The ICT sector is the largest investor in research and development (R&D) and it drives a large part of technical change and innovation across economies. As Annex Figure 4.A1.1 shows, the leaders in terms of R&D as a share of total R&D are two non-OECD economies (Chinese Taipei and Singapore) and two OECD economies (Finland and Korea). In 2007, ICT R&D accounted for more than 25% of total R&D spending in the OECD area; in terms of total business R&D expenditures, it accounts for roughly one-third of the total, exceeding other industries by a large margin (OECD, 2008a). As Annex Figure 4.A1.1 also shows, among countries for which information is available for 2008, the share of ICT R&D in total R&D declined somewhat, except for a slight uptick in Canada and in two eastern European OECD members (the Czech Republic and Hungary); nevertheless the share remains high and ICT R&D continues to drive the information economy. The top global ICT firms account for a large share of total ICT R&D, with the top 150 R&D spenders investing overall as much as total ICT R&D expenditures in the OECD area.1 Many of the top 250 ICT firms also rank high on the list of the top 1 000 global R&D spenders, with 36 ICT firms, for example, in the 2008 list of the top 100 R&D spenders (Jaruzelski and Dehoff, 2009).
The top 250 ICT firms spent on average over USD 1 billion for R&D in 2009, with a 4%
annual increase since 2000. However, compared to 2008, R&D expenditures dropped by 6%
in 2009 in US dollar terms, with the strongest decline in communications equipment (–7%) and information technology (IT) services and electronics (–6% each). Internet firms, in contrast, were the only top 250 ICT firms that significantly increased R&D expenditures in 2009 (+6% compared to 2008). IT equipment firms have also increased their R&D spending in 2009 but to a much smaller extent (+1%).
An E O C D
B ro
L e c t ur e s e u le
l y
O n
a d
R e
Overall, R&D investments in the top ICT firms tend to be pro-cyclical, growing most in periods of economic expansion and retracting during downturns (Figure 4.1). They typically lag behind growth and declines in revenue. In the 2008-09 economic crisis, however, the cyclical lag in R&D cuts was less marked than during the crisis of 2001-02, and total R&D spending had recovered almost as fast as total revenue by the beginning of 2010. This suggests not only that ICT firms are more attuned to business cycles than during the last cyclical slump, but they are investing their way out of the cyclical slump via R&D expenditures.
The 2009-10 recovery in R&D expenditure in the ICT sector was however slightly slower than the recovery across all sectors (Figure 4.2). While total R&D expenditures of all US listed firms reporting R&D (including ICT firms) started to grow again in the last half of 2009, R&D spending by ICT firms2 only regained momentum and began closing the gap with all firms at the beginning of 2010. This has not changed the R&D intensity (R&D expenditure as share of sales) of the ICT sector, which remains, after the health-care sector, the most R&D-intensive sector (see below). Furthermore, although ICT R&D dropped by more than the total it is now catching up relatively rapidly.
Top ICT R&D spenders by firm
Microsoft, Nokia, Samsung Electronics and IBM lead the list of ICT firms ranked by R&D expenditures (Table 4.1). In 2007, Samsung overtook IBM in reported R&D spending.
The first two firms were also among the top R&D spenders across all industries in 2008, just behind Toyota Motor (USD 9 billion) and Roche Holding (USD 8 billion) in the automotive and pharmaceutical sectors, respectively. There were no changes from the list of the top 10 in the OECD Information Technology Outlook 2008 (OECD, 2008a); all but Sony remained among the top 10 ICT R&D spenders, but this was because Sony’s R&D expenditures for 2008 were not available.
Figure 4.1. Growth in quarterly R&D and revenue of the top 200 ICT firms reporting R&D spending, Q1 2001-Q1 2010
Four-quarter moving average
Note: 2010Q1 is based on averages of those firms that have reported R&D spending at the cut-off date.
Source: OECD Information Technology Database, compiled from quarterly reports, SEC filings and market financials.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932329073 25
20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15
%
2001Q1 2001Q3
2002Q1 2002Q3
2003Q1 2003Q3
2004Q 1
2004Q3 2005Q1
2005Q3 2006Q1
2006Q3 2007Q1
2007Q3 2008Q1
2008Q3 2009Q1
2009Q3 2010Q1
Total R&D Total revenue
An E O C D
B ro
L e c t ur e s e u le
l y
O n
a d
R e
Figure 4.2. R&D expenditures of “technology” (ICT) firms and all R&D firms listed on US stock exchanges, Q1 2009-Q1 2010
Percentage change, year-on-year
1. “Technology” comprises US listed firms in the following industries: communications equipment; computer hardware; computer networks; computer peripherals; computer services; computer storage devices; electronic instruments and controls; office equipment; scientific and technical instruments; semiconductors; and software and programming.
2. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) based on filings at the US Stock Exchange Commission (SEC) of around 2 000 companies across all sectors.
Source: OECD based on data drawn from WIPO (2010).
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932329092
Table 4.1. Top ICT R&D spenders: Absolute expenditure, 2008 and 2009
USD millions
Rank Company Industry 2008 2009
1 Microsoft1 United States Software 9 010 8 581
2 Nokia Finland Communications equipment 7 588 6 867
3 Samsung Electronics Korea Electronics and components 6 411 5 870
4 IBM United States IT services 6 337 5 820
5 Intel United States Semiconductors 5 722 5 653
6 Siemens Germany Electronics and components 5 532 5 356
7 Cisco Systems United States Communications equipment 5 325 5 208
8 Ericsson Sweden Communications equipment 5 091 4 250
9 Panasonic Japan Electronics and components 5 009 5 053
10 Motorola United States Communications equipment 4 109 3 183
11 Alcatel Lucent France Communications equipment 4 031 3 465
12 Hitachi Japan Electronics and components 4 029 3 947
13 CANON Japan Electronics and components 3 618 3 227
14 Hewlett-Packard United States IT equipment 3 543 2 819
15 NEC Japan IT equipment 3 312 2 872
16 Google United States Internet 2 793 2 843
17 Oracle United States Software 2 767 3 254
18 NTT Japan Telecommunications 2 718 2 711
19 Philips Electronics Netherlands Electronics and components 2 598 2 240
20 Fujitsu Limited Japan IT services 2 417 2 383
1. Figures for 2009 estimated based on quarterly data since 2009 annual data were not available at the cut-off date.
Source: OECD Information Technology Database, compiled from annual reports, SEC filings and market financials.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932330194 8
4 6
2 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10
%
2009Q1 2009Q2 2009Q3 2009Q4 2010Q1
Total2 Technology1
An E O C D
B ro
L e c t ur e s e u le
l y
O n
a d
R e
In terms of growth in R&D spending, most of the top ICT R&D spenders reduced their R&D expenditures in 2009 in US dollar terms. Motorola, HP and Ericsson cut their R&D spending by almost 20%, followed by Alcatel Lucent, NEC and Canon with R&D expenditure cuts between 15% and 10%. For Samsung Electronics, total R&D spending in USD also decreased by 10% in 2009, but increased by 8% in KRW. Panasonic, in contrast, increased its R&D expenditures in USD by 1%, but this represented a decrease of 8% in JPY. The only top ICT R&D spenders that increased R&D in 2009 were Oracle (18%, software) and Google (2%, Internet).
Google is also the leader in the growth of long-term R&D expenditure (86% CAGR 2000-09 in current USD), followed by Research in Motion (55%), Marvell Technology Group (42%) and eBay (34%) (Table 4.2). The majority of the top 20 fastest-growing ICT R&D spenders continued to increase their R&D expenditures in 2009. Furthermore, the number of firms based in non-OECD economies among the top 10 fastest-growing ICT R&D spenders has increased from two in the OECD Information Technology Outlook 2008 to five, with seven firms from Asian economies (China; Hong Kong, China; and Chinese Taipei), in the top 20. This shows not only the important role of new high-growth entrants into the top league of R&D performers, but also the major shift in R&D towards Asian ICT producers, even if much of this effort is in commercial development rather than basic research.
Trends in R&D intensity
R&D intensity is defined as R&D expenditure as a share of sales revenue. The top 250 firms spent an average of around 6% of revenue on R&D during 2009, with semiconductor, software and communications equipment firms on average the most R&D-intensive (Chapter 1). As
Table 4.2. Top R&D spenders: Expenditure growth, 2000-09 and 2009
Percentages, based on current USD
Rank Company Economy Industry CAGR 2000-09 (%) Growth 2009 (%)
1 Google United States Internet 86 2
2 Research In Motion Canada Communications equipment 55 41
3 Marvell Technology
Group Bermuda Semiconductors 42 –11
4 eBay United States Internet 34 11
5 Hon Hai Precision
Industry Chinese Taipei IT equipment 34 8
6 Lite-on Technology Chinese Taipei IT equipment 31 –19
7 Garmin Cayman Islands Electronics and components 30 16
8 NVIDIA United States Semiconductors 30 6
9 Compal Electronics Chinese Taipei IT equipment 30 16
10 Yahoo! United States Internet 30 –1
11 TPV Technology Hong Kong, China IT equipment 29 19
12 Huawei Technologies China Communications equipment 29 27
13 Tatung Chinese Taipei Electronics and components 28 –16
14 Juniper Networks United States Communications equipment 25 1
15 Qualcomm United States Communications equipment 24 7
16 Symantec United States Software 24 –3
17 ZTE China Communications equipment 24 47
18 SanDisk United States IT equipment 23 –11
19 CommScope United States IT equipment 22 –20
20 Jabil Circuit United States Electronics and components 21 –17
Source: OECD Information Technology Database, compiled from annual reports, SEC filings and market financials.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932330213
An E O C D
B ro
L e c t ur e s e u le
l y
O n
a d
R e
The top 20 firms in this ranking spent between one-fifth and one-third of revenue on R&D.
Firms from the United States dominate the list of the most R&D-intensive; others include the semiconductor manufacturers ASML Holding (the Netherlands), STMicroelectronics (Switzerland), NXP (the Netherlands). A few non-US communication equipment firms (e.g. Nortel Networks, Canada; Ericsson, Sweden; and Alcatel Lucent, France) are also on the list, although it is declining revenues rather than increasing R&D which have ensured their place in the R&D-intensive rankings. Only one Japanese firm, Tokyo Electron (electronics and components), is in the top 20 ranking by R&D intensity.
R&D expenditure per employee is another measure of R&D intensity. Semiconductor and hardware firms (communication and IT equipment, electronics) are the most R&D-intensive in terms of R&D expenditures per employee (Table 4.4). Broadcom (semiconductors) leads with USD 207 000 per employee, followed by AMD (semiconductors), Nvidia (semiconductors), and Qualcomm (communication equipment). Google has greatly increased R&D spending per employee to reach sixth place in 2009. Software firms such as Electronic Arts, Microsoft, Adobe Systems and Intuit are also among the leaders. ICT firms based in the United States dominate the top 20; others include Nintendo (Japan), ASML Holding (the Netherlands), and Research in Motion (Canada). None of the top 10 ICT R&D spenders is among the top 10 for R&D expenditure per employee. Google is the only top 20 ICT R&D spender that is in the top 10 in terms of R&D expenditures per employee.
Apart from sector-specific factors, as in the semiconductor industry, some very high-intensity R&D spenders (in terms of R&D per employee and R&D as a share of sales) either specialise in R&D (e.g. Qualcomm) or are in an early stage in the growth cycle before R&D efforts become new saleable products and reduce both ratios (e.g. Google).
Table 4.3. Top ICT spenders: R&D expenditure as a share of sales, 2000 and 2009
Percentages
Rank Company Industry 2000 (%) 2009 (%)
1 Electronic Arts United States Software 28 35
2 Broadcom United States Semiconductors 31 34
3 Advanced Micro Devices United States Semiconductors 14 32
4 Marvell Technology Group Bermuda Semiconductors 24 29
5 ASML Holding Netherlands Semiconductors 11 29
6 NVIDIA United States Semiconductors 12 27
7 STMicroelectronics Switzerland Semiconductors 13 25
8 Qualcomm United States Communications equipment 11 23
9 Juniper Networks United States Communications equipment 14 22
10 NXP Semiconductors Netherlands Semiconductors . . 22
11 Freescale Semiconductor United States Semiconductors 17 22
12 Adobe Systems United States Software 19 19
13 Yahoo! United States Internet 11 19
14 Applied Materials United States Electronics and components 12 19
15 Nortel Networks Canada Communications equipment 13 19
16 Intuit United States Software 16 18
17 Tokyo Electron Japan Electronics and components 5 18
18 Alcatel Lucent France Communications equipment 9 17
19 Intel United States Semiconductors 12 16
20 Ericsson Sweden Communications equipment 15 16
Source: OECD Information Technology Database, compiled from annual reports, SEC filings and market financials.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932330232
An E O C D
B ro
L e c t ur e s e u le
l y
O n
a d
R e
Overall, ICT firms continue to play a dominant role in the top group of R&D-performing firms, and their role has not weakened in the recession and recovery. If anything, R&D has been more tightly linked with changes in revenue than in the 2001-02 recession, a sign that ICT firms have not cut their R&D expenditures and are well positioned for renewed technology-driven growth, which in turn will have major spillover effects across the information and Internet economy.
Internet adoption and use
Business adoptionWhile the ICT supply side has had a roller-coaster ride through the global recession and aftermath, particularly in hardware, the use of ICTs and the Internet has continued to expand. Levels of Internet business adoption and use have increased rapidly. Very few businesses in most OECD countries are not connected and in many cases are very intensive users of the Internet and the capabilities offered by it. In many cases the Internet has transformed the way businesses work. Whole new areas of business have been created around the Internet, for example provision of ICT services and digital content services.
ICTs and the Internet have also introduced efficiencies in product design, development, production, distribution and sales (OECD, 2004). These changes go far beyond e-commerce and simple online sales, which are nevertheless also growing rapidly.
In most OECD countries at least three-quarters of businesses with ten or more employees are connected to high-speed broadband, with business use of broadband close to 100% in some. Almost all businesses have connections of some kind (Figure 4.3).
High-use countries include the Nordic countries, but also France, Spain, New Zealand and Australia, suggesting that business and sector imperatives drive firms’ use of broadband Table 4.4. Top ICT R&D spenders: R&D expenditures per employee, 2000 and 2009
USD
Rank Company Industry 2000 2009
1 Broadcom United States Semiconductors 124 169 207 223
2 Advanced Micro Devices United States Semiconductors 44 461 165 481
3 NVIDIA Corporation United States Semiconductors 108 040 159 288
4 Qualcomm Incorporated United States Communications equipment 54 032 151 553
5 Marvell Technology Group Bermuda Semiconductors 46 746 149 171
6 Google United States Internet 10 500 143 332
7 Electronic Arts United States Software 107 486 125 922
8 SanDisk United States IT equipment 104 248 117 600
9 Nintendo Japan Electronics and components 52 000 109 623
10 Juniper Networks United States Communications equipment 104 639 102 572
11 ASML Holding Netherlands Semiconductors 46 171 97 908
12 Microsoft United States Software 91 996 92 269
13 Yahoo! United States Internet 35 993 87 065
14 Cisco Systems United States Communications equipment 79 529 79 451
15 Research In Motion Canada Communications equipment 14 570 75 375
16 Intuit United States Software 34 206 72 590
17 Applied Materials United States Electronics and components 57 643 71 854
18 Intel United States Semiconductors 45 261 70 840
19 NetApp United States IT equipment 51 477 67 164
20 Adobe Systems United States Software 81 507 65 254
Source: OECD Information Technology Database, compiled from annual reports, SEC filings and market financials.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932330251
An E O C D
B ro
L e c t ur e s e u le
l y
O n
a d
R e
rather than national industry structures, the relative availability of broadband, or country-specific government programmes or incentives for businesses to connect. However, businesses in countries in which broadband costs remain high and availability is poor are obviously constrained in their use of broadband. These countries include Mexico, Poland and Greece. To the extent that business use is persistently lagging, government attention should focus on lowering costs and extending coverage to ensure that businesses can reap the benefits of high-speed Internet to find new business opportunities and streamline existing business value chains.
Business websites provide platforms for firms to disseminate more extensive business information and to buy and sell products. They are often part of a conscious shift towards adopting integrated e-business strategies (OECD, 2004). However, the distribution of business websites does not always mirror high-speed broadband adoption. The Nordic countries and the Netherlands have relatively high broadband and website adoption, an indication that businesses in these countries adopt both as part of integrated Internet strategies. Businesses in a few countries report higher website ownership than broadband adoption, but the majority of countries have lower levels of business websites than broadband connections.
There are also some large differences between broadband access and website ownership in some countries. These include countries with high business broadband adoption such as Korea, France, Spain and Australia. In these countries business broadband adoption does not necessarily appear to be a part of integrated e-business strategies that include exploiting business websites. Nevertheless, despite some differences across countries, business use of the Internet is generally high, and business clearly recognises the value of greater adoption and use, either in general or for specific business purposes.
Figure 4.3. Business use of broadband and websites, 2008
Percentage of businesses with 10 or more employees
Notes: For Australia, website includes a presence on another entity’s website. For Japan, businesses with 100 or more employees. For Mexico, businesses with 50 or more employees. For New Zealand, businesses with 6 or more employees and with a turnover greater than NZD 30 000. For Switzerland, businesses with 5 or more employees.
Source: OECD, ICT Database and Eurostat, Community Survey on ICT usage in enterprises, May 2009.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932329111 100
75
50
25
0
% Broadband Have own website
Iceland Korea (2007)
Canada (2007)
France Spai
n Finland
Belgium New Z
ealand
Aus tralia (20
07) Swede
n
United Ki ngdom
Luxemb ourg
Norwa y
Netherlands Swit
zerland ( 2005)
Germa ny
Irel and
Italy EU27
Portugal Denma
rk
Czech R epublic
Slovak R epublic Japa
n Aus
tria Hun
gary Greece
Poland Mexico (20
03)
An E O C D
B ro
L e c t ur e s e u le
l y
O n
a d
R e
Business use
Purchasing: Business exploitation of the Internet is also reflected in their buying and selling activities. Businesses purchase over the Internet far more commonly than they sell, with the majority of firms purchasing at least routine business supplies (office equipment, general products for administrative purposes, etc.) and, increasingly, major inputs. Some sectors have tightly integrated supply networks (e.g. food products and final packaging in the food processing industry) and their business activities rely entirely on Internet-based purchasing.
Countries vary widely in the share of business reporting online purchasing (Figure 4.4).
Countries with a high share (over one-half) of businesses reporting online purchasing include those that have very dispersed populations and/or are geographically isolated such as Australia, Canada, Ireland and New Zealand. As these are all English-language countries, online purchasing may be easier because of the larger number of English-language websites that sell products. Germany and Switzerland are the other two countries with over one-half of businesses reporting Internet purchasing; this may reflect their industry structure, particularly their industrial equipment manufacture. Countries reporting very low levels of Internet purchasing are also those with low levels of business broadband uptake and
Figure 4.4. Internet selling and purchasing, total industry, 2008
Percentage of businesses with 10 or more employees
Note: The definition of Internet selling and purchasing varies between countries, with some explicitly including orders placed by conventional e-mail (e.g. Australia and Canada) and others explicitly excluding them (e.g. Ireland, the United Kingdom and some other European countries). Most countries explicitly use the OECD concept of Internet commerce, that is, goods or services are ordered over the Internet but payment and/or delivery may be off line. For Australia, Internet income results from orders received via the web for goods or services, where an order is a commitment to purchase.
Source: OECD, ICT Database and Eurostat, Community Survey on ICT usage in enterprises, May 2009.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932329130
%
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Selling Purchasing
Australia (2007) Austria Belgium Canada (2007) Czech Republic Denmark EU27 Finland (2007) France Germany (2007) Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy Japan Korea (2007) Luxembourg Mexico (2003) Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Republic Spain Sweden Switzerland (2005) United Kingdom
An E O C D
B ro
L e c t ur e s e u le
l y
O n
a d
R e
Selling: Internet selling requires much more complex business infrastructure than Internet purchasing. Ordering, verification, invoicing, payment, logistics and delivery technologies, and infrastructure are all necessary and can be expensive and onerous to set up and run. Online selling is reported by around half the number of businesses that report online purchasing, but it tends to be symmetrical with purchasing. Countries in which a high share (over one-half) of businesses report online purchasing also report a moderately high share of businesses with online selling activities.
Countries with relatively high levels of online selling (over 20% of businesses reporting selling activities) include Australia, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. Canada is an exception in that it has relatively few businesses reporting online selling compared with those reporting online purchasing. Very few countries report approximately equal shares of businesses buying and selling, and none reports more businesses selling than buying. This clearly shows specialisation on the selling supply side.
The share of total business turnover from online activities remains relatively low, but it is growing. It is larger in business-to-business than in business-to-consumer activities, despite the consistent rapid growth in the consumer segment (see below). There is a relatively high congruence between the share of businesses reporting online selling activities and the share of total business turnover from e-commerce (compare Figures 4.4 and 4.5).
The four European countries reporting the highest share of business turnover from e-commerce (around 20%) are Norway, Denmark, the United Kingdom and Ireland; all report 20% or more of businesses selling on line. However the share of European business turnover from e-commerce is somewhat lower than the share of European businesses reporting selling activities; this suggests that having a selling activity does not necessarily translate into sales.
Figure 4.5. Enterprises total turnover from e-commerce, 2008
As a percentage of total enterprise turnover
Note: Total sales via the Internet or other networks during the reference year, excluding VAT.
Source: OECD, ICT Database and Eurostat, Community Survey on ICT usage in enterprises, May 2009.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932329149
% 25
20
15
10
5
0
Norwa y
Denma rk (2007)
United Ki ngdom Irel
and
Finland ( 2007)
Czech Republic Netherlands
Swede n
Aus tria
EU27 Hun
gary France
Portugal Germa
ny ( 2007)
Belgium (2007) Poland
Spai n
Iceland (2006) Slov
ak Rep ublic
Greece Italy (2007)
An E O C D
B ro
L e c t ur e s e u le
l y
O n
a d
R e
Household adoption
In parallel with the rapid rise and pervasive business access to and use of high-speed Internet (broadband), households now also have very high levels of access and use. Rapidly improving technology, increased availability of commercial services (information, news, online stores, digital content) and government services (information, registration, interaction with administrations, tax payments, local government), declining prices, ease of use, and imitation effects and changing habits of younger age groups all encourage households to access and use high-speed Internet.
On average well over 50% of OECD households have high-speed broadband connections;
in Korea, Iceland, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark, Finland and Luxembourg over 70% of households have high-speed access. In fact, Korea has well over 90% of households with high-speed access. These data are very encouraging for the aims of most OECD governments to have 100% availability of high-speed Internet for household access in the near and medium term, and to have by far the largest majority of households connected and using high-speed Internet. There is particular policy interest in connecting remote and rural areas and poorer and disadvantaged groups.3 Speeds are also increasing, and a number of governments aim to make all household connections optical fibre with over 100 Mbit/s. In some countries they aim to make broadband access part of Universal Service Obligations (see Chapter 7, Table 7.3).
However, in some countries less than 40% of households have broadband access: much needs to be done in these countries to increase coverage and raise access (Figure 4.6).
Figure 4.6. Households with broadband access, 2009 or latest available year
Percentage of all households
Notes: Generally, data from the EU Community Survey on household use of ICT, which covers EU countries plus Iceland, Norway and Turkey, relate to the first quarter of the reference year.
For the Czech Republic: Data relate to the fourth quarter of the reference year.
For Korea: For 2000 to 2003, data included broadband access modes such as xDSL, cable and other fixed and wireless broadband via computers. As of 2004, data also included mobile phone access.
For Canada: Statistics for 2001 and every other year thereafter include the territories (Northwest Territories, Yukon Territory and Nunavut). For the even years, statistics include the 10 provinces only.
For Japan: Only broadband access via a computer.
For Luxembourg: For 2004, data include wireless access.
For Mexico: For 2001 and 2002, households with Internet access via cable. From 2004, households with Internet access via cable, ADSL or fixed wireless.
For Norway: For 2003, data include LAN (wireless or cable).
For United States: Data comes from National Telecommunications and Information Administration, “Digital Nation:
21st Century America’s Progress toward Universal Broadband Internet Access,” February 2010, Figure 1.
Source: OECD, ICT Database and Eurostat, Community Survey on ICT usage in enterprises, May 2009.
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
%
Korea Iceland
Swede n Norwa
y
Netherlands Denma
rk Finland Luxemb
ourg
United Ki ngdom
Germa ny Canada United Sta
tes Swit
zerland Belgium
EU15 Japa
n Aus
tria France
EU27Ireland OECD ave
rage Aus
tralia Spai
n Hun
gary Poland Czech Republic
Portugal Slov
ak Rep ublic Italy
New Z ealand
Greece Mexico
Turkey