Rosalie Viney and Elizabeth Savage CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney
National Institute of Standards and Technology Technology Administration U.S. Department of Commerce...
-
Upload
meredith-briggs -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of National Institute of Standards and Technology Technology Administration U.S. Department of Commerce...
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
Rosalie Ruegg, DirectorEconomic Assessment Office
Advanced Technology ProgramTel: 301-975-6135 [email protected]
““Delivering Public Benefit Delivering Public Benefit With Private Sector Efficiency With Private Sector Efficiency
Through the ATP”Through the ATP”
NAS/NRC/STEP Workshop onAssessing the ATPWashington, D.C.
April 25, 2000
• A Decade of . . . Innovation Program Assessment Benefits to the Nation
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
A Decade of InnovationA Decade of Innovation
468 projects co-funded
1,067 participants and 1,027 subcontractors– > 50% of projects led by small businesses– More than 145 Universities participating– Nearly 20 national laboratories participating
$3 billion of advanced technology development funded– ATP Share = $1.496 billion– Industry Share = $1.499 billion
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
Direct & Indirect Paths to Direct & Indirect Paths to ImpactsImpacts
• Productivity Gains• New Business Opportunities• Employment Benefits• Higher Standard of Living• Quality of Life Gains
New/ImprovedProducts and
Services
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
““Direct Path” BenefitsDirect Path” BenefitsPrivate and Social Returns to R&DPrivate and Social Returns to R&D
Source: Jaffe 1996, Modified by Ruegg.
• Pure Market Spillover
Firm 1R&D
NewKnowledge
Held byFirm 1
BetterProducts
LowerCosts
ProductMarketCompe-
tition
Firm 1Profits
CustomerBenefit
privatereturn
socialreturn
Economic Benefit
spillovergap
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
““Direct Direct && Indirect Path” Benefits Indirect Path” BenefitsPrivate and Social Returns to R&DPrivate and Social Returns to R&D
Source: Jaffe 1996, Modified by Ruegg.
(Rev
erse
Eng
inee
ring)
• Patents• Publications• Other
NewKnowledgeReleasedBy Firm 1
OtherFirms’
Knowledge
BetterProducts;
LowerCosts
OtherProductMarkets
OtherFirms’Profit
CustomerBase
spillovergap
socialreturn
privatereturn
Firm 1Profits
Firm 1R&D
NewKnowledge
Held byFirm 1
BetterProducts
LowerCosts
ProductMarketCompe-
titionCustomer
Benefit
• Pure Market Spillover Economic Benefit• Plus Pure Knowledge Spillover
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
““Direct Direct && Indirect Path” Benefits Indirect Path” BenefitsPrivate and Social Returns to R&DPrivate and Social Returns to R&D
Source: Jaffe 1996, Modified by Ruegg.
OtherFirms’Profit
CustomerBase
spillovergap
socialreturn
privatereturn
Firm 1R&D
NewKnowledge
Held byFirm 1
BetterProducts
LowerCosts
ProductMarketCompe-
tition
OtherFirms’
Knowledge
BetterProducts;
LowerCosts
OtherProductMarkets
• Patents• Publications• Other
(Rev
erse
Eng
inee
ring)
NewKnowledgeReleasedBy Firm 1
• Pure Market Spillover• Plus Pure Knowledge Spillover
Firm 1Profits
CustomerBenefit
Economic Benefit
OtherFirms’Profit
• Plus Interaction of the Two
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
Illinois Superconductor Corp, (ISC)Mt. Prospect, ILplus subcontractors and research partners
Startup funded by ATP in 1990 8 employees at project start ATP funding = $1.98 Million Company funding = $1.56 Million Project duration = 3/1/93 – 2/29/96 Successful IPO Built production plant Producing products based on ATP work 75 employees in 1997
Illinois Superconductor Corp, (ISC)Mt. Prospect, ILplus subcontractors and research partners
Startup funded by ATP in 1990 8 employees at project start ATP funding = $1.98 Million Company funding = $1.56 Million Project duration = 3/1/93 – 2/29/96 Successful IPO Built production plant Producing products based on ATP work 75 employees in 1997
““Direct Path” Benefits:Direct Path” Benefits:ExampleExample
ImpactFor a given area of cell phone reception, a 40% reduction in number of tower sites required.
Source: Status Report, Vol. I
Hi-Temp SuperconductingThick-film Materials
• Improved signal trans- mission capability
Extended/improvedcellphone service
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
““Indirect Path” Example: Indirect Path” Example: ISCISC
1 9 9 6
1 9 9 7
1 9 9 8
1 9 9 9
5 9 1 9 7 3 6Jo h n L ith g o w
5 9 0 9 1 5 9Illin o is
S u p e rco n d u c to r
5 8 4 3 8 7 1Illin o is S C
5 8 8 9 4 4 8Illin o is S C
5 8 3 8 2 1 3Illin o is S C
5 9 5 8 5 9 9L o c k h e e d M a rtinE n e rg y S y s te m s
5 9 6 4 7 6 6L o c k h e e d M a rtinE n e rg y S y s te m s
5 6 1 6 5 4 0IS C
5 6 2 9 2 6 6IS C
5 6 0 4 4 7 2IS C
5 5 2 7 7 6 5IS C
5 6 8 2 1 2 8IS C
5 7 3 9 0 8 6L o c k h e e d M a rtinE n e rg y S y s te m s
5 8 4 6 9 1 2L o c k h e e d M a rtinE n e rg y S y s te m s
6 0 2 2 8 3 2A m eric a n S u p e r-c o n d u c to r C o rp .
6 0 2 7 5 6 4A m eric a n S u p e r-c o n d u c to r C o rp .
5 8 3 8 2 1 3Illin o is S C
2 0 0 0
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
““Direct Path” Benefits:Direct Path” Benefits:ExampleExample
Aastrom Biosciences, Inc. Startup funded by ATP in 1991 ATP funding = $1.2 Million Company funding = $1.5 million Subsequent private investment for clinical trials and commercialization
Aastrom Biosciences, Inc. Startup funded by ATP in 1991 ATP funding = $1.2 Million Company funding = $1.5 million Subsequent private investment for clinical trials and commercialization
Stem Cell Expansion Technology
• New approach to Bone Marrow Transplant for Cancer Treatment
Other uses; e.g., immunotheraphy tissue repair
Impacts (estimated vs. best alternatives) Peripheral Blood Progenitor Cell (ATP)
Conventional Collection CPSDonor Visits 8 21 2Procedures Hours 16 39 1-3Needle Sticks 100-140 22 4-10Treatment Cost (1996 $) $10K-15K $12K-$20K <$12kMedical Staff Advantages Easier to do
Requires less trainingPatient Benefits Less pain
Fewer side effects Better treatment outcomeSource: RTI, 1998.
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce1 9 9 7
1 9 9 9
1 9 9 8
2 0 0 0
6 0 4 8 7 4A astro m
6 0 0 1 6 4 2W y le
L ab o ra to rie s
5 6 8 8 6 8 7A astro m
B io sc ien ce s
““Indirect Path” Example: Indirect Path” Example: Aastrom BiosciencesAastrom Biosciences
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
““Indirect Path” Example: Indirect Path” Example: ArmstrongArmstrong
1 9 9 6
1 9 9 7
1 9 9 8
1 9 9 9
5 5 6 5 1 4 2A rm stro n g
5 5 2 5 6 4 3A rm stro n g
5 9 4 8 4 8 2U . N e w M e x ic o
5 9 11 6 5 8P P G
In d u s trie s
5 8 8 8 4 2 5H o e ch s t
5 9 4 2 5 9 0D o w C o rn in g
5 8 0 4 5 0 8T I
5 7 0 8 0 6 9D o w C o rn in g
5 7 6 2 8 2 9A rm stro n g
2 0 0 0
6 0 1 3 1 8 7D o w C o rn in g
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
““Indirect Path” Example: Indirect Path” Example: MFCMFC
5 3 7 7 0 3 1M F C
5 4 7 5 5 1 4K o p in
5 4 9 1 5 7 1H u g h e sA irc ra ft
5 5 3 7 2 3 4H u g h e sA irc ra ft
6 0 1 4 1 9 3To sh ib a
6 0 1 8 3 8 0P rim e View
6 0 3 0 8 8 7M E M C
6 0 2 7 9 5 8K o p in
6 0 2 3 3 0 9P h ilip s
6 0 11 2 7 4O IS O p tica l
Im ag in g
6 0 11 6 0 8To sh ib a
6 0 1 7 7 8 0C h arte ra l
S em ico n d u c to r
6 0 2 5 8 9 2S h arp
6 0 2 7 9 9 9C h arte ra l
S em ico n d u c to r
6 0 2 3 1 2 6K y p w eeD isp lay
6 0 1 5 3 2 4A d v a n ced
Vis io n
5 9 2 3 3 9 3Varin te llig en t
6 0 0 5 2 6 2L u cen t
5 8 7 5 7 6 9S h arp
5 9 9 0 9 9 9L G
E lec tro n ic s
6 0 0 5 6 4 5S em ico n d u c to r
E n e rg y L ab
5 9 8 6 7 2 3To sh ib a
5 9 1 7 5 6 3S h arp
5 9 5 3 0 8 5S h arp
5 9 9 4 1 7 3F u jitsu
5 9 2 6 7 0 2L G
E lec tro n ic s
5 9 6 3 2 8 5L G
E lec tro n ic s
5 9 1 7 5 7 1S h arp
5 9 7 8 0 5 6JV C
5 8 7 2 4 2 1A d v a n ced
Vis io n
5 9 6 5 9 7 2K y p w eeD isp lay
5 9 7 7 8 7 9R o h m
5 9 0 5 5 5 9S h arp
5 9 0 3 3 2 8R a in b o wD isp lay s
5 8 8 6 7 6 3O IS G
5 9 9 9 2 3 7C an o n
5 8 3 5 1 6 9L G
S em ico n d u c to r5 8 0 8 7 1 9
S h arp
5 8 11 8 6 6N E C
5 8 1 2 1 0 1N o rth ru pG ru m m
5 7 8 1 2 5 4L G
E lec tro n ic s
5 8 1 2 2 2 8N E C
5 7 7 7 5 9 4C an o n
5 7 4 8 2 6 8K a ise rA & E
5 6 7 0 7 9 5S o n y
5 6 9 5 6 8 0C o n so rtio n .....
5 6 5 4 8 11K o p in
5 7 5 7 4 4 5K o p in
5 5 8 5 6 9 5A d ria nK ita i
5 6 6 9 8 0 2A d v a n ced
W irin g
5 5 7 6 8 5 9T h o m so n L C D
1 9 9 5
1 9 9 6
1 9 9 7
1 9 9 8
1 9 9 9
1 9 9 4
2 0 0 0
5 9 6 7 7 0 2L G
E lec tro n ic s
5 9 2 9 5 0 1H y u n d a i
5 4 9 9 1 2 4D u cy -
P rac tic a l
5 8 7 9 9 5 9In d u str ia l Te ch
R es. In s t.
5 9 9 0 9 9 4E as tm a n K o d a k
5 9 8 0 3 4 8IB M
5 9 3 3 2 0 4C an o n
5 9 7 3 7 9 8S em ico n d u c to r
K irb y L S
5 9 9 4 1 7 3F u jitsu
5 9 2 6 2 4 2S o n y
5 8 7 5 0 1 0IB M
5 7 0 5 4 2 4K o p in
5 7 5 7 4 4 5D u cy
P rac tic a l
5 7 7 0 4 8 7U .S
P h ilip s
5 7 3 7 0 5 2IB M
5 7 2 1 6 0 1S an y oE lec .
5 7 9 6 4 6 6S am su n g
A ero sp ace
5 6 2 7 6 6 2X ero x
5 6 7 0 3 8 7M o to ro la
5 6 0 5 6 4 9G ard in e rC o m m .
5 6 1 0 7 3 8H itac h i
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
ATP’s Multi-ComponentATP’s Multi-Component Assessment Measures Assessment Measures
“Direct” and “Indirect” Effects “Direct” and “Indirect” Effects
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
Who Does the Studies?Who Does the Studies?
EAO StaffEAO Staff
• Designs
• Conducts
• Manages
Evaluation Studies
• Designs
• Conducts
• Manages
Evaluation StudiesConsulting Universities,
Institutions, and Individualswith Expertise
Consulting Universities,Institutions, and Individuals
with Expertise
National Bureau ofEconomic Research (NBER)
National Bureau ofEconomic Research (NBER)
University Centers withRelevant Specialties
University Centers withRelevant Specialties
Withhelp from others
Withhelp from others
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
Early Program ResultsEarly Program Results• Leap-frog technologies developed
37% of applications represent “new-to-the-world” solutions 63% of applications represent dramatic cost reductions or
performance improvements• Rich technology platforms developed with multiple uses
Many prize-winning technologies 4.5 applications per project
• Emphasis on collaborations among companies, universities, and non-profit organizations• 157 Joint Ventures• Most “single applicants” have alliances and subcontractors• Many benefits and few costs of collaborating reported
• High Risk R&D Accelerated 86% ahead in R&D cycle
• Estimated public benefits from several projects alone exceed total ATP costs
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
Performance Data for First 50 Performance Data for First 50 ATP Projects CompletedATP Projects Completed
Strong
Medium
Low or Uncertain
Outlook (approximate)
Completed AllResearch Goals
72%
PublishedTechnical Results
52%
Awarded Patents*
54%
Technology RecognizedBy Outside Award
16%
Technology Incorporated inProduct(s) on the Market
60%
Products on the MarketOr Expected Shortly
80%
Knowledge or ProductOutputs
90%
Both Knowledge andProduct Outputs
52%
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
Terminated ProjectsTerminated Projects (40 of 468, as of April 2000) (40 of 468, as of April 2000)
44%
10%
13%
20%
5%
8%
JV members could not reach agreement; project not started
Financial distress
Company or Joint Venture asked project
to be stopped due to change in strategic
goals, structures, markets, or other
elements
Lack of technical progress
Early success
Project no longer met ATP criteria
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
Contact InformationContact Information
To Get on the ATP Mailing List:
www.atp.nist.govwww.atp.nist.gov
Call toll-free: 800-ATP-FUND (800-287-3863)
Fax your name and address to: (301) 926-9524
Send an e-mail message to: [email protected]
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
Key Features of the ATPKey Features of the ATP
• Emphasis on innovation for broad national economic benefit
• Industry leadership in planning and implementing projects
• Project selection based on technical and economic merit
• Project selection rigorously competitive, based on peer review
• Focus on the civilian sector
• Focus on enabling technologies with high spillover potential
• Focus on overcoming difficult research challenges
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
Key Features of the ATP Key Features of the ATP (cont’d)(cont’d)
• Encouragement of company-university-laboratory collaboration• Positioned after basic science and before product
development• Requirement that projects have well-defined goals/sunset
provisions• Demonstrated need for ATP funding• Coordination with other public and private funding sources• U.S. companies planning and organizing for technology
applications• Program evaluation from the outset
National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce
ATP’s “Business Reporting ATP’s “Business Reporting System” Tracks ProgressSystem” Tracks Progress
(During Project and Post-Project)(During Project and Post-Project)
• Project goals/Expected commercial advantage• Strategies for commercialization• Collaborative activities and experiences• Effect of ATP on project timing/scale/scope/ risk
level/ability to do long-term R&D/private investment dollars ($)
• Commercialization progress• Knowledge dissemination• ID of customers and competitors• International standing