regional innovation ecosystems - milken institute · 2014-06-20 · regional innovation ecosystems:...

Regional Innovation Ecosystems: The Role of the University in Fostering Economic Growth

Ross DeVol

Chief Research Officer Milken Institute

Caltech | Giant High Level Forum, Leading Innovation Ecosystems 10/14/2013

Presentation overview •  Long-term regional growth process •  Regional economic innovation ecosystem •  Measures of the university role

–  Technology transfer –  Human capital formation

•  Silicon Valley: a case study in innovation •  University innovation policies and culture to foster

economic success

Long-term regional growth process

•  Large regional differences in growth •  Few barriers to flow of economic activity •  Export-intensive activity is critical •  Manufacturing is an export sector •  Healthcare services can be an export

Factors affecting disparity in regional growth •  Existing industrial structure •  Cost of doing business:

–  Tax rates, capital costs, wage rates, space costs, energy costs, health care costs, etc.

•  Labor force skills, access to markets and capital •  Research, development and innovation capacities •  Quality of place issues

Regional Innovation Life Cycle Knowledge Creation

Technology Transfer

Commercialization Clusters and

Networks

Patents Licenses

Incubation/ Research Parks

Venture Capital

Business Planning

IPOs/gazelles Job Creation

Labor Market/ Graduates

M&A Activity

Economies of Scale

Federal R&D

Industry Consortia and Partnerships

Regulatory Environment

Value - add

Conception Formation

Growth Maturity

Clinical Trials

Regulatory Approval

Industry R&D

Universities and Research Institutions

Product Pipeline

Proof of Concept Testing

Collaborations/ Partnerships

Knowledge Creation

Technology Transfer

Commercialization Clusters and

Networks

Patents Licenses

Incubation/ Research Parks

Venture Capital

Business Planning

IPOs/gazelles Job Creation

Labor Market/ Graduates

M&A Activity

Economies of Scale

Federal R&D

Industry Consortia and Partnerships

Regulatory Environment

Value - add

Conception Formation

Growth Maturity

Clinical Trials

Regulatory Approval

Industry R&D

Universities and Research Institutions

Product Pipeline

Proof of Concept Testing

Collaborations/ Partnerships

Knowledge Creation

Technology Transfer

Commercialization Clusters and

Networks

Patents Licenses

Incubation/ Research Parks

Venture Capital

Business Planning

IPOs/gazelles Job Creation

Labor Market/ Graduates

M&A Activity

Economies of Scale

Federal R&D

Industry Consortia and Partnerships

Regulatory Environment

Value - add

Conception Formation

Growth Maturity

Clinical Trials/Prototype

Regulatory Approval

Industry R&D

Universities and Research Institutions

Product Pipeline

Proof of Concept Testing

Collaborations/ Partnerships

New Economy Strategies and Milken Institute

Entrepreneur

Research and Development Inputs Composite Map 2013

Risk Capital and Entrepreneurial Infrastructure Composite Map 2013

Human Capital Investment Composite Map 2013

Technology and Science Workforce Composite Map 2013

Technology Concentration and Dynamism Composite Map 2013

State Technology and Science Index Composite Map 2013

Per capita income & Tech and Science Index Income relative to working age population

WYWVWI

WAVT

VAUT

TXTN

SDSCRI

PAOR

OKOHNY

NVNMNJ

NHNE

NDNC

MTMS

MOMNMI

MEMD

MALA

KYKSIN

ILID

IAHI

GAFL

DECT

COCAAZ

ARAL

AK

55

50

45

40

35

30

25

$US Thousands

ActualPredicted

Measures of the university role Tech transfer

•  Role of national innovation policies •  Faculty research quality •  Incentives and culture •  Human capital investment in OTT •  Absorptive capacity of regional ecosystem •  Measures on commercialization outcomes

9. University of Washington

1. Harvard University

21. Massachusetts Institute of Technology

30. University of Toronto

23. Universites de Paris (I-XIII)

3. University of London

2. University of Tokyo

6. Univ of CA, San Diego

5. Univ. of Pennsylvania

7. Johns Hopkins University

10. Univ. of CA, Los Angeles

8. Washington University

29. SUNY at Yeshiva University

28. Univ. of NC at Chapel Hill

22. Univ. of TX at Dallas

27. Cornell University26. Case Western Reserve University

25. Univ. of CA, Berkeley

24. Columbia University

12. Stanford University

11. Yale University

13. Rockefeller University

14. Univ. of WI, Madison

16. Baylor College of Medicine

18. Duke University

19. Osaka University

20. Kyoto University

17. Univ. of Oxford

15. Univ. of Cambridge

4. Univ. of CA, San Francisco

University biotechnology publication ranking Top 30

Top 10 11-20 21-30

29. Yeshiva University

11. Harvard University

28. MA Institute of Technology

8. Univ of CA, San Diego15. Univ. of Pennsylvania

3. Johns Hopkins University

23. Univ. of CA, Los Angeles

22. Washington University

5. Cornell University

7. Univ. of CA, Berkeley

6. Columbia University

4. Stanford University

18. Yale University

9. Univ. of WI, Madison

2. Univ. of CA, San Francisco

27. Univ.of Minnesota

29. Univ. of Chicago

1. University of Texas

16. Rockefeller University

20. Thomas Jefferson University

26. University of Utah

17. CA Institute of Technology

30. Univ. of Alabama

25. Univ. of British Columbia

10. University of London

12. Hebrew Univ. of Jerusalem

13. University of Michigan14. McGill University

19. Univ. of Melbourne

21. Tel-Aviv University

24. University of Oxford

University biotech patent ranking Top 30

Top 10 11-20 21-30

University technology transfer and commercialization index Top 10

Rank Institution Name

PatentsIssuedScore

LicensesExecuted

Score

LicensingIncomeScore

StartupsScore

OverallScore

1 Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (MIT) 95.17 79.89 90.64 100.00 100.002 University of California System 97.26 85.25 95.16 83.24 96.593 California Institute of Technology 100.00 70.77 87.12 86.60 92.944 Stanford University 91.56 84.28 93.76 77.02 92.655 University of Florida 84.82 71.41 92.57 69.26 86.116 University of Minnesota 78.92 77.46 91.02 69.24 85.557 Brigham Young University 66.87 80.60 86.13 77.57 85.418 University of British Columbia 74.36 74.09 82.73 77.42 84.239 University of Michigan 82.70 72.25 77.98 74.89 82.54

10 New York University 73.68 63.30 100.00 58.16 81.63

U.S. university licensing income

Actual vs. fitted

Universities in Descending Order

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

US$ Millions

Actual ValuesFitted Values

Conclusions: national innovation policy and culture

•  Commitment to financing university research •  University mission must include commercialization •  IP protection system is important •  Industry involvement critical to success

Conclusions: national innovation policy and culture, cont’d

•  Entrepreneurial support and financing key •  Human capital investment essential •  Biotechnology cluster formation promotes national success

Conclusions: university level findings

•  Faculty – Research capacity – Entrepreneurial incentives and culture –  “Star Scientist”

Conclusions: university level findings, cont’d •  OTT

–  Professional OTTs generate high returns –  Age of OTT office (networking effect) –  Critical mass required for returns –  Absorptive capacity of regional ecosystem significant –  Exclusive licensing important for spinouts and startups –  Without OTT, commercialization occurs, just not as

efficiently

Real GDP per capita of U.S. metros Actual vs. predicted, 2010

Share of employment in human capital intensive occupations Top 10 among the largest metropolitan areas (2006–2010)

01020304050Percent

Patents and GDP per capita In 261 U.S. Metropolitan Areas

Sources: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Moody's Analytics, Science-Metrix, Milken Institute.

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Patents per thousand people (ln)

Real GDP per capita (US$ thousands)

Conclusions: Technology transfer

•  Gaps remain between research quality and commercialization outcomes

•  Commercialization increasing over time •  U.S. tops in research and commercialization •  Other countries making sizeable investments

1)  Make higher education more affordable 2)  Make higher education more accessible 3)  Increase higher education graduation rates 4)  Strengthen coordination between higher

education institutions and industries 5)  Promote research and development

Conclusions: Human capital formation