National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

PAPERBACK
price:$54.25
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Successes and Difficulties of Small Innovative Firms in Russian Nuclear Cities: Proceedings of a Russian-American Workshop (2002)

Citation Manager

. "State's Efforts in Small Business Development: Two Models." Successes and Difficulties of Small Innovative Firms in Russian Nuclear Cities: Proceedings of a Russian-American Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2002.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
49
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Page 49

versity system initiated an effort to develop and implement an intellectual property policy and a technology transfer program.

As background, several years ago most technology in Nevada was associated with the federal government, i.e., with the Nevada Test Site or the Department of Defense or with the University of Nevada System. Because of the nature of the business and security concerns, the operation of the Nevada Test Site has essentially been a closed industry and now, with the exception of activities at Yucca Mountain and its use as a geological repository, it is a nongrowth industry with little opportunity for the development of spin-off companies. The main industry in Nevada now is gaming and tourism, and diversification, which was not attractive to the casinos in the past, is now considered essential to the sustainability of the gaming and tourism industry.

Small companies in Nevada are the backbone of the business development community. For example, 40 percent of the new businesses in Clark County, Nevada (the county that includes the city of Las Vegas) have four employees or fewer; nearly 20 percent have 5 to 9 employees and almost 13 percent have from 10 to 19 employees. By contrast, only 0.3 percent of the businesses in Clark County have 1,000 or more employees, and 0.2 percent have from 500 to 999 employees.

More generally, the common characteristics of most state technology development programs beginning in the early 1980s include the creation of tripartite linkages between state economic development agencies, universities, and private industry; a recognition of the importance of technology development as a key ingredient of economic renewal and diversity; and a significant investment of funds. Matching funding, however, is typically required either from federal, state, or private sources.

Differences in these programs tended to be more numerous. Some of the more significant differences were the degree to which basic or applied research is emphasized; the nature of the relationship and degree of private sector involvement; the manner in which state funds are distributed; and the degree of accountability that is applied to the programs.

In 1983 the North Carolina State Legislature established the Technology Development Authority (NCTDA) ( www.nctda.com ) to create jobs and wealth throughout the state and gave it authority to establish incubators to transfer technologies into commercial applications by private industry. Since then the NCTDA has expanded its offerings to effectively provide and connect entrepreneurs through business incubation, venture capital, technology transfer, rural initiatives, and entrepreneurial expertise to commercialize promising business opportunities.

The incubators typically provide office and laboratory space, consultant expertise, an administrative infrastructure, and Internet access. The goal, of course, is to graduate, and the incubators provide incentives by

Page
49
Front Matter (R1-R14)
Nuclear Cities Initiative: Interests of the Program (1-7)
Analysis of the Results of the Targeted Program for Promoting Employment for the Population of Minatom Closed Administrative-Territorial Zones for 1998-2000 (8-21)
Technobusiness in Russia's Atomic Cities (22-23)
Innovation Activity in Russian Higher Education (24-38)
Challenges at the Zelenograd Technopark (39-47)
State's Efforts in Small Business Development: Two Models (48-56)
Development of Small Innovative Companies in Sarov to Serve the Russian Market (57-67)
Development of Small Innovative Companies in Snezhinsk to Serve the Russian Market (68-78)
Development of Small Innovative Companies in Zarechny to Serve the Russian Market (79-87)
Development of Small Innovative Companies in Obninsk to Serve the Russian Market (88-96)
Companies Based on Technologies Developed at U.S. National Laboratories (97-100)
The Creation of Sustainable Business in Russia's Nuclear Cities (101-110)
Russian and American Business Practices and Laws: Advice to Businesses in Russian Nuclear Cities (111-113)
Support for Innovation Activites by the City Administration: Review of Innovative Firms in Zheleznogorsk (114-138)
Steps Taken by the Zarechny City Administration to Support Small Innovative Companies (139-147)
The Role of Foreign Partners as Investors or Customers in the Development of Small Inonovative Business in Snezhinsk (148-156)
Steps Taken by the Sarov City Administration and Most Important Organizations in Support of Small Innovative Businesses (157-166)
Activities of the Obninsk City Administration Aimed at Supporting Small Innovative Firms (167-181)
Small Business and the Macro Economy: Some Observations (182-189)
Steps Being Undertaken by the Snezhinsk City Administration to Support Small Innovative Companies (190-199)
The Role of Foreign Partners as Investors or Customers in the Development of Small Innovative Firms (200-208)
The Role of Foreign Partners as Investors and Customers in the Development of Small Innovative Companies (209-215)
The Role of Nongovernmental Approaches to Business Development (216-222)
Small Innovative Business in the Nuclear Cities (223-229)
Highlights of Presentations and Discussions (230-232)
Appendix A: Committee Members and Participants (233-238)
Appendix B: Russian Science Cities (239-242)