STEM Visa Bill Defeated in Congress but Debate Goes On

One of the most talked about measures to improve the competitiveness of the United States in the area of technology and innovation is the STEM Jobs Bill. On September 20^th, the bill, put forth by Republican Congressman Lamar Smith of Texas, was defeated in the House, failing to receive two thirds of the votes.

The Bill would enable 55,000 students with a doctorate or a master’s degree in one of the STEM subjects to apply for a Green Card upon graduation. If enacted, the STEM Jobs Bill would have discontinued the Diversity Visa Program, or Green Card Lottery, which currently allocates 55,000 Green Cards to people from countries with low levels of immigration to the United States. The Bill was struck down mostly by Democrats unwilling to eliminate the Diversity Visa Program. Two more bills are on the table, one by Democratic Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren of California, the other by Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer of New York. Both of these bills aim to keep the Diversity Visa Program alive while introducing the STEM Visa program simultaneously.

Politicians on both sides, as well as heads of industry all agree that something needs to be done in order to not lose highly educated workers to other countries. Without the ability to stay and work in the United States, these foreign students are forced to leave and end up working for companies overseas. These students are especially important to the future of the US economy because of the low rates of American students who decide to go in to science and engineering, only about 5% of graduates.

Solving the issue of talent leaving the US will be essential in order to ensure America’s continual success in leading the world in technology and innovation in the 21^st century. If Congress can manage to cooperate across the aisle and reach a compromise, the STEM Jobs Bill would supply hi-tech companies with much needed workers and boost the US economy.

Progress is being made, but a lot more has to be done in order for the United States to reverse the current trend of lagging behind other countries in competitiveness. Ultimately, the problem of American students lacking interest in studying science and engineering has to be tackled in order to ensure future prosperity.

Posted by: Samuel Benka

Sources: Forbes, Politico, The Huffington Post

Photo Credit: US Capitol Courtesy of Flickr user katieharbath

The Innovation Frontier No Longer Ends at Silicon Valley: Forbes 500 Inc. Companies Come from all over the United States

Forbes is famous for its annual publications ranking the private sector by a variety of means- revenue, innovation, and growth among them. The lists themselves are fascinating, but even more interesting is looking into the details that explain why some companies manage to top the list and others do not make the final cut. An equally interesting question is that of where these companies come from; what is their geographic location and how does that factor into their ranking? Are the most successful companies grouped together in clusters like Silicon Valley, thriving in big cities Boston, or incorporating in business-friendly Delaware? Do the same geographic areas claim a significant portion of the list each year?

The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation has conducted research to answer these questions in a work entitled “The Ascent of America’s High-Growth Companies”. This study demonstrates significant geographical diversity in Forbes’ fastest-growing privately-held companies in terms of revenue between 1982 and 2010. The research “reveals that high numbers of fast-growing firms are concentrated in unexpected regions and industrial sectors”. Conclusively, this interactive data map  allows the viewer to visually compare company density by location and witness the overall the geographic diversity.

Kauffman Foundation researchers Yasuyuki Motoyama and Jared Konczal have discussed some of their surprising findings from the study. First is that of all the large metropolitan areas, Washington, D.C. has the “highest concentration of Inc. firms, both in absolute number and per capita (normalized by population)” demonstrating the growth of a strong government services cluster in the last few decades. Second, typical innovation hotspots are usurped by clusters of companies in areas such as Salt Lake City, Utah, Indianapolis, Indiana, Buffalo, New York, and Louisville, Kentucky. Lastly, the researchers found that though many variables such as patents per capita, access to venture capital investments, and ivy league-level universities significantly influence the placement of innovation centers in the United States, only one relationship matters for the largest-growing firms— having a highly-skilled labor force nearby.

The Kauffman Foundation’s research ends at 2010, but the 2012 Forbes list is out. In an ever-changing economy like the United States companies are always adapting to stay efficient and relevant for the consumer, so the geographical densities are likely different but following the same trend of the last thirty years. It appears that Americans have crossed another frontier; entrepreneurs no longer have to grow their businesses in Silicon Valley, but have the resources to create revenue from anywhere. In a world increasingly without borders, innovation and business seem to be able to grow everywhere.

Posted by: Sophia Higgins

Sources: Forbes, The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, Huffington Post

Fortune Brainstorm TECH 2011 @ Fortune Live Media courtesy of Flickr user Fortune Live Media

Techonomy Conference 2012: Objectives of Technology-Driven Economic Revitalization

On Wednesday, September 12^th business leaders, political figures, and technology experts came together for the annual Techonomy Conference in Detroit. Hosted by the Detroit Economic Club, the conference’s agenda focused on the role of technology as a vital component of achieving social progress and economic growth.  This single day program is especially committed to the issues of “reigniting U.S. competitiveness and economic growth, creating jobs, and revitalizing cities in a technologized age”. Featured speakers included Grady Burnett, the Vice President of Facebook’s Global Market Solutions, James Dougherty, an Adjunct Senior Fellow for Business and Foreign Policy on the Council of Foreign Relations, and Justin Fox, the Editorial Director of the Harvard Business Review. They addressed the crowd on topics ranging from challenges in the era of globalization to the democratization of finance and product development to the future of manufacturing and its impact on employment. Audience members were also greeted by the founder of Techonomy, David Kirkpatrick, and treated to speeches on individual entrepreneurial development and other related topics.

The conference took a local look at Michigan and Detroit’s economic struggles for revitalization and at the challenges faced auto-mobile industry. Described as the Silicon Valley of an “earlier era”, Detroit is said to represent the larger issues facing American cities, including adapting to changes in education, employment, and infrastructure brought on by an increasingly globalized market society. Some have questioned the conference’s location of Detroit due to current economic struggles. Techonomy’s founder sends a different message, citing Detroit’s troubles as emblematic of cities that have missed the opportunities of technology in the past but have the potential to resolve these issues. Even a recently hurting automobile industry, a defining characteristic of Detroit, stands to make substantial gains from strengthening its tech culture of efficiency and educational achievement.

What were the goals and expectations of Techonomy? The event sought to utilize the revitalization of industry through technological advances, entrepreneurship, and innovation as major strategies for economic recovery. A focus on the increasing globalization of business and industry practices seemed also to be an objective of the conference. Intent on keeping America pushing the technological envelope, speakers discussed the future of expanding innovation and inspiring competitive growth. Complementarily, lecturers represented a diverse background of national industry and intellectual leadership, to address the concern of declining US competitiveness in detail and tackle the issue from unique viewpoints.

What can the public expect to come from this meeting of multi-disciplinary minds? Perhaps policy-makers will be influenced by the incredible support from the business community for this technology initiative as a means of creating jobs and stimulating urban development. Another possible outcome is a renewed emphasis on education for current and future generations to establish a more highly-skilled workforce with improved techno-literacy. Finally, perhaps Americans will see more pressure for regulatory reform easing start-up business restrictions. Ultimately, conference publicity should push technology to the forefront of economic recovery initiatives as a tool for improving US competitiveness and improving urgent urban issues to speed along city development.

Forbes highlights examples of innovative entrepreneurs in the Detroit area who exemplify these aims and serve as best-practice models for aspiring start-up companies. With the help of the Techonomy and its conference speakers, the American public may be able to look forward to more success stories like these.

Posted by: Sophia Higgins

Sources: Techonomy, Forbes, CNBC

Photo Credit: 2010_08_05_techonomy_105 @ Techonomy courtesy of Flickr user dserals

 

You are invited to: The New Advanced Manufacturing Partnership Report

 You are invited to: 

The Program on America and the Global Economy (PAGE) presents:

The New Advanced Manufacturing Partnership Report

Thursday, September 20, 2012

1:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.

5^th floor Conference Room, Woodrow Wilson Center

---

Martin A. Schmidt, Co-Technical Lead, Advanced Manufacturing Partnership Report; Associate Provost; Professor of Electrical Engineering at MIT

 

Theresa Kotanchek, Co-Technical Lead, Advanced Manufacturing Partnership Report,

Vice President, Sustainable Technologies and Innovation Sourcing, Dow Chemical Company

 

Introduction:

Thomas Kurfess, Prof., Georgia Tech, Assistant Director for Advanced Manufacturing, Office of Science and Technology

---

The recently released Advanced Manufacturing Partnership report, Capturing Domestic Competitive Advantage in Advanced Manufacturing, details the unique role that manufacturing plays in the broader U.S. economy-as a direct source of jobs, as a spur to additional job growth across the economy, and as an important force for addressing the nation’s trade deficit.  Most importantly, the report reveals that the nation’s continued strength in innovation depends on sustaining a close, two-way connection between the innovation and manufacturing processes.  “Proximity to the manufacturing process creates innovation spillovers across firms and industries leading to the ideas and capabilities that support the next generation of products and processes,” the report notes.  “In this way, a vibrant manufacturing sector is inextricably linked to our capacity as a nation to innovate.”  At this forum the two technical co-leads for the AMP report will discuss its findings.

---

RSVP here or to receive further information, send an email to PAGE@wilsoncenter.org

Directions to the Wilson Center: www.wilsoncenter.org/directions

What the Apple-Samsung Case May Mean for Innovation & Competitiveness

In a case that has garnered much attention by the media, Apple claimed that Samsung had infringed on several patents on the iPhone and iPad.The San Jose jury unanimously agreed with Apple in its verdict. However, a similar case in South Korea found that Samsung infringed only one Apple patent while Apple infringed two Samsung patents.

More important than the $1 billion that Samsung must pay to Apple for its infringements (which is a mere 1.5 percent of Samsung’s annual revenue) is the message Apple conveyed to companies with regard to basic design elements in electronic devices.    The case of Apple versus Samsung is just the first of several claims by Apple of patent infringements by other companies.  Most threatening is the message sent to device makers who use Google’s Android operating system.  Apple has surprisingly chosen not to sue Google likely because it is much easier to make a case for monetary damage against companies like Samsung that sell hardware to consumers versus a company like Google, which doesn’t charge device makers for its software.

The impact this case will have on future competition is yet to be seen, as some lawyers argue that Apple isn’t the only company that can come up with innovative designs-and its court victory could encourage more innovation by competitors.  However, others argue that this verdict could stifle innovation as it may force device makers to slow or abandon product development in fear of breaching Apple’s intellectual property resulting in less smartphones and tablets on the market and higher production costs and prices for consumers.

Samsung stated, “It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies.”

Perhaps this case, which is one of the largest patent damages verdict on record, will encourage others to, “think outside the box” (no pun intended) and develop more unique designs in the future.

 

Posted by: Elizabeth White

Sources: The NY Times, The Wall Street Journal & CIO Journal

Photo Credit: apple-samsung Courtesy of Flickr user diTii

What Went Wrong with A123?

China’s largest producer of automotive parts is poised to purchase a controlling share of a US company, A123 Systems, which develops and manufactures advanced lithium-ion batteries and battery systems.  China’s Wanxiang Group Corp said on Wednesday they intend to invest up to $450 million in A123 Systems, taking an 80 percent stake in the company.

The purchase is an almost textbook example of the kind of issues America currently faces in an ever more competitive and global economy.  A123 is a startup company that was founded in 2001 based on the research of a duo of scientists at MIT.  The company’s unique nanophosphate technology is built on novel nanoscale materials initially developed at MIT and, according to the company, “enables customers to commercialize innovative products for the transportation, electric grid, commercial and government markets”.  The company has received tens of millions of dollars in grants from Chrysler, General Motors, Ford, GE, and defense contractors to develop lithium-ion batteries using their technology for hybrid cars, commercial trucks and buses, and components to electric grids.  A123 received more than $200 million from venture investors before raising $378 million in a 2009 initial public offering.  The company had also received frequent grants and investments from the Department of Energy and in 2009 was awarded over $200 million as part of the Stimulus Act, specifically under the Electric Drive Battery and Component Manufacturing Initiative.

Apparently all this was not enough to keep the company afloat.  It reported a second-quarter loss this year of $82.9 million, or 56 cents per share, and a 53 percent drop in revenue to $17 million.  Its cash pile was more than halved to $47.7 million at the end of the quarter, down from $113.1 million at the end of the first quarter.  The battery industry as a whole has suffered in the US, with some pointing to too much capacity and not enough demand for hybrid vehicles.  Essentially, A123 and companies like it invested heavily in the ability to churn out their batteries on a large scale, and then found a painful lack of consumers.

A123 Systems is exactly the kind of company Americans hear so much about as the way forward in this global economy.  Researchers at one of the country’s top universities developed cutting edge technology, were able to successfully commercialize it, created manufacturing capacity here in the US, and received both private and government support that is so often considered a necessity for innovative startups.  Energy Secretary Steven Chu said of A123, “It’s a perfect example of what’s possible when the private sector, government, and academia work together”.  And yet, that company is now owned by a private Chinese company.  It remains to be seen what kind of tangible effects this will actually have.  The company will most likely still allow for manufacturing jobs in the US and will still have domestic factories; in fact the bailout from Wanxiang might actually save some American jobs.  Of course, it is unlikely that any future expansion will occur in the US.  More generally speaking, the case of A123 Systems shows that there is no easy fix when it comes to creating high-tech manufacturing in the United States and that further discussion, research, and methods need to be explored if the US hopes to be the home of companies like A123 Systems in the future.

Posted by: Sean Norris

Sources: CNNMoney, Reuters, The New York Times, BusinessWeek, Fortune

Photo Credit: Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm at the grand opening of an A123 Systems plant in Michigan entitled A123 Systems Grand Opening in Livonia courtesy of flickr user graham.davis

You Are Invited: The Start-Up Act 2.0 and American Innovation

The Program on America and the Global Economy Presents:

 The Start-Up Act 2.0 and American Innovation

 Thursday, June 28, 2012

9:00 – 11:30 a.m.

Joseph and Claire Flom Auditorium, 6^th Floor, Woodrow Wilson Center

 ________________________________________________________________________        

 Keynote:

 Senator Chris Coons, Delaware

 Panelists:

 Michael Waring, Executive Director, Federal Relations, The University of Michigan

 Joseph Kennedy, Former Chief Economist, U.S. Department of Commerce

 Peter Mueller, Director, Government Relations, Intel Corporation

 Moderator:

 Kent Hughes, Director, Program on America and the Global Economy

 ________________________________________________________________________

 Senator Chris Coons is part of a bipartisan group of Senators that recently introduced the Startup Act 2.0 in the Senate.  He will provide a keynote address on the Act followed by a panel discussion that will focus on key aspects of the Start-Up Act 2.0.  There will be a special focus on the provisions designed to accelerate the commercialization of university research, the broadening of opportunities for temporary immigrants with post-graduate degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) for visas for permanent residency, and the proposal to assess the impact of regulations.

________________________________________________________________________

 

Please RSVP acceptances only to page@wilsoncenter.org

Directions to the Wilson Center: www.wilsoncenter.org/directions

New Economist Report Suggests Africa is the Place to Invest

Is Africa the new frontier for innovation? That’s what The Economist Magazine is asking in their latest report Into Africa: Emerging Opportunities for Business. The report discusses the implications of increased trade, urbanization and development for the region in the next decade. It focuses on changes to Africa’s macro economy by highlighting that 28 of the 52 counties are projected to increase GDP growth by 5% or more in the next five years. In addition, Sub-Saharan Africa’s real GDP growth is expected to increase to more than three times that of the United States’ by 2013. One such example cited in the report is the progress of Sierra Leone, which is expected to post a rate of 25% growth in real GDP by the end of this year.

The report also highlights how the continent has become increasingly urbanized, with 49 cities having metro populations of over 1 million people and 5 of those cities having populations of over 7 million. The Economist explains how these cities serve as vehicles for trade and commerce, receiving much of their imports from Europe, but seeing more potential in trading with China. Additionally, the report finds advances in technology to be the leading drivers of increased integration in the world market, with the continent surpassing over half a billion mobile subscribers in 2010.

Still, the report points out that more work is needed. For one thing, it makes the point that the continent’s “production potential does not match its needs.” It finds that Africa has had tremendous success in its oil and mining industries, but fails to supply the refining capabilities necessary to retain that success. In addition, bureaucracy continues to halt employment and educational opportunities, scaring away investors who would otherwise take risks to fix those problems if it weren’t for increase corruption and turmoil. It concludes by pointing out that many African economies have enormous potential for future economic growth, but if they cannot tackle many of the underlying problems that still exist than it will be harder for them to continue growing in the future.

Posted By: Jonathan Sherman

Sources: The Economist Magazine Intelligence Unit

Photo Credit: Johannesburg courtesy of Flickr user Austinevan

You are Invited: Beyond Smart Cities: How Cities Network, Learn, and Innovate

Please join the Comparative Urban Studies Project for a discussion of

 

Beyond Smart Cities: How Cities Network, Learn, and Innovate

featuring

Tim Campbell, The Urban Age Institute

 Neal Peirce, Citiscope Project and Washington Post Writers Group

 Fernando Rojas, The World Bank

Thursday, May 24, 2012

3:00 – 4:30 p.m.

6^th Floor Moynihan Boardroom

Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars

To achieve the real promise of smart cities—that is to create the conditions of continuous learning and innovation that has led cities like Seattle, Barcelona, Ahmedabad and Curitiba to keep pace with economic change—we need to understand what is below the surface of smart and connected places. Yet, city learning is a blind spot in policy on urban development and city innovation. Few cities and even fewer national institutions give much attention to the civil mechanisms behind innovation. Collective learning is one of them, but it is not only what is learned; a key factor is how learning takes place in cities.

Join us in a discussion of the findings of Tim Campbell’s latest work. Beyond Smart Cities raises as many questions as it answers. Some of the most important for future work involve a deeper analysis of networks of learning elites, the elements in efficiency of learning, how a market of exchange might be organized and regulated, and longitudinal and cross-city experience of learning outcomes

For more information, click here.

 

Posted by: PAGE Staff

Reverse Innovation: Create Far From Home, Win Everywhere

Which way does innovation flow? Traditionally, products and services have been thought of as originating in advanced economies, which have a more suitable environment for technological development than do developing countries. Authors Vijay Govindarajan and Chris Trimble would argue that the reverse is also true.

Deputy managing editor of the Wall Street Journal Alan Murray reviewed Govindarajan and Trimble’s new book Reverse Innovation, which provides a different model of successful product innovation. Rather than taking products designed for developed countries’ demands, businesses have increasingly been doing the reverse – creating “innovative new products for developing countries” and adapting them “to satisfy demands in the developed world.” Murray provides several of the authors’ examples of “reverse innovation” in his article, including General Electric’s inexpensive compact ultrasound medical scanners that were originally developed for the Chinese market, but became successful just about everywhere.

However, “reverse innovation” is held back by the low profit margins of the developing world. To combat this obstacle, Govindarajan and Trimble promote “local growth teams,” which Murray describes as “small, cross-functional, entrepreneurial groups located in emerging markets” that can both effectively utilize advanced technologies and cater to local markets.

Indeed, finding a way to mitigate these barriers to innovation could greatly help developed countries address significant problems such as rising health care costs. Reverse Innocation authors use the example of Narayana Hrudayalaya hospital in India, which had benefited from “process innovation” – the key to lowering the cost of open-heart surgery to around $2000, about a tenth of what it costs in the U.S.

 

Posted by: Pokyee Yu

Sources: The Wall Street Journal, Reverse Innovation

Photo Credit: Reverse Innovation. By Vijay Govindarajan and Chris Trimble. 229 pages. Harvard Business Review Press. $30