SSTI Digest

The nation’s largest system of higher education with over 2 million students is trying to connect community colleges to their regional economies through a three-year, $17-million-dollar investment to establish a statewide network of maker-focused colleges. The California Community College (CCC) Maker Initiative may provide a model for community colleges to infuse making, innovation, and entrepreneurship into students’ college experiences while helping them prepare for STEM/STEAM careers with the necessary skills for 21st Century jobs.

 During the initiative’s developmental stage last year, the CCC Chancellor’s Office commissioned the California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) to develop a report that provides a critical look at the makers movement, which included a playbook for creating a maker network across the state of California leveraging their community college system.

The Senate passed the Promoting Women in Entrepreneurship Act, directing the National Science Foundation (NSF) to recruit women into entrepreneurial programs, and the INSPIRE Women Act, directing NASA to expand its outreach to women, on February 14. Both bills previously passed the House and now head to the White House for signature.

The Senate advanced Wilbur Ross’s nomination for Secretary of Commerce with a vote in favor of ending debate; the full vote on confirmation is expected for February 27.

Arkansas has new tools targeting growth in the state’s innovation and technology sector after Gov. Asa Hutchinson signed legislation creating a $2 million accelerator grant program for startups and establishing a Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) matching funds program. The Arkansas Economic Development Commission’s (AEDC) Division of Science and Technology will administer the programs and seek corporate sponsors to provide matching funds to create accelerator events throughout the state. Grants will be available to qualified applicants of up to $250,000 per event. The SBIR fund will provide funds to match up to 50 percent of federal grant funds for qualifying companies, up to a cap of $50,000 for Phase One and up to $100,000 for Phase Two. The program seeks to create and retain high-tech jobs, foster research, and increase the number of federal SBIR awards for startup and early-stage companies.

Science and engineering advocates are increasingly finding ways to voice their dedication to ensuring that the fields remain open and free of politics. Hundreds of supporters gathered this past weekend at a Rally to Stand Up for Science in Copley Square in Boston, coinciding with the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. On its Facebook page, the organizers called upon the scientists attending the conference and others to join in the rally, which was supported by more than a dozen science organizations.

SSTI submitted a letter to the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) in response to a request for information on the Institute’s investments in early translational research. The letter recommends partnerships and initiatives NHLBI could develop to improve identification of commercializable discoveries, strengthen business and technical development, and facilitate the scaling of innovations and spin-outs. These suggestions are grounded in examples of work by SSTI members. Read the full letter on ssti.org.

After training nearly 80 PhD scientists and engineers in the craft of policy making, the California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) has awarded planning grants to nine other states to evaluate the potential to create a policy fellowship for scientists and engineers in their state capital.  The new one-year grant, which is administered by CCST and funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the Simons Foundation, will support teams in Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Washington as they work on feasibility studies and other strategic steps toward creating science fellowships in their state policy arenas. It is up to each state to design the fellowship that would work best in their state, whether that is a position in the legislature or another body.

U.S. intellectual property (IP)-intensive industries employ at least 27.9 million workers and contributed more than $6.6 trillion dollars (38.2 percent) to U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) in 2014, according to Intellectual Property and the U.S. Economy: 2016 Update. In this update to a 2012 report, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and Economics and Statistics Administration (ESA) identified 81 industries (from among 313 total) as IP-intensive including trademark-intensive, copyright-intensive, and patent-intensive industries.

For academics and practitioners involved in economic development, quantifying the vibrancy of a regional innovation system can be a challenging experience.  To support these efforts, new research by authors from Cleveland-based venture development organization Jumpstart and Cleveland State University’s Center for Economic Development seeks to do two things: identify key indicators – a grouping of measures representing a broader concept – for describing a vibrant entrepreneurial ecosystem, and establish which of these indicators are most valuable for entrepreneurs. Ultimately, the authors find that three broad indicators – innovation, centers of commerce, and small business hubs – can help measure entrepreneurial ecosystem vitality in a region.

In 2016, approximately 46.7 percent of small- and medium-sized manufacturing firms (SMMs) receiving services from Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) centers expect challenges in the next three years related to employee recruitment, up from 19.1 percent in 2009, according to a recent survey of MEP client companies. While employee recruitment needs have grown over the last seven years, the top two challenges remained the same – cost reduction (70 percent of all respondents in 2016) and growth (53.5 percent). The findings come from an annual NIST MEP survey of their clients – small manufacturers across the United States.

Before, during, and since the 2016 presidential election, there has been considerable discussion on whether trade or automation is responsible for America’s long-term loss in manufacturing employment. A December New York Times article highlights several examples of studies finding automation has been the key perpetrator.  Recent research from Adams Nager of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), however, pins the problem on trade and competition. ITIF suggests that roughly two-thirds of the 5.7 million U.S. manufacturing jobs lost between 2000 and 2010 were a result of international trade pressure and wavering U.S. competitiveness.

C2ER is sharing a letter to Congress that describes the value of federal data collection and publication, including the census, employment information, R&D spending and much more, for private- and public-sector decision making, individual choice and democratic institutions. If you agree with this sentiment, you can complete a form with the Association of Public Data Users to have your name, title and affiliation added to the letter in support of continuing this critical information source.

Leadership in the data economy should be a target for the state of North Carolina, according to a new report by the North Carolina Board of Science, Technology and Innovation (BSTI). As more economic value is placed on the ability to successfully collect and manipulate data for insight and profit, the state needs to focus on closer collaboration, proactive branding and a greater focus on data science education and talent development, according to the report, NC in the Next Tech Tsunami: Navigating the Data Economy.

Fast growth, high wages, the need for talent, improved rural economics and more competitive industries are all cited as top reasons for the state to target the data economy. The report identifies state assets in the data economy such as companies like SAS and Red Hat headquartered in the state, programs at the state’s public and private universities, and a vibrant entrepreneurial environment, among other things.

To become a top state in the data economy, the report recommends that the state should: