Search

While the 2002 election marked the return of Republican control of the U.S. Senate and the departure of a number of governors that had been strong supporters of investing in science and technology (e.g., John Engler of Michigan, Angus King of Maine, and Roy Barnes of Georgia), it may also mark the beginning point of a new group of governors that embrace technology-based economic development as a focal point of their administrations.

Some of the 200-plus ballot measures decided in the 2002 General Election held Tuesday were dedicated to promoting tech-based economic development (TBED). The results were generally mixed, however. Promoters of Michigan's Life Sciences Corridor were pleased with the failure of an initiative that would have dictated the allocation of the state's tobacco settlement funds, including a smaller amount than the state is currently spending on life sciences research.

Biotechnology has enormous potential for North Carolina's future, but the state's economic development strategy must be broader than any single industry and must include growth-from-within strategies, concludes a report published by the Institute for Emerging Issues at North Carolina State University.

An increase in a city's share of college educated workers results in an increase in manufacturing output in that city, according to a report released by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

The National Science Foundation (NSF) has released a statistical report on Science and Engineering Doctorate Awards: 2001. The data show trends in science and engineering (S&E) doctorate awards by S&E field and recipient characteristics, institutions awarding doctorates, and postgraduation plans of recipients.

We appreciated hearing from so many of our readers that last week's special Digest issue on innovation indices was particularly timely or useful. As an additional resource on the topic, SSTI has prepared three matrices presenting the common indicators included in the national, state and local indicator reports referenced in the issue.

The Washington Technology Center (WTC), the state's science and technology organization that stimulates growth in the state, is seeking someone to become Federal Program Development Manager. WTC helps Washington companies develop commercially viable technology through statewide programs and services.

Homeland security R&D, high-end computing, the National Nanotechnology Initiative, and the President's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative are among the interagency R&D priorities that will receive a special focus in agency budget requests, according to a memorandum outlining the Administration's R&D budget priorities for 2007.

SSTI is proud to announce the addition of two new staff members to its team. Sheri Stickely will join SSTI on Aug. 15 as a Vice President. Sheri is leaving the Oklahoma Center for the Advancement of Technology (OCAST) to join SSTI. She has served most recently as Interim Executive Director and has been with OCAST since its inception in 1987.

While some state legislatures debate banning public funds for some or all stem cell research, others are using whatever funding tools they have available to advance the controversial science. Some states use tobacco settlement money, others use revenue bonds, and still others use direct appropriations. Some states use voter referenda while most stay within the traditional state legislative process. The newest twist comes from Illinois, where Illinois Gov.

The Oregon Legislature overwhelmingly passed S.B. 853 last week, creating venture development funds to facilitate technology commercialization for students and faculty at the state's seven public universities.

For many practitioners, the quickest summary of a recent 16-page analysis from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York might be "something has to change." Looking at job creation since the recovery began three years ago, Richard Freeman and William Rogers III state in The Weak Jobs Recovery: Whatever Happened to "The Great American Jobs Machine"? that this is the worst recovery in all post-World War II recoveries.

The quality of the economic performance assessment of federal programs has improved, but gaps still remain in the application of the measures used, according to the latest report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO).

A new resource published by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) argues that indices claiming to measure the same thing - namely, the capacity or potential for economic growth - often vary widely in their results and are not effective yardsticks of economic potential.

An important aspect of all indices, regardless of their geographic orientation, is that each is created with a different purpose or goal in mind. As a result, each index has an inherent or implicit bias toward the data collected, the manner in which the data is manipulated and presented, and the conclusions drawn or policy recommendations made.

Seven indices introduced below are followed by a sample of the similarities and differences that exist among them.

Even when indices are trying to measure the same activity or characteristic this may be done utilizing different measures and some indices may include indicators not used in others. A matrix presenting the common indicators among the national indices is available here. Examples of these differences and similarities follow: (Please note that not all indicators for all indices are mentioned.)

Led by Massachusetts, which released its first innovation index in 1997, states have been creating indices in an attempt to track changes and transformations in their own economies. Many of these indices look at some of the same characteristics such as investment capital, industrial productivity, technology workforce development, business development and many others.

Indices also are created at the regional and local level as well. Once again, while there is some crossover in measures, there are also significant differences that reveal some regional variation and shifts in priorities. This section highlights: regional indices for Washington D.C.

Some characteristics that STTI has found to represent a good index would contain some, if not all, of the following:

One of the more common topics in the information requests SSTI receives regards how to do or what are good examples of innovation indices or S&T report cards — compilations of statistics and data presenting a geographic area's standing against similar areas across several metrics thought to be useful guides in assessing economic health or potential for growth.

An important aspect of all indices, regardless of their geographic orientation, is that each is created with a different purpose or goal in mind. As a result, each index has an inherent or implicit bias toward the data collected, the manner in which the data is manipulated and presented, and the conclusions drawn or policy recommendations made.

One of the more popular sections of the SSTI Weekly Digest — according to our annual surveys of readers — are the periodic useful stats, which point to or present comparative statistics across cities or states. Fortunately, because we try to standardize the information for more meaningful interpretation, several of these tables provide useful data for developing a local or state innovation index.

The U.S. can watch as another country significantly expands its investments in innovation. This time it's France, as newly appointed Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin last month announced that the national government will double its funding from €500 million to €1 billion for the Industrial Innovation Agency (IIA), and give €350 million to the National Research Agency (ANR).

Just over two months ago, Acting Gov. Richard Codey announced budget shortfalls were delaying the state's $380 million stem cell research initiative (see the April 25 issue of the Digest).