MEETING GLOBAL CHALLENGES

German-U.S. Innovation Policy

SUMMARY OF A SYMPOSIUM

Charles W. Wessner, Rapporteur

Committee on
Comparative National Innovation Policies:
Best Practice for the 21st Century

Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy
Policy and Global Affairs

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



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
SUMMARY OF A SYMPOSIUM Charles W. Wessner, Rapporteur Committee on Comparative National Innovation Policies: Best Practice for the 21st Century Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy Policy and Global Affairs

OCR for page R1
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-PI0000010, TO #15, between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of Energy; Contract/Grant No. SB1341-03-C-0032 between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Institute of Standards and Technology of the U.S. Department of Commerce; Contract/Grant No. OFED-858931 between the National Academy of Sciences and Sandia National Laboratories; and Contract/Grant No. NAVY-N00014-05-G-0288, DO #2, between the National Academy of Sciences and the Office of Naval Research. 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: 978-0-309-26359-7 International Standard Book Number 10: 0-309-26359-X Additional copies of this report are available for sale 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 R1
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 examination 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 National 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 R1

OCR for page R1
Committee on Comparative National Innovation Policies: Best Practice for the 21st Century* Alan Wm. Wolff, Chair Mary L. Good (NAE), Vice Chair Senior Counsel Dean Emeritus, Donaghey College McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP of Engineering and Information and Technology STEP Board Special Advisor to the Chancellor for Economic Development University of Arkansas Michael G. Borrus Founding General Partner at Little Rock X/Seed Capital Management and STEP Board Gail H. Cassell (IOM) Visiting Professor Kent H. Hughes Department of Global Health Director and Social Medicine Program on America Harvard Medical School and the Global Economy Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Carl J. Dahlman Henry R. Luce Associate Professor Edmund A. Walsh School Gregory Kats of Foreign Service President Georgetown University Capital E Charles K. Ebinger Director, Energy Security Initiative Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy The Brookings Institution *As of June 2012. v

OCR for page R1
Project Staff Charles W. Wessner Sujai J. Shivakumar Study Director Senior Program Officer Alan H. Anderson David S. Dawson Consultant Senior Program Assistant McAlister T. Clabaugh David E. Dierksheide Program Officer Program Officer vi

OCR for page R1
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 Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy 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 competitiveness 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 ensure their authoritativeness, independence, and objectivity. The members of the STEP Board* and the NRC staff are listed below: Paul L. Joskow, Chair Mary L. Good (NAE) President Dean Emeritus, Donaghey College Alfred P. Sloan Foundation of Engineering and Information Technology Special Advisor to the Chancellor Ernst R. Berndt Louis E. Seley Professor for Economic Development in Applied Economics University of Arkansas Massachusetts Institute at Little Rock of Technology William H. Janeway Partner John Donovan Chief Technology Officer Warburg Pincus, LLC AT&T Inc. Richard K. Lester Japan Steel Industry Professor Alan M. Garber (IOM) Provost Head, Nuclear Science Harvard University and Engineering Founding Director, Industrial Performance Center Ralph E. Gomory (NAS/NAE) Research Professor Massachusetts Institute Stern School of Business of Technology New York University continued *As of June 2012. vii

OCR for page R1
William F. Meehan III Kathryn L. Shaw Lecturer in Strategic Management Ernest C. Arbuckle Professor Raccoon Partners Lecturer of Economics in Management Graduate School of Business Graduate School of Business Stanford University Stanford University and Laura D’Andrea Tyson Director Emeritus S.K. and Angela Chan Professor McKinsey and Co., Inc. of Global Management Haas School of Business University of California, Berkeley David T. Morgenthaler Founding Partner Morgenthaler Ventures Harold R. Varian Chief Economist Google, Inc. Arati Prabhakar Atherton, CA Alan Wm. Wolff Senior Counsel Luis M. Proenza McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP President The University of Akron William J. Raduchel Chairman Opera Software ASA STEP Staff Stephen A. Merrill Charles W. Wessner Executive Director Program Director Paul T. Beaton David S. Dawson Program Officer Senior Program Assistant McAlister T. Clabaugh David E. Dierksheide Program Officer Program Officer Aqila A. Coulthurst Sujai J. Shivakumar Program Coordinator Senior Program Officer viii

OCR for page R1
Contents PREFACE xv I. OVERVIEW 1 II. PROCEEDINGS 31 DAY 1 Welcome 33 Gert G. Wagner, Chairman, Executive Board, German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin) Alan Wm. Wolff, Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, and Chair, U.S. National Academies Committee on Comparative National Innovation Policies Opening Remarks for Germany 39 Georg Schütte, State Secretary for Education and Research Opening Remarks for the United States 43 The Honorable Philip Murphy, U.S. Ambassador to Germany Keynote Address 46 John Fernandez, Assistant Secretary, U.S. Economic Development Administration Panel I: Current Trends in Innovation Policy 50 Moderator: Jens Schmidt-Ehmcke, German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin) U.S. Innovation Policy: New Initiatives 50 Ginger Lew, Senior Counselor, White House National Economic Council ix

OCR for page R1
x CONTENTS New Initiatives in German Innovation Policy 54 Dietmar Harhoff, Chairman, Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation Policy Initiatives at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology 58 Phillip Singerman, Associate Director for Innovation and Industry Services, U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Discussion 61 Keynote Address 63 Werner Hoyer, Minister of State at the Foreign Office (Auswertiges Amt) Panel II: Competition and Cooperation in a Global Economy 68 Moderator: Katharina Schlüter, Finance-Magazin Chinese and Indian Investments and Economic Strategy 69 Carl Dahlman, Henry R. Luce Associate Professor, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, and Member, U.S. National Academies Committee on Comparative National Innovation Policies Innovation and Trade 73 Alan Wm. Wolff, Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, and Chair, U.S. National Academies Committee on Comparative National Innovation Policies Discussion 77 Panel III: Human Resources, Competition for Manpower, and the Internationalization of Labor 79 Moderator: Irwin Collier, John F. Kennedy Institute, Free University Berlin (FU Berlin) The Human Resource Challenge 79 Klaus F. Zimmermann, Director, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), and German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin) A Microsoft Perspective on the United States and Europe 85 Jan Muehlfeit, Chairman Europe, Microsoft Corporation Discussion 87

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS xi Panel IV: Growing Universities for the 21st Century 88 Moderator: Reinhard Grunwald, Director, Zentrum für Wissenschaftsmanagement e.V. Speyer (ZWM) Challenges and Changes for German Research Institutions 88 Karl Ulrich Mayer, President, Leibniz Association Growing the New Akron University 93 Luis Proenza, President, The University of Akron German Universities and the Role of the Excellence Initiative 97 Andreas Pinkwart, Dean, Leipzig Graduate School of Management, (Handelshochschule Leipzig) Discussion 100 Roundtable—Competition and Cooperation: Systematic Challenges 101 Chair: Peter Engardio, Senior Writer, BusinessWeek (retired) DAY 2 Panel V: Helping Small Business: Current Trends and Programs 105 Moderator: David Audretsch, Director, Institute for Development Strategies, Indiana University The “Mittelstand” Programs and Innovation in Germany 106 Rainer Jäkel, Head, Directorate for Technology and Innovation Policies, Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi) Small Business Innovation: Federal Investments to Cross the Valley of Death 110 Charles W. Wessner, Director, Technology, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship, The U.S. National Academies Discussion 115 Panel VI: Early-Stage Finance and Entrepreneurship 117 Moderator: Alexander Kritikos, Research Director, German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin) New Initiatives in Early-Stage Finance in Germany 118 Peter Terhart, Chairman, German Private Equity and Venture Capital Association (BVK)

OCR for page R1
xii CONTENTS The Clash of Innovation Cultures: The United States and Germany 119 Eran Davidson, Managing Partner, Hasso Plattner Ventures Trends and Challenges for Venture Capital in the United States 122 Arati Prabhakar, Partner, U.S. Venture Partners Discussion 125 Panel VII: Policies and Programs for CO2 Reduction 127 Moderator: Claudia Kemfert, Head of Energy, Transportation, and Environment Department, German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin) The “Morgenstadt” Concept 129 Frauke Lohr, Senior Partner, Grolman.Result GmbH U.S. Carbon Reduction Policies 132 Charles Ebinger, Director, Energy Security Initiative, The Brookings Institution Climate Change and Innovation: Mitigation and Adaptation Measures 135 Reinhard F. Hüttl, Scientific Executive Director, Helmholtz Centre Potsdam/GFZ, and President, acatech, the German Academy of Science and Engineering Discussion 138 Panel VIII: Building Electric Vehicle Industries 140 Moderator: Andreas Möller, Head of Division Policy and Social Consulting, acatech, the German Academy of Science and Engineering U.S. Battery Initiative for Electric Drive Vehicles 141 Ed Owens, Supervisory General Engineer for Vehicle Technologies, U.S. Department of Energy German Developments in Electric Vehicles 143 Dirk Arnold, Deputy Head of Division, Environmental Innovation and Electric Mobility, Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi) Discussion 145

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS xiii Panel IX: Medical/Biomedical Innovation for the 21st Century 147 Moderator: Charles W. Wessner, Director, Technology, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship, The U.S. National Academies Advancing Innovation and Convergence in Cancer Research 147 Jerry S. H. Lee, Deputy Director, Center for Strategic Scientific Initiatives, U.S. National Cancer Institute Medical/Biomedical Innovation for the 21st Century 151 Joachim Giesekus, Strategic Marketing, Fraunhofer Heinrich Hertz Institute (HHI) Discussion 153 Panel X: Policies and Programs to Build Solar Industries 154 Moderator: Peter Strunk, WISTA Management GmbH, and Adlershof Science Park, Berlin The German Solar Industry 154 Karsten Neuhoff, Director, Climate Policy Initiative (CPI-Berlin) U.S. Initiatives in Solar Energy Policy 158 Minh Le, Chief Engineer, Solar Energy Technologies Program, U.S. Department of Energy Discussion 161 Roundtable—“Energy Change: What Are the Consequences for the German and U.S. Innovation Systems?” 165 Chair: Tim Stuchtey, Director, Brandenburgisches Institut für Gessellschaft und Sicherheit Seth Winnick, Counselor for Economic Affairs, Embassy of the United States Sylvia Kotting-Uhl, Green Party; Member, Committee for Education, Research, and Technology Assessment Albert Rupprecht (CSU) Committee for Education, Research, and Technology Ernst Dieter Rossman, Social Democratic Party, Schleswig-Holstein (SPD); Member, Committee for Research, Education, and Technology Arati Prabhakar, Partner, U.S. Venture Partners

OCR for page R1
xiv CONTENTS Closing Remarks 174 Alan Wm. Wolff, Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, and Chair, The U.S. National Academies Committee on Comparative National Innovation Policies Klaus F. Zimmermann, Director, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), and German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin) III. APPENDIXES A Agenda 177 B Bibliography 184

OCR for page R1
Preface Recognizing that a capacity to innovate and commercialize new high- technology products is increasingly a part of the international competition for economic leadership, governments around the world are taking active steps to strengthen their national innovation systems. These steps underscore the widely held belief that the rising costs and risks associated with new potentially high- payoff technologies, and the growing global dispersal of technical expertise, require national R&D programs to support new and existing high-technology firms within their borders. What is the impact of these initiatives for the competitive position of the United States? In a recent report, the National Academies warned that “this nation must prepare with great urgency to preserve its strategic and economic security,” adding that “the United States must compete by optimizing its knowledge-based resources, particularly in science and technology, and by sustaining the most fertile environment for new and revitalized industries and the well-paying jobs they bring.”1 Reinforcing this message, a new report by the National Academies describes the growth in foreign programs and investments in new technologies and industries while noting the decline in support at home for the traditional pillars of U.S. competitiveness. 2 The report urges steps to ensure that products derived from U.S. innovation are manufactured in the United States, so as to capture the economic activity and the high-quality jobs that they can bring. Understanding the policies that other nations are pursuing to support their industries and to what effect is essential to understanding how the nature and terms of economic competition are shifting.3 U.S. policymakers would 1 National Academy of Sciences/National Academy of Engineering/Institute of Medicine, Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Future, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2007, p. 4. 2 National Research Council, Rising to the Challenge: U.S. Innovation Policy for the Global Economy, C. Wessner and A. Wm. Wolff, eds., Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2012. 3 The Woodrow Wilson Center’s Kent Hughes has argued in this regard that the challenges of the 21st century require new strategies that take account of new technologies, new global competitors, as well as new national priorities concerning national security and the environment. See Kent Hughes, xv

OCR for page R1
xvi PREFACE benefit from knowing of the wide variety of innovation and competitiveness policies that leading nations have adopted. In the case of Germany, these innovation policies support industrial production and technology research through consistent investments in applied research programs buttressed by programs for job training and worker retention. German organizations such as the Fraunhofer Institutes partner with companies to turn advanced technologies into production processes and commercial products. These initiatives are coupled with active export promotion support from the highest level of government. THE OVERALL PROJECT The global economy is characterized by increasing locational competition to attract the resources necessary to develop leading-edge technologies as drivers of regional and national growth. One means of facilitating such growth and improving national competitiveness is to improve the operation of the national innovation system. This involves national technology development and innovation programs designed to support research on new technologies, enhance the commercial return on national research, and facilitate the production of globally competitive products. The formal Statement of Task for the overall project states: Recognizing the importance of targeted government promotional policies relative to innovation, the Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy (STEP) is studying selected foreign innovation programs and comparing them with major U.S. programs. This analysis of Comparative Innovation Policy, carried out under the direction of an ad hoc Committee, includes a review of the goals, concept, structure, operation, funding levels, and evaluation of foreign programs designed to advance the innovation capacity of national economies and enhance their international competitiveness. This analysis focuses on key areas of future growth, such as renewable energy, among others, to generate case-specific recommendations where appropriate. The Committee will assess foreign programs using a standard template, convene a series of meetings to gather data from responsible officials and program managers, and encourage a systematic dissemination of information and analysis as a means of better understanding the transition of research into products and of improving the operation of U.S. programs. THE CONTEXT OF THE PROJECT Since 1991, the STEP Board has undertaken a program of activities to improve policy makers’ understanding of the interconnections among science, technology, and economic policy and their importance to the American Building the Next American Century: The Past and Future of American Economic Competitiveness, Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2005, Chapter 14.

OCR for page R1
PREFACE xvii economy and its international competitive position. The Board’s interest in comparative innovation policies derives directly from its mandate. This mandate has previously been reflected in STEP’s widely cited study, chaired by Gordon Moore of Intel, on how government-industry partnerships can support the growth and commercialization of productivity enhancing technologies.4 Reflecting a growing recognition of the importance of the surge in productivity that occurred in the mid-nineties, the Board also launched a multifaceted assessment, exploring the sources of growth, measurement challenges, and the policy framework required to sustain what was then characterized as the information and communications technology driven New Economy.5 The current study on Comparative Innovation Policy builds on STEP’s experience to bring together leading academics, public officials, business representatives, and policy experts from around the world to identify current trends and challenge faced by U.S. and foreign innovation programs. PROJECT ACTIVITIES To open its analysis, the study Committee held an overview symposium that drew together leading academics, policy analysts, and senior policymakers from around the globe to describe their national innovation programs and policies, outline their objectives, and highlight their achievements.6 Major conferences in Taipei and Tokyo focused on the evolution of the Taiwanese and Japanese innovation systems over the past decade.7 The Committee also convened a major conference in Washington that identified current trends in the Indian and U.S. innovation systems and highlighted the emerging U.S.–India innovation partnership.8 4 This summary of a multi-volume study provides the Moore Committee’s analysis of best practices among key U.S. public-private partnerships. See National Research Council, Government-Industry Partnerships for the Development of New Technologies: Summary Report, Charles W. Wessner, ed., Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2003. For a list of U.S. partnership programs, see Christopher Coburn and Dan Berglund, Partnerships: A Compendium of State and Federal Cooperative Programs, Columbus, OH: Battelle Press, 1995. See also National Research Council, U.S. Industry in 2000: Studies in Comparative Performance, David Mowery, ed., Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999. 5 National Research Council, Enhancing Productivity Growth in the Information Age: Measuring and Sustaining the New Economy, Dale W. Jorgenson and Charles W. Wessner, eds., Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2007. 6 For a summary of this conference, see National Research Council, Innovation Policies for the 21st Century—Report of a Symposium, Charles W. Wessner, ed., Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2007. 7 For a summary of the Tokyo conference, see National Research Council, 21st Century Innovation Systems for Japan and the United States: Lessons from a Decade of Change, S. Nagaoka, M. Kondo, K. Flamm, and C. Wessner, eds., Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2009. 8 For a summary of this conference, see National Research Council, India’s Changing Innovation System: Achievements, Challenges, and Opportunities for Cooperation, Charles W. Wessner and Sujai J. Shivakumar, eds., Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2007.

OCR for page R1
xviii PREFACE This was soon followed by a symposium on “Synergies in Regional and National Innovation Policies in the Global Economy” hosted by Flanders Vice Minister Fientje Moerman. This event reviewed the synergies and success of regional innovation policies in Flanders, buttressed by national and European Union programs. Flanders benefits from major university and research centers with strong commercialization records, and is also home to imec, one of the leading microelectronics research facilities in the world and arguably the flagship of Flemish technology policy.9 To address a growing opportunity in U.S. S&T cooperation with Europe, the Committee hosted a series of meetings to review the potential for greater U.S.-Polish cooperation in science and innovation, with particular attention to traditional energy sources (e.g., coal) and health. In a related effort, a major international symposium was convened to review national strategies to foster the development of science and technology research parks, with representatives from around the world.10 In light of China’s surging investments in science and new technologies, a number of meetings on China’s innovation policies were convened, beginning with a symposium in May 2010 in Washington, DC, on U.S.-China Cooperation on Science, Technology, and Innovation that drew together speakers primarily from the U.S. and Chinese governments and academia.11 This was followed in June 2011 with a series of meetings in Shanghai and Beijing that included U.S. and Chinese corporate leaders and leading Chinese academic researchers. These interactions were capped by a September 2011 symposium in Washington, DC, on U.S.-China Policy for Science, Technology, and Innovation. Germany’s renewed focus on investments in R&D and education, worker retention and training, as well as its strong support for exports suggest opportunities for mutual learning and expanded cooperation. Accordingly, the Committee convened in 2010 a conference in Washington, DC, on Meeting Global Challenges: German-U.S. Innovation Policy. A second large conference was then organized in cooperation with the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW) in Berlin in 2011. This volume summarizes that conference. It examined U.S. and German approaches to support innovation and manufacturing both in terms of institutional support (e.g., by the Fraunhofer Institutes) and in specific sectors such as bio-medical, electric vehicle and solar technologies. These two conferences highlighted the value of policy dialogue and cooperation on innovation for Germany and the United States. Both countries 9 National Research Council, Innovative Flanders: Innovation Policies for the 21st Century—Report of a Symposium, C. Wessner, ed., Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2008. 10 This report has garnered considerable national and international attention. See National Research Council, Understanding Research, Science, and Technology Parks: Global Best Practices—Report of a Symposium, C. Wessner, ed., Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2009. 11 For a summary of this conference, see National Research Council, Building the 21st Century, U.S.- China Cooperation on Science, Technology, and Innovation—Summary of a Symposium, C. Wessner, rapporteur, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2011.

OCR for page R1
PREFACE xix seek to better translate research into innovations and innovations into successful products. Further, both countries can benefit through cooperation in addressing the “grand challenges” we face today, including those in climate, energy production, health, and security. The conferences underscored the opportunity for Germany and the United States to learn from each other and to gain by cooperating more actively with each other. Drawing together the information and insights from this series of meetings, the Committee developed a consensus report that provides an overview of the changing international environment and offers a wide range of recommendations to support more effective U.S. innovation policies for the future.12 THIS WORKSHOP SUMMARY This report captures the presentations and discussions of the 2011 Berlin symposium on Meeting Global Challenges: German-U.S. Innovation Policy. It includes an introduction highlighting key issues raised at the meeting and summary of the meeting’s presentations. This summary has been prepared by a rapporteur as a factual summary of what occurred at the workshop. The planning committee’s role was limited to planning and convening the workshop. The statements made are those of the rapporteur or individual workshop participants and do not necessarily represent the views of all workshop participants, the planning committee, the DIW, or the U.S. 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 greatly indebted to Klaus Zimmerman of IZA (the Institute of the Study of Labor) and then head of the DIW-Berlin, for his leadership and initiative as well as to Jens Schmidt-Ehmcke, who played an instrumental role in the organization of the conference and the identification of the many high-level German participants. We are most grateful for the support and participation of U.S. Ambassador Murphy and his able staff and to Englebert Beyer of the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) for his leadership, support, and substantive contributions to this cooperative German-American event. We would like to express our thanks to Alan Anderson for preparing the initial overview and summary of the meeting in a very short timeframe. We also thank Sujai Shivakumar and David Dierksheide of the STEP staff for their work on the review and production of this report and recognize the efforts of 12 National Research Council, Rising to the Challenge: U.S. Innovation Policy for the Global Economy, C. Wessner and A. Wm. Wolff, eds., op. cit.

OCR for page R1
xx PREFACE McAlister Clabaugh and David Dawson for their assistance in organizing this international conference. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF REVIEWERS This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved 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: David Audretsch, Indiana University; Erik Lehmann, Augsburg University; Andreas Pinkwart, HHL-Leipzig Graduate School of Management; Jens Schmidt-Ehmcke, Hasso Plattner Ventures Management; and Klaus Zimmerman, University of Bonn. Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments 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 content of this report rests entirely with the rapporteur and the institution. Alan Wm. Wolff Charles W. Wessner