Building the Ohio Innovation Economy Summary of a Symposium (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Panel I: The Ohio Innovation Economy in the Global Context
Panel I: The Ohio Innovation Economy in the Global Context
Pages 32-44
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 32... ...
He described the Ohio Business Roundtable as a partnership of chief executives of major businesses that is "committed to working with public leaders to build a stronger Ohio." He said that the organization was selective in the issues it addressed, advocating "public policies that foster vigorous and sustained economic growth and an improved standard of living for all the citizens of this state." Mr. Stoff emphasized his organization's commitment to "major system change," and their efforts to serve as a catalyst for change over the last two decades.
|
From page 33... ...
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE OHIO INNOVATION ECONOMY Ross DeVol Milken Institute Mr. DeVol, then executive director of economic research at the Milken Institute, said he would describe recent findings of Milken's State Technology and Science Index (STSI)
|
From page 34... ...
"The existing industrial structure can determine growth for a number of years. Each region inherits its industrial structure from historically determined factors, especially the costs of doing business, including tax rates, capital costs, wage rates, real estate prices, energy costs, and health care costs." Increasingly important, he said, are "labor force skills, access to markets, access to capital, research and development, innovation capacity, and "quality of place" issues." In the future, he predicted, new factors are likely to emerge.
|
From page 35... ...
This determines the number of new startups, how many grow to be successful firms, and ultimately the jobs that are created." He noted that Ohio has moved up rapidly to 20th from 40th two years ago in this indicator, indicating "significant improvement in entrepreneurial activities in the state of Ohio." Mr. DeVol added that the index uses the term "access to risk capital" to refer to "the smart money," to angel investors and venture capitalists whose connections are part of dynamic ecosystems with links to management talent where it is needed.
|
From page 36... ...
"But when you look across the indicators, Ohio is typically in the middle tier of most of these human capital measures." Attracting Talent Mr. DeVol turned to the Technology and Science Workforce, which he called "a little different" because it describes the ability to attract talent from other places in terms of "intensity." "Regions with a high concentration of skilled technology and science workers," he said, "have the advantage of being able to pool intellectual capital with labor force skills specific to those sectors.
|
From page 37... ...
DeVol said, gave Ohio a rank of 29th, which he called "a definite improvement from where it was a few years ago." At the top of the list, Massachusetts was number one, Maryland had moved to second place, Colorado had moved ahead of California on a per capita basis to third place, California scored fourth, and Utah had risen rapidly to fifth, "now nipping at California's heels." Despite Ohio's position of 29th, he said, the state tied for the biggest increase from the previous index, having moved up seven places. This was propelled by significant improvement in the risk capital infrastructure and business startup rates.
|
From page 38... ...
While VC investments in Ohio were encouraging, he said, it was essential to "follow through to make sure startup companies that have been funded actually grow to become medium-sized firms that create jobs." MEETING THE GLOBAL INNOVATION IMPERATIVE Charles Wessner The National Academies On behalf of the National Academies, Dr. Wessner expressed his thanks to the co-organizers of the symposium, and expressed his admiration for the region in generating so many agile innovation based development
|
From page 39... ...
Wessner said that the key to economic development for regions as well as for nations in the future is a well-functioning innovation ecosystem, and offered the following definition: Innovation means transforming ideas into new products, services, or improvements in organization or process. What this means, he added, is that "innovation translates knowledge into economic growth and social well-being." He said that while many academics and policy makers "could debate with you for hours about the correct definition of innovation," he found an informal description to be useful: "Research converts dollars into knowledge, and innovation converts knowledge back into many more dollars." "It's a virtuous cycle," he said.
|
From page 40... ...
He cited President Hu Jintao's Report to the 17th National Congress of the Community Party of China: "Innovation is the core of our national development strategy and a crucial link in enhancing the overall national strength." He also cited Mu Rongpin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, who wrote in the 2010 UNESCO Science Report that China's goal is to become an "innovation-driven economy" by 2020. The payoff of this commitment in China and in Asia more broadly can already be seen, he said, pointing out that the rapidly growing R&D expenditures of the Asia-8 economies (China, India, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand)
|
From page 41... ...
But German companies do well in sending products abroad because they understand that technological capacity matters. They know that this is what produces jobs and trade surpluses." He added that the Germans understand the importance of the manufacturing sector, and have created the institutional structure necessary to maintain it, including investments in job training and worker retention; support for raising productivity to offset high wages; assistance to small manufacturers in global marketing; and energy and transportation policies that have fostered an edge in manufacturing.
|
From page 42... ...
Dr. Wessner said that the lessons from the New York initiative include: addressing emerging technological needs; concentrate resources; encouraging innovative management, allowing universities freedom from restrictive rules; and creating strong connections between universities and the private sector to identify needs and attract funding.
|
From page 43... ...
But it provides you with an initial $150,000, which brings validation and opportunity to explore." A key feature of SBIR is that it is a set-aside from existing research budgets, rather than a program with annual budget fluctuations. He suggested that other Federal programs, notably the Technology Innovation Program, and the Manufacturing Extension Program at the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST)
|
From page 44... ...
He said that in a recent study of the SBIR program, the National Academies had found additional resources in the SBIR program would be effectively used, but also noted the need for expanded support for basic research, applied research, and especially translational research to move innovations toward the marketplace.5 5 National Research Council, An Assessment of the SBIR Program, Charles W Wessner, ed., Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2008.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.