Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Clustering for
21st Century Prosperity
Summary of a Symposium
Charles W. Wessner, Rapporteur
Committee on Competing in the 21st Century:
Best Practice in State and Regional Innovation Initiatives
Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy
Policy and Global Affairs
OCR for page R2
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing
Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of
the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute
of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for
their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Contract/Grant No. DE-DT0000236, TO# 28, (base award
DE-AM01-04PI45013), between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department
of Energy; and Contract/Grant No. N01-OD-4-2139, TO# 250, between the National
Academy of Sciences and the National Institutes of Health. This report was prepared by
the National Academy of Sciences under award number SB134106Z0011, TO# 4 (68059),
from the U.S. Depart ment of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST). This report was prepared by the National Academy of Sciences under award num-
ber 99-06-07543-02 from the Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the
author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Institute of Standards
and Technology, the Economic Development Administration, or the U.S. Department of
Commerce. Additional support was provided by the Heinz Endowments, the Association
of University Research Parks, Acciona Energy, Dow Corning, IBM, and SkyFuel, Inc.
Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication
are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or
agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-26413-6
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-26413-8
Limited copies are available from Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy,
National Research Council, 500 Fifth Street, NW, W547, Washington, DC 20001;
202-334-2200.
Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500
Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313;
http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2012 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R3
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of
distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the
furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the
authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate
that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr.
Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of
the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers.
It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with
the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government.
The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at
meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior
achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of
Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences
to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examina-
tion of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the
responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to
be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of
medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute
of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in
1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's
purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in
accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become
the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the Na-
tional Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and
the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both
Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest
are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
www.national-academies.org
OCR for page R4
OCR for page R5
Committee on
Competing in the 21st Century:
Best Practice in State and Regional Innovation Initiatives*
Mary L. Good, Chair
Donaghey University Professor
Dean, Donaghey College of Engineering
and Information Technology
University of Arkansas at Little Rock
and STEP Board
Richard A. Bendis W. Clark McFadden II
CEO Partner
Bendis Investment Group, LLC Dewey & LeBoeuf, LLP
Michael G. Borrus David T. Morgenthaler
Founding General Partner Founding Partner
X/Seed Capital Management Morgenthaler Ventures
Susan Hackwood Edward E. Penhoet
Executive Director Director
California Council on Science and Alta Partners
Technology
Tyrone C. Taylor
William C. Harris President
President and CEO Capitol Advisors on Technology
Science Foundation Arizona
*As of February 2010.
OCR for page R6
PROJECT STAFF
Charles W. Wessner
Study Director
McAlister T. Clabaugh Peter Engardio
Program Officer Consultant
David E. Dierksheide Adam H. Gertz
Program Officer Program Associate
(through June 2010)
David S. Dawson
Senior Program Assistant Sujai J. Shivakumar
Senior Program Officer
OCR for page R7
For the National Research Council (NRC), this project was overseen by the
Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy (STEP), a standing board of
the NRC established by the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering and
the Institute of Medicine in 1991. The mandate of the STEP Board is to advise
federal, state, and local governments and inform the public about economic and
related public policies to promote the creation, diffusion, and application of new
scientific and technical knowledge to enhance the productivity and competitive-
ness of the U.S. economy and foster economic prosperity for all Americans. The
STEP Board and its committees marshal research and the expertise of scholars,
industrial managers, investors, and former public officials in a wide range of
policy areas that affect the speed and direction of scientific and technological
change and their contributions to the growth of the U.S. and global economies.
Results are communicated through reports, conferences, workshops, briefings,
and electronic media subject to the procedures of the National Academies to en-
sure their authoritativeness, independence, and objectivity. The members of the
STEP Board* and the NRC staff are listed below:
Edward E. Penhoet, Chair Mary L. Good
Director Donaghey University Professor
Alta Partners Dean, Donaghey College of
Engineering and Information
Lewis W. Coleman Technology
President & CFO University of Arkansas at Little Rock
DreamWorks Animation
Amory Houghton, Jr.
Alan M. Garber Former Member of Congress
Henry J. Kaiser, Jr. Professor
Professor of Medicine David T. Morgenthaler
Stanford University Founding Partner
Morgenthaler Ventures
Ralph E. Gomory
Research Professor William F. Meehan, III
Stern School of Business Lecturer in Strategic Management
New York University Raccoon Partners Lecturer in
and Management
President Emeritus Stanford University
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and
Director Emeritus
McKinsey and Co., Inc.
* As of February 2010.
OCR for page R8
Joseph P. Newhouse Jack W. Schuler
John D. MacArthur Professor of Partner
Health Policy and Management Crabtree Partners
Harvard Medical School
Laura D'Andrea Tyson
Arati Prabhakar S.K. and Angela Chan Professor of
General Partner Global Management
U.S. Venture Partners Haas School of Business
University of California, Berkeley
William J. Raduchel
Chairman Alan Wm. Wolff
Opera Software ASA Partner
Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP
viii
OCR for page R9
STEP STAFF
Stephen A. Merrill Charles W. Wessner
Executive Director Program Director
Paul Beaton Adam H. Gertz
Program Officer Program Associate
(through June 2010)
McAlister T. Clabaugh
Program Officer Daniel Mullins
Program Associate
Aqila Coulthurst (through August 2011)
Program Coordinator
Sujai J. Shivakumar
David S. Dawson Senior Program Officer
Senior Program Assistant
David E. Dierksheide
Program Officer
ix
OCR for page R10
OCR for page R11
Contents
PREFACE xv
I. OVERVIEW 1
II. PROCEEDINGS 37
Welcome 39
Charles Wessner, The National Academies
Introduction 41
Mary Good, University of Arkansas at Little Rock and STEP Board
Panel I: Clustering for Growth 43
Moderator: Michael Borrus, X/Seed Capital Management
Regional Innovation Clusters 44
Ginger Lew, National Economic Council
Building a Clean Energy Economy Through Accelerated
Innovation 47
Kristina M. Johnson, Department of Energy
xi
OCR for page R12
xii CONTENTS
Enhancing Competitiveness and Speeding Innovation:
Design and Initial Results of the NIST Rapid Innovation
and Competitiveness Initiative 53
Marc G. Stanley, National Institute of Standards and Technology
Panel II: Clustering for Growth (Continued) 60
Moderator: William Harris, Science Foundation Arizona
Building Regional Innovation Clusters 60
Karen Mills, Small Business Administration
Regional Innovation Strategies Initiative 64
John Fernandez, Economic Development Administration
Panel III: Building 21st Century Clusters--The Role of State
and Regional Governments 68
Moderator: Dan Berglund, State Science and Technology Institute
Building on the Battery Initiative in Michigan 68
Doug Parks, Michigan Economic Development Corporation
Making the Big State Bigger: Current Texas University
Initiatives 73
David Daniel, University of Texas at Dallas
Growing Northeast Ohio's High-Tech Economy
78
Rebecca Bagley, NorTech
Panel IV: Lessons from Abroad--Clusters, Parks, & Poles in
Global Innovation Strategies 81
Moderator: Stephen Lehrman, Office of U.S. Senator Mark Pryor
(D-AR)
An Integrated Approach: Brazil's Minas Gerais Strategy 82
Alberto Duque Portugal, Minas Gerais Secretariat for Science,
Technology, and Higher Education, Brazil
Brazil's New Innovation Strategy
86
Francelino Grando, Ministry of Development, Industry, and
Foreign Trade, Brazil
OCR for page R13
CONTENTS xiii
Hong Kong Science Park--Optimizing Synergies 91
Nicholas Brooke, Hong Kong Science and Technology Parks
Corporation
Innovation and Clusters: Why They Are Back on the
OECD Policy Agenda 94
Mario Pezzini, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development
Luncheon Address 97
Gary Locke, Secretary of Commerce
Introduced by Ralph J. Cicerone, National Academy of Sciences
Panel V: Clustering Around the Lab--
Best Practices in Federal Laboratory Commercialization 101
Moderator: Jonathan Epstein, Office of U.S. Senator Jeff Bingaman
(D-NM)
Sandia National Laboratories as a Catalyst for Regional
Growth 101
J. Stephen Rottler, Sandia National Laboratories
Exploration Park at the Kennedy Space Center 105
Robert Cabana, NASA Kennedy Space Center
Discussant107
Ken Zweibel, George Washington University
Panel VI: University-Based Clusters 114
Moderator: Brian Darmody, Association of University Research
Parks
Current Trends and Challenges in University
Commercialization 115
Ashley J. Stevens, Boston University and Association of
University Technology Management
Improving the University Model 124
Aris Melissaratos, Johns Hopkins University
Building New Growth Clusters
127
James Clements, West Virginia University
OCR for page R14
xiv CONTENTS
Panel VII: A Policy Roundtable--What Should U.S. Policy Be? 134
Moderator: Mary Good, University of Arkansas at Little Rock
and STEP Board
III.APPENDIXES
AAgenda 143
B Biographies of Speakers 147
C Participants List 166
DBibliography 173
OCR for page R15
Preface
Responding to the challenges of fostering regional growth and employment
in an increasingly competitive global economy, many U.S. states and regions have
developed programs to attract and grow companies as well as attract the talent
and resources necessary to develop regional innovation clusters. These state and
regionally based initiatives have a broad range of goals and increasingly include
larger resource commitments, often with a sectoral focus and often in partnership
with foundations and universities. Recent studies, however, have pointed out that
many of these efforts lack the scale and the steady commitment needed for success.1
This has prompted new initiatives to coordinate and concentrate investments from
a variety of federal agencies to develop research parks, business incubators, and
other strategies to encourage entrepreneurship and high-tech devel opment in the
nation's regions. Understanding the nature of innovation clusters and public policies
associated with successful cluster development is therefore of current relevance.
PROJECT STATEMENT OF TASK
An ad hoc committee, under the auspices of the Board on Science, Technol-
ogy, and Economic Policy (STEP), is conducting a study of selected state and
1See, for example, Karen G. Mills, Elisabeth B. Reynolds, and Andrew Reamer, "Clusters and
Competitiveness: A New Federal Role for Stimulating Regional Economies," Washington, DC:
The Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program, April 2008. See also Jonathan Sallet, Ed
Paisley, and Justin R. Masterman, "The Geography of Innovation," Center for American Progress,
September 2, 2009. Also see Mark Muro and Bruce Katz, The New `Cluster Moment': How Regional
Innovation Clusters Can Foster the Next Economy, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution Metro
politan Policy Program, September 2010.
xv
OCR for page R16
xvi PREFACE
regional programs in order to identify best practices with regard to their goals,
structures, instruments, modes of operation, synergies across private and public
programs, funding mechanisms and levels, and evaluation efforts. The committee
is reviewing selected state and regional efforts to capitalize on federal and state
investments in areas of critical national needs. This review includes both efforts
to strengthen existing industries as well as specific technology focus areas such
as nanotechnology, stem cells, and advanced energy in order to better understand
program goals, challenges, and accomplishments.
As a part of this review, the committee is convening a series of public work-
shops and symposia involving responsible local, state, and federal officials and
other stakeholders. These meetings and symposia will enable an exchange of
views, information, experience, and analysis to identify best practice in the range
of programs and incentives adopted.
Drawing from discussions at these symposia, fact-finding meetings, and
commissioned analyses of existing state and regional programs and technology
focus areas, the committee will subsequently produce a final report with findings
and recommendations focused on lessons, issues, and opportunities for comple-
mentary U.S. policies created by these state and regional initiatives.
THE CONTEXT OF THIS PROJECT
Since 1991, the National Research Council, under the auspices of the Board
on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy, has undertaken a program of
activities to improve policymakers' understandings of the interconnections of
science, technology, and economic policy and their importance for the American
economy and its international competitive position. The Board's activities have
corresponded with increased policy recognition of the importance of knowledge
and technology to economic growth.
One important element of STEP's analysis concerns the growth and impact
of foreign technology programs.2 U.S. competitors have launched substantial
programs to support new technologies, small firm development, and consortia
among large and small firms to strengthen national and regional positions in stra-
tegic sectors. Some governments overseas have chosen to provide public support
to innovation to overcome the market imperfections apparent in their national
innovation systems.3 They believe that the rising costs and risks associated with
new potentially high-payoff technologies, and the growing global dispersal of
2National Research Council, Innovation Policies for the 21st Century: Report of a Symposium,
Charles W. Wessner, ed., Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2007.
3For example, a number of countries are investing significant funds in the development of research
parks. For a review of selected national efforts, see National Research Council, Understanding
Research, Science and Technology Parks: Global Best Practices, Charles W. Wessner, ed., Washington,
DC: The National Academies Press, 2009.
OCR for page R17
PREFACE xvii
technical expertise, underscore the need for national R&D programs to support
new and existing high-technology firms within their borders.
Similarly, many state and local governments and regional entities in the
United States are undertaking a variety of initiatives to enhance local economic
development and employment through investment programs designed to attract
knowledge-based industries and grow innovation clusters.4 These state and re-
gional programs and associated policy measures are of great interest for their
potential contributions to growth and U.S. competitiveness and for the "best
practice" lessons they offer for other state and regional programs.
STEP's project on State and Regional Innovation Initiatives is intended to
generate a better understanding of the challenges associated with the transition of
research into products, the practices associated with successful state and regional
programs, and their interaction with federal programs and private initiatives. The
study seeks to achieve this goal through a series of complementary assessments
of state, regional, and federal initiatives; analyses of specific industries and
technologies from the perspective of crafting supportive public policy at all three
levels; and outreach to multiple stakeholders. The overall goal is to improve the
operation of state and regional programs and, collectively, enhance their impact.
THIS SUMMARY
As the report of the STEP Board's second workshop on innovation clusters,
this volume deepens the committee's review of policies to support innovation clus-
ters. The first symposium explored, more generally, the role of clusters in promot-
ing economic growth, drawing particular attention to the strategies of American
states to promote cluster development.5 In complement, the second symposium
focused more on the Obama Administration's efforts to develop an integrated
cluster initiative and on the role of research parks in promoting innovation and
regional and national economic development. The second workshop also reviewed
selected best practices in regional and cluster development from other countries.
This volume includes an introduction that provides an overview of the key
issues raised at the second workshop as well as detailed summaries of each of
the meeting's presentations. This workshop summary has been prepared by the
workshop rapporteur as a factual summary of what occurred at the workshop.
The planning committee's role was limited to planning and convening the work-
shop. The statements made are those of the rapporteur or individual workshop
4For a scoreboard of state efforts, see Robert Atkinson and Scott Andes, The 2010 State New
Economy Index: Benchmarking Economic Transformation in the States, Kauffman Foundation and
ITIF, November 2010.
5For a summary of the first STEP workshop on innovation clusters, see National Research Council,
Growing Innovation Clusters for American Prosperity: Summary of a Symposium, Charles W.
Wessner, Rapporteur, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2011.
OCR for page R18
xviii PREFACE
participants and do not necessarily represent the views of all workshop partici-
pants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
On behalf of the National Academies, we express our appreciation and
recognition for the insights, experiences, and perspectives made available by
the participants of this meeting. We are indebted to Pete Engardio for preparing
the draft introduction and summarizing the proceedings of the meeting. We are
also indebted to Sujai Shivakumar and David Dierksheide of the STEP staff for
preparing the report manuscript for publication.
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL REVIEW
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their
diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures ap-
proved by the National Academies' Report Review Committee. The purpose
of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will
assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to
ensure that the report meets institutional standards for quality and objectivity.
The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the
integrity of the process.
We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Rebecca Bagley, NorTech; Daniel Berglund, SSTI; Robert Geolas, Clemson
University; Randall Jackson, West Virginia University; and Andrew Reamer,
Brookings Institution.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive com-
ments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the content of the report,
nor did they see the final draft before its release. Responsibility for the final con-
tent of this report rests entirely with the rapporteur and the institution.
Charles W. Wessner Mary L. Good
