CHIPS and Science Highlights: Regional Innovation

备受关注的“芯片与科学法”（CHIPS+）的通过承诺将注入超过500亿美元的注入，以激发美国半导体行业。这是一个催化时刻。是的，它代表实际上，投资比阿波罗计划略大。

由CHIPS+资助和授权的新计划的一长串包括国家科学基金会技术创新和合作伙伴局（NSF Tip）的旗舰计划，这是第一个以来在NSF创建的新董事C+C音乐工厂在图表中达到了顶峰。NSF区域创新发动机计划（通俗地称为NSF发动机），现在由国会正式授权，加入了其他机构的区域集群开发计划的一系列积极投资。这些当代计划包括经济发展管理局的重建更好的区域挑战和良好的就业挑战，这代表了15亿美元的拨款。

CHIPS+ also includes an additional authorization (if not funding) for the EDA’s work to develop regional innovation capacity across the country, including two major elements: a $10 billion regional tech hub program with outposts in every EDA region and a $1 billion tech hub development program intended “distressed communities” (originally included in the Recompete Act).

这三个新程序，NSF发动机，技术枢纽和重新组件，以及BBBRC和GJC等现有计划，代表了在建筑区域创新群中的大量投资。既是立法和时代精神dictate that these investments will be distributed across the country, virtually guaranteeing geographic inclusion. But as regional innovation ecosystems and cluster development efforts become the dominant mode of economic development strategy, we would do well to consider the degree to which these efforts drive broad wealth creation, creating inclusive opportunity in our communities.

但是该法案最不讨论的影响可能是最具变革性的。Chips+ Investment在正在进行的叙述上引起了人们的惊叹，联邦政府已有效地宣布集群发展是华盛顿在支持当地经济发展努力方面的主导方式。

This mode of targeting the co-location and creation of like-minded firms in a close geographic area was pioneered by Michael Porter, the father of modern competitive strategy. These groups, or clusters, of companies in a particular industry, share critical infrastructure like equipment, space, and talent in ways that maximize regional efficiency and increase firm productivity. “A cluster,”波特说，“允许每个成员好像它的规模更大，或者好像它与他人一起而没有牺牲其灵活性。”随着时间的推移，添加了针对性，相关和世界一流的研究和商业化能力的建筑物。现代集群发展理论 - 经济发展哲学对筹码+如此重要 - 是吸引大学，政府，公司，资本提供者和企业家作为利益相关者，通过推动一系列创新的发展来创造比较本地优势的利益相关者- 领导的公司。

然而,集群发展并不总是executed in an inclusive and equitable way, and it’s easy to see why. Today, many communities approach cluster development as a conversation between R1 universities, corporate executives, top government staffers, and elite economic development leaders. While these approaches are effective in driving short-term resources and focus to support these efforts, they often omit the voices and views of communities that have been systemically left behind–those that they allude to as benefitting from the increased productivity, efficiency, job creation, wealth creation, and research activity that these efforts promote. For instance: the creation of “good jobs” (and especially “good jobs” in STEM fields) is an oft-measured outcome of cluster development efforts, but识别为黑人和西班牙裔的人仅占STEM领域就业的9％和8％， 分别。这是一个鲜明的结果，它揭示了传统经济发展努力使各种社区参与集群发展工作的失败。除非时间和资源致力于开始今天耸耸肩的对话，否则这种情况不会改变。

相反，当经历过投资投资的社区开始新的创新和小型企业支持工作时，他们很少求助于使社区服务数十年的机构。像在堪萨斯城的坚定当地领导人领导的基层努力在基层的努力中，这更常见礼物。，，，，La Placita， 这Prospect Business Association，，，，前景和其他（这些仅代表了堪萨斯城的许多这样的努力中的一些）。

This bottom-up approach has led to vibrant, innovative, and extremely well-networked small business ecosystems. In this context, trust (not funding) is the essential currency driving entrepreneurial ecosystems. Yet, trust-building is an inherently time-intensive, complex process that is seldom funded by government programs, philanthropy, or anyone else.

So how might cluster building efforts more scalably and thoughtfully engage in the trust building activities that are required to make their work more inclusive and equitable? How might the institutions leading cluster development conversations invite engagement in the process of cluster selection, when the cluster in question seems inaccessible, and therefore irrelevant to large swaths of their communities? How can we integrate the systems that have been created to support small businesses and those that support innovation-driven enterprises in ways that emphasize their interdependence, as is characteristic of trueecosystems？这些是我们下一代集群开发工作必须解决的问题。

今天，随着我们开始从Covid-19的大流行中出现，我们可以看到影响带来长期存在的不平等现象的方式。例如：只有8.6％的PPP贷款分发给了黑人拥有的企业， 但话又说回来，黑人拥有的公司在获得与白人企业的资本方面经历了持续的挑战在Covid之前很久，控制了类似的信誉水平。是的，服务欠缺的社区受到19日大流行的影响不成比例的，但是这些近期失败所代表的系统问题已经存在了很多年。

也许更令人不安的是，我们将继续为未来建立，而没有考虑到任何地方和每个人都来自所有人。新技术的扩散通常受旧系统的影响，这意味着建立创新生态系统的关键基础设施正在扩大。Today, 20% of disproportionately low-income, Black, Hispanic, and rural Americans lack access to broadband–this represents, essentially, digital redlining. Clearly, the challenge of achieving equitable innovation outcomes is both urgent and systemic, as our solutions must be.

As we enter the age of cluster development and regional innovation ecosystem building, we can take comfort in knowing that geographic diversity has been designed as a condition of our investments. But to build a system in which innovation truly can come from anyone, anywhere will take trust-building. It will take time, care, and a willingness to engage unusual voices in coalition efforts. We will need to carefully consider how these efforts might have a more equitable impact than past movements to grow high-tech and deep-tech companies, in order to be successful.

We have an opportunity to design this approach into these new regional innovation funding mechanisms, just as we designed in geographic diversity. Just as importantly, we have the opportunity to proactively answer these questions in communities across the country. With that in mind, this author offers a humble prediction–that our next generation of breakout innovation clusters will be those that engage their communities most inclusively, not just those that develop efficiently.