporate Top R&D Investors: Paving the Way to Carbon Neutrality, Publications Office of the European Union, https://web-archive.oecd.org/2021-11-22/617125-world-corporate-top-rd-investors-paving-the-way-for-climate-neutrality.pdf.
[69] Audretsch, D. et al. (2020), “Innovative start-ups and policy initiatives”, Research Policy, Vol. 49/10, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104027.
[53] Becker, B. (2014), “Public R&D policies and private R&D investment: A survey of the empirical evidence”, Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 29/5, pp. 917-942, https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12074.
[55] Bloom, N., J. Van Reenen and H. Williams (2019), “A toolkit of policies to promote innovation”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 33/3, pp. 163-184, https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.33.3.163.
[24] Calvino, F., C. Criscuolo and C. Menon (2016), “No Country for Young Firms?: Start-up Dynamics and National Policies”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 29, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5jm22p40c8mw-en.
[21] Calvino, F., C. Criscuolo and C. Menon (2015), “Cross-country evidence on start-up dynamics”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, No. 2015/6, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5jrxtkb9mxtb-en.
[25] CAPMAS (n.d.), Economic Census (database), Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics, Cairo, https://censusinfo.capmas.gov.eg/Metadata-en-v4.2/index.php/catalog/Economic_Census.
[58] Criscuolo, C. et al. (2023), “Quantifying industrial strategies across nine OECD countries”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 150, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5f2dcc8e-en.
[59] Criscuolo, C. et al. (2022), “Are industrial policy instruments effective? A review of the evidence in OECD countries”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 128, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/57b3dae2-en.
[1] De Groen, W. et al. (2017), Impact of Digitalisation and the On-demand Economy on Labour Markets and the Consequences for Employment and Industrial Relations, CEPS Special Report, Centre for European Policy Studies,Brussels, http://aei.pitt.edu/id/eprint/88531.
[71] Dechezleprêtre, A. et al. (2024), “A comprehensive overview of the renewable energy industrial ecosystem”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, No. 2024/11, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/94dce592-en.
[9] Dechezleprêtre, A., Y. Ménière and M. Mohnen (2017), “International patent families: From application strategies to statistical indicators”, Scientometrics, Vol. 111/2, pp. 793-828, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2311-4.
[73] Dernis, H. et al. (2015), World Corporate Top R&D Investors: Innovation and IP Bundles, Publications Office of the European Union, https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC94932.
[30] Dutz, M., R. Almeida and T. Packard (2018), The Jobs of Tomorrow: Technology, Productivity, and Prosperity in Latin America and the Caribbean, World Bank, Washington, DC.
[68] Egypt Energy (2022), Egypt Energy Sector Market report 2022, Informa Markets, https://www.egypt-energy.com/content/dam/Informa/egypt-energy/en/pdf/Egypt%20Energy%20Report-16-5%20.pdf.
[41] El Baradei, L. and M. Kadry (2022), “Bridging the Employability Skills Gap in Higher Education”, The Public Policy Hub Policy Brief Sep 2022.
[2] Elgohary, E. and R. Abdel‐Aziz (2022), “The effect of digital transformation on employment in Egypt: An applied study using ARDL model”, Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, Vol. 89/1, https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12240.
[60] El-Haddad, A. and C. Zaki (2022), “Firm dynamics in times of COVID: Evidence from Egyptian firms”, ERF Working Paper, No. 1586, Economic Research Forum, https://erf.org.eg/app/uploads/2022/09/1664179013_730_1270740_1586.pdf.
[7] El-Shala, A. and E. Moustafa (2014), “Beyond the norms: Innovation, productivity, and gender in Egyptian firms”, ERF Working Paper, Economic Research Forum, https://erf.org.eg/publications/beyond-the-norms-innovation-productivity-and-gender-in-egyptian-firms-2/.
[18] Galindo-Rueda, F. and V. Millot (2015), “Measuring Design and its Role in Innovation”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, No. 2015/1, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5js7p6lj6zq6-en.
[31] Gal, P. et al. (2019), “Digitalisation and productivity: In search of the holy grail - Firm-level empirical evidence from EU countries”, OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 1533, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5080f4b6-en.
[63] IEA (2023), National Climate Resilience Assessment for Egypt, International Energy Agency, https://www.iea.org/reports/climate-resilience-for-energy-transition-in-egypt.
[62] IEA (2022), Energy System of Egypt, International Energy Agency, https://www.iea.org/countries/egypt (accessed on 26 November 2024).
[42] IFC (2020), Creating Markets in Egypt: Realizing the Full Potential of a Productive Private Sector, International Finance Corporation, World Bank Group, https://www.ifc.org/content/dam/ifc/doc/mgrt/cpsd-egypt.pdf.
[40] International Telecommunication Union (n.d.), Proportion of youth and adults with ICT skills, by type of skills, ITU, Geneva, https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/SDGs-ITU-ICT-indicators.aspx.
[19] INVESTMED (2023), Intellectual Property Rights: Major Challenges and how to Overcome Them in Egypt, Lebanon, and Tunisia, https://www.enicbcmed.eu/fr/node/33823.
[36] ITU (2023), Measuring digital development: Facts and Figures 2023, International Telecommunication Union Development Sector, https://www.itu.int/itu-d/reports/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2023/11/Measuring-digital-development-Facts-and-figures-2023-E.pdf.
[37] ITU (2022), Egypt: Individuals using the Internet, https://datahub.itu.int/data/?e=EGY&i=11624&d=Location&g=9291.
[74] ITU (n.d.), Individuals Using the Internet (%) (database), International Telecommunication Union, https://datahub.itu.int/data/?e=EGY&c=701&i=11624 (accessed on 28 November 2023).
[67] Jin, L., K. Duan and X. Tang (2018), “What is the relationship between technological innovation and energy consumption? Empirical analysis based on provincial panel data from China”, Sustainability, Vol. 10/1, p. 145, https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010145.
[54] Le, T. and A. Jaffe (2016), “The impact of R&D subsidy on innovation: Evidence from New Zealand firms”, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Vol. 26/5, pp. 429-452, https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2016.1213504.
[48] MCIT (2024), Human Development: ELCC, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/ELCC#tabM.
[45] MCIT (2024), Human Development: ITI, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/ITI#tabM.
[44] MCIT (2024), Human Development: ITIDA, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/ITIDA#tabM.
[43] MCIT (2024), Human Development: MCIT, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/MCIT#tabM.
[46] MCIT (2024), Human Development: NTI, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/NTI#tabM.
[47] MCIT (2024), Human Development: SECC, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Human_Capacity/SECC#tabM.
[34] MCIT (2023), Digital Egypt, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Digital_Egypt (accessed on 30 October 2023).
[50] MCIT (2023), “Egypt emerges as regional electronics hub”, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Media_Center/Latest_News/News/66889.
[49] MCIT (2023), MCIT Achievements in 10 Years, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Media_Center/Press_Room/Press_Releases/67076 (accessed on 29 April 2024).
[70] Menon, C. et al. (2018), “The evaluation of the Italian “Start-up Act””, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 54, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/02ab0eb7-en.
[17] Millot, V. (2009), “Trademarks as an Indicator of Product and Marketing Innovations”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, No. 2009/6, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/224428874418.
[29] MPED (2024), Macroeconomic stability, structural reforms and economic diplomacy to advance sustainable economic development, MPED Annual report 2024, https://moic.gov.eg/page/annual-report-2024.
[28] MSMEDA (2021), Equity Fund of Funds Program, Egyptian Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Agency, https://www.msmeda.org.eg/Files/Tenders/Call_for_Proposal.pdf.
[22] OECD (2026), Business Dynamics Review of Egypt, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/adf24f43-en.
[6] OECD (2026), OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: Egypt 2026, OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c6675315-en.
[35] OECD (2024), OECD Economic Surveys: Egypt 2024, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/af900de2-en.
[27] OECD (2023), Egypt Economic Snapshot: Economic Forecast Summary, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/economic-surveys/egypt-economic-snapshot.html.
[57] OECD (2023), “The Impact of R&D tax incentives: Results from the OECD microBeRD+ project”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 159, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1937ac6b-en.
[56] OECD (2020), SME and Entrepreneurship Policy in Brazil 2020, OECD Studies on SMEs and Entrepreneurship, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/cc5feb81-en.
[51] OECD (2020), “The effects of R&D tax incentives and their role in the innovation policy mix: Findings from the OECD microBeRD project, 2016-19”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 92, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/65234003-en.
[3] OECD (2015), Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development, The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239012-en.
[12] OECD (2009), Innovation in Firms: A Microeconomic Perspective, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264056213-en.
[11] OECD (2009), OECD Patent Statistics Manual, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264056442-en.
[26] OECD (n.d.), DynEmp (database), OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/en/about/projects/measuring-job-creation-by-start-ups-and-young-firms.html.
[16] OECD (n.d.), Intellectual Property Statistics (database), STI Micro-data Lab, OECD, Paris, http://oe.cd/ipstats.
[14] OECD (n.d.), Patents in OECD Selected Technologies (dataset), OECD, Paris, https://data-explorer.oecd.org/vis?tm=patent&pg=0&hc[Measure]=&snb=36&vw=tb&df[ds]=dsDisseminateFinalDMZ&df[id]=DSD_PATENTS%40DF_PATENTS_OECDSPECIFIC&df[ag]=OECD.STI.PIE&df[vs]=1.0&dq=9P50_3.A...PRIORITY...INVENTOR%2BAPPLICANT..._T&pd=2010%2C&to[TIME_PERI.
[13] Pénin, J. and D. Neicu (2018), “Patents and open innovation: Bad fences do not make good neighbors”, Journal of Innovation Economics and Management, Vol. 25/1, pp. 57-85, https://doi.org/10.3917/jie.025.0057.
[64] Shabalov, M. et al. (2021), “The influence of technological changes in energy efficiency on the infrastructure deterioration in the energy sector”, Energy Reports, Vol. 7, pp. 2664-2680, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.05.001.
[33] SIS (2022), “Egypt ranks 1st in Africa for fixed broadband internet speed”, State Information Service, https://sis.gov.eg/Story/171974/Egypt-ranks-1st-in-Africa-for-fixed-broadband-internet-speed?lang=en-us (accessed on 18 March 2025).
[20] SIS (2022), National Intellectual Property Strategy, State Information Service, https://www.sis.gov.eg/UP/Culture/Strategic%20Book%20(E).pdf.
[23] Tybout, J. (2000), “Manufacturing firms in developing countries: How well do they do and why?”, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 38/1, pp. 11-44, https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.38.1.11.
[65] Villanthenkodath, M. and S. Pal (2024), “Empowering tomorrow: Unleashing the role of technology driven energy efficiency for sustainable development in China”, Journal of Economy and Technology, Vol. 2, pp. 155-165, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ject.2024.02.001.
[5] WIPO (2025), End of Year Edition – Despite the Odds, Global R&D Spending Grew Again in 2024, Inching Closer to the USD 3 Trillion Mark, World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), https://www.wipo.int/en/web/global-innovation-index/w/blogs/2025/end-of-year-edition#:~:text=Northern%20Africa%20and%20Western%20Asia,estimates%20(see%20Figure%205).
[10] WIPO (2023), “How patent information can help spot technology gaps and catalyze economic development”, World Intellectual Property Organization, https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine_digital/en/2023/article_0034.html.
[4] World Bank (2025), Research and Development Expenditure (% of GDP) - Egypt, Arab Rep., World Bank, Washington, DC, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GB.XPD.RSDV.GD.ZS?locations=EG (accessed on 21 November 2025).
[15] World Bank (n.d.), Population, Total - World (dataset), World Bank, Washington, DC, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=1W.
[8] World Bank (n.d.), Research and development expenditure (% of GDP) (database), World Bank, Washington, DC, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GB.XPD.RSDV.GD.ZS?contextual=aggregate&end=2021&locations=EG&start=2005.
[38] World Population Review (n.d.), Internet Speeds by Country (database), https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/internet-speeds-by-country.
[66] Zaghdoud, O. (2024), “Technological progress as a catalyst for energy efficiency: A sustainable technology perspective”, Sustainable Technology and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 4/1, p. 100084, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stae.2024.100084.
[32] Zaki, C. (2023), “Does digitalization matter? Evidence from Egyptian and Jordanian firms”, ERF Working Paper, No. 1636, Economic Research Forum, https://erf.org.eg/publications/does-digitalization-matter-evidence-from-egyptian-and-jordanian-firms/.
[61] Zaki, C. (2023), “Which firms are more digitized? A comparative study between Egypt and Jordan”, ERF Working Paper, No. 1635, Economic Research Forum, https://erf.org.eg/app/uploads/2023/04/1682432769_852_760052_1635.pdf.
[52] Zuniga, P. (2023), “Innovation policy effectiveness in emerging countries: Lessons from impact evaluation studies”, World Bank Working Paper, World Bank, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/eb246063161707fe707b339a2ea02f86-0050062024/original/Innovation-Policies-Paper.pdf.
← 1. For more information on patent statistics, see the OECD Patent Statistics Manual (OECD, 2009[11]).
← 2. Patent indicators used throughout the report mainly rely on IP5 patent families that identify the most valuable patents protected on the largest markets, as discussed by Amoroso et al. (2021[72]) and Dernis et al. (2015[73]). The value of patents is often associated with the number of patent jurisdictions in which the invention is protected: patentees will only take on the additional costs and delays of extending protection to other countries if they deem it worthwhile in terms of economic returns (OECD, 2009[11]). IP5 patent families are defined as sets of patent applications protecting the same invention filed in at least two IP offices, with at least one application filed in one of the five largest IP offices worldwide (IP5): the European Patent Office (EPO), the Japan Patent Office (JPO), the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), the State Intellectual Property Office of the People’s Republic of China (CNIPA) or the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
← 3. The RTA index in a technology field and economy is compiled as the share of patents in the technology filed by applicants in economy divided by the share of patents filed by the same economy in all technologies (Dechezleprêtre et al., 2024[71]). It can be expressed as follows: where represents the number of patents filed by economy in technology . The index is equal to zero when the country holds no patent in a given sector, is equal to 1 when the country’s share in the sector equals its share in all fields (no specialisation) and above 1 when a positive specialisation is observed.
← 4. Intellectual property rights (IPRs) are the exclusive legal rights associated with creative work, commercial symbols or inventions. There are four main types of intellectual property: patents, trademarks, designs and copyrights (OECD, 2009[11]).
← 5. MENA is the unweighted average of Jordan, Morocco, Tunisia and Türkiye.
← 6. INVESTMED is an EU-funded European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) Cross-Border Cooperation (CBC) Mediterranean project that aims to support the development of new, sustainable entrepreneurship and business initiatives in the blue, green and creative sectors for young people and women in Egypt, Lebanon and Tunisia. One of the main objectives of this initiative it to facilitate the registration process of IPRs, as it acts as an important tool for the development and sustainability of businesses. Gaps were identified upon consultation with public officials, ecosystem actors and entrepreneurs.
← 7. While the Egyptian Economic Census does not allow to distinguish between innovative and non‑innovative young firms or examine their survival rates (see Chapter 6 for a broader discussion on the data), it offers insights into the distribution and characteristics of young firms (firms aged 0-2 years) at a specific point in time (2022/23).
← 8. The ICT 2030 Strategy contributes to achieving Egypt Vision 2030 objectives, through building Digital Egypt. The latter lays the foundations for the transformation of Egypt into a digital society by building on three main pillars: i) digital transformation; ii) digital skills and jobs; and iii) digital innovation. These pillars are based on two vital elements: digital infrastructure and a legislative framework.
← 9. The Decent Life initiative, launched by President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi in 2019, aims to provide a decent life for the most vulnerable groups nationwide. It further contributes to enhancing the quality of daily public services provided to citizens, with an eye to inhabitants of rural areas. The initiative provides an integrated package of services, including various aspects of health, social and living conditions. The MCIT plays a significant role in implementing some of the initiative’s pillars, including developing the telecommunications infrastructure, through installing a fibre optic cable network and covering targeted villages with mobile phone network services, developing post offices to serve citizens and promoting human development.
← 10. For more than a decade, Egypt saw a rapid increase in the percentage of individuals using the Internet. From 21.6% Internet penetration in 2010 (OECD average in 2010: 70.4%), the value grew to 72.7% in 2023, quickly catching up with to the OECD average of 91.8% (ITU, n.d.[74]).
← 11. According to GitHub’s “Innovation Graph”, which tracks how software development activity evolves across countries on GitHub, Egypt has seen a steady increase in the number of developers between 2020 and 2025. Over the same period, the volume of git pushes has also increased markedly, indicating growing engagement in software creation and collaboration. See https://innovationgraph.github.com/economies/eg for more details.
← 12. The specific training plans are implemented in co‑operation with major technology companies and global universities with the aim to build digital competencies in all fields at various levels (MCIT, 2023[34]).
← 13. The training provides basics to enhance youth employability, followed by specialised training, and programmes for young people to qualify for technology jobs (MCIT, 2023[49]).
← 14. The PVTD provides short-term courses to improve technicians’ skills in the factories across 59 different professions. The department also provides career guidance activities to its students.
← 15. MENA is the unweighted average of Jordan, Morocco, Tunisia and Türkiye. OECD is the unweighted average of all OECD countries.
← 16. The ongoing Digital Decent Life initiative can be key in narrowing the gap in the access to high-quality Internet between urban and rural areas in Egypt.
← 17. Digitalisation measures used in Zaki (2023[61]) include the following: use of a website; listing the firm on an application; online buying; online selling; use of self-built sites; use of the Internet; and use of a smartphone.
← 18. This percentage has significantly decreased over time, from 12% in 2013 (see Annex Table C.7). The percentage is lower than in other MENA economies. Additionally, a back-of-the-envelope calculations using World Bank Enterprise Surveys 2020 reveals that remote areas of the country identify electricity as a major constraint relatively more than metropolitan cities (Alexandria, Cairo and Giza).
← 19. These industries include Textiles (13-15), Wood and paper products (16-18), Basic metals (24-25) and Furniture and other manufacturing (31-33), where around 40% of businesses aged 10 years and above are still informal.
← 20. Innovative start-ups must meet at least one of the following criteria: i) an R&D expenditure ratio of at least 15%; ii) one-third of employees must be doctoral students, graduates or researchers and/or two-third must hold a master’s degree; and iii) the start-up must hold, deposit or license a patent or own registered software.
← 21. According to the Economic Census 2022/23, firms with less than 250 workers account for only 12% of total employment in Egypt’s Basic pharmaceutical products and pharmaceutical preparations (21) industry. By contrast, in OECD countries, SMEs represent 45% of employment in the same industry on average.