将区域经济发展计划与联邦优先事项保持一致
概括
经济发展计划不应该这么困难。从自下而上的上下向下，我们在美国的规划系统高度脱节，这对我们建立功能，一致和专业创新生态系统的能力产生了负面影响。如今，没有单个文件或指令从研发，商业或经济发展的角度概述了美国的经济优先事项。此外，执行我们经济发展计划的组织很少包括对创新生态系统的深入分析以及在计划中进行集群发展的机会。
The elements of a coherent innovation plan have started to appear in policy publications: for example, the2022国家安全战略文件outlines the need for a “modern industrial and innovation strategy,” and thebiotechnology executive order,《筹码与科学法》和国家关键技术评估网络all send strong signals that a short list of industries, industrial capabilities, and strategic supply chains are critical to our country’s continued prosperity. However, while these signals might be strong, they are not yet clear and not yet strategically framed. TheOffice of Science and Technology Policy, in consultation with other federal agencies and non-governmental organizations, will bring together a national competitiveness plan from these disparate efforts in the coming months. Today, proponents of innovation would do well to think about the next step of this challenge: once a national competitiveness plan exists, how will it be implemented and who will lead the charge?
在全国各地，一个网络区域发展组织(RDOs) regularly create and maintain economic development plans (called comprehensive economic development strategies, or CEDS) on a regional basis. At the same time, the federal government’s emphasis on building innovation ecosystems and developing regional innovation clusters has释放了数十亿美元用于集群一致的项目的资金。人们可能会认为这些努力是高度调整的，而RDOS创建和维护的CED为集群开发工作提供了分析和基础。实际上，由于一些关键原因，群集开发工作很少以CEDS开头：（1）CED不符合明确的国家竞争策略；（2）创建CEDS的RDO通常具有评估创新生态系统以及更有限的资源以提高其能力或进行分析的资源的能力有限；（3）通常很难找到现有的CED（即使对于RDO地区的社区成员）。
Creating a better planning system will require clear, top-down guidance about competitiveness priorities, which is on its way. It will also require more sophisticated, focused, and better supported local economic planning. The U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA) manages existing processes that allow for certification of RDOs and the regular production of CEDS. Additional guidelines and incentives should be structured into these programs in order to build our national capacity for strategic planning around shared competitiveness priorities and to ensure that regional planning processes incorporate a cohesive national framework. This will allow local cluster development efforts to best capitalize upon their respective comparative advantages, setting up communities for success as they develop plans to build stronger local economies, create better jobs, and promote sustainable growth.
Challenges
挑战1：创新生态系统发展是经济发展活动的一种形式，资金和计划都高度分散。
创新是经济发展的关键部分，由年轻，充满活力的公司驱动，导致较高的水平创造就业和生产力的增长。因此，联邦政府一直在激励创建和增长，尤其是在高科技行业中发挥积极作用。从历史上看，支持创新生态系统开发和创业创建的公共部门工具包括赠款，巨大的挑战，奖品比赛，税收优惠和贷款援助等机制。近年来，投资促进了传统创新中心以外的地理区域的高科技和先进行业集群的增长，例如加利福尼亚州的硅谷或马萨诸塞州的波士顿128号公路。例如：
- The EDA’sBuild Back Better Regional Challenge(BBBRC) awarded $1 billion to encourage cities and regions to develop regional development plans centered around expansion of industry hubs. The21个获胜者通过增强其潜在的生产，人才和资本访问能力来支持几个高优先行业的发展。
- The EDA also administers programs like the好工作挑战(GJC) and构建规模（B2），通过加强当地劳动力并提供催化资本的机会来增强创新能力。最近，GJC授予5亿美元to 32 cities, colleges, and workforce organizations to expand local industry talent hubs, and B2S provided4,700万美元跨51种大学和加速器的赠款。
- 能源部（DOE）的区域清洁氢枢纽将建立6至10个枢纽，以生产，处理，交付，存储和使用整个工业应用中的清洁氢。
- 国防部（DOD）的国防制造社区支持计划invests in workforce development, skills, R&D, and small business support to aid the defense innovation base in communities across the United States.
许多联邦机构为创新生态系统开发活动提供资金。In 2018, the DoE spent$10 billion仅在研发上，以及《降低通货膨胀法》（IRA）的通过（IRA）将增加数千亿赠款和贷款支持，以用于绿色技术的商业化，例如太阳能，风，氢和碳捕获和存储。Beyond the DoE, the DoD’s DARPA, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science & Technology Directorate, the National Science Foundation (NSF), and a host of other government agencies distribute billions in innovation funding, which has been recently buttressed by the American Rescue Plan, Inflation Reduction Act, CHIPS and Science Act, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. These are all supported by smaller, but critically important, matching investments at the state level.
简而言之是economic development, and the federal government understands that. It has a clear national interest in prioritizing the development of certain industries in order to generate positive spillovers, correct market failures, and preserve national competitiveness. State governments and regional bodies have an interest in promoting the economic well-being of specific communities. So why is reconciling these interests across the country so difficult? The answer lies more in game theory than in politics.
挑战2：社区将自己的想法集中在仅在几个行业中发展创新集群，而在做出这些选择时未能为他们的比较优势及其在民族竞争力中的作用提供足够的思想和分析。
当一个地区决定评估其发展创新集群的潜力时，其领导者必须首先决定whichcluster to develop, turning to the information that is mostly easily accessible to them. This generally includes lagging metrics describing the region’s present-day economy (such as location quotient, industry-level employment, and skills concentration). In many regions of the country that do not already have a strong cluster, these metrics look very similar. It is also data that answers the wrong question. When seeking to build a cluster, regions should not just ask “What are our strengths today?” or “What industries have gotten the most press lately?” Instead, regions should ask “In which growing or emerging industries might our community have a comparative advantage?” Asking the wrong question also leads regions to end up proposing cluster efforts in a few industries (e.g., biotechnology, advanced manufacturing, and semiconductors), rather than picking a goal for cluster development in an industry that is comparatively underserved yet still vitally important (e.g., green tech, water tech, or aerospace). Even a modest concentration of assets in an underserved industry might position a region as a leading hub, and 40% of American regions cannot build identical hubs at the same time.
For example, too many国家科学基金会引擎建议集中半导体和微电体簇。创建半导体枢纽的资金仅限于少数地方：最近，商务部长吉娜·雷蒙多（Gina Raimondo）宣布，商务部将花费500亿美元的筹码法案来开发至少两个半导体轮毂。However, given the scale and cost of developing半导体制造足总cilities以及所需的劳动力，基础设施和其他公共服务投资，可能只会开发两个或三个枢纽。因此，提交引擎申请的23个地区和城市中的绝大多数集中在半导体和微电子上，将浪费时间和金钱，同时又产生了巨大的机会成本，以追捕他们不适合建造的集群。但是，更重要的是，这使城市和地区分散了他们可以坚持的长期计划的注意力，这对于需要的长期投资至关重要促进创新。
尽管我们拥有系统和流程，以支持将竞争优先级集成到本地开发计划中的大规模推动力，但系统和资金的组织都具有有限的带宽甚至更有限的资源。决策者还必须平衡增加对国家竞争力的关注与美国方式核心的地方控制传统的需求。在美国，没有对中央计划的胃口，但是迫切需要清晰，共同的优先事项，可以使每个地区确定其社区如何最好地实现更高的爱国目的。
挑战3：负责经济计划的组织（RDOS）需要提高其内部能力，以计划创新生态系统发展，这将需要额外的资源。
很容易想象一个世界，在这个世界中，RDO带头来提高CEDS计划的质量，以及由全国发展组织协会(NADO) Research Foundation are in place to do just that. In addition to managing an EDA-funded community of practice for RDOs, which includes maintaining resources and conducting webinar trainings, the NADO Research Foundation independently maintainsCEDS Central,一个优秀的库的最佳实践。而these resources and their consistent use demonstrate communities’ desires to plan well, they alone have not yet led to the widespread use of CEDS as a means of detailed cluster analysis and planning.
查看任何一个单独的RDO时，很容易理解原因。RDO（也称为政府委员会，经济发展区，区域发展区或区域规划组织）具有令人难以置信的广泛计划责任，并且人员配备和资源有限。他们管理的CED反映了这些广泛的汇款，通常包括与宽带访问，运输，人口老龄化，住房，教育以及就业和经济增长有关的要素。结果，制定清晰，详细的创新计划的能力很少。纳多（Nado）的计划列为榜样的组织CEDS中央站点, the average total staff size was 17 with an average of three employees dedicated to economic development. Moreover, no employees were dedicated to innovation ecosystems, entrepreneurship, or cluster development.
In order for RDOs to build their capacity for creating regional cluster development plans, they must train and hire staff with new capabilities. This is nearly impossible for these organizations to do on their own, given their current financial resources and the breadth of demands on their time. Changing that will require dedicated funding for new staff and training, as well as a clear directive to prioritize this work.
挑战4：许多地区，地方，州和非政府利益相关者都参加了事实上的经济计划活动。但是，这些并没有与RDO的努力融为一体，透明度是一个关键障碍。
The innovation funding picture is further complicated by a long tail of regional, local, and state players. There are over 520 RDOs in the United States. However, only23 RDOhave published digital CEDS, indicating that these critical planning documents are not yet widely produced, or at least not widely shared, by local and regional stakeholders. In addition, there is no publicly accessible central repository of active CEDS. Providing such a resource could facilitate greater community alignment and better understanding of communities’ comparative advantage across the country.
此外，各种各样的私人和社会部门机构都参与了创新计划和区域发展。基于波士顿等孵化器大量提供风险投资，还支持技术转移，指导和小型企业创新研究（SBIR）的支持。行业贸易组织，当地商会和大型非营利组织大厅进行监管变更，帮助其选民驾驶政府资源，并鼓励非正式的计划。在CEDS过程中，这些群体将在没有有意义的透明度上，因此将努力将其活动与区域计划保持一致。
仅透明度就不会修复高度分散的系统，但是它将为倾向于寻求一致性的团体提供机会这样做。它还使机会有机会进行更多联邦计划（包括EDA自己的创新计划），要求申请人在申请过程中以更详细的方式与其区域CED对准，并在审查申请时将与CED的一致性作为评估标准。
机会
R&D is at the core of innovation, and the United States has excelled compared to its peers and competitors. Both the European Union and China have努力达到投资于研发的2％国内生产总值（GDP）的基准水平, giving the United States a huge edge in cutting-edge technologies such as biotechnology, clean tech, and software. However, the decline in public R&D spending, which was over 1% of GDP in the 1970s but is now down to ~0.7%, has significant repercussions for competitiveness in emerging technologies that require significant public investment to overcome developmental hurdles. For example, China was first to launcha quantum encryption satellite, and by 2030 China is projected to have25% of semiconductor manufacturing capacity, compared to just 10% in the United States.
美元（美元）持续购买电力奇偶校验（PPP）价格。来源： 经合组织的研发统计 ，2023年2月（2023年3月21日访问）。
需要明确的是，美国在研发和创新方面保留了大量和定性的优势，并受到世界领先的大学系统以及不断增长的私人投资的支持。在美国，总支出正在增加。但是，鉴于不同的激励措施和时间范围，私营部门研发主要旨在商业化，而不是基础科学的发展。长期以来，经济学家已经认识到早期研发的市场失败：私营部门公司没有考虑投资的积极社会溢出，导致了次优的投资水平。政府可以更好地证明投资创新的总体社会影响是合理的。
Increasing the amount of public R&D and ecosystem spending, which includes workforce development and infrastructure, is crucial to accelerating American innovation. The5亿美元在EDA的区域技术和创新中心的《 23财年综合支出法案》中拨款是一个良好的开端，但这只是《筹码法》提出的金额的一小部分。但是，有两党协议支持区域集群大楼，最近由2022年12月的研究和技术听证会上的小组委员会展示建筑区域创新经济。
In addition to growing the cumulative effectiveness of national innovation spending, regionally based cluster development plans will distribute economic prosperity more equitably. In 2021, the United States invested nearly3500亿美元在风险资本资金中。但是，几乎$250 billion只进入了三个州：加利福尼亚，纽约和马萨诸塞州。尽管这三个州是美国一些最大，最有生产力，受过教育最高的城市的所在地，但其他地区也具有新兴的集群和令人信服的竞争优势，应获得更多的财务和人力资本。结构良好的创新路线图从国家优先事项开始，纳入当地的优势并鼓励透明度，将帮助区域一级的公共，私人和非营利利益相关者制定长期投资计划。反过来，这将使更多地区和个人能够从创新中获得经济利益，创造好工作并提高生活水平。
行动计划
Recommendation 1: Direct, align, and coordinate innovation ecosystem development activities more clearly at the federal level.
更好的创新支出协调从顶部开始。地区，州和城市将从美国关于创新的优先事项方向上的更明确性中受益。对于对国家竞争力至关重要的技术和部门尤其如此，需要重大的前期研发，并且具有巨大的溢出效益。
- Publish an innovation roadmap every four years at the national level。白宫和主要联邦部门应共同努力，每四年（总统任期开始）每四年发布全面的创新路线图。为了实现国家路线图的快速发展，总统竞选应使基于地点的创新政策成为其竞选和过渡团队结构的核心。该文件应每年与重大事件（例如工会状况和国家安全战略的发布）一起刷新。至少，OSTP应在其四年一员的科学技术评论中包括这样的路线图（秒10613）。
- 资助关键技术领域及其需求的持续评估。NSF应该继续为努力提供资金，例如国家关键技术评估网络，以确保我们对这些行业内特定需求的理解仍然具有当前和技术相关性。
- 白宫或管理和预算办公室应定期召集联邦政府的创新生态系统和集群开发计划经理。Ensuring that federal programs work together to facilitate local alignment and engagement with CEDS can help serve an ongoing alignment function. It can also prevent local fragmentation caused by funding of competing or misaligned efforts across agencies.
- 主要利益相关者应包括the National Economic Council, Domestic Policy Council, and the National Security Council. The Departments of Commerce and Treasury and the Small Business Administration should also have major roles. In addition, other agencies should be involved in specific components of the innovation plan (such as the Departments of Labor and Education for workforce development).
建议2：Direct RDOs to include detailed innovation and cluster planning in the CEDS process.EDA应更新CEDS内容指南，以要求该计划解决建立创新生态系统并开发本地群集的机会，因为他们必须要求计划包括弹性措施。这些计划应包括：
- 清楚地描述了聚类重点的选定领域和作为做出选择的数据信息理由的描述。
- An overall strategic direction.
- An asset capacity assessment relative to the selected cluster.
- A high-level operational plan that outlines major initiatives.
- 主动联盟成员及其角色的描述。
- A framework for evaluating progress, including key metrics.
建议3：Give RDOs the resources needed to include detailed innovation and cluster planning in the CEDS process.Congress should authorize annual funds支持将高级创新和集群领导者安置在RDO中，作为区域竞争力官员（RECO）。该计划应由EDA或其指定人员管理，并以经济回收团奖学金为基础。这将建立员工的能力，以帮助协调跨州和城市界限的区域战略的制定，从而使创新计划成为经济发展政策的常规方面。
- 这笔资金应在适用于Build Back Back Back Back Regial Challenge或Good Obs Challenge但没有赢得奖励的地区中优先考虑。
- RECOs should be responsible for leading community efforts to create plans for innovation ecosystem and cluster support and facilitate broad engagement in community efforts to seek federal grants to implement these plans.
EDA应通过现有的实践社区提供创新生态系统和聚类研究培训RDO投资于开发创新策略，作为其CEDS流程的组成部分。
建议4：Facilitate local alignment through greater CEDS transparency and require that federally funded cluster development initiatives to ask applicants to demonstrate alignment with their regional CEDS as they apply.
- EDA应与RDO协调，以创建和维护公共访问的CED国家数据库及其随附的创新策略。这将促进在识别已经在市场上的想法并适当协调资源的区域参与者之间的更高透明度和协调。该数据库还可以发挥关键的透明度功能，并回答当前无法回答的问题，例如“美国有多少地区正在努力构建生物技术或半导体群集？”
- 跨所有机构的联邦集群开发计划应要求申请人表达其与区域CEDS的一致性。应指示员工和外部审阅者将一致性视为所有基于区域集群程序的关键标准。
- 地区，州和城市应以透明和公开可用的CEDS目标和战略为基础的经济发展。提供规划赠款，支持赠款和其他资源的较小实体和政治名称可以将与CED的一致性整合到其评估标准中。
结论
这里提出的方法将有助于制定协调的国家创新政策方法。采用这种方法将有助于地区对其行业集群进行更好的投资，帮助私营部门投资者更有效地将资金用于战略性的重要领域，并加快高质量工作的增长。加强创新计划将通过加速经济发展，扩大当地经济集群并产生建立社区的中产阶级就业来使所有美国人受益。
4月初，国会研究服务局（CRS）发布了一份具有里程碑意义的报告，概述了联邦在区域生态系统中的投资范围，这是我们过去在FAS上写的。CRS报告“区域创新：联邦计划和考虑问题”，涵盖了我们大规模联邦投资的范围和规模的出色工作[…]金博宝正规网址
经济创新需要更复杂，集中和更好地支持当地经济计划。这是实现它的方法。
We don’t know if Congress does New Year’s Resolutions like the rest of us, but it seems like at least one of their goals is to continue ‘Building Regional Innovation Economies.’ We can guess that much from that title – given to a House of Representatives Subcommittee on Research and Technology hearing at the end of December. […]
我们的创新生态系统需要更具变革性的研究和参与企业（树木），尤其是对于从历史上没有从以解决方案为导向的研究中受益的社会挑战。