Universities need to collaborate on R&D

BYLINE: WILLIAM T. SELLERS

READERS

A little noticed development has been occurring the past few months in the halls of Congress. Amid all the controversy over scandal, gas prices, illegal aliens and the Iraq war, both political parties have gotten very concerned about America´s slipping national competitiveness. As a result they are practically falling over one another to introduce numerous bills targeting this issue, and with a level of bipartisan support not seen since Dec. 8, 1941.

There are more than 200 bills specifically addressing competitiveness. In a recent week alone, the House Science Committee introduced three bills, HR 5358, HR 5356, and HR 5357 -- all dealing with competitiveness. And then there´s one bill, S 2197, introduced by New Mexico Sen. Pete Domenici with over 60 co-sponsors, that most closely parallels President Bush´s new American Competitiveness Initiative. Among other things, it would create six new technology-transfer centers around the country.

The upshot of all this is a great deal of money will be pushed out for what is termed "extramural R&D" by the State Science & Technology Institute (SSTI), a think tank in Ohio. "Extramural R&D" is going to universities, non profits, and other research foundations over and above those specifically targeted funds the various cabinet departments, like Energy or Defense, might spend. SSTI estimates the yearly total now stands at approximately $77 billion, the new competitiveness bills notwithstanding. They could easily add another $10 billion to $12 billion per year.

Unfortunately, Idaho is woefully unprepared to compete for many of these funds. According to SSTI, since 1999 Idaho has fallen 10 places to 33rd in per capita extramural R&D received. Yet aside from the actual research our universities get to do, the single biggest secondary benefit is the potential for new business creation and capital formation.

For us Idaho conservatives, that´s spelled "p-r-i-v-a-t-e s-e-c-t-o-r." Ownership of any or all, commercializable intellectual property resulting from this kind of R&D will belong to the creators. Idaho needs to get in the game; it´s one we could do well in.

Chief among our biggest handicaps is the inability of our universities to do better collaborative research utilizing some very, very big broadband links. Why do I say "collaborative research?" Because the federal agencies that will disburse the lion´s share of these funds are now "scoring" their research proposals on how well in-state universities do just that ... play nice together and share in the sandbox.

It gives a real advantage to states that have coordinated university systems, like those under a chancellor style of management, where the opportunity to allocate scarce university resources is done more efficiently. If these same systems are further along with their broadband linkages, so much the better. We´re talking 10 gigabyte capacity minimums here; a communications level increasingly needed for computing-intensive research.

Right now, under the leadership of the Idaho National Lab´s information office, the three main Idaho universities and the INL are studying a way to link themselves with just such a research-only network. Ultimately, it would also connect up with branch campuses and community colleges as well.

The state´s payback on such a system could easily be accomplished in under three years. New Mexico, which has utilized its broadband links to commercialize university-national lab-business collaborations, has seen the establishment of over 75 new tech firms and nearly 8,000 new jobs since 1993.

But it all begins with the research. Unless Idaho can get into the game, we´ll continue to miss billions in opportunities gone by.

William T. Sellers is the vice president for business development of Idaho TechConnect based in Idaho Falls. His email address is wtsiictr.com