News from the IPL
INTRODUCTION
This newsletter is published by The Innovation Policy Lab at the Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto, and sponsored by the Ministry of Research and Innovation. The views and ideas expressed in this newsletter do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Ontario Government.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
President Obama Launches Advanced Manufacturing Partnership
The Advanced Manufacturing Partnership (AMP), a national effort bringing together industry, universities, and the federal government to invest in the emerging technologies that will create high quality manufacturing jobs and enhance our global competitiveness. Investing in technologies, such as information technology, biotechnology, and nanotechnology, will support the creation of good jobs by helping U.S. manufacturers reduce costs, improve quality, and accelerate product development. The President’s plan, which leverages existing programs and proposals, will invest more than $500 million to jumpstart this effort.
Big Data Feeding Canadian Research Innovation
CANARIE, Canada’s Advanced Research and Innovation Network, today reported that research traffic over its ultra-high-capacity, fibre-optic network has increased by an average of 50% per year over the past four years. This traffic includes data-intensive DNA sequences, climate models, and information collected from an increasing array of sensors on the ground, under the sea, and in space. In 2010 alone, over 28,000 Terabytes of data were transmitted over the network, more than twenty times the volume of residential Internet traffic in Canada. Researchers in Canada are taking advantage of the opportunity to accelerate discovery by mining rich data sets in virtually all domains, including the humanities and social sciences.
The Centre for Drug Research and Development (CDRD) and the Lead Discovery Center GmbH (LDC), two leading drug discovery and development centres supporting the commercialization of research from academic institutions across Canada, from select global partners, and from Germany’s Max Planck Institutes, today announced they have signed a Partnership Agreement to enable joint development of promising innovations from their broad networks. The agreement includes sharing infrastructure and expertise from LDC’s and CDRD’s powerful drug development platforms in order to support the organizations’ shared objective of successfully translating basic research into high-quality commercial opportunities – and ultimately into new medicines that will benefit patients around the world.
One of Canada’s greatest treasures has been auctioned off. Nortel Networks’ last and largest remaining asset, a portfolio of 6,000 patents spanning wireless 4G, data networking, optical, voice and Internet technologies is being sold to the highest bidder. The loss to Canada will not be fully appreciated for years to come. That’s because our nation, which continues to depend on energy, forestry and agriculture for its prosperity, has long overlooked the most precious national resource of all: intellectual property (IP).
Editor's Pick
State of the Nation 2010: Canada’s Science, Technology and Innovation System
Science, Technology and Innovation Council of Canada
This report charts progress from a baseline set in 2008 and compares Canadian performance to global science, technology and innovation leaders. The report also proposes a core list of 20 indicators for future monitoring. The list covers talent, science and technology and other innovation indicators. The report shows that Canada’s strengths are a strong talent pool and a robust public research capacity. Its two main challenges are to increase private sector investment in innovation and to improve Canada’s capacity to transfer knowledge into the marketplace.
Innovation Policy
Innovation Union Competitiveness Report 2011
European Commission
This report concludes that the EU’s innovation performance needs major improvements in many areas if the Europe 2020 strategy is to deliver smart sustainable growth. Europe needs more and “smarter” investment in both public and private research and development – not only does this boost growth in the medium-term, it also has a counter-cyclical effect in times of crisis. More research cooperation within the EU and internationally is needed, along with better use of research results, including through a stronger intellectual property regime. Education systems need to be adapted to business innovation needs. Innovative and fast-growing SME’s need more encouragement. A concerted effort is necessary to build on Europe’s promising record in innovation tackling global challenges such as climate change. The gender gap in science and research must be closed. The Report analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of national research and innovation systems and provides solid facts on which to base national policy choices.
Report to the President on Ensuring American Leadership in Advanced Manufacturing
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
The United States has long thrived as a result of its ability to manufacture goods and sell them to global markets. Manufacturing activity has supported American economic growth, leading the U.S.’s exports and employing millions of Americans. The manufacturing sector has also driven knowledge production and innovation in the United States, by supporting two thirds of private sector research and development and by employing scientists, engineers, and technicians to invent new products and introduce innovations in existing industries.The U.S. ’s historic leadership in manufacturing, however, is at risk. Manufacturing as a share of national income has declined, as has manufacturing employment, and U.S. leadership in producing and exporting manufactured goods is in question. The U.S. requires a strategy for supporting innovation in advanced manufacturing. The objectives of an innovation policy should be to ensure (i) that the U.S. provides the best overall environment in which to do business, (ii) that powerful new technologies are developed and (iii) that technologybased enterprises have the infrastructure required to flourish here.
Where is the Best Place to Invest $102,000 – In Stocks, Bonds, or a College Degree?
Michael Greenstone and Adam Looney, The Brookings Institute
As the college class of 2011 graduates in the aftermath of the Great Recession, some graduates are struggling to find a good job—or any job at all. As a result, many are questioning whether the time and expense of college was worth it. We try to answer this question by comparing the economic benefits of a college degree to its costs, as one would for any other investment. When compared to other types of investments, how does a college degree really stack up? The answer is clear: Higher education is a much better investment than almost any other alternative, even for the “Class of the Great Recession” (young adults ages 23-24). In today’s tough labor market, a college degree dramatically boosts the odds of finding a job and making more money.
Anthony P. Carnevale and Stepehn J. Rose, Georgetown University Center on Education and Workforce
This study confirms that over the past 30 years, the demand for college-educated workers in the United States has outpaced supply, resulting in economic output below potential and growing income inequality. The current recession and grudging recovery, however, hides the fact that the U.S. is underproducing college graduates. This study finds that if the U.S. is to make up for lost ground in postsecondary attainment and respond to future economic requirements, it will need to add an additional 20 million postsecondary-educated workers to the economy by 2025.
Improving Access to Capital for High-Growth Companies
National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship
Entrepreneurship plays an important role in American history as one of the key drivers of American economic growth and stability. From Google and GE to Amgen and Whole Foods, high-growth companies have revolutionized global industries in electronics, energy, health, food, consumer goods, and countless other markets. They have leveraged American ingenuity towards the creation of domestic platforms and innovation ecosystems, while contributing to over 40% of new American jobs every year. Yet in the wake of recent economic challenges, entrepreneurs in high-growth companies have found their access to capital significantly constrained. Investment in startup and early-stage companies has steadily declined since the dot-com crash, compounding the typical challenges high-growth startups face with operating capital. This report makes eight recommendations for improving access to capital for high-growth companies.
Cybersecurity, Innovations and the Internet Economy
National Institute of Standards and Technology
The Department of Commerce’s Internet Policy Task Force Green Paper on Cybersecurity, Innovation and the Internet Economy recommends consideration of a new framework for addressing internet security issues for companies outside the orbit of critical infrastructure or key resources. While securing energy, financial, health and other resources remain vital, the future of the innovation and the economy will depend on the success of Internet companies and ensuring that these companies are trusted and secure is essential. The report recommends that the U.S. government and stakeholders come together to promote security standards to address emerging issues. It also proposes that the government continue to support both innovation in security and on the Internet more broadly. This framework will both improve security at home and around the world so that Internet services can continue to provide a vital connection for trade and commerce, civic participation, and social interaction around the globe.
Council on Competitiveness
Leaders from nearly three dozen top universities and national laboratories say that America must make radical changes in its manufacturing policy to maintain its innovation leadership. This report calls for a stronger partnership between research and manufacturing – especially manufacturing at scale, improved vocational and STEM education and a commitment to supporting higher education and science. The report is the second in a three-part Ignite series to be released by the Council’s U.S. Manufacturing Competitiveness Initiative (USMCI). The initiative drew insights from America’s leading CEOs in the first report, and will feature labor leaders in the third installment in the series. The USMCI is focused on developing a comprehensive National Manufacturing Strategy to deliver to Congress and the Administration at a national summit in December 2011.
Cities, Clusters & Regions
The Vital Commons: An Agenda for the Great Lakes – St. Lawrence Region
The Mowat Center for Policy Innovation
Regions will be just as important as nation-states in ensuring the well-being of communities in the coming decades. The Great Lakes – St. Lawrence Region (GLSLR)—made up of the eight states and two provinces (Quebec and Ontario) that surround these great waters—has everything necessary to succeed in this new world. The conventional narrative about the region has been of a “rust belt” and the decline of heavy industry. However, this storyline ignores the fact that the production and trade models of the 20th
century generated the wealth and infrastructure on which a new economy is being built. This white paper is intended to facilitate the discussion about what can be done to strengthen the region. This paper outlines the shared challenges and opportunities facing the cross-border region. It also outlines a series of initiatives for government, business, and civil society that have been proposed to deepen cross-border collaboration.
Enterprising States: Recovery and Renewal for the 21st Century
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Over a year and a half into the recovery, the condition of the American economy is far from satisfactory. Unemployment remains high, job creation meager, and American workforce participation has dropped to near record depths — the lowest rate in a quarter of a century. The U.S. will need to create 20 million jobs in this decade to recover from the 7 million lost in the Great Recession and 13 million needed for the country’s growing population. The 2011 Enterprising States study highlights state-driven initiatives to 1) redesign government, including measures to deal with excessive debt levels that inhibit economic growth and job creation and 2) implement forward-looking, enterprise-friendly initiatives with a primary goal of creating the conditions for job creation and future prosperity.
Statistics & Indicators
How SUNY Mattes: Economic Impacts of the State University of New York
The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government (University at Albany) & University at Buffalo Regional Institute
According to this research tthe SUNY system had a minimum economic impact of $19.8 billion in 2008-09.Importantly, the study also found that the system is making an even greater contribution to New York’s future economy. SUNY expands the state’s capacity to grow and produce jobs via three primary contributions, according to the report: educating a competitive workforce; helping employers adopt new technologies and ideas; and rapidly growing the capacity of SUNY research campuses to develop new technologies and to transfer research into commercial use. This research is based on a series of surveys and extensive field study work conducted on all SUNY campuses with respect to economic development activities, as well as detailed statistical and financial data collection from each campus.
U.S. Metro Economies: GMP and Employment Forecasts
The United States Conference of Mayors
This report predicts a sluggish economic recovery, mostly due to no sustained upturn in housing activity, combined with pressures from rising commodity costs, supply-chain disruptions, and extreme domestic weather means most U.S. metros can expect only minimal job growth by the end of this year. Job growth in 2011 is expected to reach 1.2 percent and unemployment will not fall below 8 percent until late 2013. Only in the first half of 2014 will unemployment in the U.S. match its previous peak level of early 2008, the study finds. Of course some metros will recover faster than others. Over the past year, noteworthy improvements have been recorded in the Midwest as the metros of the rust belt have rebounded from the severe manufacturing layoffs of 2008 and 2009.
Policy Digest
Demand-Side Innovation Policies
OECD
Demand-side innovation policies have been receiving increasing interest from a number of OECD countries in recent years in the context of slow growth and lagging productivity performance. Pressures on fiscal budgets in the aftermath of the financial crisis have also motivated governments to seek ways to boost innovation without necessarily engaging in new program spending, primarily to meet social demands in areas such as health, energy or the environment. This book examines dynamics between demand and innovation and provides insights into the rationale and scope for public policies to foster demand for innovation. It shows the potential – but also the limits – of using public procurement, regulations or standards to stimulate public and private demand for innovation, including among SMEs. Drawing on country experience and case studies, this report illustrates good practices for designing, implementing and evaluating demand-side innovation policies.
Shifting to Demand
This interest in demand-side innovation policy has emerged as part of a greater awareness of the importance of feed-back linkages between supply and demand in the innovation process. Demand-side innovation policies are part of an evolution from a linear model of innovation, usually focused on R&D, to a more broad-based approach that considers the full scope of the innovation cycle. This focus on the demand side also reflects a general perception that traditional supply-side policies – despite refinements in their
design over recent decades – have not been able to bring innovation performance and productivity to desired levels. Furthermore, current pressures on fiscal budgets in OECD countries have generated interest in using demand-side innovation policies to boost
innovation performance while increasing the productivity of public spending, through innovation, in areas of strong societal demand, such a health, security, population ageing and the environment.
Demanding Success
The evidence to date suggests that the likely success of demand-side innovation policies depends on a number of strategic factors.
- Clearly articulated policy agendas: because government is one of several actors that influence demand, it is important to
consider whether the action undertaken is efficient from a market (and budgetary) point of view and whether it improves social welfare. Thus, demand-side innovation policies should be targeted to clearly articulated policy objectives and their impacts should be carefully evaluated. In addition, complementarities between demand- and supply-side measures are essential. As innovation dynamics are sector-specific, the sectoral level may be the most promising for policy making. The scale of demand-side innovation policies should be carefully assessed as it is easier to match demand-side and supply side policies in a certain sector than across the economy as a whole. The timing and duration of government intervention also need to be considered: different policy measures supporting the demand and/or the supply side are needed along the different phases of the innovation cycle; - Strategic alignment: adopting demand-side innovation policies has several implications for the public sector. The combination of policy measures (sectoral, supply- or demand-oriented) to support demand for innovation makes good
governance and policy co-ordination within the public sector essential. The systemic nature of demand-side innovation policies also implies that alignment needs to be achieved not only across levels of government, but also with industry and other influential stakeholders. It is therefore necessary to establish shared visions and roadmaps between the public sector and firms to implement demand-side policy instruments successfully. A demand-side innovation policy gives a more pivotal role to public administrations (e.g. through procurement, regulation, and setting and certifying standards). This requires
investments in skills and competencies in public administration, as well as organizational and cultural change. It also raises the question of how the public sector can be encouraged to participate in this innovative effort; - Facilitative public procurement: Public procurement is at the centre of recent demand-side innovation policy initiatives. Because of their large purchasing power governments can pull demand for innovation and can also create a signalling effect as lead user and influencing the diffusion of innovations more broadly. However, using public procurement as a policy instrument to promote innovation is challenging. The traditional focus on value for money as well as the problem of fragmentation of public demand (often between different levels of government) can limit the potential scale effects of innovative procurement. Furthermore, many agencies or local governments with responsibilities for public procurement operate separately from line ministries or government agencies with a remit to foster innovation. This dispersion and the lack of data on this issue make it very difficult to assess the proportion of procurement dedicated to innovative products or services. In addition, public procurement can distort competition by excluding foreign firms from domestic markets.
Recommendations
The general principles and recommendations for demand-side innovation policies stemming from this policy report and from the evidence provided by the case studies are the following:
• Government should assess the rationale and opportunity for policy intervention. Demand-side measures can represent costs for firms, but can also provide new business opportunities.
• Policies to foster demand for innovation need to consider market and sectoral issues. Some demand-side measures are appropriate to stimulate the uptake of innovations, while others will act on their diffusion.
• Scale, timing and duration of policies to foster demand need to be determined carefully and address the risks of protectionism, large player dominance and technological lock-in.
• Demand-side innovation policies need to be matched and combined with adequate supply-side policies and measures. This will require mechanisms to enhance government co-ordination and stakeholder involvement;
• There exists significant potential to boost demand for innovation by increasing the innovation capacity of the public sector to meet
societal and even global challenges.
• Adequate incentives and regulatory frameworks can help foster innovative public procurement in line with good governance, transparency and accountability.
• Mobilizing public administrations in favour of innovation – through supply-side or demand-side measures – requires establishing strong incentives, administrative reform and upgrading competencies of human resources.
• Consumer policy and education ought to be emphasised as a means of enhancing user involvement in the creation and diffusion of innovation.
Events
Regional Studies Association – Third Global Conference on Economic Geography
Seoul, Korea, 28 June – July 2, 2011
In the wake of the economic downturn of 2007-, the debate about the causes of the crisis and recession has focused upon the unbalanced nature of its economic models and geographies. Explanations have been concerned with the imbalances in international trade and currency flows, sectoral structures between especially financial and other services and manufacturing, the relative sizes and roles of the public and private sectors, the composition of demand between consumption and production as well as its domestic or external orientation, and its socially and spatially uneven geographies. Following this diagnosis of the problems, debate about recovery has focused upon the idea of ‘rebalancing’ as a means of rebuilding new economic models that somehow correct the problematic and disruptive imbalances that generated the crisis. ‘Rebalancing’ has become an international concern for high-income economies such as Australia, UK and Japan, middle-income economies such as Portugal and South Korea as well as emerging economies such as Brazil and China. Yet it is not clear what ‘rebalancing’ might mean, whether and how it can be achieved and how it relates to currently dominant ‘new economic geographical’ models promoting greater spatial agglomeration and concentration of economic activities. These sessions will engage this debate on rebalancing regional and national economies.
Experience the Creative Economy
Toronto, 21 June, 2011
Experience the Creative Economy is a unique conference which allows scholars new in their careers to experience notions of the creative economy in a small and focused setting. This conference will bring together up to 25 individuals with similar research interests to share their work, receive feedback, foster the development of effective research methods and to establish an ongoing framework of collaborative learning and mutual exchange for years to come.
Re-imaginging Place Leadership for the 21st Century – Your toolkit for effective
Birmingham, UK, 4-7 July, 2011
The program emerged from the 2010 European Commission ‘Open Days’ event ‘Re-thinking Leadership for 21st Century European Cities and Regions’ held in Brussels in October 2010. It also draws on the learning from the Regional Studies Association international research network “Leadership in Urban and Regional Development”. This introductory Summer School, the first in a series, presents and debates the changing leadership tasks associated with new and emerging issues around place-based policy agendas. This practice-orientated Leadership Summer School will enable participants from across Europe to explore effective leadership approaches for integrated policy and will develop leadership skills for collaborative working across economic development, planning, housing, regeneration, education, health, crime and security for neighbourhoods, towns, cities and regions.
Building Capacity for Scientific Innovation and Outcomes
Atlanta, GA, 15-17 September, 2011
The ability of science and innovation systems to deliver depends on continually improving capacity. Yet, capacity is multidimensional and has interrelated characteristics and related challenges. The Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy 2011 will explore the research base that addresses the broad range of capacity related issues central to the structure, function, performance and outcomes of the science and innovation enterprises. The conference will include a variety of sessions: plenaries to discuss critical questions, contributed paper sessions and a young researcher poster competition.
The Impact of the Global Economic Crisis on Capital Cities
Warsaw, Poland, 23 September, 2011
Numerous studies and surveys from across Europe demonstrate that in ‘old EU’ the biggest cities are suffering the most from recession, while in new EU members and in Eastern Europe it is rural areas that suffer while cities and capital cities in particular are able to sustain their growth (or to minimise decline). Thus we are proposing to create a Regional Studies Association Research Network which will look at various cases of capital cities’ reactions in the wake of global economic crisis and will come up with the tentative summary of different trends and types of responses which would be useful for further regional socio-economic analysis.
Lund, Sweden, 13-14 October, 2011
The conference offers two days of plenaries, presentations and intense discussions on preconditions and strategies for regional innovation policy and regional development in Europe. It is organized around five key themes: (1) Preconditions for sustainable development (economically, socially and environmentally) in European regions: (2) the role of universities in the promotion of regional development; (3) sectoral specificities (resource based and cultural/creative industries) and their impacts on regional competitiveness; (4) Southern European regions and their strategies to grow out of the global economic crisis; (5) the growth of emerging economies in Asia and Latin America and consequences for European regions. Confirmed keynote speakers include Meric Gertler (University of Toronto), Claire Nauwelaers (OECD), Staffan Laestadius (Royal Institute of Technology KTH), Dominic Power (Uppsala University), Mario Rui Silva (University of Porto) and Cristina Chaminade (Lund University).
Culture, Place and Identity at the Heart of Regional Development
St, John’s, 13-15 October, 2011
This conference will examine the relationship between the arts, cultural heritage and regional development in islands and in rural and remote regions. It will bring together representatives from academia, government, the arts community, the cultural heritage community, the knowledge economy, the tourism industry, and organizations dealing with regional development. It will examine global trends in tourism, technology and demographics, and will feature global best practices in cultural tourism.
CALL FOR PAPERS – Geography of Innovation 
Saint-Etienne, France, 26-28 January, 2012
Public and corporate actors are faced with pressing questions concerning innovation policy and the return of R&D investment. To answer these questions, new perspectives are necessary to overthrow received wisdom. This first European seminar on “Geography of Innovation” invites scholars from all disciplines to present their work on local and global processes of innovation, on the interaction between science, technology and policy, on clusters, entrepreneurship and competitiveness, and on green growth and sustainability. To further our understanding of innovation processes, the seminar intends to bring together a variety of disciplines including economic geography, regional science, economics of innovation, network theory and management science. We further welcome new contributions to the establishment of (European) databases as well as new analytical tools, including spatial econometrics, network analysis, (interactive) visualisation, bibliometrics and policy evaluation tools.
Subscriptions & Comments
Please forward this newsletter to anyone you think will find it of value. We look forward to collaborating with you on this initiative. If you would like to comment on, or contribute to, the content, subscribe or unsubscribe, please contact us at ipl.munkschool@utoronto.ca.
This newsletter is prepared by Jen Nelles.
Project manager is David A. Wolfe.