By Martin Grueber, Research Leader, Battelle, Cleveland, Ohio and Tim Studt, Editor in Chief, Advantage Business Media
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Though the readership of this publication may be somewhat biased, the public at large would likely agree that advanced technologies play a significant role in corporate and U.S. competiveness now and in the future. Yet, the relationships among R&D investment recipients, the importance of technology, and view of corporate and U.S. competiveness are murky at best.
Nearly half (47%) of R&D Magazine’s survey respondents stated that incorporating advanced technologies was “critical” to their organizations’ future growth, with another 38% saying it was “important.” Coming from the readership of a publication dedicated to covering R&D, it is difficult to say if these numbers are positive or should be of concern. From other studies, there is also concern (and some say evidence) that the link between corporate R&D investment and competitiveness, especially when measured via corporate financial performance, is tenuous at best, and nonexistent at worse. Additionally, the connections between leadership from a technology/R&D perspective and other measures of corporate or national strength, e.g., productivity, employment, also are often at odds.
click to enlarge
|
|
Can (or does) a stronger link between overall U.S. R&D investment (including federal and academic performers) and competitiveness exist? Over the next decade, we will likely find out, as countries begin to approach the overall U.S. level of investment, and U.S. corporations and the federal government increase or decrease their investments among the key technological categories of energy/environmental, health/bioscience, defense/security, and other advanced technologies.
We briefly examine these four areas with respect to our survey results of R&D and technology leaders’ perceptions of the U.S. position across a range of specific technologies.
click to enlarge
|
|
Energy/Environmental Technologies
Through the ARRA and within base fiscal year budgets, the U.S. is investing significant resources toward R&D in energy and environmentally-related technologies in the name of “energy independence” and “climate change.” However, the view of current technological leadership suggests that the U.S. is behind and will likely fall further behind over the next five years with respect to most energy generation-related technologies. By contrast, respondents see the U.S. in a very strong position regarding technologies related to environmental impacts or distributional aspects of energy technologies.
Of these technologies, respondents felt corporate and government investments would likely make the most inroads in improving U.S. leadership, particularly in the areas of biofuels and clean coal/zero emission technologies.
RELATED CONTENT
Biopharm in Flux
Ten years ago, the U.S. was the epicenter of the pharmaceutical universe. Now, the historical way of doing things, as well as where drug development is being performed is changing.
Read the article
|
|
Health and Bioscience Technologies
Investment in health and bioscience-related R&D continues to be a high priority for both federal and corporate funders. And while current U.S. leadership in almost all health/bioscience technologies is unquestioned, some areas are likely to see significant challenges from foreign players over the next five years. One area worth watching, from both performance and policy perspectives, is stem cell development and related technologies. Views of the current U.S. performance, likely reflect the stem cell research environment within the U.S. during the previous administration, as well as other countries’ willingness to further push the R&D boundaries. Recent changes under the current administration regarding the use of stem cells in U.S. research may indeed be shifting the perception of U.S. capabilities in this area. Last year, 48.2% of the survey respondents felt the U.S. was not one of the leaders in stem cell development, compared with 32.5% this year.
click to enlarge
|
|
Defense and Security Technologies
The significant federal and contractor investment in defense and security-related R&D (which accounts for more than 20% of all U.S. R&D over recent years), has undoubtedly led to the significant U.S. leadership in these technologies. Yet, there is concern that other countries will begin to encroach on our leadership over the next five years. Though obviously not purely a defense and securityrelated technology, the area seen most at risk is our leadership in manned and unmanned space technologies. Nearly 40% of the respondents said the U.S. would likely lose its leadership position in the next five years. It will be interesting to observe how much of this is perception, as based on the current situation with NASA direction and funding, or realized through investment and the development of space technologies by foreign countries. Respondents also feel that this decline in space technology leadership is not inevitable; a focused effort could actually lead to gains in U.S. leadership over the next five years.
click to enlarge
|
|
Other Advanced Technologies
Among the remaining advanced technologies included in our survey, the U.S. is seen as a current leader in all of them, but for many, leadership in manufacturing has shifted overseas. Despite current U.S. technological leadership, there is a strong perception and a likely chance that overall technological competitiveness may soon (or likely has already begun to) follow manufacturing and will reduce the U.S. leadership role in many of these technologies over the next five years.
It is important to note these are “building block” advanced technologies—having both direct applications and significant roles as inputs to other technologies. This makes them significant for research, competitiveness, and strategic purposes, likely leading to increased attention paid to the U.S. efforts in these areas in the future. However, only in carbon nanotubes (nanotechnology) do respondents feel current U.S. investment plans may lead to additional gains in leadership.
Taken together, it appears significant and long-term investments by both the public and private sectors has led to current U.S. leadership in many advanced technology areas. This has been further enhanced by having an innovative and “first in” mind-set as regards R&D in new areas. However, as budgets tighten within the U.S., market demand continues to become less oriented toward Western and/or developed nations, and foreign competitors increase their investments in and ability to perform R&D in these technology domains, the perception (and the stark reality) is that the U.S. likely will miss some emerging opportunities and see declines in its leadership role in at least some of these existing technologies over the next decade.
