The ability to create new products, supply industries, and manufacture goods rests on more than a single facet of the economy. There has been recent discussion about ensuring that critical entities can obtain the supplies they need. The concepts are relatively similar if you are talking about essential products, services, manufacturing, military supplies, etc. Doing so requires us to rethink our supply chains and production capabilities in the United States.
There are complex issues involved, but we can begin by considering a few ideas. There will be lots of people who have their own thoughts but vetting those ideas and making them useful is part of the process. These are only starting points for discussion. They can be agreed with, disagreed with, changed, adjusted, or expanded. Starting a discussion is not the same as reaching a conclusion. These are simply some initial points to consider. Think as you wish....
Idea 1: If we continue awarding contracts to a similar group of stakeholders at the top, we should not expect significant changes in innovative capacity. A mix of small, medium, and large companies could improve innovation while also strengthening the diversity and resilience of our production base. Keep in mind that the successful strategies that made a company large and the owners rich doesn't mean it will continue to be successful. Rapid innovation is about doing new things while maximizing the capacity of things that are already working,
Idea 2: We should consider attracting more investment and manufacturing to the United States. There are people who are trying to do this across the political and non-political spectrum. Simply saving a little money by moving production overseas to make a few more pennies on the dollar can make the country weaker in the long run if if it makes the big investors rich but depletes capacity. If American workers help build a company, a significant portion of that production should remain in this country (At least that is what some people might say who have a sense of commitment to our society).
Idea 3: We should consider bringing more new people and new ideas into decision-making positions. While we do not want to replace everyone, we should encourage innovative people to enter these organizations and strengthen existing processes. Elect and hire your best and brightest from society and your communities. Same old vetted group doesn't change things. They are chasing the big money and campaign finance reform, insider traiding restrictions, etc. are impacting decision making. Vetting can mean ensuring quality in one context and paid for in another.
Idea 4: From a policy standpoint, we should consider broader policies that strengthen the manufacturing base by attracting new businesses, encouraging investment, and fostering more start-ups. How we do this is a complex issue but our infrastructure, labor, research, local governance and education can help.
Idea 5: We should ensure that human capital is developed by encouraging new ideas, participation, and innovation while rewarding people based on their contributions rather than their backgrounds, race/religion, politics, connections, or position within established networks. New ideas that come from fresh people makes a big difference in the long run.
There is much more to this then a number of basic ideas but it is interesting to explore.
These thoughts are not intended to be a final solution. Research would generally support these basic details. The tactical specifics would take a considerable amount of effort and cross industry collaboration (i.e. multi clusters).They are a starting point for a broader conversation about how the United States can strengthen its manufacturing capacity, supply chains, innovation, and ability to produce the goods needed for both economic purpose and national resilience.
The American Way of Innovation and Its Deficiencies- The United States remains strong in basic research, particularly through universities and government-supported research, but has weakened its ability to turn scientific discoveries into manufactured products.
- Manufacturing and applied research have declined together. The loss of domestic production capabilities has also meant losing technical knowledge and supplier networks necessary for continued innovation.
- Outsourcing can weaken future innovation because manufacturing experience contributes to technological knowledge. When production moves overseas, some of that knowledge and expertise can move with it.
- The United States needs stronger innovation intermediaries that connect universities, government, and industry. Germany’s Fraunhofer Institutes provide one example of how applied research can support industrial innovation.
- Innovation policy should place greater emphasis on applied research and domestic manufacturing. Rebuilding these capabilities can strengthen productivity, employment, technological development, and long-term economic competitiveness.
Adler, D. (2018). The American way of innovation and its deficiencies. American Affairs, 2(2), 80–95. https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2018/05/the-american-way-of-innovation-and-its-deficiencies/
No comments:
Post a Comment