R&D is not factory floor oppressive work for people who have no options and often little political power. It is the domain of the intelligent; people with options who are more fully aware of what their options are. IOW, a true middle class. The more the thinking class grows the better all of us are.
R&D is not a zero sum game like manufacturing. With manufacturing there is only so much demand for the manufactured goods; only so much material with which to make the goods etc. With R&D the only limiting factor that comes to mind is the size of R&D budgets. It is relatively easy to increase the size of that pie if R&D brings results.
This class of people will be in a better place to act on opportunity as well compared to the low payed laborers whether it be to move to more developed countries once they have some valuable experience or to take their ideas and experience and create enterprises on their own or to simply demand higher compensation with these other options in mind. I'd bet they'd also have more political clout as well.
In short, more R&D in these countries will accelerate parity with their counterparts in more developed countries and might even pull their labor class with them.
These aren't necessarily research positions, they are often just offshored software development work and even tech support call centers.
Anything that isn't billed per widget is often counted as R&D - especially when it comes to tax breaks!
The material wasn't really a problem in most industries since early 1950s. The demand is also permanently growing, with population levels increasing, wealth being created etc.
R&D however always follows manufacturing, it's just the nature of their relationship. It can not last long in ivory tower, no matter what politicians tell.
"R&D however always follows manufacturing, it's just the nature of their relationship" This is true but R&D leads to whole new markets with explosive growth as opposed to commodity plateaus and slower incremental growth based on population or other rate limited market phenomena.
In the 1980's the driving force was quality and the ones to emulate were the Japanese. Now the driving force is cost, quality is not that important, and the ones to emulate are the Chinese/Indians.
Google for "787 Dreamliner outsourcing". It was costly experience for Boeing.
From the point of view of a board of directors or senior mgmt, if outsourcing is such a good idea, why not outsource management? It would be more cost-effective, and just as efficient.
1. Just like in the US, quality is dependent on the people you hire (duh).
2. In India, unlike the US, it seems the more oversight you offer (while observing #1), the better the results. In the US, you generally hire smart people and get out of the way. In India, I found it was necessary to do high touch dev....I don't think this is a result of developer quality, but rather shared understanding and culture. In the US you can say "we are doing X b/c of Y sorta like Z" and usually you can get to the point without being too explicit. That is lacking, making MORE effort needed to communicate. Again, not a bad thing, just a point.
3. I never, ever understood thinking offshoring to a place that doesn't speak your native language (well) AND has a huge timezone offset was a good idea.
The absolute best experience I had and will constantly advocate for US companies is to use New Zealand. Native English speakers, 4 hour (and 1 day) offset from SF... a place your developers would LOVE to visit to train people. About a 1/4 - 1/2 the cost situation as well, so bang for the buck is usually much, much higher than China, India and Vietnam where timezone and language is usually a problem.
How much is attributable to "R$wages + R$cost of training" < "US$ wages" I cannot say.
I guess what I'm getting at, is that I wonder how much of these R&D facilities are being set up as a way to reduce costs as some people are speculating, and how many are being forced in order to side step red tape and continue pushing their products into new markets?
Maybe, but they're not affordable to every american. This countries subsidize upper studies so their citizens can access this kind of education.
I think is just a matter of priorities. Instead of spending so much on X thing, spend more on scholarships for the top students in the country in specialized science areas. Universities know how to compete.
Russian/Estonian/[insert any country] are doing that for a while. Just not in their own country, but in Silicon Valley (50% of Silicon Valley startup has at least one founder that's not from USA). For creme de la creme products you need more than just good Indian "worker".
What the WSJ article was describing is offshoring.