r&d

Industry investment in research and development (R&D) indicates, literally, how invested each state’s businesses are in creating new products and processes. To better-understand industry’s commitment to innovation, business R&D can be viewed as a percentage of each state’s private sector gross domestic product (GDP), providing a measure of research intensity. This measure highlights substantial differences in the orientation of states’ businesses toward research, with some states seeing an investment rate of less than 1 percent while others are above 5 percent. The metric further reveals a broad trend that businesses in many states have stagnated their investments in R&D relative to the overall performance of the economy.

In the wake of the Great Recession, Congress enacted the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011 to curb federal discretionary spending as the nation approached the statutory debt limit. Originally intended to reduce spending by nearly $2 trillion over the period from FY 2012 through FY 2021, the BCA spending caps were periodically raised by Congress. While these negotiations reduced the overall impact of the BCA, new analysis from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) estimates that more than $200 billion in federal R&D spending were nonetheless “lost” to these spending cuts, impacting several key elements of innovation economies — higher education R&D, private R&D investment, and STEM workforce development.

A thriving innovation economy requires a robust R&D enterprise — with participation by academia, government, and the private sector. As a substantial performer and funder of R&D in the United States, the strength of private industry’s R&D activity in a region can provide an indication of the region’s capacity for bringing innovative technologies to market. Using data from the recent release of the National Science Foundation’s 2018 Business Enterprise R&D Survey, this SSTI analysis shows that while total R&D performed domestically by private companies in 2018 increased over 2017, as did the share of the R&D that was paid for by companies, this was not the case for all states.

Stemming from a collaboration between the Census Bureau and the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES) within the National Science Foundation (NSF), a new data set aims to untangle the dynamics of research and development (R&D) performed by private companies. Specifically, the new Annual Business Survey incorporates previously experimental data on the R&D performance by microenterprises — businesses which employ between one and nine people. SSTI’s analysis of this new data shows the total R&D performed by microenterprises in each state, and the portion of that R&D which the companies paid for themselves.

The United States is currently ranked tenth in research and development intensity (a measure of R&D investment as a percent of a nation’s Gross Domestic Product) but has continued to lead the pack in total research and development spending, according to the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) recently published A Snapshot of U.S. R&D Competitiveness: 2020 Update. The report analyzes the role R&D investment plays within the U.S. while also examining research and development trends globally. It notes that while U.S. spending remains high, China’s R&D spending has “seen staggering increases over the past two decades, and remains an undeniable leadership rival to the U.S.” When measuring R&D intensity, AAAS found that the U.S. ranked tenth when combining public and private R&D investment, but is ranked 14th when only factoring in public spending towards R&D.

With the general election less than one month away, SSTI has reviewed the 120 state ballot initiatives throughout the country for innovation-related issues. Education, gig workers, redistricting and issues surrounding elections and state budgets are scattered across the country and can affect the future of innovation through funding, talent and political will. Read below for coverage on the initiatives that could have an impact on different segments of the economy and the future of innovation.

At a time that is often referred to as “The Age of Technology,” the U.S. has no coherent strategy for maintaining its high standing as a world leader in science, technology and innovation, and has watched as China has overtaken the country on many indicators of prowess in R&D and innovation. That assertion is among among the findings of a new report from the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, one that shows the country at a tipping point and failing to embrace necessary actions to maintain its leadership in science and engineering.

Government investment in R&D within the health, defense, and energy sectors can provide both immediate and long-term benefits in the form of employment, income, and federal and state tax revenue. A new report released by Breakthrough Energy explores these benefits, while also studying the effects that an increase in public R&D spending could have throughout the nation.

While business investments towards research and development have varied among states, the overall trend throughout the country has been a positive one. Business R&D funding has weathered two recessions over the past 20 years, with many states seeing investments grow beyond their pre-recession levels. While the scope of COVID-19’s economic impact continues to grow, business R&D investment has shown a strong history of recovering from, and building beyond, national financial downturns.

As discussion of innovation ecosystems remains near the front of science, technology, and innovation policy discussions — and resources are spent providing environments for creative exchange between researchers, industry, government, and entrepreneurs — substantive and empirical research is still lagging. However, a recent study sheds new light on the mechanisms and types of interactions that may contribute to the desired outcomes of promoting innovation ecosystems. Specifically, the study evaluates the effectiveness of combining two long-running, potentially complementary programs in encouraging increased engagement among ecosystem groups and individuals.