SSTI Digest

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy signed multiple bills late last month that may help position the state as a leader in technology-based economic development. One bill increases the tax credit for angel investors in qualified technology companies, with even larger credits available for investments in women- and minority-owned businesses and those located in low-income areas. Meanwhile, the state’s approved FY 2020 budget includes $1.0 million for the New Jersey Commission on Science, Innovation, and Technology. After nearly a decade of receiving no funding from the state, this marks the second consecutive year that the commission will receive $1.0 million to support technology-based economic development.

Thanks to leadership by Senators Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.), the Senate approved a revamped authorization of the Regional Innovation Strategies program (RIS) as part of its National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2020 (NDAA). The bill would extend the program’s funding authority to $50 million per year through FY 2024. Further changes would define venture development organizations and recast RIS to have a greater emphasis on achieving beneficial economic outcomes within the awardee regions, including increasing the availability of financing for innovation-based business ventures and completing the introduction of new products, processes and services to market.

The RIS reauthorization was originally introduced this session as part of the Startup Act, by Senators Moran, Mark Warner (D-Va.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.).

At this week’s SSTI 2019 Dialogue in Washington, D.C., senior leaders from 30 member organizations talked innovation policy and opportunities with each other and with federal leaders. Those speaking with us at the event included: Congresswoman and research and technology subcommittee chair Haley Stevens; EDA Director John Fleming; NIST associate director for innovation and industry services Phillip Singerman; NIH deputy director for the office of extramural research Jodi Black; and Senate small business committee professional staff member Renée Bender. The dialogue is an invite-only meeting, with SSTI state and sustaining members receiving guaranteed invitations to the annual event.

Pictured: Congresswoman Stevens (at left) and Dr. John Fleming (at right).

The U.S. House has now passed 10 of the 12 annual appropriations bills that fund federal agencies. Agencies with House-approved budgets include the Department of Commerce, Department of Energy, National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, and Small Business Administration. Federal R&D and Commerce’s Regional Innovation Strategies would see substantial increases, and — due to amendments made on the House floor — SBA’s accelerators and clusters programs would retain their funding. Unfortunately, of the four budget questions SSTI identified at the start of the year, most remain insufficiently answered to provide confidence for how the final FY 2020 budget will ultimately resolve.

House appropriations highlights

From the 10 bills that have been passed by the House so far, several line items are significant for regional innovation economies.

This month, SSTI research has examined changes in total R&D and total R&D intensity for each state over a 15-year period from 2002 to 2016. In this final installment of the series, this article looks at how the performance of R&D in the states changed over time. In half of the states (25 states), the share of total R&D performed by colleges and universities increased more than any performer (e.g., industry, federal government) from 2002 to 2016. Meanwhile, 20 states saw industry’s share of total R&D performance increase more than any other performer. The share of total R&D performed by industry increased the most in Wyoming (32.7 percentage point increase), followed by Iowa (19.6 percentage point increase) and Missouri (18.5 percentage point increase).

Reshoring manufacturing companies claim to be able to innovate at increasing rates, but some cite challenges with hiring qualified workers and with the country’s regulatory and trade policy environment, according to a new report from Select USA, a national program led by the U.S. Department of Commerce focused on business investment.  In Reinvesting in the USA: A Case Study of Reshoring and Expanding in the United States, authors from Select USA look at the experiences of six manufacturing companies that chose to reinvest in their U.S. operations, providing detail on what drove them to reshore, challenges and benefits to the move, and general lessons learned. They find that, although the reshoring process was more expensive and time consuming than the case companies expected, local partners such as economic development agencies provided valuable resources to make the process easier. 

In a recent report focused on the impact of the small-scale manufacturing sector, the Urban Manufacturing Alliance (UMA) compiled what they say is a first-ever examination of what this emerging sector looks like and what may help charge its growth. They found an information gap on these businesses, as many of them combine design, art and production, and fall outside of data collection categories used to classify manufacturers. The report begins to identify the role and economic potential of these emerging businesses to help local stakeholders identify actions they might take to grow the small-scale manufacturing sector.

An issue brief this month from the Pew Research Center asserts that despite the current national economic expansion still underway, states are still coping with lasting effects of the 18-month recession that ended in 2009. Calling it a “lost decade,” the authors found that although budget pressures have eased in several ways, states still have not fully restored cuts in funding for infrastructure, public schools and universities, the number of state workers, and support for local governments. The report, ‘Lost Decade’ Casts a Post-Recession Shadow on State Finances, details 10 ways that states face a legacy from the lost decade, including foregone tax revenue, decreased state spending, and less funding for higher education.

Two recent executive orders issued by the White House have met with mixed reactions. While one order intended to ease the regulatory process for certain biotech products was met with favor by some in that industry, another order that could eliminate at least one third of the current federal advisory committees that was issued just days later, was roundly criticized.

In his June 11 Executive Order, the president directs federal agencies to streamline the agricultural biotechnology regulatory processes. The order gives the leaders of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Department of Agriculture 180 days to design a plan that will provide regulatory information and guidance in a coordinated response to inquiries from developers of agricultural biotechnology products.

Manufacturing growth is helping fuel one of the longest expansions in the U.S., steadily adding jobs since 2010, according to Economic Innovation Group’s (EIG) recent data brief, Manufacturing’s Real But Patchwork Rebound. While manufacturing job growth has risen over the past two years, the report notes that its growth was broad but uneven. Counties in western states saw the highest annual growth rates from December 2016 to December 2018, and the South saw the largest number of new manufacturing jobs over that period: 173,900. However, authors Kenan Fikri and August Benzow also found that after two years of accelerated growth, the U.S. manufacturing sector is showing signs of slowing down.

Last week, Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue announced plans to relocate nearly 550 USDA scientist positions from the agency’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., to the Kansas City metropolitan area. Originally announced in August 2018, the planned relocation of scientists within the USDA Economic Research Service, a statistical agency, and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, has gained widespread attention. The scientists involved are arguing that the move is political: that their research is so important to setting policy that they should be in the Beltway. On the other hand, proponents of the decision argue that the move will cut costs and bring the scientists closer to stakeholders in the nation’s agricultural heartland. Here are four takeaways about the proposed move.

Takeaway One: This marks another step in the politicization of federal science.

Founded in 2015, venture-backed aerospace firm, Relativity Space, is poised to disrupt the rocket manufacturing and launch markets as it secures long-term contracts at NASA’s Stennis and Kennedy Space Centers. Relativity is reimagining the process to iterate and scale rockets quickly, relying on its revolutionary “Stargate” metal 3D printer and new autonomous facilities to build and launch rockets in days rather than years. The Mississippi Development Authority supplied the cost reimbursement and tax incentive package that, combined with a $59 million infrastructure investment from Relativity, enabled the firm to move into a 220,000 square foot facility, unused for the last 20 years, in southern Mississippi.