High-risk/high-reward research can yield breakthroughs, produce new technologies, and allow the surrounding region to remain economically relevant. However, the scientific community remains concerned that research and development-focused policies, both in the U.S. and elsewhere, continue to be conservative with their goals by only encouraging incremental growth that can yield tangible results in shorter amounts of time. These concerns, and potential policy solutions, are explored in a recently published research paper by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

A recent research study suggests that diverse identity representation of website spokespeople increases the likelihood of attracting a higher proportion of prospective entrepreneurs.

Faculty of the nation’s higher education institutions have long used research publications and citations as a measure of success. A new working paper posted by the National Bureau of Economic Researchers (NBER) suggests a select group of research publications may do more than gain the authors tenure and celebrity in their chosen field: these works are correlated with reductions in local disease-related mortality.

From 2005 to 2008, the clean technology industry experienced a venture capital boom where the share of total VC investments in clean energy technologies tripled before falling dramatically. Many studies have concluded that the boom and bust in cleantech as an equity investment focus was because clean energy does not fit the venture capital “model.” A recent study from the National Bureau of Economic Research explores other possible reasons for the failure of venture capital to remain interested in clean energy.

A team of researchers recently assessed the relationship between angel investing and venture capital (VC) for startups. Although they found some variation in the performance of companies based on their share of angel and VC financing, there was no clear indication that angel investing provides any unique value for a startup.

Discussions surrounding automation’s power and the effect it could have on jobs have only increased over time. The current pandemic adds to the debate of whether automation and robotics, which are unaffected by viruses and have the potential for cost savings, could offer a safer bet for industries than human labor. Such are the debates the authors of a new working paper considered in their research examining jobs that were identified in the past as being at risk of elimination through automation.

Building on top of the notion that diversity of industry is central to a region’s entrepreneurial success, recent research has noted that the personalities of people living throughout a region also play an important role in local knowledge spillover and the economic diversity of the area. The report, Entrepreneurship in Cities by Sam Tavassoli, Martin Obschonka, and David B.

“The Achilles Heel of Reputable VCs,” a recent paper by Nuri Ersahin et al., finds that the most successful venture capital (VC) funds make fewer and smaller investments in states after investment tax credits go into effect. These VCs also co-invest with fewer firms, are less likely to invest in “serial” entrepreneurs and experience fewer positive exits after the introduction of the tax credit.

A recent study found that the use of industrial robots (UIR) can reduce a country’s overall ecological footprint while simultaneously promoting economic growth. This is through timesaving, green employment, and energy upgrading effects that increase as the level of economic development and human capital within the country increases.

The early days of vaccinating against the coronavirus might not be the most receptive time to raise issues of antitrust in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry, but a November 2020 Barcelona GSW Working Paper raises several concerns about the degree and effect of common ownership within big pharma. Does this explain the resistance of drug prices to fall? Should Congress take on the likes of brand firms Johnson & Johnson, Merck and Pfizer, in addition to already challenging the tech giants, in 2021?

A popular development strategy at the state and regional level, incubators seek to support economic growth by providing entrepreneurs with business assistance, access to capital, and networking. As of 2012, approximately one-third of the 1,250 business incubators in the United States were connected with universities, up from one-fifth in 2006, according to International (formerly National) Business Incubation Association data featured in The New York Times. Despite the proliferation of these programs at universities, there have been relatively few conclusions to date on the impacts of these incubators beyond anecdotes. Recent research from faculty at the University of Central Florida (UCF), however, finds evidence that firms in university incubators experience positive growth in number of employees and sales at a statistically significant rate compared to non-university incubated firms. On average, the authors find that university incubated firms were responsible for 3.965 more jobs than non-university incubated firms.

Having interdisciplinary teams of scientists and relationships with “star” entrepreneurs are factors that can influence the chances for academic discoveries to reach the commercialization stage. While proximity to capital has traditionally been viewed as the core stimulus for academic commercialization, a recently released working paper by the National Bureau of Economic Research reexamines the variables that play a role in the commercialization of academic sciences, and provides new insight into the importance of team composition throughout the commercialization process.

The challenge of attracting and retaining skilled manufacturing talent consistently ranks as a top concern in the industry. Recent findings from the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) show that more than 70% of industry leaders cite workforce issues as their primary challenge for the past year, outpacing supply chain disruptions and rising raw material costs.

Forthcoming research suggests venture development organizations, that is, those publicly-supported nonprofits that combine risk financing with expert technical assistance to grow local innovation-based startups, should give careful consideration to the exit histories of the venture capitalists they partner with to move the VDO’s portfolio firms through seed and series A investment rounds.

A working paper by a team of Harvard-affiliated researchers presents challenging findings for growth equity impact investors. Given the potential alignment between this sector of the market and publicly funded capital access programs (including many venture development organizations and the State Small Business Credit Initiative), this research may find its way into public policy debates. The paper, which has not yet been published in an academic journal, also contains several shortcomings in its approach that should caution any stakeholders from acting on its findings alone.

Differences in per capita innovation capacity between urban and rural regions are not as large as previously believed according to a recent working paper from the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES). The study’s conclusions reduce the difference by a factor of three.

Since 1980, billion-dollar climate disasters in the United States have increased an astonishing 749%, from averaging 3.3 throughout the 1980s to 28 in 2023 alone. These data from the NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information include floods, wildfires, droughts, severe storms, tropical cyclones, and winter storms.

Traditionally, a scientific discovery's commercial potential is gauged after significant R&D. However, a recent paper by Duke University researchers Roger Masclans-Armengol, Sharique Hasan, and Wesley M. Cohen (2024) proposes a new method for assessing the commercial potential of scientific research before it's fully developed.

A study titled Incubators, accelerators and urban economic development,[1] published in the Urban Studies Journal last year, found positive impacts on employment and access to capital for participants.

States with top-ranking university AI research programs garner a greater number of Phase II AI-related SBIR awards, according to a working paper from the Department of Economics at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Researchers there investigated state variations in the distribution of Phase II SBIR research projects focused on artificial intelligence (AI). The authors of the paper hypothesized that the state-by-state variations are related to the presence of a research university with a “Top 10” AI program in each state.

Accelerators, incubators and entrepreneurial assistance programs work to ensure their startups understand their product’s market competition, customers, and supply chain. As it turns out, that’s also good advice for small research-based firms trying to move from SBIR proof-of-concept funding to securing the larger Phase II awards.

Innovation spreads, but how far can it reach? A new study finds that firms operating in multiple tech clusters act as conduits, transmitting knowledge and boosting productivity across distant locations. However, certain types of firms are better at it—and benefit more readily—than others. This insight, from a recent National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) working paper, “Innovation Spillovers across U.S.

A recent National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) working paper, Immigrant Entrepreneurship: New Estimates and a Research Agenda provides fresh insights into the growth and characteristics of immigrant-founded firms across the United States. The study also outlines directions for future research in this field.

Key findings from the authors’ statistical analysis include:

In the last twenty years, there has been a critical shift in the technology transfer landscape that calls for a fundamental overhaul of university Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) from focusing on passive IP management to active startup development, according to a recent SSRN article.