Government-Industry Partnerships for the Development of New Technologies (2003) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 77-110
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 77... ...
· Funding New Ideas Partnerships can help overcome funding gaps for needed R&D and for new products. In the real world, new innovative firms face substantial obstacles in their search for equity financed Even though venture capitaliSee Joshua Lerner, "Public Venture Capital: Rationale and Evaluation," in National Research Council, The Small Business Innovation Research Program, Challenges and Opportunities, C
|
From page 78... ...
3, Adam B Jaffe, Joshua Lerner and Scott Stern, eds., Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002.
|
From page 79... ...
Appropriately structured partnerships among industry, universities, and gov6Federal laboratories offer important capabilities and lessons from experience in dealing with complex research problems. Historically, NIH has not directly supported industry R&D, but this is changing.
|
From page 80... ...
Toward More Effective Partnerships The need to advance new technologies, often in support of national missions, and often involving national laboratories, universities, and large and small firms
|
From page 81... ...
engineering research centers, NSF's science and technology centers, the National Institute of Standards and Technology's Manufacturing Extension and Advanced Technology Program, and the multi-agency Small Business Innovation Research program, among others. University-industry cooperation is also on the upswing, with a significant percentage of university R&D now provided by industry and through innovative cooperation efforts, such as the MARCO program.
|
From page 82... ...
Luger and Harvey A Goldstein (Technology in the Garden; Research Parks & Regional Economic Development, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1991, p.
|
From page 83... ...
The success rate among all announced parks is relatively low.... Research parks will be most successful in helping to stimulate economic development in regions that already are richly endowed with resources that attract highly educated scientists and engineers." See Michael Luger and Harvey Goldstein, Technology in the Garden, Research Parks and Regional Economic Development, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1991, p.
|
From page 84... ...
NASA's Ames Research Center, at Moffett Field, California, has developed a strategic approach to the use of its extensive human and physical resources consistent with NASA's overall mission in order to leverage its own particular research capabilities and exceptional location in the heart of Silicon Valley.22 i9National Research Council, Industry-Laboratory Partnerships: A Review of the Sandia Science and Technology Park Initiative, C Wessner, ea., Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999.
|
From page 85... ...
Recognizing this, the Committee's study of publicprivate partnerships has focused on the case of SEMATECH not as a model to be 23Given the scope and ambition of these objectives, the then NASA Administrator, Daniel Goldin, asked the NRC's Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy to review the Ames initiatives. See National Research Council, A Review of the New Initiatives at the NASA Ames Research Center, op.
|
From page 86... ...
If most or all firms follow the same strategy, the optimum amount of innovation is not achieved. See Kenneth Flamm, "SEMATECH Revisited: Assessing Consortium Impacts on Semiconductor Industry R&D," in National Research Council, Securing the Future: Regional and National Programs to Support the Semiconductor Industry, op.
|
From page 87... ...
By the end of 1996, more than 665 research joint ventures had been registered. In 1993, Congress again relaxed restrictions this time on cooperative production activities by passing the National Cooperative Research and Production Act, which enables participants to work together to apply technologies developed by their research joint ventures.
|
From page 88... ...
R&D consortia."34 At the time of SEMATECH's founding, industry leaders became concerned that they needed to improve manufacturing quality and resolved to find a way to improve the situation collectively.35 Despite the independence and fierce competitiveness among firms in the industry, the Semiconductor Industry Association took the unusual step of approaching the government and making the argument that collective action was necessary for the sake of long-term U.S. economic 3lIbid.
|
From page 89... ...
38See the presentation by Gordon Moore in Securing the Future: Regional and National Programs to Support the Semiconductor Industry, op.
|
From page 90... ...
148-151. For an analysis of the empirical evidence, see Kenneth Flamm, "SEMATECH Revisited: Assessing Consortium Impacts on Semiconductor Industry R&D," in National Research Council, National and Regional Programs to Support the Semiconductor Industry, op.
|
From page 91... ...
Some of what exists is flawed in terms of the assumptions underlying its econometrics. For a review of the literature and an updated assessment, see Kenneth Flamm, "SEMATECH Revisited: Assessing Consortium Impacts on Semiconductor Industry R&D," op.
|
From page 92... ...
Semiconductor Industry, op. cit., Chapter 1.
|
From page 93... ...
was not always accurate and, in the case of the conversion to 300mm wafers, caused significant loss to some suppliers. See the comments by Kalman Kaufman of Applied Materials in the proceedings of National Research Council, Securing the Future: Regional and National Programs to Support the Semiconductor Industry, op.
|
From page 94... ...
For a recent review, see National Research Council, Small Wonders, Endless Frontiers: A Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 2002. 58For more discussion of some of the technical, resource, and organizational challenges facing the semiconductor industry in maintaining the pace predicted by Moore's Law, see National Research Council, Securing the Future: Regional and National Programs to Support the Semiconductor Industry, op.
|
From page 95... ...
141-51. 60See remarks by Bill Spencer in the Proceedings section of National Research Council, Partnerships for Solid-State Lighting, Report on a Workshop, op.
|
From page 96... ...
cit. 63Solid-state lighting, by replacing less efficient lighting devices, is expected to yield significant gross energy savings and environmental benefits.
|
From page 97... ...
A consortium would appear to hold considerable potential to contribute to a range of valuable national goals. GOVERNMENT AWARDS TO FUND INNOVATION Firm Size and Sources of Innovation Small business is widely believed to be a significant source of innovation and employment growth a perception that has considerable basis in fact.65 Certa~nly in the nineteenth century the individual inventor played a central role in U.S.
|
From page 98... ...
Galbra~th later argued that the source of innovation was more plausibly the large firm, which he believed, had the resources available to invest at sufficient scale, not the individual innovator.67 Concentration and centralization in research and development, which character~zed the early years of the twentieth century, did seem consistent with the ideas about firm size and innovation hypothesized by Schumpeter and Galbra~th. The great corporate research laboratories were established at companies such as DuPont, General Electric, and AT&T.
|
From page 99... ...
venture capital industry, which helped high-growth firms to exploit the commercial potential of promising new technologies.7i To some extent, science and technology policy in the 1980s and l990s reflected this emphasis on the innovative role of small and rapid-growth business. Cooperation as a Policy Goal In the 1970s and 1980s the United States recorded slow economic growth relative to postwar norms, sluggish productivity performance, and a loss of global market share and technological leadership in key U.S.
|
From page 100... ...
76Michael Borrus and Jay Stowsky observe that many partnerships have been successful, but there are also "outright flops like the supersonic transport, synfuel plants and the fast breeder reactor, as well as more ambiguous cases like the development of numerical control (NC) for machine tools or of photovoltaics.
|
From page 101... ...
In 2000, it became International SEMATECH, a consortium that includes companies from both Asia and Europe. 79Some of the other major federal partnerships of this period were DOD's Manufacturing Technology (MANTECH)
|
From page 102... ...
102 G O VERNMENT- IND US TR Y PA R TNER SHIP S 80Adapted with NRC modifications from Berglund and Coburn, op.
|
From page 103... ...
Moreover, that knowledge is likely to be insufficient to perfectly predict potential payoffs. The result is "statistical discrimination" whereby financiers are motivated to withhold funds, even for promising opportunities, because it is too costly and often impossible to gather the information needed to assess potential investment payoffs.82 8iSee Joshua Lerner, "Public Venture Capital: Rationale and Evaluation" in National Research Council, The Small Business Innovation Research Program, Challenges and Opportunities, C
|
From page 104... ...
Private equity markets are characterized by two substantial funding gaps. The first gap occurs primarily in the seed and start-up financing stage.
|
From page 105... ...
In Phase III, which normally does not involve SBIR funds, grant recipients should be obtaining additional funds either from an interested agency, private investors, or the capital markets to move the technology to the prototype stage and into the marketplace. Initially the SBIR program required agencies with R&D budgets in excess of $100 million to set aside 0.2 percent of their funds for SBIR.
|
From page 106... ...
The evaluation is also expected to include estimates of the benefits, both economic and non-economic, achieved by the SBIR program, as well as broader policy issues associated with public-private collaborations for technology development and government support for high-technology innovation, including benchmarking of foreign programs to encourage small business development. The assessment is to gauge the contributions of the SBIR program with regard to economic growth, technology development, and commercialization, and contributions by small business awardees to the accomplishment of agency missions.
|
From page 107... ...
These have included adaptive learning systems, component-based software, digital data storage, information infrastructure for health care, microelectronics manufacturing infrastructure, manufacturing technology for photonics, motor vehicles and printed wiring boards, new tissueengineering technologies, big-polymer repairs, and tools for DNA diagnostics.~°i These technologies are technically promising but commercially risky. This means that significant portions of the ATP-funded projects are likely to fail.~02 This is to be expected; no failures would suggest insufficient risk.
|
From page 108... ...
Based on his research on the SBIR program, Joshua Lerner describes this as a "certification effect." See J Lerner, "'Public Venture Capital': Rationales and Evaluation," in National Research Council, The Small Business Innovation Research Program: Challenges and Opportunities, op.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.