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.
More than $11 million in two New York State Assembly grants will support several new incubators for Brooklyn and Queens. The investments were recently announced by Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Assembly members representing the two boroughs.
Innovation Philadelphia, the public-private partnership dedicated to enhancing the global innovation economy of Philadelphia, has unveiled the first Innovation and Entrepreneurial Index, a comprehensive study examining where Philadelphia stands in relation to key competitors in the Innovation Economy.
With more than 700 facilities around the country, federal laboratories and research centers can provide many resources for communities to tap as they strive to develop tech-based economies: technologies available for transfer and commercialization; facilities and technical staff available to partner with companies and universities for research; and, connections to funding and procurement opportunities.
The National Consortium of Entrepreneurship Centers (NCEC) presented on Tuesday the 2002 NASDAQ Entrepreneurial Excellence Awards to entrepreneurship centers at Babson College, Indiana University-Bloomington, and Saint Louis University.
With more than 1,000 links to socio-economic data sources, EconData.Net provides a convenient and valuable starting point for gathering information to understand regional economies. Funded by the Economic Development Administration, EconData.Net is a 100 percent free website offering easy access to state and sub-state socio-economic data for practitioners, researchers, students and data users in general.
Minnesota Technology, Inc. (MTI), the state's leading tech-based economic development corporation, currently is searching for a dynamic individual with top-notch skills to help bring federal technology transfer activities to Minnesota companies.
Michigan's NextEnergy Center, the central component of Gov. John Engler's $50 million fuel cell initiative, will be located within Wayne State University’s Research and Technology Park in Detroit, the Michigan Economic Development Corporation (MEDC) recently announced. Wayne State is situated in the Woodward Technology Corridor, one of 11 SmartZones located across Michigan.
The use of Congressional earmarks on federal agency budgets to support projects and programs in academic institutions has exploded since 1996, according to statistics compiled by and reported in the September 27, 2002 issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education.
Anthony Armstrong returns to the Indiana 21st Century Research and Technology Fund as its new director.
Bay Area Regional Technology Alliance (BARTA) has been renamed the TechVentures Network as the Bay Area's leading source of access to financing, business data and services for emerging technology.
Anthony Armstrong returns to the Indiana 21st Century Research and Technology Fund as its new director.
Bay Area Regional Technology Alliance (BARTA) has been renamed the TechVentures Network as the Bay Area's leading source of access to financing, business data and services for emerging technology.
John Bradley is the Tennessee Valley Authority's as its first chief of economic development. Bradley had been senior vice president of economic development at the Memphis Regional Chamber of Commerce.
Randy Goldsmith resigned as President & CEO of the Oklahoma Technology Development Corp to assume the role of President and CEO of the San Antonio Technology Accelerator Initiative.
J.A. Hans Roeterink, chief technical officer and vice president of network operations for T-Systems in New York, is the new executive director of the Alaska Science & Technology Foundation. Roeterink begins Nov. 1, succeeding Jamie Kenworthy.
Dennis Yablonsky, who has been serving as CEO for both the Pittsburgh Digital Greenhouse and the Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse for most of the past year, has decided to focus exclusively on the biotech initiative. His replacement as president and CEO at the Pittsburgh Digital Greenhouse is David Ruppersberger.
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.