8158.0 - Innovation in Australian Business, 2012-13 Quality Declaration 
Previous ISSUE Released at 11:30 AM (CANBERRA TIME) 21/08/2014   
   Page tools: Print Print Page Print all pages in this productPrint All RSS Feed RSS Bookmark and Share Search this Product

FINANCIAL INDICATORS


TYPE OF INNOVATION RELATED EXPENDITURE

Innovation-active businesses were asked to indicate the types of expenditure they had incurred in the development or introduction of new goods, services, processes or methods. Businesses were not asked to report dollars expended against each expenditure category and could indicate more than one type of expenditure.

INNOVATION-ACTIVE BUSINESSES: Types of expenditure for innovation purposes(a)(b), by employment size, 2012-13

0-4 persons
5-19 persons
20-199 persons
200 or more persons
Total
%
%
%
%
%

Acquisition of machinery, equipment or technology
26.2
40.0
44.8
57.4
34.0
Training
21.3
30.4
43.7
50.7
27.7
Marketing activities undertaken to introduce new goods or services to the market
23.1
30.5
31.5
31.4
27.0
Research and experimental development for purposes of introducing innovation only:(c)
acquired from other businesses
3.6
5.2
6.1
5.1
4.6
undertaken by the business
8.9
10.0
12.2
21.7
9.8
any expenditure on Research and Experimental Development
11.2
11.6
13.6
22.9
11.7
Design, planning or testing
10.8
14.0
17.0
30.2
13.0
Acquisition of licences, rights, patents or other intellectual property
9.1
7.9
9.2
17.5
8.7
Other activities related to the development or introduction of new or significantly improved goods, services, processes or methods
2.4
2.1
1.9
1.3
2.2
No expenditure on any activities related to the development or introduction of new or significantly improved goods, services, processes or methods
45.0
35.9
26.9
20.6
39.1

(a) Proportions are of innovation-active businesses in each output category.
(b) Businesses were asked if they had incurred any expenditure during the reference period for activities related to innovation only. Businesses were not asked to report actual dollar expenditure for the items or activities included in this table.
(c) A detailed definition of Research and Experimental Development was not provided. No interpretation checks were made.


Almost two in five innovation-active businesses had no expenditure on any activities related to the development or introduction of new or significantly improved goods, services, processes or methods (39%). Businesses with 0-4 persons employed were more than twice as likely to have had no expenditure on any activities related to the development or introduction of new or significantly improved goods, services, processes or methods as businesses with 200 or more persons employed (45% and 21% respectively).

Across all businesses, acquisition of machinery, equipment or technology was the most common type of expenditure for the purpose of innovation, ranging from 26% of businesses with 0-4 persons employed to 57% of businesses with 200 or more persons employed. Businesses with 200 or more persons employed were the most likely to have expenditure for six of the nine types listed. For example, these larger businesses were more than twice as likely to have had expenditure on training as businesses with 0-4 persons employed (51% compared with 21%) and almost three times as likely to have had expenditure on design, planning or testing (30% and 11% respectively).

By industry, results show businesses in the Mining industry were the most likely to have had expenditure on acquisition of machinery, equipment or technology (54%), while businesses in the Health care and social assistance industry were the most likely to have had expenditure on training (50%). Businesses in the Wholesale trade industry were more than five times as likely as businesses in the Agriculture, forestry and fishing industry to have had expenditure on marketing activities undertaken to introduced new goods or services to the market (42% and 8% respectively).


GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR INNOVATION RELATED ACTIVITIES

Innovation-active businesses were asked if they had received any financial assistance from Australian government organisations specifically for the purpose of innovation. Those that indicated that they had were asked which broad level of government provided this assistance.

Assistance from government for innovation purposes(a), by employment size, 2012-13

0-4 persons
5-19 persons
20-199 persons
200 or more persons
Total
%
%
%
%
%

Businesses that received government financial assistance for the purpose of innovation
2.2
3.1
7.9
15.2
3.4
Level of government that financial assistance was received:(b)
Federal government
*75.8
*63.6
^70.7
*67.0
^69.6
State/territory or local government
*54.4
*41.8
^41.3
^45.6
^45.9

^ estimate has a relative standard error of 10% to less than 25% and should be used with caution
* estimate has a relative standard error of 25% to 50% and should be used with caution
(a) Proportions are of innovation-active businesses which received financial assistance in each output category.
(b) Businesses could identify more than one level of government from which financial assistance for the purpose of innovation was received.


Of all innovation-active businesses, 3% received financial assistance from Australian government organisations for the development or introduction of new goods, services, processes or methods during the year ended 30 June 2013. Of these businesses, 70% indicated the financial assistance was from the federal government, while 46% indicated it was from state/territory or local government.

The proportion of businesses that received financial assistance for innovation from Australian government organisations increased with each successive employment size range, from 2% of businesses with 0-4 persons employed to 15% of businesses with 200 or more persons employed.

It is important to note that the population varies considerably between each employment size range. For example, 15% of businesses with 200 or more persons employed that received financial assistance for innovation from Australian government organisations represents approximately 450 businesses. In contrast 2% of businesses with 0-4 persons employed that received this financial assistance represents approximately 3,300 businesses.