FINAL REPORT
POSITIONING ARIZONA AND ITS RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES:
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY CORE COMPETENCIES ASSESSMENT
PREPARED FOR: Arizona Commerce and Economic Development Commission and the Arizona Department of Commerce in association with Arizona’s public research universities and the Arizona Board of Regents
PREPARED BY: Technology Partnership Practice Battelle Memorial Institute Cleveland, Ohio
April 2003 © 2003 Battelle Memorial Institute © 2003 Battelle Memorial Institute (Battelle) does not endorse or recommend particular companies, products, services, technologies nor does it endorse or recommend financial investments and/or the purchase or sale of securities. Battelle makes no warranty or guarantee, express or implied, including without limitation, warranties of fitness for a particular purpose or merchantability, for any report, service, data or other information provided herein. Table of Contents Executive Summary...... i Introduction ...... i Assessment of Arizona’s Position in Research Innovation ...... iii Summary and Conclusions ...... xvi Introduction ...... 1 Project Approach and Methodology...... 1 Setting the Research Context ...... 3 Research Funding ...... 3 Peer Recognition ...... 7 Publications/Citations...... 8 Grant Analysis...... 8 A Closer Look at the Research Clusters ...... 12 Ecological Sciences ...... 12 Agricultural Sciences...... 15 Earth Sciences ...... 16 Space Sciences...... 18 Computer Modeling and Simulation Software ...... 19 Anthropology...... 22 Mathematics ...... 22 Evolutionary Biology ...... 24 Electronics and Optical Sciences...... 25 Chemistry and Materials Science ...... 28 From Research Clusters to Core Competencies...... 31 Electronics and Optics...... 32 Computer Modeling and Simulation...... 36 Chemistry and Materials...... 40 Space Sciences...... 43 Ecological Sciences ...... 45 Plant and Agricultural Sciences...... 49 World Class Research Signatures for Arizona ...... 52 Technology Platforms, Products and Market Niches for Arizona ...... 54 Communications...... 55 Information Technology...... 64 Bioengineering ...... 74 Sustainable Systems ...... 79 Identification of Gaps, Options, and Opportunities to Further Improve Competitiveness in the Technology Platforms ...... 88 Platform-Specific Gaps and Options ...... 88 Cross Cutting Opportunities ...... 97 Creating a Collaborative Environment ...... 100 Attracting the Best and Brightest...... 103 Application Centers ...... 104 Business Development and Marketing ...... 106 Technology Transfer and Commercialization ...... 107 Summary and Conclusions ...... 109 Appendix: University Research Profiles—Grants, Funding, Publications and Degrees ...... 110 The University of Arizona...... 110 Arizona State University ...... 112 Northern Arizona University ...... 116
Executive Summary
INTRODUCTION Research universities are emerging as a key economic asset in today’s global knowledge-based economy. States across the nation are increasingly seeking to leverage the science and technology assets found at their research universities as a source of “World class research is a passport competitive advantage. Research universities are becoming to success in the global economy. anchors for an exciting array of state economic development Industry can no longer compete by initiatives involving commercialization activities, collaborative selling standard products made with and multi-disciplinary research centers, and innovative new standard processes and that could curriculum and educational programs needed for workforce be produced anywhere in the world at lower cost. Businesses must training. constantly innovate to raise the But each state’s research base offers different areas of strength quality of production, introduce new and economic opportunity. States are learning that to gain product lines or services, and add greater value to their outputs. For economic value from their research universities, they need to this reason, states must create an assess the specific areas of research focus and excellence found environment that supports continuous at their universities and determine how those research capacities innovation. This requires investment link to market opportunities and locally-based industry in cutting-edge research, facilities specializations. and equipment.” National Governors Association, With three public research universities generating a combined State Leadership in the Global $500 million annually in research funding, the opportunity for Economy Task Force, 2002 Arizona to harness the economic potential of its research universities is clear. Accordingly, as Arizona develops its comprehensive state economic development strategy, a critical aspect is to determine how to further build the state’s growing research stature and reputation in specific university research fields that can also link to the state’s efforts to build its economic future through private-public partnerships between industry, higher education, and government.
Project Approach and Methodology The focus of this study is to identify the specific research competencies found at Arizona’s research universities from both a research and broader economic development perspective, identify areas for raising Arizona’s research stature and potential niches for economic development, and present opportunities for future collaborations that will fill key gaps. This effort builds upon a recently completed assessment of the state’s position in the biosciences, particularly in biomedical research efforts. This project was funded by the Flinn Foundation and conducted by the Battelle Technology Partnership Practice. Arizona’s Commerce and Economic Development Commission and the Arizona Department of Commerce, in consultation with the state’s research universities, engaged Battelle to extend their core competency assessment to the non-bioscience areas found in the state.
i Conducting this assessment requires a variety of integrated and complementary analyses involving both quantitative analysis and qualitative intelligence gathering from interviews and market research. The overall methodology involved a four-step process. • Rigorous Quantitative Analysis. First, a variety of quantitative analyses of research activities were undertaken to identify leading areas of research focus found across the research universities in Arizona, which would underpin areas of core competency. Analyses included examination of Arizona’s position in research funding across research areas, review of studies of peer recognition, analysis of publications activity, and an assessment of grant activity using cluster analysis. • In-Depth Qualitative Analysis. Second, an extensive interview process with research administrators and research leaders in Arizona—with 60 interviews being conducted—was undertaken to better interpret the quantitative analyses. This also helped determine how the leading research areas link into research core competencies that are based on factors such as competitive differentiation, ability to transcend single business areas, and how difficult they are for competitors to imitate. • Market Assessment. Third, an assessment involving market research was conducted to identify whether these core competency areas can be related to technology platforms that link to market opportunities and avenues for economic development in the state. • Gaps, Options, and Opportunities Assessment. Fourth, the interviews and market research data, combined with analysis of programs in other states, were used to identify gaps both within and across technology platforms. These gaps identify options and opportunities to strengthen the platforms and the overall state infrastructure supporting technology-based economic development. Our overall approach is shown in Figure ES1. Figure ES1: Overall Core Competency Project Plan
Key Competitive Core Competency Efforts in Assessment Other States Quantitative • Analysis of core Analysis of research areas – University basic research, Research Qualitative enabling and Assessment Activities to applications Gaps, Identify of University Options, & Core •Linkages across Potential Opportunities Core Competency core research Competency Areas areas Areas • Broad market potentials • Development potential in Broad Market Assessment Arizona
ii ASSESSMENT OF ARIZONA’S POSITION IN RESEARCH INNOVATION
Core Competency Areas To identify leading areas of research activity, Battelle identified those research areas that had a concentration of activity and excellence as demonstrated by having: • A significant number of clusters of federally funded research grants awarded through rigorous peer-review processes such as those at the National Science Foundation, the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), NASA, and other federal agencies. These clusters are groups of grants that relate to one another based on the actual research activities underway in each grant. To undertake this cluster analysis, Battelle used a proprietary data-mining tool, known as Starlight, which identifies textual similarities in each of the grants’ abstracts. • A broad base of principal investigators, along with prominent researchers who hold multiple peer-review grants. • Substantial level and impact of publications for the five-year period of 1997 to 2001, based on a compilation by ISI Thomson Scientific in its University Science Indicators database. We highlighted those research fields with at least 150 publications and a relative citation impact of 40 percent higher than the national average in that field. The high rankings in funding or the high standing in peer recognition were based on surveys conducted by US News and World Report. An initial set of ten leading research areas (outside of biomedical research) in Arizona were identified. Further analysis of these leading research areas, informed by intelligence gathered through structured interviews with research administrators and leaders, enabled Battelle to identify six areas of core competency (Figure ES2). These core competencies reflect areas of research focus in Arizona meeting the following criteria: breadth, depth, reputation and impact on their field, competitive differentiation, ability to transcend single business areas, and hard for competitors to imitate. Figure ES2: Research Strengths to Core Competencies
Leading Research Areas Core Competencies
Ecological Sciences
Earth Sciences Ecological Sciences Evolutionary Biology
Anthropology
Agricultural Agriculture & Sciences Plant Sciences
Space Sciences Space Sciences Computer Modeling Computer Modeling Mathematics & Simulation
Electronics & Electronics Optical Sciences & Optics
Chemistry & Material Sciences Chemistry & Materials iii A brief description of each of the core competencies is set out in Table ES1 below. Table ES1: Description of Non-Biomedical Core Competency Areas Identified Across Arizona Research Universities
• Electronics and Optics – It is the departments such as physics, electrical combination and integration of electronics engineering, bioengineering, mechanical and optics that places Arizona in a class with engineering, and optical science. very few other states (perhaps only New York • Space Sciences – The Arizona Space and California). Therefore, in characterizing Grant College Consortium ties all three this competence, we emphasize where these Arizona research universities together. The two research areas converge, namely in Consortium is a NASA-sponsored program of optoelectronics, photonics, semiconductors, outreach, training, and research to optics in computing/storage, and both encourage understanding of space wireline and wireless applications. A robust exploration and provide a stream of trained group of approximately 60 faculty works in professionals into the industry. About 60 this combined field across primarily faculty are engaged in space sciences University of Arizona and Arizona State (astronomy and planetary sciences). Key University, and is closely linked to the high areas of focus include basic science tech industry in the region and nationally. concerned with observations in our solar • Computer Modeling and Simulation – system and the emerging area of The computer modeling and simulation core biogeochemistry to study materials on earth competency depends on two key attributes: and other planets. However, the focus of this the wide range of software applications, from core competency is the engineered devices environment and health to materials and and systems that are the means to that end electronics, and the strong foundation in (i.e., powerful telescopes and satellites, applied mathematics. This area underpins measuring instruments and related materials, much of the research effort at all three optics and electronics developments). The universities. Approximately 400 principal combination of astronomy and planetary investigators are engaged in mathematics sciences at UA, ASU, and NAU makes the and computer modeling and simulation state a national leader in space science and research endeavors. Computer modeling and engineering. simulation is very applications-oriented, with • Ecological Sciences – Significant particular emphasis on electronics, expertise and resources in the ecological communications, and data management. sciences exists at all three universities, Other pockets of concentration are in making this area by far the strongest core materials science, energy, environment, and competence in Arizona. Over 300 faculty are biology. engaged in research on ecology. If one • Chemistry and Materials – This core counts faculty engaged in the related fields of competency ranges from geochemistry to Earth Sciences, Anthropology, and electronic materials. It is impossible to Evolutionary Biology, there are over 500 separate out chemistry from materials principal investigators, and with graduate inasmuch as chemistry plays a crucial role in students, well over 2,000 researchers are materials synthesis, materials performance, involved. Fundamental research is underway and materials characterization. More than in Arizona on how all living creatures interact 100 researchers are engaged in this within our environment on Earth, embracing competence. New or improved materials are research on environmental effects like global being created to advance technologies in the climate change and adaptation, evolutionary semiconductor, electronics, aerospace, biology of plants, mammals and insects, health sciences and other industries. botany, natural resources (i.e., water, land, Chemical and materials research is found forests) management, earth sciences, across all research universities in Arizona population, communities, and landscape and is closely tied to research in other changes (i.e., urban ecology). Since ecology
iv covers such a broad area of science, Sustainable agriculture is strong at NAU. engineering, and policy, the connections to Plant science looks at genetics and other key other areas of research strength are mechanisms of plant development, such as numerous. photosynthesis, and is strong at both Arizona • Plant and Agricultural Sciences – State and the University of Arizona. However, Arizona has traditional agricultural science it is the integration of these two research addressing the challenges of growing crops areas that makes this a state core in arid/semi arid lands at each of its research competence. universities, which is closely related to Ecological Sciences and Earth Sciences.
Opportunities for World Class Research “Signature” for Arizona Battelle was also asked to identify potential world class research areas in the universities, which are worthy of nurturing as potential state “signature” research. Clearly, not all components of the core competencies meet this criterion. Below are some areas that Battelle believes are worthy of state recognition and nurturing as potential research signatures. Arizona’s strongest core competence by far is the ecological sciences. There are three areas of world-class research and scholarship in this broad and deep competence. • Arid/semi-arid lands ecology – Battelle could not find another university system that possessed the same depth of knowledge. • Urban ecology – The extension of the remote sensing and urban environmental systems studies to many other cities around the world substantiates Arizona’s leadership here. • Hydrology and water resources – UA is #1 nationally in hydrology; add to that distinction the four water centers, each dealing with a different problem area, and ASU’s and NAU’s contributions, and Arizona has what is arguably the world’s biggest and best water resource portfolio. The only other collection of water resources that Battelle found is the memorandum of understanding that links the water resource centers in universities in Washington, Idaho and Oregon, with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and Idaho National Environment and Engineering Laboratory. After ecology, the next best core competence for Arizona is electronics and optics, which is complemented by chemistry and materials as well as computer modeling and simulation. Within this competence, Battelle sees three areas of strength (the first enhanced by the chemistry and materials competence; the last two enhanced by the computer modeling and simulation competence), but each has serious competitors in other universities in New York and California. • Materials that are being produced at the electronics/optics interface – photonic, optoelectronic, and nanoelectronic materials are specialties. • Integration of these materials into complex circuitry – strength in embedded systems is pervasive. • Wireless – wireline infrastructure unification is a key competence. In the bioengineering area, discussed in the Flinn Foundation study, the clear strength that Arizona has is the linkage of neuroscience with the materials, software, and electronics capabilities to provide a neural engineering platform. Neural engineering advances in Arizona include using
v thoughts to instruct robots for an advanced neural prosthetic interface, and spinal cord stimulation to restore gait. This could definitely be developed into a world-class bioengineering specialty with enormous impact in the health field. Competitors do exist, however. Oregon boasts a world class neuroscience core competence at Oregon Health and Science University and University of Oregon, and a growing neuro-products (imaging) industry cluster. Space Sciences has two areas of world class research. For example: • Advanced land-based and space telescope design and mirror construction at UA; and • Design of remotely operated instruments for measurements in space. Competitors include the University of Colorado, Cornell, and the University of Chicago, but Battelle could not find any state university system that possessed the combined strengths of astronomy and planetary sciences that Arizona has, hence the interest in the integration of these research capabilities. Plant sciences also has two strong areas, which could be very powerful if integrated: • The Plant Genomics Institute at UA, led by Rod Wing, sequences plant genomes, which can be used in crop enhancement and as models for human disease; and • The Arizona Biodesign Institute at ASU, where Charles Arntzen’s group is a world leader in development and manufacture of edible vaccines. Competitors in plant sciences include St. Louis, with Washington University, Danforth Plant Sciences Center, Monsanto and others; the Research Triangle; Cornell University; and Saskatoon, Canada. Nevertheless, it is the breadth of plant science capability at UA and ASU, including crop genetics, the use of plants as models for human disease, and edible vaccines that makes this area an attractive signature research candidate.
Developing and Forming Technology Platforms Technology platforms serve as a bridge between the research core competencies and their use in commercial applications and products. They share the following characteristics: • Applications orientation, merging early-stage laboratory-scale science and technology into systems and devices; • Robust and “evergreen” to address current as well as emerging market opportunities; • Produce a regular stream of innovative, perhaps disruptive, products (i.e., a product pipeline); • Require cross department and cross-university collaborations – brand new teams as well as enhanced existing teams; and • Require partnership with industry to provide customer perspective and productization skills. Based on Battelle’s assessment, the six science and technology core competencies can be ordered into four technology platforms that could be a source of innovative technologies and/or products for Arizona’s economy. These are: • Communications • Bioengineering • Information technology • Sustainable Systems
vi The overall scheme is shown in Figure ES3. Figure ES3: Framework for Arizona Public University Technology/Product Pipeline to Industry
Technology Core Competencies Platforms Product Markets Foundational Applied “Fusion or Convergence” • Nano/Micro Satellites AEROSPACE • Photonic/Electro Optic Devices Electronics Communications • Wireless Networks/ & Optics Systems • Embedded Systems TELECOMMUN- Space ICATIONS Sciences • Molecular Electronics • “Green” Chip Computer Information Fabrication Modeling Technology • Optics in COMPUTERS & Computers/Storage Simulation Ecological Sciences • Implants/Prosthetics • Medical Imaging/ HEALTH/ Diagnostics Materials Bioengineering MEDICINE • Analytical & Instruments Chemistry Plant & • Bioproducts SUSTAINABILITY Agricultural (Chemicals) INDUSTRIES Sciences - agricultural Sustainable • Biomass Energy bioproducts - environmental Systems • Water engineering Recycle/Purification - integrated resource management • Geospatial Devices
There are several key niches identified for Arizona in each of these technology platforms. The analysis provided in the full report describes in more detail the key components of each technology platform, and some near and longer-term product opportunities, based on the market analysis. At this stage, it will not be a complete “pipeline,” but rather, examples with obvious market potential, which should be of interest to industry.
Communications This platform addresses the telecommunications challenge. It is closely tied to the second platform on Information Technology; in fact some include telecom in the IT classification. However, we have chosen to keep the two separate in order to bring focus to a real strength of Arizona, namely the existence of four core competencies that can be integrated into next generation telecom systems—electronics and optics, computer modeling and simulation, chemistry and materials, and space sciences. All four of the core competencies, if carefully integrated and nurtured, could give Arizona a world leadership position in telecommunications. In this market space, Arizona universities’ core competencies are being used to produce innovative technologies and/or products in three niche areas, all of which play into the telecom system of the future:
vii • High bandwidth, high-speed wireline technologies (0-5 years); • Unification of wireless and wireline systems (0-5 years); and • Micro/nano satellites (approximately 10 years).
Information Technology Like the preceding technology platform, the IT platform addresses the “anywhere, anytime” promise of the Internet, but from the perspectives of computers and peripherals, semiconductors and software. Because of the hardware and software dimensions, this platform embraces the electronics and optics, chemistry and materials, and computer modeling and simulation core competencies. In the IT market space, key commercialization opportunities for Arizona’s technologies are: • Ubiquitous computing environments (0-5years); • Software systems (0-5 years); • Semiconductor materials/manufacturing (0-5 years); • Optics in computing/storage (5-10 years); and • Nano (molecular) electronics (>10 years).
Bioengineering Inasmuch as bioengineering is an interdisciplinary area, it uses almost all the identified core competencies, plus connections to other university units, such as Mechanical Engineering, the Manufacturing Institute (design and manufacturing), Industrial Engineering (e.g., human factors, ergonomics), Systems Science and Engineering Research Center (for neuroengineering), and Exercise Science and Physical Education (for motor control and biomechanics). This area was identified in the Flinn Foundation-supported Arizona Biosciences Roadmap and a Phase II effort is underway to further investigate these bioengineering niches to insure that Arizona can increase its research and technology competence in this area. Some near-term opportunities (0-5 years) and some longer-term areas (approximately 10 years) that will be under consideration for Arizona leadership in this rapidly growing and crowded field include: • Neural engineering (0-5 years); • Application of optics for medical diagnosis and treatment (0-5 years); and • Implantable biocompatible devices (more than 10 years).
Sustainable Systems This platform is based on the thesis that if we want economic progress to continue, we must systematically restructure the global economy to make it environmentally sustainable. An economy is sustainable only if it respects the principles of ecology. An eco-economy would be one that satisfies current needs without jeopardizing the prospects of future generations to meet their needs. The ecological sciences are Arizona’s top core competence and the plant and agricultural sciences competence is also strong. Therefore, this is an area where Arizona has an opportunity to be both a market creator and leader. There are several areas of sustainability that Arizona could take the
viii lead in. In developing this platform, it is important to look beyond the traditional measures of commercialization. The knowledge gained from environmental research will play a critical role in land use planning, siting of industrial and residential developments, agricultural policies, and so on, which will have a different but no less important impact on economic development. Arizona could well become the lead state for the best model of sustainable growth. • Sustainable manufacturing – (0-5 years) For environmentally compatible products and manufacturing processes that fit into current fabrication plant designs; (5-10 years) designing the next generation fabrication plant to take advantage of miniaturization that micro/nano systems provide, which will radically reduce the plant footprint; and (more than 10 years) the emerging areas of bio-nanomaterials and molecular electronics. • High value bioproducts – (0-5 years) “Green factory” producing edible vaccines; and (5-10 years) new, environmentally friendly industrial products such as chemicals for plastics, solvents, and fibers. • Water resources – (0-5 years) The concentration of hydrology and water expertise in the state makes this a potentially very rich area to mine for technology that will help solve world water problems and also create economic benefit. • Remote sensing – (0-5 years) The strong remote sensing and data analysis capabilities of the Arizona universities would be an asset to the state’s environmental engineering/consulting cluster, providing new capabilities to assess water resources, land use, forest health, etc. In the longer term (5-10 years), these capabilities could be linked to the micro/nanosatellite competence to produce a new business of remote monitoring and control. • New construction materials – (5-10 years) The investments being made in new materials technology that fuses chemistry, biology, and physics can produce new bio-inspired construction materials, which will not require the high energy input to fabricate, yet will have the strength of traditional steels or concrete. They can also be designed to be biodegradable after their useful operating lifetime. • Sustainable agriculture – (0-5 years) NAU and UA are already engaged in sustainable agriculture, which can be further enhanced through integration with the plant genomics advances. • Sustainable forests – (0-5 years) NAU and UA are studying a broad range of forest issues, including fire management, tree growth, and use of low-grade wood from clear-cutting. • Renewable energy – (more than 10 years) The state has abundant wind and solar energy and a small group of companies in Flagstaff (wind) and Phoenix (solar). NAU has an active wind energy research program that could be leveraged to grow this industry. • Infectious disease treatments – (more than 10 years) Concerns over environmental variability and change and its impact on human health are steadily growing around the world. Many of the possible threats are becoming more widespread in arid and semi-arid regions around the world, and this provides a unique opportunity for Arizona.
ix Gaps, Options, and Opportunities For three platforms—Communications, Information Technology, and Sustainable Systems— Battelle identified the gaps within these platforms and the options to be addressed to build and strengthen each platform. The report also identifies opportunities that cut across these three platforms to position Arizona’s public research universities and the state for the future. These represent preliminary analysis of gaps, options, and opportunities and a full roadmap for each platform would enable the setting of priorities and implementation plans for each platform, an activity outside the scope of the current project.
Communications Key gaps in communications to build a more robust platform includes: Gaps: • Limited coordination • System capabilities to draw industry • Limited collaboration at system scale • Deficiencies in technology transfer/ commercialization process • Quality and depth of graduate student pool • Limited strategic alliances and partnerships • Facilities for interdisciplinary showcases with other research centers • Faculty gaps in specialty areas • University-industry differences in interest/time frames Key options to consider in addressing these gaps in the communications platform include: Options: • Statewide umbrella communications entity • Establish statewide program of graduate student excellence in communications • Showcase facilities for interdisciplinary, systems labs to engage industry • Improve communications between researchers and technology transfer • Recruit world-class faculty from higher function education and industry
Information Technology Gaps for information technology included several that overlapped communications, but there were also distinct issues. Gaps: • Address talent base at K-12 • No software focus to build critical mass within state • Not nationally competitive in major federal research awards • Aging non-competitive IT labs and materials • Limited hardware/software system infrastructure across universities to interest • Chip development fragmentation of industry focus/interests
x To position Arizona in this highly competitive information technology platform, the following options might be considered: Options: • Enhance faculty gaps • Focus IT efforts around translational research/product development key areas • Improve technology transfer/ commercialization processes • Increase IT collaboration across research universities • Compare and follow Sematech Roadmap to Chart Arizona’s IT Future • Attract industry IT research operations to Arizona
Sustainable Systems There were some similarities in Battelle’s findings as to gaps, options, and opportunities regarding the communications and information technology platforms. However, in the case of sustainability, this platform is at a more formative or developmental stage, necessitating a different set of needs and requirements. Gaps: • Limited markets for sustainability • Building research quality through faculty/student excellence needed • Applications at local/regional levels missing • Technology commercialization support critical to “building your own” • No single national center of leadership and responsibility • Green manufacturing niche area for Arizona through research collaboration Additional gaps include: • Need for central users facility; • No federal research anchor for sustainability in Arizona now; • Losing star researchers outside the state; and • No industry association linking users and products of sustainability. Among the options that might go into an investment plan or strategy for what is at the earliest stages of what could become a full technology platform are the following: Options: • Establish statewide sustainability • Attract major federal sustainability organization linking state government and center/institute to Arizona universities • Establish pilot regional projects in Arizona • Establish or reposition a state industry association
xi Cross Cutting Opportunities Although we have proposed specific platform options to address gaps for each platform, there are options and opportunities that are generic to all platforms. We call these “cross cutting opportunities” that address all three technology platforms just discussed. This does not negate the options and opportunities specific to each platform but represent macro-level solutions across all three areas. What is very encouraging is that many of the solutions have already been initiated in part by at least one university, so there is momentum and a base to build on. These crosscutting opportunities are presented in five categories: • Creating a collaborative environment; • Attracting the best and brightest; • Application centers; • Business development and marketing; and • Technology transfer and commercialization.
Creating a Collaborative Environment Of all the gaps identified in interviews, the challenge of starting and maintaining collaborations across the universities in the state was mentioned most frequently.
Cross-Institutional Collaborations Options to address enhanced cross-institutional collaborations are suggested for each of the technology platforms, because these are the engines for economic growth. Fortunately for Arizona, in most cases a collaborative effort exists on which to build. Collaboration options for each platform include: Telecommunications. It may be possible to form a university-industry collaboration around the technologies needed for the telecom system of the future—the unification of wireless systems with the conventional wireline infrastructure. This collaboration could be built on the foundations provided by Connection 1, an NSF industry/university cooperative research center, and the Consortium for Embedded and Internetworking Technology (CEINT) at ASU, and the proposed Center for Intelligent Optical Networks at UA. Information Technology. A possible base for research university collaboration and a university- industry collaboration is to capitalize on the convergence of electronics and optics, which will yield new optoelectronic materials, semiconductors, lasers, molecular/nanoelectronics, and optical computing and storage systems, revolutionizing information technology infrastructure. A new initiative is needed to embrace all the research at ASU, NAU and UA that can contribute to this convergence. A start is being made at UA with the proposed Photonic Technology Center that will serve to integrate the university’s enabling capabilities. Sustainability. This broad area is the wave of the future, and so now is the time to bring the contributing components together into a systems approach that can address community and industry needs and provide answers that are backed by good science. The foundation for a statewide collaboration could be the Institute for the Study of Planet Earth (ISPE), formed at UA.
xii Making ISPE the Arizona Institute for Planet Earth is the logical next step, with coordinating offices at ASU and NAU.
Improving Connectivity With the major research and development resources in Arizona being geographically dispersed, one option is creating a “Collaboratory” for each platform, in which the state’s researchers can work cooperatively to further research and develop applications for technology without regard to geographical location. Hardware and software is now available that can enable researchers to interact with their colleagues, access instrumentation, share data and computation resources, and access information in digital libraries. By providing access to instruments, data, and computer display sharing, the Collaboratory would enable researchers in different geographical locations to interact as if they were located more closely. Another option for improving connectivity is for Arizona to organize and provide support for formal technical networks that will foster the collaboration needed between research and industry to achieve the state’s technical and economic goals. The value to participants includes the expansion of their knowledge base, access to resources not available in their home institutions, and increased opportunities for collaborative R&D funding. Technical network activities could include developing and maintaining an inventory of network capabilities, conducting topical workshops or seminars sponsored by the partners, and developing joint research opportunities and contributions to new intellectual property and capabilities. The Collaboratory environment discussed above would be very useful in enabling the networks. The state could assist in organizing the networks and make funding available to support network activities such as Web sites, workshops, and other gatherings. Attracting the Best and Brightest Recruiting Incentives There are still major opportunities to enhance the depth of research, management, and entrepreneurial capacity in Arizona. Specific actions might include: • Develop the Arizona Executive Corps, to bring serial entrepreneurial managers to the state both to temporarily manage prototype development and seed and pre-seed funds, and offer business counseling and mentoring. Eventually, these managers can serve as CEOs and CFOs of spin-offs and startups coming from these technology platforms. • Expand the entrepreneurial assistance role through university-industry partnerships to offer in-depth training and networking programs to develop qualified CEOs and help train firms in various aspects of business and technology management and other skills, including taking greater advantage of the universities’ business schools, faculty, and student body.
Growing Your Own For long-term sustainability, a state must have a system that continuously yields first-class students, researchers, entrepreneurs and business leaders. New programs that encourage innovation and commercial deployment are needed. A few that are compatible with Arizona’s capabilities and culture include:
xiii • Advanced interdisciplinary science courses for high schools that are developed in the universities and taught in their laboratories with university/private sector mentors; • Increase the number of local state science fairs that would produce high school teams for international competitions like Intel’s Science Fair; • Expand on the Flinn Scholars program to further increase the scholarships and/or internships available to the best students in advanced communications, information technology, biosciences and ecological sciences; • Address the need for additional resources for pre-prototype development and technology commercialization support such as capital gaps, by forming private equity funds focused on seed and early stage investing in each platform area; and • Establish stronger industry relationships and partnerships in each platform through an applied matching grant program, leveraging industry funds and forming collaboration between research faculty in each platform and small and large firms in and outside the state.
Application Centers Infrastructure is either missing or deficient for all the platforms. This gap was the second most frequently mentioned in interviews. Therefore, to help forge and sustain the collaborative environment, Battelle suggests that Arizona help create and fund the initial operation of Application Centers around each platform, which will provide access to facilities, equipment and experts to enable industry, working in partnership with academic researchers, to adapt, develop, and utilize discoveries from the state’s research institutions. The Application Center will: • Include one-of-a-kind equipment or facilities (e.g., wet labs, clean rooms) that enhance the current or planned capabilities of Arizona’s research institutions and industry; • Operate as user facilities, shared by both research institutes and private industry; • Focus on translational research, i.e., activities undertaken to increase the commercial value of Arizona’s innovations; • Provide a training ground for undergraduates and graduates; • Emphasize the development of products that will support the growth of emerging markets and the creation of brand new markets; • Seek to leverage and influence federal investments in research and development; and • Be networked to institutions conducting basic science research and the companies that are the end users of the technology being developed. The Centers would provide demonstration and test-bed facilities as well as testing and evaluation services. Examples of the type of services that could be provided by the Centers include capabilities to allow for the manufacture of limited quantities of prototypes for testing, and further development or access to a computer-aided design facility to provide software development and simulation. An additional attractive feature would be availability of space to incubate entrepreneurial startup companies. Such an infrastructure would help Arizona surpass its competitors in these areas by reducing commercialization time.
xiv Business Development and Marketing Growing the R&D Business To move to the next level, Arizona’s public research universities might push the envelope in addressing how to secure additional federal research dollars. More market intelligence is needed to create awareness of large opportunities before they become wired to other institutions. Centralizing this function at the university, or having a single office for the Arizona university system, would be advantageous. University assignments to key federal agencies would help build “mind share” within those agencies. Also, a continuous Washington presence is required to work with Arizona’s delegation. Strategic hiring of key government officials after they have retired is one way to initiate this. Finally, each platform should have at least one business development professional to work with faculty on large procurement opportunities. While competitive intelligence is very important, the key to success is building the team that can deliver the winning proposals. Strategic hires of professional project managers, who can pull together university- industry partnerships, would be a great investment.
Technology Transfer and Commercialization This area is the Achilles heel of most universities and research institutes and Arizona is no exception. While this is a subject of much interest to faculty, there appears to be a general lack of knowledge of the universities’ current programs, policies, and changes in personnel and practice in recent years. UA, ASU, and NAU (through its agreement whereby ASU manages its intellectual property) have made critical new hires and changed policies and procedures to reduce the barriers to successful commercial development of inventions. Universities’ will need to continue to address this general communication problem between faculty and the Technology Transfer Offices, and gaps in the overall system, such as ASU’s recent technology ventures initiative.
xv SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Arizona has a considerable research base in its three public research universities on which to build a strong technology-based economic development effort. Combining this analysis with the earlier Arizona biosciences roadmap suggests six technology platforms on which Arizona’s public research universities can focus: • Communications; • Information technology; • Sustainable systems; • Bioengineering; • Neurological sciences; and • Cancer-therapeutics. These six platforms represent: • Competitive research areas nationally for the state’s three public research universities as measured by the “market place” of academic research, e.g., citation analysis and federal funding concentrations (e.g., multiple PI awards), and augmented by Battelle’s “Starlight” cluster analysis of linkages within and across these areas. • Interdisciplinary areas that, for the most part, take advantage of a wide range of disciplines and whose enhancement is more likely through higher education collaboration across Arizona’s public research universities. • The basis for sustained and growing industry, government, and academic partnerships in both research and knowledge and technology commercialization. The six core competencies identified in this study were blended into four technology platforms that have the potential of catching the next major technological waves: advanced communications, gene-based medicine, and sustainable systems. Gaps and options for enhancement of three of the platforms—communications, information technology, and sustainability—were identified through interviews and analysis of similar programs elsewhere. The fourth platform, bioengineering, is currently the subject of a platform development strategy, supported by the Flinn Foundation and involving the three research universities, other research organizations, and Battelle. Finally, Battelle identified five crosscutting opportunities and actions that might be considered and needed to address all technology platforms. Because a core competency analysis led to the identification of these platforms, this study can only address gaps, options and opportunities in a preliminary fashion. To further build Arizona’s future in these platforms, each will need to be further developed as comprehensive roadmaps.
xvi Introduction
Research universities are emerging as a key economic asset in today’s global, knowledge-based economy. States across the nation are increasingly seeking to leverage the science and technology assets found at their research universities as a source of competitive advantage. Research universities are becoming anchors for an exciting array of state economic development initiatives involving commercialization activities, collaborative and multi-disciplinary research centers and innovative “World class research is a passport new curriculum and educational programs needed for to success in the global economy. Industry can no longer compete by workforce training. selling standard products made with But each state’s research base offers different areas of standard processes and that could strength and economic opportunity. States are learning be produced anywhere in the world at lower cost. Businesses must that to gain economic value from their research constantly innovate to raise the universities they need to assess the specific areas of quality of production, introduce new research focus and excellence found at their product lines or services, and add universities and determine how those research greater value to their outputs. For capacities link to market opportunities and locally- this reason, states must create an based industry specializations. environment that supports continuous innovation. This requires With three public research universities generating a investment in cutting-edge research, combined $500 million annually in research funding, facilities and equipment.” the opportunity for Arizona to harness the economic National Governors Association, potential of its research universities is clear. State Leadership in the Global Economy Task Force, 2002 Accordingly, as Arizona develops its comprehensive state economic development strategy, a critical aspect is to determine how to further build the state’s growing research stature and reputation in specific university research fields that can also link to the state’s efforts to build its economic future through private-public partnerships between industry, higher education, and government.
PROJECT APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY This study has the following major objectives: 1. Identify the specific research competencies found at Arizona’s research universities from both a research and a broader economic development perspective; 2. Indicate areas of research that should be emphasized to raise Arizona’s research stature internationally; and 3. Propose potential technology platforms and niches that are appropriate for economic development, and identify gaps that afford opportunities to strengthen them. This effort builds upon a recently completed project, funded by the Flinn Foundation and conducted by the Battelle Technology Partnership Practice, to assess the state’s position in the biosciences, particularly in biomedical research efforts.
1 Arizona’s Commerce and Economic Development Commission and the Arizona Department of Commerce, in consultation with the state’s research universities, engaged Battelle to extend their core competency assessment to the non-bioscience areas found in the state. To conduct this assessment requires a variety of integrated and complementary analyses that involve both quantitative analysis, qualitative intelligence gathering from interviews and market research. The overall methodology involved a four-step process: • First, a variety of quantitative analyses of research activities were undertaken to identify leading areas of research focus found across the research universities in Arizona that would underpin areas of core competency. Analyses included examination of Arizona’s position in research funding across research areas, review of studies of peer recognition, analysis of publications activity, and an assessment of grant activity using cluster analysis. • Second, an extensive interview process with research administrators and research leaders in Arizona—with 60 interviews being conducted—to better interpret the quantitative analyses and determine how the leading research areas link into research core competencies, based on such factors as competitive differentiation, ability to transcend a single business area and difficult for competitors to imitate. • Third, an assessment involving market research was conducted to identify whether these core competency areas can be related to technology platforms that link to market opportunities and avenues for economic development in the state. • Fourth, the interviews and market research data, combined with analysis of programs in other states, were used to identify gaps, both within and across technology platforms, which present opportunities to strengthen the platforms and the overall state infrastructure supporting technology-based economic development. Our overall approach is shown in Figure 1. Figure 1: Project Approach and Methodology The report is organized into the Key following components: Competitive Core Competency Efforts in Assessment Other States • Setting the research context; Quantitative • Analysis of core Analysis of research areas – University basic research, • A closer look at the research Research Qualitative enabling and Activities to Assessment applications Gaps, clusters; Identify of University Options, & Core • Linkages across Potential Opportunities • Core Competency core research From research clusters to core Competency Areas areas Areas • Broad market competencies; potentials • Development • Areas upon which to build a potential in Broad Market world class science and Assessment Arizona technology image; • Technology platforms, products and market niches for Arizona; and • Gaps and opportunities to strengthen the technology platforms to further improve competitiveness.
2 Setting the Research Context
To develop an understanding of the position and characteristics of non-bioscience research activities in Arizona, we have reviewed secondary data sources and assessed existing or emerging areas of research and development strength with technology and/or commercial potential. This includes: 1. Trends in research funding found across Arizona’s universities, focusing on research fields in which Arizona excels; 2. National rankings on research excellence based on peer recognition; 3. Analysis of publications and citation activity across research fields; and 4. Analysis of federal research grants using pattern recognition software.
RESEARCH FUNDING Across non-bioscience research areas, Arizona stands as a top tier state in university research funding. Arizona ranks 16th in the nation across all states in non-bioscience university research funding. By comparison, in total university research funding, including biosciences, Arizona slips to 21st in the nation. Arizona has risen sharply in non-bioscience university research relative to the nation over the past twenty-five years, though in recent years has lagged national growth in research. As Figure 2 shows, back in the early 1970s, Arizona stood at roughly 1.6 percent of national university research funding in the non-bioscience fields. By 1995, Arizona had climbed to 2.4 percent of the nation’s university research funding—nearly doubling Arizona’s share of national university research funding. However, since 1995 Arizona has fallen off slightly and is now at roughly 2.2 percent. Figure 2: Arizona Non-Life Science Academic R&D as a Percentage of Total U.S. Academic R&D
2.6%
2.4%
2.2%
2.0%
1.8%
1.6%
1.4% 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
3 Arizona is a national leader in research funding in a number of specific non-bioscience research fields—including astronomy, earth sciences and engineering. A closer look at research funding by specific fields (see Table 1 below) reveals that, as a state, Arizona ranks among the top ten of all states in the physical sciences (7th), led by astronomy (2nd) in which Arizona has nearly 18 percent of all university research activities nationwide. Arizona ranks 7th in earth sciences; and also is highly ranked in a number of engineering fields, such as mechanical (11th), civil (12th) and electrical (14th). Table 1: Research Funding by Specific Fields in Arizona
Arizona’s Top 3 Universities NSF Field R&D Funding (thousands of 2001 Dollars) FY 2000 % US Rank ALL DISCIPLINES 513,951 1.5 21 PHYSICAL SCIENCES 114,362 3.8 7 Astronomy 75,727 17.6 2 Chemistry 21,405 2 17 Physics 10,633 0.8 29 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 25,316 1.3 23 Atmospheric 3,544 1.1 19 Earth 21,342 3.4 7 Oceanography 402 0.1 28 MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES 5,229 1.4 20 COMPUTER SCIENCES 8,755 0.9 24 ENGINEERING 94,529 1.9 17 Aeronautical 1,233 0.4 26 Bioengineering 3,950 2.1 18 Chemical 8,687 2.1 18 Civil 18,540 2.8 12 Electrical 28,441 2.3 14 Mechanical 22,405 3.2 11 Metallurgical 2,768 0.6 24
4 On an individual basis, in research funding Arizona universities are among the national leaders in non-bioscience fields. University of Arizona ranks first among all universities in astronomy, while Arizona State University is 10th in earth sciences. Both University of Arizona and Arizona State University show strengths in engineering fields, including civil, electrical, mechanical and in the case of University of Arizona, chemical engineering (Table 2). Table 2: Individual University Rankings in Arizona
Arizona University’s Am ong Top 25 of All Universities By Field Field University Total University Research University of Arizona (22nd) Astronomy University of Arizona (1st) Earth Sciences Arizona State University (10th) University of Arizona (20th) Engineering Total University of Arizona (18th) Chemical Engineering University of Arizona (26th) Civil Engineering Arizona State University (18th) University of Arizona (22nd) Electrical Engineering Arizona State University (24th) University of Arizona (19th) M echanical Engineering Arizona State University (22nd) University of Arizona (11th)
In federal research funding to universities, Arizona is a leader in NASA and NSF research funding—reflecting Arizona’s strengths in astronomy, earth sciences and engineering. Across Arizona’s three research universities, the state ranks highly in key federal agency R&D funding, standing 9th among all states in NASA research funding to universities and 14th in NSF funding. Federal research funding to universities in Arizona, however, is falling off the pace of national growth, similar to recent trends in overall non-bioscience university research funding in Arizona. From FY 1996 to FY 2000, federal research funding to universities grew in Arizona by only nine percent compared to 12 percent nationally. Closer examination shows this fall off in growth relative to the nation is due to declines in NASA funding and slower growth in DOD, but NSF funding is outpacing the nation (Figures 3 and 4, next page)
5 Figure 3: Percentage of Change in Federal Agency Funding for Arizona vs. U.S., FY 1996–2000 , 90%
81.5% 80%
Arizona 70% United States
60% 53.5% 53.9%
50%
40% 34.3%
27.4% 30% Percentage Change Percentage 25.5%
17.3% 20% 14.7%
10% 3.2%
0% HHS NSF NASA Other Research DoD -6.4% Funding -10% Agency
Figure 4: Arizona Universities Federal Research Funding, FY 1996–2000
$250
$200
NSF $150 NASA DoD $100 Millions of Dollars
HHS $50
Other Research $0 Funding FY 1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000
6 PEER RECOGNITION In peer recognition conducted by US News & World Report, Arizona’s research universities are also among the national leaders in fields of geology, analytical chemistry, optics, and applied mathematics (Table 3). Table 3: Individual University Rankings and Peer Assessments for Arizona
US News & World Report Ranking and Peer Assessment Score Field Institution Rank Peer Assessment Score (out of 5) Engineering, General University of Arizona 41 3.3 Industrial/Manufacturing Arizona State Univ. 18 N/A Ph.D. Programs in the Sciences Geology University of Arizona 7 4.1 Arizona State Univ. 25 3.3 Hydrogeology University of Arizona 1 N/A Sedimentology/Stratigraphy University of Arizona 4 N/A Tectonics/Structure University of Arizona 4 N/A Chemistry University of Arizona 37 3.4 Arizona State Univ. 54 3 Analytical Chemistry University of Arizona 6 N/A Applied Mathematics University of Arizona 21 3.7 Arizona State Univ. 44 3.1 Physics University of Arizona 38 3.3 Arizona State Univ. 52 3 Atomic/Molecular/Optical/ Plasma University of Arizona 12 N/A Computer Science University of Arizona 35 3.2 Arizona State Univ. 55 2.7 Mathematics University of Arizona 42 3.4 Arizona State Univ. 60 3 * Bold is a major category. Indented Field is a Sub discipline of a larger category. Sub disciplines do not have Peer Assessment Scores.
7 PUBLICATIONS/CITATIONS Analysis of publications/citations in the ISI Thomson Scientific Database shows significant diversity across research fields. We have used criteria of at least 150 publications and relative impact above 1.30, which measures percent of citations per publication in Arizona to percent of citations per publication for the nation in that field. Altogether there are 15 non-bioscience fields where Arizona stands out. Key strengths in publications/citation analysis are found in environment/ecology, earth sciences, plant sciences, space sciences and physics (Table 4). Table 4: Top Fields in Publication, FY 1997–2001 Top Fields in Publications, FY 1997-2001 (at least 150 publications and relative citation impact of 40% higher) Percent Higher Relative Change in Citation Publication Publications Impact than Concentration 1996-2000 to Field Publications US Ratio 1997-2001 Space Science 1,482 1.55 5.56 72 Appl Phys/Cond Matt/Mat Sci 1,441 1.50 0.91 (19) Earth Sciences 1,053 1.63 1.91 99 Environment/Ecology 1,010 1.44 1.89 202 Physics 897 1.46 0.92 64 Plant Sciences 488 1.92 1.20 91 Chemistry & Analysis 402 1.46 0.70 35 Elect & Electronic Engn 378 1.69 1.09 0 Optics & Acoustics 371 1.43 1.64 (24) Materials Sci and Engn 354 1.60 0.51 (11) Entomology/Pest Control 257 1.72 2.18 20 Mechanical Engineering 248 1.48 0.80 (4) Chemistry 234 2.74 0.47 29 Civil Engineering 233 2.25 1.84 (1) Engineering Mgmt/General 169 2.14 1.48 22
GRANT ANALYSIS To gain a deeper assessment of research focus areas, Battelle conducted a specialized analysis of the substance of grant activities using a sophisticated cluster analysis that examines how grants relate to one another based on the actual research activities underway in each grant. To undertake this cluster analysis, we used a proprietary data-mining tool, known as Starlight, which identifies textual similarities in each of the grants’ abstracts. Battelle developed this tool for use by the intelligence community for pattern recognition and has applied it in its own efforts to identify technology focus areas within its overall research activities across its many offices and laboratories.
8 In this cluster effort, we are looking for those areas of research where both concentration of activity and excellence are demonstrated by having: • A significant number of research grants awarded through rigorous peer-review processes such as those at NSF, DOD and NASA; and • A broad base of principal investigators, along with prominent researchers who hold multiple peer-review grants. We have focused on peer-reviewed grants awarded from 1997 to 2001, which constitute over 1,100 new grant awards. Because of disparities in the grant information provided by NSF (good descriptors) versus the grant information provided by other agencies’ data bases (poor descriptors), it was decided to make two Starlight runs: one with NSF data only, and one with all other agency data. The results were generally consistent with respect to cluster themes. The results from the two Starlight runs show ten “significant clusters,” namely clusters of grant activities that have more than 50 grant awards and a base of principal investigators that exceeds 40 (see Table 5).
9 Table 5: Grant Clusters from Starlight Analysis Total Number of Number by Number Cluster Title Number of Clusters University of PIs Grants ASU – 80 ECOLOGICAL 23 338 UA – 215 305 SCIENCES NAU - 43 ASU – 9 AGRICULTURAL 2 95 UA – 80 NA SCIENCES NAU – 6 ASU – 48 EARTH SCIENCES 8 128 UA – 73 80 (GEOLOGY) NAU – 7 ASU – 13 SPACE SCIENCES 7 69 UA – 55 59 NAU – 1 COMPUTER MODELING ASU – 114 and SIMULATION 5 200 UA – 82 265 SOFTWARE NAU – 4 ASU – 16 ANTHROPOLOGY 3 57 UA – 36 63 NAU – 5 ASU – 28 MATHEMATICS 2 61 UA – 22 124 NAU – 11 ASU – 13 EVOLUTIONARY 4 75 UA – 56 71 BIOLOGY NAU – 6 ASU – 16 ELECTRONICS/OPTICAL 5 54 UA – 38 59 SCIENCES NAU – 0 ASU – 52 CHEMISTRY and 7 120 UA – 61 127 MATERIALS SCIENCES NAU – 7
10 Another way to depict the Starlight analysis is through a data visualization approach presented in Figure 5 below. Below is a data visualization of NSF grant awards over the period 1997 to 2002. The clusters highlighted in the picture represent technology areas with the highest concentration of grants, with the arrows pointing to the specific clusters in each cluster area. Not reflected in the picture is the agriculture cluster area because it is based on grant awards from USDA. Figure 5: Starlight Cluster Presentation
Electronics/Optical NSF Grants for ASU, NAU, Sciences and UA
Source: NSF 1997-2002 Chemistry/Material Sciences
Computer Mathematics Modeling / Simulation
Anthropology Planetary Sciences
Earth Sciences
Ecological Sciences Evolutionary Biology
Note: NSF Grant abstracts from the three Arizona state universities were loaded into data visualization software called Starlight. Starlight created “clusters” of grants based on textual similarities in the grant abstracts. The clusters highlighted in the picture represent technology areas with the highest concentrations of grants.
11 A Closer Look at the Research Clusters
A more detailed examination of the ten topical areas contained in the grant clusters reveals the depth and breadth of the research in the three institutions.
ECOLOGICAL SCIENCES Arizona is very well endowed with expertise and resources in the ecological sciences at all three universities. Over three hundred principal investigators are engaged in a wide variety of research projects and publications have grown strongly from 1996 to 2001, showing a 20 percent increase (Table 6). At Northern Arizona University, the College of Ecosystem Science and Management includes the Ecological Restoration Institute, the Merriam Powell Center of Environmental Research and the Forestry Department. At the University of Arizona ecological sciences are focused in the departments of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and Soil, Water and Environmental Science and the Institute for Planet Earth; and at Arizona State University in the Department of Ecology and Organismal Biology. Table 6: Ecological Sciences Publication Indexes Ecological Sciences Publication Indexes Field Publications Publication Percent Higher Concentration Relative Citation Ratio Impact than US Entomology/Pest Control 257 2.18 72% Environmental Studies, Geography & Development 180 2.19 -18% Environment/Ecology 1,010 1.89 44% Environment Engineering/Energy 110 0.88 151% Environment Medical & Public Health 65 0.50 49%
Northern Arizona University. Research covers current conservation issues, environmental planning, conflicts about resource utilization, ecosystems, natural resource recreation, and other aspects of the natural environment including: • Watershed restoration, including channel restoration and monitoring; • Sediment transport analysis and modeling; • Urban and rural stream and river repair; • Water pollution and wastewater standards research and development; • Urban drainage modeling and analysis; • Land management and restoration practices designed to sustain ecosystems; • Carbon cycle and global climate change;
12 • Renewable energy—solar and wind; and • Forest management. The Colorado Plateau Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (CPCESU) is a cooperative network, transcending political and institutional boundaries, which creates innovative opportunities for research, education, and technical assistance in support of the management and stewardship by partner agencies of the Colorado Plateau's natural, cultural, and social resources. The Ecological Restoration Institute is a new initiative to restore forest health. The Center for Sustainable Environments involves 27 Native American tribes in a broad range of sustainability research, including conservation biology, sustainable community development, and food systems analysis. Arizona State University. A very important and central ecology project is the Central Arizona– Phoenix Long-Term Ecological Research (CAP LTER) Project funded by the National Science Foundation, in which Phoenix is a “living laboratory,” monitoring the effects of the urban environment on plants, insects, amphibians and mammals. It is one of two such centers in the U.S. with $1 million in annual NSF funding. Other related programs include the NASA- sponsored Urban Environmental Monitoring of 100 Cities, Agrarian Landscapes in Transition, Networking Urban Ecological Models, and the Greater Phoenix 2100. Related research activities include: • Physiological ecology, of amphibians and reptiles; • Organismal biology applied to conservation and management; • Environmentally induced diseases and environmental toxicology with focus on heavy metals/lead poisoning and pesticides; • Conservation of desert herpetofauna; • GIS applications in ecology and resource management; and • Ecological modeling addressing questions of the relationship among spatial patterns, ecological processes, and scale. University of Arizona. The Institute for the Study of Planet Earth (ISPE) provides an integrating point for ecological research, including: • Hydrology and water resources; • Ecosystems, soils, and biogeochemistry; • Weather and climate variability and predictability; • Land use and land-cover change; • Climate, environment, and human health; • Agriculture and ranching; • Engineering for a sustainable future; and • Remote sensing of natural and anthropogenic environmental change. The Advanced Resources Technology Laboratory (ART) is an interdisciplinary research group in the School of Renewable Natural Resources that provides state-of-the-art tools in computer analysis and modeling, geographic information systems (GIS), remote sensing and artificial
13 intelligence to assess and analyze the natural resource base of Arizona and other southwestern arid lands. UA is also the lead group in a new $16 million, multi-university center that is developing ways to efficiently manage water resources in semiarid regions. The SAHRA STC (Science and Technology Center) is developing water management strategies that integrate and accommodate a wide variety of needs, both environmental and human. And the Arizona Water Resources Research Center (WRRC) facilitates university research at all three Arizona universities on water problems of critical importance to the state and region. It is also important to note the number of graduates pursuing degrees in the respective clusters (Table 7). The ecological sciences at Arizona institutions graduate the second highest number of students of any cluster, with the University of Arizona and Northern Arizona University comprising the greatest share of the degrees at nearly 80 percent between the two universities. While most Arizona institutions offer programs in these areas, the University of Arizona makes up more than half of the degrees with about 54 percent and Northern Arizona University makes up roughly 24 percent of the degrees, with both institutions offering degrees at all levels except Associates. Table 7: Ecological Science Degrees Degrees in Ecological Sciences AY 1999 - 2001 Program Areas Associates Bachelors Masters Ph.D's Total Number of Degrees Conservation & Renewable Natural Resources, Other 25 5 8 38 Ecology 177 15 19 211 Environmental & Pollution Control Technologies 43 43 Environmental Control Technologies, Other 4 4 Environmental Science/Studies 5 265 6 276 Environmental/Environmental Health Engineering 31 22 3 56 Farm and Ranch Management 1 1 Forestry Sciences 81 36 11 128 Forestry, General 1 1 Natural Resources Management & Protective Services, Other 6 16 8 30 Natural Resources Conservation, General 13 24 15 52 Natural Resources Management and Policy 26 10 36
Water Quality/Wastewater Treatment Technologies 27 27 Water Resources Engineering 20 51 25 96 Wildlife and Wildlands Management 113 31 9 153 Ecological Sciences Total 81 757 216 98 1,152
14 AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES Agricultural sciences in Arizona address the growth patterns of crops and the influence of land and water quality in the southwest, and are therefore closely related to both ecological sciences and plant sciences. Agribusiness is the business of food and fiber production and the technology necessary to change a raw material (a commodity) or an idea into a new product or business for the world’s consumers. Arizona universities publish strongly in agricultural related topics and have a strong impact, as measured by citations (Table 8). Table 8: Agricultural Science Publication Indexes
Agricultural Sciences Publication Indexes Field Publications Publication Percent Higher Concentration Relative Citation Ratio Impact than US Agricultural Chemistry 56 0.44 25% Agriculture/Agronomy 126 0.74 39% Aquatic Sciences 136 0.53 23% Plant Sciences 488 1.20 92% University of Arizona. A number of departments and centers focus on agricultural issues in the southwestern US. These include agribusiness; agricultural biosystems, which merge the physical with the biological sciences, and include irrigation and water resource engineering, biosystems/biological engineering, and bio-environmental engineering; the Controlled Environmental Agriculture Center; the Plant Genomics Institute, which specializes in genome/EST sequencing (rice, corn, tomato, cotton); and Tucson Area Agricultural Centers, which provide facilities and services in support of the research, teaching, extension, and public service activities of the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. Northern Arizona University. As noted earlier, the Center for Sustainable Environments (CSE) serves as a catalyst for collaborative research, education, training, and stewardship in the application of sustainable land, water, and energy use practices. Sustainable agriculture is one focus area. Arizona State University. The Morrison School of Agribusiness and Resource Management provides academic programs that combine business and technology in food marketing and management. Four Arizona Institutions provide the 331 degrees in agricultural sciences from 1999-2001 (Table 9): • Arizona Western College; • Central Arizona College; • Prescott College; and • University of Arizona. While Arizona Western and Central Arizona Colleges had only eight degrees at the Associates level over the three-year period, Prescott College had eight at the Bachelor and Master’s levels. The University of Arizona made up 95 percent of the total degrees awarded in agricultural
15 sciences, primarily at the Bachelor’s level, though issuing nearly half of these degrees at the Master’s and Ph.D. levels as well. Table 9: Agriculture Sciences Degrees
Degrees in Agricultural Sciences AY 1999 - 2001 Program Areas Associates Bachelors Masters Ph.D's Total Number of Degrees Agricultural Engineering 19 13 12 44 Agricultural Plant Pathology 69 15 Agriculture/Agricultural Sciences, Other 3 8 11 Agronomy and Crop Science 1 1 Animal Sciences, General 85 10 9 104 Animal Sciences, Other 3 3 Genetics, Plant and Animal 10 3 13 Plant Sciences, General 5 40 4 7 56 Range Science and Management 2 2 3 7 Soil Sciences 12 40 25 77 Agricultural Sciences Total 8 169 86 68 331
EARTH SCIENCES Closely related to the environmental and ecological research, Earth Sciences also explores the earth’s crust, seismic activity, and mineral resources. At least eighty principal investigators are engaged in this research area and publish regularly (see Table 10). Table 10: Earth Sciences Publication Indexes
Earth Sciences Publication Indexes Field Publications Publication Percent Higher Concentration Relative Citation Ratio Impact than US Earth Sciences 1,053 1.91 63% Geology/Petroleum/ Mining Engineering 22 0.46 139% Arizona State University. The Geology and Geography Departments conduct research on earth surface and interior processes. Geology strengths include: • Solid state geochemistry and mineral physics; • Meteorites and cosmochemistry; • Active tectonics, geomorphology and quantitative structural geology; • Astrobiology; • Deep earth processes, geophysics; • Geological remote Sensing Laboratory(GRSL); • GeoSIMS Laboratory for characterization studies; and
16 • Vulcanology, including lava flow morphology and rheology. Geology is linked to chemistry and biology via an emerging strength in biogeochemistry; and to planetary sciences, with research on earth and Mars. Geography strengths include: • Earth surface processes, including geomorphology; • Remote sensing; • Geographical information systems (GIS); and • Natural resources and the environment. Northern Arizona University. The Department of Geology covers a fairly broad area, but the theme is in field geological research, with a focus on the Colorado Plateau. Fundamental research includes specific problems in: • Neotectonics; • Volcanology; • Igneous and metamorphic petrology; and • Sedimentology. Applied research has an environmental orientation, and includes a research group funded through USGS—the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center—that examines nutrient recycling. The Department also has a high profile in paleontology (e.g., a Mammoth discovery). University of Arizona. Research interests include: • Geomechanics and excavation, including rock mechanics; • Geomorphology, using modeling, fieldwork, small-scale experiments, and remote sensing techniques to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics of the Earth's surface; • The Southern Arizona Seismic Observatory (SASO), which conducts research on different aspects of seismology, fault mechanics, active tectonics, and geodynamics; and • The Center for Mineral Resources, which specializes in economic Geology. Five schools in Arizona offer a degree in earth sciences/geology (Table 11): • Arizona Western College; • Eastern Arizona College; • Arizona State University; • Northern Arizona University; and • University of Arizona. The latter three institutions comprised 95 percent of these degrees with more than half being awarded at The University of Arizona. Nearly all of the degrees during this time frame were awarded at the bachelor’s level and above.
17 Table 11: Earth Sciences Degrees
Degrees in Earth Sciences (Geology) AY 1999 - 2001 Program Areas Associates Bachelors Masters Ph.D's Total Number of Degrees Earth and Planetary Sciences 5 10 14 29 Geochemistry 1 1 Geological Engineering 27 6 8 41 Geology 1 162 86 41 290 Mining and Mineral Engineering 49 10 1 60 Mining Tech./Technician 1 1 Earth Sciences (Geology) Total 2 244 112 64 422
SPACE SCIENCES The combination of astronomy and planetary sciences makes this area a major research and training focus for Arizona at all three universities. They have produced a wealth of space science publications over the past ten years (see Table 12). Table 12: Space Science Publications Space Sciences Publication Indexes Field Publications Publication Percent Higher Concentration Relative Citation Ratio Impact than US Physics 897 0.92 46% Space Science 1,482 5.56 55%
University of Arizona. Ranked #1 in research grants, the Department of Astronomy and Steward Observatory has a very impressive program of research that ranges from telescope design and optics to theoretical astrophysics. Research is grouped into specialties such as infrared astronomy, X-ray astronomy, astrochemistry, quasars, solar system, stellar astronomy, asteroids, brown dwarfs, cosmology, galactic astronomy, supernovae, and extra-solar planets. The Department of Planetary Sciences and Lunar and Planetary Laboratory conducts: • Astronomical studies of solar system bodies, and stellar and interstellar objects; • Laboratory analysis of extraterrestrial matter to seek clues about the origin and early evolution of the solar system; • Investigations of the surfaces, atmospheres, and magnetospheres of planets; • Studies of the sun; analyses of imaging and spectroscopic planetary data; • Efforts to plot the distribution of useful resources in space and to develop techniques for beneficial use of such resources; • Efforts to discover and study other planetary systems; and
18 • Theoretical and experimental investigations of planetary interiors, tectonics, the interplanetary/interstellar medium, cosmic rays, cosmic magnetic fields, and the formation of stars and planetary systems. Arizona State University. The astronomy group's research spans a wide variety of topics in observational astronomy and theoretical astrophysics, including studies of: • The solar system; • The structure and physics of the interstellar medium, novae and cataclysmic variables, compact objects, and galactic structure; and • Cosmology. The Planetary Exploration Laboratory conducts research on the geology of a wide variety of planetary environments via integrated field, laboratory, and remote sensing investigations; planet Mars is a particular focus. The Mars Space Flight Facility is NASA mission control for two instruments currently in orbit around Mars and another scheduled for landing in 2004. The ASU Sat Lab conducts a student satellite program that engages undergraduates in satellite design and construction for actual deployment. ASU has also entered into a formal agreement with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory that will allow the two institutions to share resources and to significantly expand on past collaborative research and teaching activities in space science and exploration. Northern Arizona University. The Department of Physics and Astronomy is home to active research and training programs in surface physics and astrophysics. Some of the research topics sponsored by the NASA Space Grant include: • Infrared spectra of embedded luminous stars; • Heterogeneous reactions on water ice films at stratospheric temperatures; • The composition of Titan’s troposphere; and • P.I.E. (Probing for Ice on Europa). Among all the clusters, space sciences offer the fewest number of graduates from 1999–2001 with only 77, yet all of these came from The University of Arizona at the bachelor’s level and above (Table 13). Table 13: Space Sciences Degrees
Degrees in Space Sciences AY 1999 - 2001 Program Areas Associates Bachelors Masters Ph.D's Total Number of Degrees Astronomy 23 6 13 42 Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology 17 13 5 35 Planetary Sciences Total 0 40 19 18 77
COMPUTER MODELING AND SIMULATION SOFTWARE Computer modeling and simulation ranges from basic algorithms to specific applications in manufacturing, energy, communications, electronics and materials. A large number of principal investigators (265) are involved in this work. We believe that the average publication record
19 shown in Table 14 is due to their papers more likely being published in journals associated with the application areas. Table 14: Computer Modeling and Simulation Publications Computer Modeling and Simulation Publication Indexes Field Publications Publication Percent Higher Concentration Relative Citation Ratio Impact than US Computer Sciences & Engineering 188 1.28 -9% Information Technology & Communication Systems 93 0.88 86% Arizona State University has a strong department in Computer Science and Engineering, plus a Collaborative Program for Ubiquitous Computing, a Computational Materials Science Group, and a Partnership for Research in Stereo Modeling. The department has 1600 undergraduate students and about 400 graduate students and has established a Consortium for Embedded and Internetworking Technology (CEINT) that is unique in the nation; it attracts $1 million in annual revenue from Intel and Motorola. Other related centers include the Design Automation Laboratory, Telecommunications Research Center, and the Systems Science and Engineering Research Center. Relevant research areas are: • Artificial intelligence applied to distributed planning systems, incremental planning, and applications. • Multi-media data mining. • Graphics and visualization. • Advanced database research and multimedia information systems. Current research is targeted toward commercial and manufacturing applications. Funded by NSF and industrial sources, it is emerging as a national leader. • Distributed processing and parallel high performance systems that facilitate the fault tolerant usage of computer networks and multi-processors. This has NSF and industrial support. • Microprocessor design, involving extensive research collaboration with companies, such as AT&T, En. Gen. Inc., Enhanced Software Inc., Inter-Tel, Motorola, Municipal Services & Software, and Unizone, Inc. • Networks of all types—computer networks, wireless networks and communications, mobile computing, optical networks, and biosensor networks. • Software engineering spanning the software life cycle and covering central as well as distributed and parallel systems, web-based software, middleware, and software architecture construction. University of Arizona also has strong Computer Science and Computer Engineering departments, which are linked through collaborative research with Electrical Engineering, Physics, Environment, Materials and Optics, and Medical departments. Their areas of research include: • Multi-modal data, digital libraries, multimedia information retrieval, and data mining;
20 • Compilers, program analysis and optimization, programming language implementation; • Network and transport protocols for high speed, for mobility and for wireless links; • Geometric pattern matching, and spatial data bases; • Algorithms for mobile robots; • Intelligent information management systems, and agent-based artificial intelligence; • Software engineering: specification and design of software systems, automated test data generation, mathematical models for program comprehension; • Design and analysis of algorithms for computational biology, algorithm implementation, combinatorial optimization and bioinformatics; • XML indexing and query processing, high performance spatial and multidimensional databases, scalable web servers, data mining and warehousing, and parallel and distributed processing; and • Computer and network architecture, operating systems, distributed systems, and systems programming. Northern Arizona University. Faculty in Computer Science and Engineering has expertise in: • Artificial intelligence; • Software engineering; • Image processing; and • Digital signal processing. While many of the institutions in Arizona offer degrees in computer modeling and simulation areas, roughly 84 percent of them are awarded at the University of Arizona and Arizona State University combined, 15 percent and 69 percent of the total, respectively. Also of note is the fact that 691 (72 percent) of the 960 degrees awarded at all Arizona institutions were awarded at the associates and bachelor levels (Table 15). Table 15: Computer Modeling and Simulation Degrees Degrees in Computer Modeling and Simulation AY 1999 - 2001 Program Areas Associates Bachelors Masters Ph.D's Total Number of Degrees Computer Engineering 55 299 354 Computer Programming 3 10 13 Computer Science 12 252 244 25 533 Computer Systems Analysis 60 60 Computer Modeling and Simulation Total 130 561 244 25 960
21 ANTHROPOLOGY Anthropology in Arizona covers a broad set of research interests involving over sixty principal investigators, which range from archeology, social behavior, and anthropological genetics to linguistic anthropology and specific issues with indigenous peoples of the southwest. There is some overlap with ecology and evolutionary biology. The ISI publication database does not break out the field of anthropology, so we have no information on their productivity. Arizona State University. With 34 full-time faculty plus other staff members, the Department of Anthropology offers courses and degree programs covering diverse areas of the discipline. Research is undertaken in all the major sub disciplines: archaeology, physical anthropology, sociocultural anthropology, and linguistics. The Institute of Human Origins is among the preeminent centers of the world for the study of human origins and evolution. University of Arizona. The Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology (BARA), with over 20 professionals, applies social science knowledge toward an enhanced understanding of real-world problems. Its diverse range of research activities—in both domestic and international contexts— addresses critical human issues dealing with change and development, power and poverty, gender and ethnicity, growth and learning, social justice and equity, and environmental change and sustainability. Northern Arizona University. Ten faculty and students are engaged in applied research in cultural anthropology, archeology, and linguistic anthropology. While six institutions in Arizona offer degrees in the field of anthropology, the University of Arizona, Arizona State University, and Northern Arizona University account for 98 percent of this total from 1999 to 2001. Totals for all institutions are shown in Table 16. Table 16: Anthropology Degrees
Degrees in Anthropology AY 1999 - 2001 Program Areas Associates Bachelors Masters Ph.D's Total Number of Degrees Anthropology 10 551 180 63 804 Anthropology Total 10 551 180 63 804
MATHEMATICS The integration of applied mathematics with computer science and engineering is an essential research foundation for Arizona. Applied mathematics is the area of cross-fertilization between mathematical theory and applications in the natural, economic, engineering, social, and psychological sciences. Over 120 principal investigators are involved, and they are cited roughly 25 percent more than other institutions in the field (Table 17).
22 Table 17: Mathematics Publications Mathematics Publication Indexes Field Publications Publication Percent Higher Concentration Relative Citation Ratio Impact than US Mathematics 305 0.80 35%
Arizona State University. Applied mathematics research includes: • Studies in nonlinear dynamical systems, chaos, fractals, and related areas of perturbation theory and ordinary, partial, and functional differential equations. Specific applications in mathematical biology, flow instabilities, and control theory. • Control and systems theory, including adaptive nonlinear and infinite dimensional control, (differential) geometry of highly nonlinear systems, stochastic partial differential equations, and applications to vision and pattern recognition. • Ordinary, partial, and functional differential equations and related areas such as bifurcation, perturbation and stability theories, and dynamical systems. • Mathematical biology concerns cellular and neural modeling, ecology, epidemics, genetics, physiology, and population dynamics. University of Arizona. Applied mathematics is a highly interdisciplinary research topic with applications ranging from physics to the environment. Some selected focus areas include: • Differential equations, integral equations; • Materials theory, modeling and simulation, structural defects; • Mathematics programming applications in production systems design; • Nonlinear dynamics (pattern formation, envelope equations, weak turbulence) and applications to hydrodynamics, optics and biology; • Digital communication/data storage systems, data compression, digital signal/image processing; • Optics and laser modeling; • Remote sensing; and • Fluid mechanics. Northern Arizona University. Mathematics research is focused on: • Combinatorics and combinatorial group theory; • Differential equations including nonlinear PDEs; • Dynamical systems, nonlinear functional analysis and numerical analysis; • Operations research; and • Statistics (measures of agreement, mixed linear models, nonlinear regression, variance components), and topology.
23 Most Arizona institutions offer degrees in mathematical science fields with the majority of them awarded at the bachelor’s level (see Table 18). Most of these degrees are awarded by Arizona State University and the University of Arizona. Table 18: Mathematics Sciences Degrees
Degrees in Mathematics Sciences AY 1999 - 2001 Program Areas Associates Bachelors Masters Ph.D's Total Number of Degrees Applied Mathematics, General 25 15 40 Mathematical Statistics 25 25 Mathematics 19 244 77 31 371 Mathematics, Other 99 Mathematics Total 19 253 127 46 445
EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY This area involves over seventy principal investigators, many of whom also have strong ties to the ecological sciences and anthropology. The ISI database does not break out evolutionary biology as a separate category, so we do not have data on their publication experience. Arizona State University. The Department of Biology has a 40-person faculty with related research programs in urban ecology, host-pathogen biology, biological stoichiometry, astrobiology, behavioral biology, molecular biology, bioimaging, computational biology, and biology and society. Evolutionary biology research focuses on: • Evolutionary theory, mating systems, reptilian reproductive physiology, conservation biology, and zoos and endangered species. • Vertebrate evolution, primarily amphibians and reptiles of arid regions; mate recognition and sexual selection in amphibians and reptiles; conservation of desert herpetofauna. University of Arizona. The Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology maintains five zoological collections that are Arizona's largest and among the nation's largest regionally oriented collections. They represent an irreplaceable resource of material and information on the unique biota of the southwestern United States and northwestern Mexico. The Center for Insect Science and the Genetics Program are also located at UA. Key research activities include: • Evolutionary biology and behavioral ecology, especially in natural bird populations. • Mechanics of molecular evolution; transmission genetics; asexual organisms and organelle genes. • Plant evolution and global change. • Evolutionary genetics; transposable elements in Drosophila; insect disease vectors. • Population and evolutionary genetics; chromosomal evolution; speciation; mammalian evolution. • Evolutionary ecology; patterns of species diversity; theory and mechanisms of habitat selection and population dynamics; structure of mammalian communities.
24 ELECTRONICS AND OPTICAL SCIENCES The cluster analysis showed a high level of relationship between these two areas, with at least sixty principal investigators. Both the University of Arizona and Arizona State University have very strong electrical engineering departments and specialized centers of excellence in leading edge areas of electronics, photonics, and semiconductor research, which are closely linked to the high tech industry in the region and nationally. Electrical engineering at both schools is also linked to their computer science and engineering programs. Other important linkages are with Bioengineering, Materials and Optical Sciences. University of Arizona’s Optical Sciences program is number one at the graduate level in the United States. Arizona universities are leading producers of publications in optics, analytical chemistry/spectroscopy, and electrical engineering, with high impact (see Table 19). Table 19: Electronics and Optics Publications Electronics & Optics Publication Indexes Field Publications Publication Percent Higher Concentration Relative Citation Ratio Impact than US Optics & Acoustics 371 1.64 43% Electronics & Electronic Engineering 378 1.09 69% Instrumentation/ Measurement 82 0.49 33% Spectroscopy/ Instrumentation/ Analytical Sciences 257 0.52 27% AI, Robotics & Auto Control 153 0.89 5%
University of Arizona. Research has two main themes: photonics/electro-optics systems and electronics manufacturing. Key areas include: • Broadband networks and multimedia communications; • Efficient parallel retrieval and processing of data by moving the bulk of database operations from electronics to optics; • Application of optical interconnects for use in high-speed massively parallel computer systems; • Application of optical components and optical interconnection architectures to communications problems in parallel processing systems; • Electromagnetics, microwaves and antennas; • Microelectronic devices and processing focused on environmental factors in the design and development of new tools and processes in the semiconductor industry; • Electrical and thermal characteristics of electronic device packages, and interconnected devices;
25 • Volume optical storage, pattern recognition, and optoelectronic devices/systems; and • Photonic techniques that enhance the capabilities of information processing, communication, and sensing systems. UA has two NSF Centers in collaboration with universities throughout the U.S.: • NSF/SRC Engineering Research Center for Environmentally Benign Semiconductor Manufacturing – Integrating Design for the Environment into new processes and tools for the industry is the technical driver and the common theme of the Center’s research. The Center’s interdisciplinary research efforts involve six universities, and about 30 professors, 30 undergraduates, and 50 graduate students in 11 different academic disciplines. • NSF Center for Microcontamination Control – Shared with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, the focus is on thin oxide quality, particle and film nucleation and growth, electronic characterization of ultra-thin oxide films, and CMP improvements. The Optical Sciences Center is recognized internationally for its strong research programs and partnerships with industry. It has over 50 faculty members, including 2 Nobel Laureates, and 190 graduate students. Center revenues are about $20M/year with $3M from State and the rest from DoD, NASA, Industry and NIH. Focus areas include quantum optics, optoelectronics, optical communications, optical systems design and fabrication, optical imaging systems and analysis, and metrology, test, and measurement. Arizona State University. Areas of leading edge research include: • Electromagnetics, including computational electromagnetics; microwave circuits; wireless RF circuits; semiconductor device simulations; • Nanoelectronics for low power, high performance components and circuits; • Fiber optics and electro-optics; • Electronic circuits and mixed-signal integrated circuit design, including impact of device design on system performance through behavioral modeling and ultra-small device fabrication; • Communication Systems and Signal Processing, including VLSI architectures and algorithms for signal processing and image processing, low power system design, high level synthesis for low power, CAD tools for VLSI, and VLSI design; and • Silicon and III-V semiconductor Quantum Dots, properties and applications.
26 ASU has several centers related to electronics and telecommunication with significant ties to industry: • Center for Low Power Electronics Research – Collaboration with UA to address fundamental, industry-relevant research problems in the design of ultra-low power portable computing and communication systems. • Center for Solid State Sciences – focuses on electron microscopy and other advanced characterization tools, materials and device integration. Within CSSS, the Center for High Resolution Electron Micrsocopy (CHREM), an NSF Center, advances knowledge in and applications of high-resolution electron microscopy. • Center for Solid State Electronics Research (CSSER) – focuses on fabrication and processing for solid-state electronics, molecular electronics, biochips and MEMS. Current emphasis is on CEMOS process, nanotechnology and fluidics, and molecular electronics. The Nanostructures Research Group performs modeling and experiments for next generation systems based on quantum dots, strained silicon (on relaxed SiGe) and ultra-submicron devices. • Communication Circuits and Systems Research Center (Connection One) – Goal is the unification of wireless systems with the conventional wireline infrastructure. A key focus area is integration of complex RF, analog and digital systems on a chip. Northern Arizona University. A small number of faculty (approximately 6) have interests and experience in microelectronic materials and devices. Five Arizona institutions offer degrees in electronics/optical sciences with the vast majority of these awards occurring at the Bachelor’s level and above (see Table 20): • Arizona State University; • Embry Riddle Aeronautical University-Prescott; • ITT Technical Institute; • Northern Arizona University; and • University Of Arizona. Table 20: Electronic/Optical Sciences Degrees Degrees in Electronics/Optical Sciences AY 1999 - 2001 Program Areas Associates Bachelors Masters Ph.D's Total Number of Degrees Electrical & Electronic Engineering and Related Technologies 283 136 419 Electrical, Electronics & Communication 665 479 102 1,246 Optics 82 54 136 Electronics/Optical Sciences Total 283 801 561 156 1,801
27 CHEMISTRY AND MATERIALS SCIENCE It was impossible to resolve this cluster grouping into separate materials and chemistry clusters; it appears to be a materials chemistry concentration with well over 100 principal investigators. Analytical chemistry and spectroscopy (both development and application) are broadly strong at Arizona State and University of Arizona, while Northern Arizona has a niche strength in environmental chemistry. The publication record and impact in materials science and chemistry are impressive (see Table 21). Table 21: Chemistry and Material Sciences Publications
Chemistry and Materials Sciences Publication Indexes Field Publications Publication Percent Higher Concentration Relative Citation Ratio Impact than US Applied Physics/Conductive Materials/Materials Sciences 1,441 0.91 50% Chemical Engineering 51 0.20 4% Chemistry 234 0.47 174% Materials Science and Engineering 354 0.51 60% Organic Chemistry/ Polymer Science 211 0.34 0 Physical Chemical /Chemical Physics 589 0.73 34%
University of Arizona. Illustrative activities include: • Bio-mimetic materials; • Diffusion and permeability in polymers for barrier materials and coatings; • Intelligent materials; • Conducting polymers; • Organic optical materials; • Electronic packaging materials research; • Thin film growth and characterization; • Plasma chemistry and plasma-solid reaction; • Photo-enhanced reactions; • Sol-gel synthesis of ceramics and nanocomposites; • Wet chemical approaches for the generation of electronic and opto-electronic materials; and • Analytical chemistry utilizes a broad range of instrumentation to analyze interfacial processes in electronic materials, the environment and biological materials.
28 Arizona State University. Research interests include: • Materials produced by high temperature and high pressure. • Semiconductor materials processing. • Synthesis of molecules for custom device application (e.g. molecular electronics, biomolecular nanotechnology, Bio-MEMS). This area is a key component of the new Arizona Biodesign Institute, which includes a NanoBiosystems Center and the Center for Single Molecule Biophysics. • Development and application of novel microscopy techniques for material characterization. CHREM has the most comprehensive collection of advanced electron microscopes of any academic institution in the U.S. The Center is a local and regional resource for applications of high-resolution electron microscopy, including imaging, microanalysis, electron diffraction, electron holography and surface microscopy, as well as developments in methods and instrumentation. All of its expertise and facilities are available for use by the scientific community. • The Center for Solid State Electronics has a specialty in optoelectronic materials and devices. • The Computational Materials Science Group uses computer simulation to study the structure, properties, and processing of materials on the atomic scale. • The Laboratories for Growth of Novel Materials researches high temperature engineered microsystems based on GaN, the improvement of dielectric materials for microwave applications, the fundamental mechanism of III-N semiconductor growth, and development of superconductor devices for photonic applications. • The Nanostructures Research Group focuses on quantum dots in silicon and III-V materials, modeling semiconductor devices, strained silicon (on relaxed SiGe) as a material for advanced devices, physics of quantum transport, fast photo-excitation of semiconductors and development of processing technology for ultra-submicron devices. • Analytical chemistry is focused on development of new methods for analysis of trace metals in the environment and analysis of DNA and proteins. Northern Arizona University. • In the Chemistry Department, research is focused on interfacial chemistry and surface analysis of environmental systems; atmospheric chemistry; chemical genotoxicity; and natural product synthesis. • The Physics and Astronomy Department is conducting an expanding set of research activities using MEMS microsensors to detect chemical and biological species in liquid and gaseous environments, with applications to hazardous waste cleanup and military needs. With the third largest number of degrees awarded among the cluster areas, chemistry and materials sciences in Arizona accounted for more than 1,100 degrees from 1999-2001 awarded at nine different Arizona institutions. Roughly 72 percent of these degrees were awarded at the bachelor degree level among all universities (see Table 22) and the University of Arizona, Arizona State University and Northern Arizona University awarded 49 percent, 39 percent and 10 percent of the total respectively.
29 Table 22: Chemistry and Material Sciences Degrees Degrees in Chemistry and Materials Sciences AY 1999 - 2001 Program Areas Associates Bachelors Masters Ph.D's Total Number of Degrees Biochemistry 150 4 12 166 Chemical Engineering 270 39 24 333 Chemistry, General 10 305 102 77 494 Chemistry, Other 3 3 Material Engineering 27 1 28 Materials Science 47 18 19 84 Chemistry and Materials Sciences Total 10 802 164 132 1,108
30 From Research Clusters to Core Competencies
While all the areas of research strength found in Arizona meet the criteria for research breadth, depth, reputation and impact, it is not automatic that all are Arizona’s core competencies, particularly given the interest in having a foreseeable path to some commercial outcome. To take the analysis further, we have chosen to apply an industrially-focused core competency definition, which is widely used by technology-based firms. As defined by Hamel and Prahalad, in “Competing for the Future,” a competence is a bundle of skills and technologies, rather than a single discrete skill or technology. It represents the sum of learning across individual skill sets and individual organizational units. Further, three tests can be used to identify a core competency: 1. Is it a significant source of competitive differentiation? Does it provide a unique signature for the state? 2. Does it transcend a single business? Does it cover a range of businesses, both current and new? 3. Is it hard for competitors to imitate? Applying this qualitative screen to the ten individual clusters of research strength produces six areas of university-based research that in our opinion qualify as Arizona’s research core competencies. Figure 6: Research Strengths to Core Competencies
Leading Research Areas Core Competencies
Ecological Sciences
Earth Sciences Ecological Sciences Evolutionary Biology
Anthropology
Agricultural Agriculture & Sciences Plant Sciences
Space Sciences Space Sciences Computer Modeling Computer Modeling Mathematics & Simulation
Electronics & Electronics Optical Sciences & Optics
Chemistry & Material Sciences Chemistry & Materials
31 We maintain that these six core competencies meet these criteria. They are broad, deep, very competitive, and if nurtured properly, can provide a pipeline of innovative technologies and products for Arizona’s industry sectors, today and in the future. This section characterizes the six core competencies from the perspective of the total university asset base at Arizona’s disposal. We have identified each university’s research strengths in the process, but ultimate success for the state will depend on treating the three universities as a unit, a sort of “Arizona U Inc.”, a $500 million per year research engine.
ELECTRONICS AND OPTICS It is the combination and integration of electronics and optics that places Arizona in a class with very few other states (perhaps only New York and California). Therefore, in characterizing this competence, we emphasize where these two research areas converge, namely in optoelectronics, photonics, optics in computing, and both wireline and wireless applications.
Research in Electronics and Optics Our analysis of grants revealed a robust group of approximately 60 faculty working in this combined field (Table 23). Table 23: Grants and Faculty
Total Number of Number of Number Number of Principal Investigators Number of Grants by Clusters of PI’s with multiple NSF Grants Grants University ASU – 16 5 54 UA – 38 59 9 PIs NAU – 0
There are areas of collaboration between the two universities, but each university has its special focus areas. University of Arizona. Much of UA’s electrical engineering research is related to fusion of electronics and optics and is closely linked with optical, materials and computer sciences. A second theme is environmentally-friendly electronics manufacturing. Faculty are experts in: • Broadband networks and multimedia communications with particular emphasis on quality of service, routing, and resource allocation issues over wireline and wireless networks. • Efficient parallel retrieval and processing of data by moving the bulk of database operations from electronics to optics. • Application of optical interconnects for use in high-speed massively parallel computer systems, including a novel, highly-integrated, highly-scalable optical interconnect architecture called the Scalable Optical Crossbar Network (SOCN). • Application of optical components and optical interconnection architectures to communications problems in parallel processing systems, including three-dimensional optical network architectures that require simple optical implementations with existing optical hardware.
32 • Neurobiologically-inspired architectures and representations. Neuromorphic VLSI chips incorporate architectures and representations inspired by neurobiology in a mix of analog and digital circuitry. • Electromagnetics, microwaves, and antennas. • Microelectronic devices and processing focused on environmental factors in the design and development of new tools and processes in the semiconductor industry • Modeling of electrical and thermal characteristics of electronic device packages (Levels 1 and 2), and interconnected devices. • Volume optical storage. • Photonic techniques that enhance the capabilities of information processing, communication, and sensing systems. In addition, the Optical Sciences Center has significant research efforts in six areas: Quantum Optics – theoretical atom optics, nonlinear optics, atomic cooling, semiconductor nonlinear optics, optical propagation, laser theory, solid state theory and semiconductor quantum dots and quantum wells. Optoelectronics – nonlinear materials, thin films, device fabrication, displays, lasers and non linear optic devices, photorefractive polymers, nanophotonics, multilayered materials and superlattices. Optical Communications – magneto optics, storage media, optical signal processing, ODS head design, holographic storage, fiber optic systems and components, optical sensors and optical waveguides. Optical Systems Design and Fabrication – optical design and analysis, fabrication of very large optics, active optics control software, materials for optical mounts, lithography, diffractive optics, and optical coatings. Optical Imaging Systems and Analysis – acoustic imaging systems, magnetic resonance imaging systems, imaging processing and classification for radiology, pathology and ophthalmology, extreme UV microlithography imaging algorithms and active optics control software. Metrology, Test and Measurement – scanning probe microscopy, confocal microscopy, ellipsometry, interferometry, Shack-Hartmann tester for aspheric optics, thermal expansion, and absolute radiometric calibration of advanced remote sensing systems. Arizona State University. Faculty work in four areas of leading edge electronics research: Electromagnetics, including: • Electromagnetics, antenna and radar • Wireless RF Circuits. cross-section measurement, printed • Interconnection limitations in VLSI and the antenna design and analysis. development of neurally inspired systems • Microwave circuits, microwave and for VLSI to overcome these limitations. millimeter-wave semiconductor devices • Fiber optics, holography, and electro- and passive components. optics.
33 Electronic Circuits and Mixed-Signal Integrated Circuit Design, including: • Low voltage/power analog CMOS for • Wireless and wireline communication A/D converters and RF circuits; ultra transceiver systems; mixed signal IC small device fabrication. design; RF design; low power mixed- signal circuit design. • BiCMOS devices and circuits; analog integrated circuits; VLSI circuits. • Design for packagability. Communication Systems and Signal Processing, including: • Controlling QoS in integrated • Digital signal processing. services networks. • Optical networks. • VLSI architectures and algorithms for signal processing and image processing, CAD tools for VLSI design. Solid State Electronics, including: • Quantum and nanostructure devices and • Wide band gap materials for device technology. optoelectronics, high frequency, high power and high temperature applications. • Micro- and nano-electronics manufacturing and contamination control. • Molecular electronics, based on organic materials. • III-V and II-VI semiconductor materials.
Northern Arizona University. A small number of faculty (approximately 6) have interests and experience in: • Microelectronic materials and devices. • Semiconductor device fabrication and characterization. • Sensor design and development for environmental and biological applications. • Microwave devices, and antennas. • Neural networks and design verification, communication theory, modulation and detection for high-speed wireless, wireless networking, and satellite communications. • Digital signal processors and their application to communications and signal processing, with emphasis in embedded systems and networks of embedded processing elements.
Key Resources University of Arizona. UA has three NSF Centers in collaboration with universities throughout the United States: Center for Electronic Packaging Research is developing new simulation tools for high-speed interconnect systems NSF/SRC Engineering Research Center for Environmentally Benign Semiconductor Manufacturing is integrating Design for the Environment into new processes and tools. The Center’s interdisciplinary research efforts involve six universities, and about 30 professors, 30 undergraduates and 50 graduate students in 11 different academic disciplines.
34
NSF Center for Microcontamination Control, shared with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, focuses on thin oxide quality, particle and film nucleation and growth, electronic characterization of ultra-thin oxide films, and CMP improvements. Additionally, the Optical Sciences Center has three specialized facilities: • Microfabrication and Clean Room; • Thin Film Physics Laboratory; and • Optical Fabrication. In an attempt to integrate across the photonics space, a Photonic Technology Center has recently been proposed. The Photonic Technology Center (PTC) would be a multi-disciplinary research and academic Center, bringing together research and educational programs in the areas of photonics, optoelectronics, material science and engineering, electrical and computer engineering, chemical engineering, physics, chemistry, molecular biology, mathematics and physiology. With this uniquely strong resource base, it is hoped that the PTC will be able to pursue emerging research opportunities and prepare students for dynamic careers in the photonics industries, including photonic communication devices, optoelectronics components, photonic materials, nanophotonic components, biophotonic and plastic optoelectronics. In addition, UA is a finalist for an NSF Engineering Research Center that would be devoted to Intelligent Optical Networks, which compliments the Communications Center recently awarded to ASU (see below). Arizona State University has three relevant centers: Center for Low Power Electronics Research, a collaboration with UA to address fundamental, industry-relevant research problems in the design of ultra-low power portable computing and communication systems. Center for Solid State Electronics Research (CSSER) conducts research, develops technology and provides educational programs in solid-state electronics, including, CMOS, molecular electronics, biochips and MEMS. The Nanostructures Research group is a part of CSSER. Its research focus is advanced devices based on quantum dots, strained silicon (on relaxed SiGe) and development of processing technology for ultra-submicron devices. Special facilities are available for electron beam lithography, surface chemical analysis, transport measurements and chemically enhanced vapor etching (CEVE) patterning. NSF Cooperative Research Center for Communication Circuits and Systems Research (Connection 1), where the focus is “system-on-a-chip,” a new circuit technique for the higher integration of complex RF, analog and digital systems, combined with novel communication protocols, algorithms and embedded system designs. The University of Arizona is currently developing the industry/university interaction necessary to become part of this Center and has a planning grant from NSF. A strong link exists between this center and the Consortium for Embedded and Internetworking Technology (CEINT), housed at ASU, which is described below. In addition, related facilities include the W.M. Keck Laboratory (electron microscopy) and laboratories for fiber optic cable test, optoelectronic materials and device preparation, growth of novel materials for photonic applications and laser diagnostics. Northern Arizona University has two relevant facilities:
35
• The Wireless Networks Laboratory, which is integrating cutting-edge, low-cost circuit and system technology into a wireless environmental sensing network—WISARDNet—based on an evolvable architecture that will meet an immediate and critical need: to dramatically improve coverage and spatial density while greatly reducing the total cost. • The Advanced Microelectronics Laboratory (AML) is a facility for designing and fabricating integrated circuits using micro-manufacturing processes, with support from Honeywell, Intel, and Raytheon.
Summary Both the University of Arizona and Arizona State University have very strong electrical engineering departments and specialized centers of excellence in leading edge areas of electronics, nanoelectronics, photonics and advanced semiconductor research, which are closely linked to the high tech industry in the region and nationally. Electrical engineering at both schools is also linked to their computer science and engineering and materials science programs. The new NSF center, Connection 1, at ASU brings together a world-class group of scientists focused on advanced wireless technology based on “system on a chip.” The Optical Sciences Center at UA is ranked number one in the US and is recognized internationally for its strong programs and partnership with industry. Two new initiatives there are the Photonics Technology Center and the Center for Intelligent Optical Networks. Optical sciences also links in to a number of research areas, including physics, and chemistry (spectroscopy), astronomy and planetary sciences, materials science (laser processing techniques), bioengineering (imaging), and electrical engineering (fiber optics) at both UA and ASU. Northern Arizona University has a small group of faculty engaged in micro-manufacturing of electronic circuits and new sensors, with support from industry.
COMPUTER MODELING AND SIMULATION The computer modeling and simulation core competency depends on two key attributes, namely the wide range of software applications, from environment and health to materials and electronics, and the strong foundation in applied mathematics. This area underpins much of the research effort at all three universities. In particular, the synergism with electronics and electrical engineering is noteworthy.
36
Research in Computer Modeling and Simulation A large number of principal investigators, approximately 400, are engaged in mathematics and computer modeling and simulation research endeavors, as shown in Tables 24 and 25. Table 24: Clusters in Computer Modeling & Simulation at Arizona Universities Total Number Number of Number Number Number of Principal Investigators of Grants by of of PI’s Clusters University With Multiple NSF Grants Grants 5 200 ASU – 114 265 15 PIs with 4+ grants UA – 82 NAU – 4
Table 25: Clusters in Mathematics at Arizona Universities Total Number Number of Number Number Noted Principal Investigators of Grants by of of PI’s Clusters University With Multiple NSF Grants Grants 2 61 ASU – 28 124 4 PIs with 3+ grants UA – 22 NAU – 11
This competence is mainly concentrated at ASU and UA. Arizona State University. Applied mathematics and computer science research interests are closely linked. Applied mathematics research includes: • Studies in nonlinear dynamical systems, chaos, fractals and in related areas of perturbation theory and ordinary, partial, and functional differential equations; • Control and systems theory; • Ordinary, partial, and functional differential equations and related areas such as bifurcation, perturbation and stability theories and dynamical systems; and • Mathematical biology concerning cellular and neural modeling, ecology, epidemics, genetics, physiology, and population dynamics. Computational science and engineering research includes: • Algorithm design and analysis, combinatorial optimization, approximation algorithms, parallel and distributed algorithms, algorithms in computational finance and operations research, computer interconnection networks, computational aspects of VLSI design, and fault-tolerant computing; • Artificial Intelligence for distributed planning systems, incremental planning, and applications; • Database/multimedia systems for advanced database research and multimedia information systems;
37
• Distributed processing and parallel high performance systems that facilitate the fault tolerant usage of computer networks and multi-processors; • Microprocessor modeling with companies, such as AT&T, En. Gen. Inc., Enhanced Software Inc., Inter-Tel, Motorola, Municipal Services & Software, and Unizone, Inc.; • Network design and modeling – computer networks, wireless networks and communications, mobile computing, ATM Networks, optical networks, biosensor networks, and ad-hoc networks; • Software engineering spanning the life cycle and covering central, distributed, and parallel systems, web-based software, middleware, and software architecture construction; and • Futuristic software for applications such as facial recognition, intelligent interactive systems for the sight and hearing impaired, and cognitive computing. University of Arizona. Similarly, applied mathematics and computer science are linked and oriented to applications. Applied mathematics is a highly interdisciplinary research topic with applications ranging from physics to the environment. Some selected focus areas include: • Differential equations and integral equations applied to population dynamics and ecology; • Medical image acquisition, processing, and display of images; • Materials theory, modeling and simulation of structural defects; • Mathematics programming applications in production systems design; • Nonlinear dynamics (pattern formation, envelope equations, weak turbulence) and applications to hydrodynamics, optics and biology; • Digital communication/ data storage systems, data compression, digital signal/ image processing; • Nonlinear optics, instability, and chaos in lasers; and • Fluid mechanics, colloidal phenomena, and bioseparations. Computer science and engineering faculty strengths include: • Multi-modal data, digital libraries, multimedia information retrieval and data mining; • Compilers, program analysis and optimization, and programming language implementation; • Algorithms and software for optical data storage; • Algorithms for network and transport protocols for high speed, mobile wireless links; • Geometric pattern matching, and spatial databases; • Algorithms for mobile robots; • Intelligent information management systems and agent-based artificial intelligence; • Software engineering/specification and design of software systems, automated test data generation, mathematical models for program comprehension; • Operating systems for high performance computing, heterogeneous computing, and scientific computing; and
38
• Design and analysis of algorithms for computational biology, bioinformatics and biomolecular data storage. Northern Arizona University. Mathematics research is focused on: • Combinatorics and combinatorial group theory; • Differential equations including nonlinear PDEs; • Dynamical systems, nonlinear functional analysis and numerical analysis; • Operations research; and • Statistics (measures of agreement, mixed linear models, nonlinear regression, variance components), and topology. Faculty in Computer Science and Engineering have expertise in: • Artificial intelligence; • Software engineering; • Image processing; and • Digital signal processing. Other faculty use computer simulation and modeling to understand environmental and geological phenomena.
Key Resources Arizona State University has five important groups: • Collaborative Program for Ubiquitous Computing – interdisciplinary research on mobile computing, bioinformatics and e-commerce applications in a ubiquitous computing environment; • A new Information Science and Engineering Center will integrate systems-scale research and training in data base systems, algorithms, multi-media and other software-based interests; • Consortium for Embedded and Internetworking Technology (CEINT) – a university- industry (Intel, Motorola) partnership for research and training, which funds software research for networks of multiple embedded systems, develops associated curricula for undergraduate electrical engineers and computer scientists, and supports visiting faculty experts in embedded systems from around the world; • Computational Materials Science Group – computer simulation of properties and structure of materials on atomic scale; and • Partnership for Research in Stereo Modeling (PRISM) – record, manipulate and recreate three-dimensional data using cutting edge 3-D software tools. University of Arizona has six important centers or laboratories: • Arizona Center for Integrative Modeling and Simulation (with ASU) – enterprise modeling and modeling of manufacturing processes;
39
• Computer Engineering Research Laboratory – optical networks, digital communications, distributed computing environments; • Multidimensional Image Processing Laboratory (MIPL) – new techniques for use in the processing and analysis of digital signals and images for a variety of applications such as automated classification of biomedical cells, content-based image retrieval for digital image libraries, hardware design for signal processing applications, and image enhancement and segmentation; • High Performance Distributed Computing Laboratory (HPDC) – networking and computing resources; • Center for Advanced Telesysmatics (CAT) – telecommunications and advanced networks, combined with distributed information systems and information theory; and • Optical Computing and Processing Laboratory – the role that optics may play in the future computing systems.
Summary Applied mathematics underpins computer modeling and simulation at all three universities. Computer modeling and simulation is very applications-oriented, with particular emphasis on electronics, communications, and data management. Other pockets of concentration are in materials science, environment and biology. Arizona State University is making major investments in software systems for multimedia, embedded systems for telecommunications, and interactive systems to aid the hearing and sight impaired. University of Arizona is growing its capabilities in telecommunications, optical systems and biomedical applications. Northern Arizona University’s specialty is applications in the environmental and earth sciences.
CHEMISTRY AND MATERIALS This core competency is equally ubiquitous and pervasive, appearing in research that ranges from geochemistry to electronic materials or aerospace. It is impossible to separate out chemistry from materials inasmuch as chemistry plays a crucial role in materials synthesis, materials performance and materials characterization. Chemistry also plays a crucial role in the emerging field of bio- inspired materials.
Research in Chemistry and Materials New or improved materials are being created for advancing technologies in the semiconductor, electronics, aerospace, health science and other industries. Nanoscale research at the interfaces of chemistry, materials and biology is producing a range of nanomaterials, bio-nanomaterials, and nanoelectronics with interesting properties. Chemical and materials research is undertaken at University of Arizona, Arizona State University and Northern Arizona University, and is closely tied to research in other departments such as physics, electrical engineering, bioengineering, mechanical engineering and optical science. Table 26 shows a large number of researchers engaged in this competence.
40
Table 26. Clusters in Chemical and Materials Sciences at Arizona Universities Total Number Number of Number Number Noted Principal Investigators of Grants by of of PI’s Clusters University With Multiple NSF Grants Grants 7 120 ASU – 52 127 4 PIs with 4+ grants UA – 61 NAU – 7
University of Arizona. Faculty has strength in: • Bio-mimetic materials—for example, a range of ceramic oxides have been formed in polymers with control of the particle size, shape and orientation; • Diffusion and permeability in polymers for barrier materials and coatings; • Intelligent materials—embedding of both piezoelectric and optical sensors, for stress and chemical changes, into composites; • Conducting polymers—polypyrrole modified with polyether side chains gives the material aspects of both a conducting polymer and a polymer electrolyte; • Optical materials and coatings and their properties—semiconductors, glass, glass ceramics and non-linear properties; • Fabrication of very large mirrors; • Electronic packaging materials; • Thin film growth and characterization, including crystallization kinetics and ion beam processes; • Photo-enhanced reactions to synthesize novel organic materials; and bio-nanomaterials; • Silicon wafer cleaning—electrochemical and environmental aspects of chemical mechanical polishing; • Sol-gel synthesis of ceramics and nanocomposites, including optical waveguides and gratings; and • Wet chemical approaches for the generation of electronic and opto-electronic materials. Arizona State University. Faculty strengths include: • Development and application of novel microscopy techniques for material characterization. • Electronic materials research including: 1. Growth of group III-nitrides by organometallic vapor phase epitaxy and molecular beam epitaxy and their fabrication into high frequency, high power and high temperature devices. 2. Fabrication of spintronic devices for very high frequency applications. 3. Synthesis of high k dielectric films by organometallic vapor phase epitaxy and correlation of properties with microstructures.
41
4. Creep and thermal fatigue behaviors of lead-free solder balls used in packaging. 5. Modeling of the evolution of thin film microstructures. • Novel materials produced by high pressures and temperatures. • Biomolecular nanotechnology – biomimetic materials and molecular electronics, produced by synthetic chemistry. Northern Arizona University. A few faculty are engaged in semiconductor manufacturing research and microelectronics, as noted earlier. In addition: • In the Chemistry Department, research is focused on interfacial chemistry and surface analysis of environmental systems; atmospheric chemistry; chemical genotoxicity; and natural product synthesis. • The Physics and Astronomy Department is conducting an expanding set of research activities using MEMS microsensors to detect chemical and biological species in liquid and gaseous environments, with applications to hazardous waste cleanup and military needs.
Key Resources University of Arizona. The Arizona Material Laboratories host a large array of state-of-the-art equipment, which is also offered for use to the scientific community and industry at large. This includes: transmission electron microscope, field emission scanning electron microscope, scanning electron microscope, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy atomic absorption spectroscopy, accelerated surface area and porosimetry system, differential scanning calorimetry, differential thermal analysis, thermogravimetric analysis, and a Buehler sample preparation laboratory. Arizona State University. At ASU, there are several key resources, including: • Goldwater Materials Science Laboratory – extensive facilities for materials synthesis and processing, as well as computer modeling and visualization. • Center for High Resolution Electron Microscopy (CHREM) has the most comprehensive collection of advanced electron microscopes of any academic institution in the US. The Center is a local and regional resource for applications of high-resolution electron microscopy, including imaging, microanalysis, electron diffraction, electron holography and surface microscopy, as well as developments in methods and instrumentation. All of its expertise and facilities are available for use by the scientific community. • The Center for Solid State Electronics – optoelectronic materials and devices, including MBE growth of III-V compound semiconductor materials, lasers and detectors and their application to chemical and biosensing. Within CSSE, the Nanostructures Research Group has facilities for work on quantum dots in silicon and III-V materials, strained silicon (on relaxed SiGe) as a material for advanced devices, fast photo-excitation of semiconductors and development of processing technology for ultra-submicron devices. • The Computational Materials Science Group – computer simulation of structure, properties, and processing of materials on the atomic scale.
42
• The Laboratories for Growth of Novel Materials – high temperature engineered microsystems based on GaN, III-N semiconductor growth, and development of superconductor devices for photonic applications.
Summary Chemical and materials sciences applied to electronics and optics is strong at both UA and ASU. The optical materials research and development at UA is world class. The research and facilities at ASU are leading edge in new silicon and III-V semiconductor devices, dielectrics and optoelectronics and nanotechnology (e.g., nanoelectronics). At both universities, new collaborations are forming in the area of molecular electronics, which uses a biological paradigm to synthetically produce molecular structures with interesting electrical properties. There are also emerging strengths at both universities in biomaterials/biomimetics, which are very important contributing capabilities for building a pre-eminent bioengineering core. The formation of the Arizona Biodesign Institute at ASU will provide a focal point for this new convergent science. A NanoBiosystems Center and a Center for Single Molecule Biophysics will be key components for interdisciplinary research and technology transfer.
SPACE SCIENCES The three Arizona Universities are linked in space sciences through the Arizona Space Grant College Consortium, which is a NASA sponsored program of outreach, training and research to encourage understanding of space exploration and provide a stream of trained professionals into the industry.
Research in Space Sciences Table 27 shows about 60 faculty engaged in space sciences (astronomy and planetary sciences). Table 27: Clusters in Space Sciences at Arizona Universities Total Number Number of Number Number Noted Principal Investigators of Grants by of of PI’s Clusters University With Multiple NSF Grants Grants 7 69 ASU – 13 59 4 PIs with 3+ grants UA – 55
University of Arizona. This is a very strong program, in both Astronomy and Planetary Sciences, with 50 faculty involved and an annual budget in excess of $40 million. They design and fabricate high performance telescopes, space probes for beyond earth orbits, and instruments for analysis. The work is centered in the Steward Observatory and the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory. Three examples typify the complex science and engineering capabilities in this competence: • The international cooperation involved in bringing the Large Binocular Telescope to Arizona. The Large Binocular Telescope Corporation was established in 1992 to undertake the construction and operation of the LBT. The goal of the LBT project is to construct a binocular telescope consisting of two 8.4-meter mirrors on a common mount. This telescope
43
will be equivalent in light-gathering power to a single 11.8 meter instrument. Because of its binocular arrangement, the telescope will have a resolving power (ultimate image sharpness) corresponding to a 22.8-meter telescope. Contracts for the fabrication and polishing of the two 8.4-meter primary mirrors are in place with the University of Arizona Steward Observatory Mirror Lab. The Lab has already successfully cast and polished three 6.5-meter honeycomb mirrors in its program of casting large mirrors. Casting of the first 8.4-meter honeycomb mirror took place in mid-January 1997. Current schedules for the telescope, mirror and enclosure suggest that first light will occur in the spring of 2004. The second primary should follow approximately one year later. • UA will play major roles in the development of the Next Generation Space Telescope (NGST), NASA’s successor to the Hubble Space Telescope, and to SIRTF, an infrared telescope to be launched early next year. NASA has selected a team led by Marcia Rieke from the UA Steward Observatory to provide the near-infrared science camera for the NGST. Rieke will lead a team that includes industry members from Lockheed-Martin, Palo Alto, Calif.; EMS Technologies, Ottawa, Canada; and COMDEV, Ltd., Cambridge, Canada. The near-infrared camera will be the primary NGST instrument to locate and conduct the initial studies of these first stars and galaxies. Scheduled for launch in 2010, the new NGST telescope’s primary science objective will be to look back in time to an extremely important period in the early history of the universe when the first stars and galaxies began to form shortly after the big bang. • A UA-led team’s proposed very high-resolution camera called “HiRISE” has been selected for the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, a powerful scientific orbiter planned for launch in August 2005. HiRISE will be used to study Martian landscapes at 25 centimeter (10-inch) resolution. The camera’s color stereo images of the Martian surface will be at least six times higher resolution than any existing images. In addition to the strong astronomy and planetary sciences at UA, they also have a NASA sponsored Space Engineering Research Center (SERC), whose charter is to develop the technologies necessary to produce a wide variety of useful products using materials and sources of energy that occur in near-Earth-surface space. Research is focused on use of space resources for propellants, and structural and shielding materials; and reduction of in-situ resource utilization to hardware and engineering practice. The center has attracted a number of industrial affiliates, including Rockwell, Boeing Aerospace, Lockheed Martin and Ball Aerospace. Arizona State University. The engineering foundation resides in the Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, which specializes in satellite design and propulsion. Space-based instrument design expertise (e.g., cameras) exists in Astronomy. Other space research, in remote sensing applications, is conducted in Geology and Geography Departments. Two illustrative programs are: • The Mars Space Flight facility is NASA mission control for two instruments currently in orbit about Mars and another scheduled for landing in 2004. The Thermal Emission Spectrometer (TES) on board Mars Global Surveyor is used to determine the types of rock and minerals on the surface of Mars and to study the atmospheric activity on Mars. The Thermal Emission Imaging System (THEMIS) onboard Mars Odyssey orbiter is looking for minerals that are related to water. The Mini-Thermal Emission Spectrometer (Mini-TES) is
44
an instrument on the mars Exploration Rovers that will help determine the mineralogy of Mars and ground-truth past orbital data. • The ASU lab uses undergraduate teams to design and construct satellites for deployment by NASA or the Air Force. A 13 lb. satellite was launched in 2000 to test low-cost earth imagery and verification of composite materials. A new collaborative project with Colorado University Boulder and New Mexico State University is developing a “Three Corner” satellite for the NASA Space Shuttle launch in 2003. This set of hardware will demonstrate stereoimaging, formation flying, innovative intersatellite communications, innovative command /data handling, and MEMS based micropropulsion, also developed at ASU. Northern Arizona University. Research focus areas are: • Astrophysics, using both ground based and space based telescopes, to detect past or present life forms; and • Condensed matter physics, which is focused on the formation of primitive chemical compounds in the solar system. This also includes a specialized laboratory facility to reproduce space-like environments and analyze these compounds. In addition, NAU takes full advantage of the privately-owned Lowell Observatory, as well as the U.S. Naval Observatory and a major USGS planetary sciences group, all located in Flagstaff. The Physics and Astronomy Department also maintains its own 24-inch research observatory.
Summary All three universities are engaged in very valuable basic science concerned with observations in our solar system and the emerging area of biogeochemistry to study materials on earth and other planets. However, the focus of this core competency is the engineered devices and systems that are the means to that end (i.e., powerful telescopes and satellites, measuring instruments, and related materials, optics and electronics developments). The combination of astronomy and planetary sciences at UA and ASU makes the state a national leader in space science and engineering. This unique position is supported by the fact that, of four proposals selected in December 2002 for final consideration by NASA for its Mars Scout mission, two are from Arizona, UA and ASU, while the other two are from NASA laboratories. The Arizona proposals offer innovative instruments to both examine and retrieve materials from Mars.
ECOLOGICAL SCIENCES Inasmuch as ecology is the science of how all living creatures interact within our environment on Earth, this very broad field embraces research on environmental effects like global climate change and adaptation, evolutionary biology of plants, mammals and insects, botany, natural resources (i.e., water, land, forests) management, earth sciences, population, communities and landscape changes (i.e., urban ecology).
Research in Ecological Sciences Ecological science is the strongest core competence in the state. Over 300 faculty are engaged in research on ecology (Table 28). If one were to add in faculty engaged in the related fields of
45
Earth Sciences (Table 29), Anthropology (Table 30), and Evolutionary Biology (Table 31), over 500 principal investigators, and with graduate students, well over 2,000 researchers are involved. Table 28. Clusters in Ecological Sciences at Arizona Universities
Number Total Number of Number of Noted Principal Investigators of Number of Grants by PI’s Clusters Grants University With Multiple NSF Grants 23 338 ASU – 80 305 17 PIs with 5+ grants UA – 215 NAU – 43
Table 29. Clusters in Earth Sciences (Geology) at Arizona Universities Total Number Number of Number Number Noted Principal Investigators of Grants by of of PI’s Clusters University With Multiple NSF Grants Grants 8 128 ASU – 48 80 11 PIs with 5+ grants UA – 73 NAU – 7
Table 30. Clusters in Anthropology at Arizona Universities Total Number Number of Number Number Noted Principal Investigators of Grants by of of PI’s Clusters University With Multiple NSF Grants Grants 3 57 ASU – 16 63 3 PIs with 3+ grants UA – 36 NAU – 5
Table 31. Clusters in Evolutionary Biology at Arizona Universities Total Number Number of Number Number Noted Principal Investigators of Grants by of of PI’s Clusters University With Multiple NSF Grants Grants 4 75 ASU – 13 71 7 PIs with 3+ grants UA – 56 NAU – 6
Northern Arizona University. Faculty research covers current conservation issues, environmental planning, conflicts about resource utilization, ecosystems, natural resource recreation, sustainable communities, field geology, and other aspects of the natural environment. Expertise includes: • Watershed restoration, involving channel restoration and monitoring; • Sediment transport analysis and modeling;
46
• Urban and rural stream and river repair; • Water pollution, wastewater treatment and water re-use; • Urban drainage modeling and analysis; • Sustainable communities, energy, and agriculture; • Forest management; non timber forest products; • Renewable energy – wind and solar power; • Land management and restoration practices designed to sustain ecosystems; • Carbon cycle and global climate change; and • Environmental genetics. Arizona State University. Research activities include: • Physiological ecology, of amphibians and reptiles; • Organismal biology applied to conservation and management; • Environmentally induced diseases and environmental toxicology with focus on heavy metals/lead poisoning and pesticides; • Conservation of desert herpetofauna; • Remote sensing and GIS applications in ecology (urban and rural) and resource management; • Analysis of very large data sets and ecological modeling to address questions of the relationship among spatial pattern, ecological processes and scale; • Water quality, including analysis, and recycle technologies; and • In situ bioremediation. University of Arizona. Research strengths exist in the following areas: • Hydrology and water resources; • Ecosystems, soils and biogeochemistry; • Weather and climate variability and predictability; • Land use and land-cover change; • Climate, environment and human health; • Agriculture and Ranching; • Engineering for a sustainable future; and • Remote sensing of natural and anthropogenic environmental change.
Key Resources Northern Arizona University. NAU’s resources include: • The Colorado Plateau Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (CPCESU), a cooperative network, transcending political and institutional boundaries, which creates innovative
47
opportunities for research, education, and technical assistance in support of the management and stewardship by partner agencies of the Colorado Plateau's natural, cultural, and social resources. • Center for Sustainable Environments, which includes a sustainable agriculture program involving the surrounding communities. • Environmental Research, Development and Education for the New Economy (ERDENE) supports environmental restoration research. • Ecological Restoration Institute focuses on advanced technologies for quantitative approaches to systems forestry and restoration of forest health. Basic research programs cover forest disease; conservation diversity; social and political aspects; wood utilization and fire management. • The Sustainable Energy Solutions Group is focused on devising sustainable energy solutions, especially as applied in the American Southwest and on Native American lands. Arizona State University. At ASU, a very important and central ecology project is the Central Arizona - Phoenix Long-Term Ecological Research (CAP LTER) Project funded by the National Science Foundation, in which Phoenix is a “living laboratory,” monitoring the effects of the urban environment on plants, insects, amphibians and mammals. The remote sensing and biogeochemical analysis capabilities in Geography and Geology Departments are developed in part through the strong space programs (i.e., Earth to Mars). This expertise in remote sensing and analysis has been extended, under NASA funding, to 100 cities around the world. ASU has also hosted an EPA water quality center for the past eight years. University of Arizona. The Institute for Planet Earth (ISPE) at UA provides a central coordinating and integrating point for ecological sciences. In addition, the Advanced Resources Technology Laboratory (ART) is an interdisciplinary research group in the School of Renewable Natural Resources that provides state-of-the-art tools in computer analysis and modeling, geographic information systems (GIS), remote sensing and artificial intelligence to assess and analyze the natural resource base of Arizona and other southwestern arid lands. UA is also the lead group in a new $16 million, multi-university center that is developing ways to efficiently manage water resources in semi-arid regions. The SAHRA STC (Science and Technology Center) is developing water management strategies that integrate and accommodate a wide variety of needs, both environmental and human. And the Arizona Water Resources Research Center (WRRC) facilitates university research at all three Arizona universities on water problems of critical importance to the state and region.
Summary Significant expertise and resources in the ecological sciences exists at all three universities, making this area by far the strongest core competence in Arizona. At Northern Arizona University, key programs include the Ecological Restoration Institute, the Merriam Powell Center of Environmental Research, and the Center for Sustainable Environments. At the University of Arizona ecological sciences are focused in the department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and at Arizona State University in the Department of Ecology and Organismal Biology.
48
Since ecology covers such a broad area of science, engineering and policy, the connections to other areas of research strength are numerous. At NAU, interest in ecology is pervasive and covers all aspects of teaching and research, including distance learning. NAU has the only Forestry school in the southwest, is a leader in field geology and manages the Arizona Earthquake Information Center. Among the most interesting and relevant connections at ASU are the Mars Laboratory, which is a huge project for NASA involving remote sensing; the Department of Plant Sciences; the Departments of Geography and Geological Sciences; and the Institute of Human Origins. At UA, the Office of Arid Land Studies; Department of Soil, Water and Environmental Science; Department of Plant sciences; and School of Renewable Resources are relevant.
PLANT AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES Traditional agricultural science in Arizona addresses the challenges of growing crops in arid/semi arid lands, and is therefore closely related to Ecological Sciences and Earth Sciences. Agriculture is strong at NAU and UA, with research being undertaken on crop diseases, increasing resistance to temperature and moisture extremes, and improved resistance to insects and pests. NAU has a sustainable agriculture initiative within its Center for Sustainable Environments. At ASU, the focus is on Agribusiness, which is the business of food and fiber production and the technology necessary to change a raw material (a commodity) or an idea into a new product or business for the world’s consumers. All three universities are linked to the state’s Agricultural Centers. Table 32 shows a total of 95 grants, implying 80-90 principal investigators in agriculture (The database from USDA did not allow us to search for PIs). Table 32: Clusters in Agricultural Sciences at Arizona Universities Total Number Number of Number Number Noted Principal Investigators of Grants by of of PI’s Clusters University With Multiple Grants Grants 2 95 ASU – 9 N/A N/A UA – 80 NAU – 6
However, what makes this area a state core competency is the strength of an integrated plant science-agriculture grouping of skills and technologies, and so we will focus on characterizing this aspect.
Research in Plant Sciences Plant science involves research on plant systems, either to address problems specific to plants or because plants provide the best model system for the question being addressed. For this project our focus is on use of plants for nutritional, energy and/or health benefit, namely the area of agricultural biotechnology. This was discussed in some detail in the Flinn report on biosciences in Arizona. Arizona State University. Plant or plant-related research includes:
49
• Biotechnology involving expression of heterologous genes in plants, and including human genes of pharmaceutical interest and genes from pathogenic organisms for vaccine production; production, chemical analysis and biological activity of plant secondary metabolites; and development of plant enzymes for clinical use and nanotechnology. • Molecular Genetics/Molecular Biology includes targeted mutagenesis of photosynthesis- related genes in cyanobacteria and green algae; plant tissue culture; plant transformation; derivation of anti-cancer drugs from plants; and plant signal transduction pathways. • Cell Biology/Physiology/Photosynthesis includes photobiology of vascular and non vascular plants; interaction of environmental stress factors and plant productivity; physiology of plant- fungal interactions; and mechanisms of membrane assembly during chloroplast development. University of Arizona. Plant genetics research includes: • Genetic mechanisms controlling gene expression in different cell types during development of complex multi-cellular organisms; • Genome/EST sequencing (rice, corn, tomato, cotton, peach, almond), functional genomics of the abscission process in plants; physical mapping, BAC library construction and bioinformatics. • Epigenetic and homology-dependent mechanisms of gene regulation; • Genomics-based approaches to elucidate biosynthetic pathways, biochemical genomics and function of plant natural products, including phytomedicine and anti-cancer drug discovery; and • Regulation of protein synthesis during seed development; control of plant growth and development; and genetic improvement of crop plants. Northern Arizona University. The Department of Biological Sciences conducts research that spans gene mapping in individual organisms to ecosystem processes such as nitrogen cycling.
Key Resources University of Arizona. The Plant Genomics Institute specializes in genome/EST sequencing (rice, corn, tomato, cotton), and functional genomics. The Natural Products Center emphasizes natural product-based anticancer drug discovery and has facilities to culture and manipulate microorganisms. Arizona State University. The Arizona Biodesign Institute (AzBio), which supercedes the Arizona Biomedical Institute, has capabilities for discovery and development of new disease intervention agents, including nutraceuticals and macromolecular drugs (i.e., edible vaccines). Production of vaccines from applied crop science is a specialty. The Center for the Study of Early Events in Photosynthesis (ASU) has a national reputation in photosynthetic energy collection and storage, including biomolecular nanotechnology, and assembly of biomolecular devices into cellular architectures. Northern Arizona University. NAU’s new facility for ecological genetics (e.g., determining the genetic status of endangered species) will have large implications for resource management decisions and their economic consequences.
50
Summary Plant science is strong at both Arizona State and University of Arizona. At ASU the Department of Plant Biology includes programs on biotechnology, molecular genetics/molecular biology, cell biology/physiology/photosynthesis, mycology/phycology/lichenology, and ecology/environmental biology. Organisms being studied include vascular plants from the desert as well as other areas, lichen, fungi, algae and cyanobacteria. The ASU Photosynthesis Center emphasizes the understanding of photosynthesis for food and energy. A specialty of the new Arizona Biodesign Institute will be production of vaccines from applied crop science; and the Cancer Research Institute works on discovery of new anti-cancer drugs from marine, terrestrial and microbiological sources. At UA, the focus in Plant Sciences is on plant biology, including plant microbiology and physiology, growth and production of plants, plant genetics and genomics and gene expression; and the Plant Genetics Institute is known nationally for sequencing important plant genomes. The new Natural Products Center is establishing a niche in anti-cancer drug discovery.
51
World Class Research Signatures for Arizona
Battelle was also asked to identify potential world class research areas in the universities, which are worthy of nurturing as potential state signature research. Clearly, not all components of the core competencies meet this criterion. Below are some that we believe are worthy of state recognition and nurturing as potential research signatures, based on our review of similar programs elsewhere. Arizona’s strongest core competency by far is the ecological sciences. There are perhaps three areas of world-class research and scholarship in this broad and deep competence. • Arid/semi-arid lands ecology – Battelle could not find another university system that possessed the same depth of knowledge. • Urban ecology – The extension of the remote sensing and urban environmental systems studies to many other cities around the world substantiates Arizona’s leadership here. Phoenix is clearly the lead “living laboratory” for studying the impacts of urbanization. • Hydrology and water resources – UA is number one nationally in hydrology; add to that distinction the four water centers, each dealing with a different problem area, and ASU’s and NAU’s contributions, and Arizona has what is arguably the world’s biggest and best water resource portfolio. The only other collection of water resources that Battelle found is the Memorandum of Understanding that links the water resource centers in universities in Washington, Idaho and Oregon, with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and Idaho National Environment and Engineering Laboratory. After ecology, probably the next best core competence for Arizona is electronics and optics, which is complemented by chemistry and materials as well as computer modeling and simulation. Within this competence, we see three areas of strength (the first enhanced by the chemistry and materials competence; the last two enhanced by the computer modeling and simulation competence). • Materials that are being produced at the electronics/optics interface – photonic, optoelectronic, and nanoelectronic materials • Integration of these materials into complex circuitry – both the software and hardware of embedded systems • Wireless – wireline infrastructure unification. However, these areas have serious competitors in other universities. While UA is the equal of University of Rochester in optical sciences, other New York state universities, such as Cornell and RPI, have better materials science capabilities than Arizona, and the state has recognized the importance of convergence in newly funded “centers of excellence”. The new Infotonics Center, supported by Xerox, Corning and Kodak, will capitalize on the state’s research system to address opportunities in advanced communications. Another new center for Wireless Internet and Information Technology at SUNY-Stony Brook is being supported by Computer Associates, Symbol and others. The industrial alliance Sematech has funded major electronic materials
52
research at Cornell and RPI and has recently announced a new center at SUNY Albany. Similarly, new state-supported centers in nanomaterials and next generation internet have been started in California at top universities like UC San Diego, UC Santa Barbara and UC Berkeley. The Georgia Centers for Advanced Telecommunications Technology (GCATT), at Georgia Tech, has been operating since 1991. In the bioengineering area, discussed in the Flinn Foundation study, the clear strength that Arizona has is the linkage of neuroscience with the materials, software and electronics capabilities to provide a neural engineering platform. Neural engineering advances in Arizona include using thoughts to instruct robots for advanced neural prosthetic interface and spinal cord stimulation to restore gait. This could definitely be developed into a world-class bioengineering specialty with enormous impact in the health field. Competitors do exist, however. Oregon boasts a “world class” neuroscience core competence at Oregon Health and Science University and University of Oregon, and a growing neuroproducts (i.e. imaging) industry cluster. Space Sciences has two areas of world class research: • Design of remotely operated instruments for measurements in space; and • Advanced land-based and space telescope design and mirror construction. Competitors include University of Colorado, Cornell, and University of Chicago, but we could not find any state university system that possessed the combined strengths of astronomy and planetary sciences that Arizona has; hence our interest in the integration of these research capabilities. Plant sciences also has two areas of strength: • The Plant Genomics Institute at UA, led by Rod Wing, sequences plant genomes, which can be used in crop enhancement and as models for human disease; and • The Arizona Biodesign Institute at ASU is a world leader in development and manufacture of edible vaccines. Competitors in plant sciences include St. Louis, with Washington University, Danforth Plant Sciences Center, Monsanto and others, the Research Triangle, Cornell University and Saskatoon, Canada. Nevertheless, it is the breadth of plant science capability at UA and ASU, from crop genetics to use of plants as models for human disease and edible vaccines that makes this area an attractive signature research candidate.
53
Technology Platforms, Products and Market Niches for Arizona
Technology platforms serve as a bridge between the research core competencies and their use in commercial applications and products. They share the following characteristics: • Applications orientation, merging early-stage laboratory-scale science and technology into systems and devices. This process is called “fusion” or “convergence.” • Robust and “evergreen” to address current as well as new, emerging market opportunities • Produce a regular stream of innovative, perhaps disruptive, products (ie. a product pipeline) • Require cross department and cross-university collaborations—brand new teams as well as enhanced existing teams. • Require partnership with industry to provide customer perspective and productization skills. Based on Battelle’s assessment, the six science and technology core competencies can be ordered into four technology platforms that could be a source of innovative technologies/products for Arizona’s economy. These are: • Communications • Information technology • Bioengineering • Sustainable Systems One way to understand these technology platforms is through a system approach in which innovations flow from core competencies resident in the universities, via the platforms, to commercial products, which then find their way into markets. These technology platforms are intended to be robust and evergreen, and to integrate several of the core competencies to produce a continuous flow of innovative, and perhaps disruptive technologies or products (i.e., a product pipeline). They also serve to bring the university groups closer to their counterparts in industry. The overall scheme is shown in Figure 7.
54
Figure 7: Framework for Arizona Public University Technology/Product Pipeline to Industry
Technology Core Competencies Platforms Product Markets Foundational Applied “Fusion or Convergence” • Nano/Micro Satellites AEROSPACE • Photonic/Electro Optic Devices Electronics Communications • Wireless Networks/ & Optics Systems • Embedded Systems TELECOMMUN- Space ICATIONS Sciences • Molecular Electronics • “Green” Chip Computer Information Fabrication Modeling Technology • Optics in COMPUTERS & Computers/Storage Simulation Ecological Sciences • Implants/Prosthetics • Medical Imaging/ HEALTH/ Diagnostics Materials Bioengineering MEDICINE • Analytical & Instruments Chemistry Plant & • Bioproducts SUSTAINABILITY Agricultural (Chemicals) INDUSTRIES Sciences - agricultural Sustainable • Biomass Energy bioproducts - environmental Systems • Water engineering Recycle/Purification - integrated resource management • Geospatial Devices
In this section, we develop each platform, its key components, and some near and longer term product opportunities, based on our market analysis. At this stage, it will not be a complete pipeline, but rather, examples with obvious market potential, which should be of interest to industry.
COMMUNICATIONS
Platform characteristics This platform addresses the telecommunications challenge. It is closely tied to the second platform on Information Technology; in fact some include telecom in the IT classification. However, we have chosen to keep the two separate in order to bring focus to a real strength of Arizona, namely the existence of four core competencies that can be integrated into next generation telecom systems—electronics and optics, computer modeling and simulation, chemistry and materials, and space sciences. All four of the core competencies, if carefully integrated and nurtured, could give Arizona a world leadership position in telecommunications. This technology platform is comprised of: • Wireline technologies based on fiber-optics and photonics for very high bandwidth, all optical-networks;
55
• Wireless technologies based on RF or lasers for high speed mobile networks; • Satellites that deliver high data rate transmissions; and • Network designs and software for integrating wireless with the wireline infrastructure, so called “systems on a chip” or embedded systems.
Research Opportunities and Challenges The Internet is redefining the role of computing and communications and their interaction with each other. Most experts believe that the outcome will be communications based. That is, computing will be subordinated to the communication task. Therefore, the opportunities for new, breakthrough technologies in communications are many. The telecom network today is a mesh of wired and wireless connections, with mobile phones, telephones, television, cable, fax machines, e-mail and the Web sharing much of the same infrastructure. Large transmission lines, known as backbones, link local and regional networks. An assortment of sophisticated computer hardware, including hubs, bridges, gateways, repeaters and routers shuttles information to its destination— around the building or across the world—along the most efficient path. The pathways can be any combination of wired or wireless technology, including copper lines, glass fiber, radio and satellite (see Figure 8). Figure 8 The Telecommunications System
Satellite Delivers data at ~400 Kilobits per second to ISP’s which direct Information along telecom lines
Gateway Wireless Metropolitan Network Network point that serves Optical Fiber plus Sends and Receives as an entrance from one Fixed Wireless Information via network to another Radio signals • RF delivers communication without wires • Fixed wireless uses lasers instead of RF
Internet Access Point Routers Local Area Network Group of connected computers share same communication line Regional Backbone Regional Network High speed data lines that Telecom System located within a provide telecom access to particular geographic that smaller networks in a contains other local networks geographic area
Raman Amplifier Boosts light signals in optical fiber LongHaul Backbone High-Speed telecom lines that speed data across countries, continents, and oceans
Like any kind of infrastructure that is inundated with traffic, the telecom system has its inadequacies. Breaking “the last mile” bottleneck and responding to increasing demands for more sophisticated forms of communication such as videoconferencing are just two challenges. This is where next generation fiber optics, photonics, and the better use of wireless technology, including radio, fixed wireless, and even laser beams can come into play. Wireless Internet is in its infancy with wireless fidelity, or Wi-Fi, being introduced into neighborhoods from New York to Stockholm. Wireless computing in the future will allow Palm Pilots and cell phones connected to wireless networks to run large applications. Optical through-air links from transmitter to receiver using an array of lasers is feasible for distances less than 500 meters.
56
Two major advances in wireless communications now being considered by DARPA are connectionless networking, which would enable radio transmissions that would not require a radio handshake prior to communication; and very small antennas, perhaps enabled by wideband gap transistors. The recent Air Force Review Board decision to rank microsatellite systems as the number one program to push for development will no doubt be an impetus for the commercial satellite sector. Photonics, the technology of generating and harnessing light and other forms of radiant energy whose quantum unit is the photon, will impact high-speed fiber-optic telecommunications and data communications, fiber optic materials, lasers, optical devices, wireless optical networks and integrated optics (corollary to integrated circuits) as data rate demands increase in the next decade or so (say to 40 gigabits per second). A very high bandwidth all-optical network is perhaps 30 years away, because it will demand advanced photonic materials (e.g., photonic band gap crystals). A key part of the future optical telecom market will be the software needed to handle the discrete optical elements, such as switches and routers. For some, microphotonics is the next revolutionary technology, producing optical devices and circuits on the same size-scale as computer chips.
Key Market Trends and Drivers The prospects for both telecommunication services and equipment in the short term are mixed. However, there is evidence for renewed interest in technology that will accelerate the introduction of the next generation Internet—the anytime, anywhere promise of mobile computing. Arizona may well be a proving ground for much of this new technology. Arizona Telecommunications and Information Council (ATIC) has outlined an ambitious plan to connect Arizona with an advanced telecom infrastructure that ensures broadband access for all.1 A related opportunity is in aerospace, which is a major industrial cluster in Arizona. This platform can contribute to the advanced cockpit, which will require integrated systems for voice and advanced data communications using RF and microwave technologies. In this section we look at trends and drivers in four sectors.
Optical Telecommunications Optical switching technology has not been a rousing success to date in the telecommunications industry, but with improved products, switchable materials could make a significant contribution to the market. Unfortunately, the telecommunications industry has been going through a tumultuous period for other reasons, thus markets for applications based on switchable materials are not expected to develop dramatically. Markets for optical switches of $18 million currently may grow to $50 million in 2006, (an AAGR of 22.7 percent) but the potential market for materials that would achieve a technological breakthrough could be larger. (Markets and Technologies for Switchable Materials, Business Communications Company, Inc., April 2002) The optical networking industry has become more diverse with the entry of specialized vendors. New entrants focusing on a few high-value product lines often sell equipment using original equipment manufacturer reseller arrangements and evolve to become subsystems vendors. Additionally, start-ups can offer equipment with a compelling value proposition providing
1 See http://www.research.com/atic.
57
superior cost/bandwidth performance and compatibility benefits. (Frost and Sullivan, World Optical Telecom Equipment Markets, August 2002) The total demand for next generation network systems in the U.S. will rise at an average annual growth rate (AAGR) of 12.6 percent from $16.4 billion in 2002 to $29.7 billion in 2007. Enhanced SONET, which accounted for just over 35.6 percent of total next-generation network revenues in 2002, will continue, by a very slim margin, to be the lead spending category in 2007 accounting for a total of $9.65 billion, or about 32.5 percent of all spending in 2007, while growing at an AAGR of just 10.6 percent, the slowest spending growth among market options. Its continued primacy will reflect its continued superiority in delivering voice traffic, its centrality in telecommunications carriers’ legacy networks, and its proven reliability in traffic quality control, especially for long-haul networks. However, as limitations of the protocol for converged traffic become more obvious and competitive technologies become refined, SONET will lose share even among telecommunications carriers. These weaknesses include SONET’s limited flexibility in adjusting to varied traffic type and demand, its slow provisioning and the fact that the platform was never designed to accommodate point to multi-point and/or bi-directional traffic. (Business Communications Company, Inc., Broadband Opportunities: A Mini Series – Next Generation Networks, October 2002) Despite recent press coverage that has painted optical Metro Area Network (MAN) services— Ethernet, Dense Wave Division Multiplexing (DWDM), and Synchronous Optical Network (SONET)—in both a positive and a negative light, these services are neither a panacea for all bandwidth needs, nor another data service doomed to failure based on false promises, according to In-Stat/MDR. Even with a decline in overall telecom service revenues, optical MAN services continue to be an attractive market. Overall U.S. optical MAN services revenues will grow from $1.9 billion in 2001 to $6.9 billion by 2006, as both consumers and business users move to higher speed Internet connections, businesses outsource corporate IT functions, and the localization of data traffic continues. DWDM will have the strongest growth from 2001–2006 primarily due to the fact that it is a lower-cost alternative to purchasing dark fiber, and has flexibility in handling multiple data protocols. By 2006, DWDM will overtake SONET in the U.S., in terms of MAN service revenues. SONET growth will be constrained as data traffic continues to grow. It will, however, account for the majority of revenues for optical MAN services for the next several years. (In-Stat/MDR, Shedding Light on Optical MAN Services: Ethernet, DWDM and SONET, June 2002) The increasing bandwidth demands of subscribers are often unpredictable and challenging for telecommunications carriers to meet. The emergence of the optical network is a crucial milestone in the evolution of communications networks. Optical networks provide higher capacity and reduced costs for applications, such as the Internet, video, multimedia, and other advanced digital services. Many in the telecom industry believe that an all-optical network will be necessary in order to keep up with bandwidth demands. Deployment of dense wavelength division multiplexing (DWDM) systems in long-haul applications is already well underway. As carriers begin using more wavelengths in their networks, there is an increased need to manage that capacity in the native optical layer, avoiding costly and inefficient optical/electrical/optical conversions. As demand for capacity increases, traditional network functions—add/drop multiplexing, cross-connection, signal restoration, and service deployment—will have to be performed optically. (The INSIGHT Research Corporation, The 2001 Telecom Industry Review)
58
Despite the telecom downturn, the development of MEMS-based solutions for optical networking is moving forward at a rapid pace. Revenues from MEMS usage in optical networking is forecast to grow from approximately $33 million in 2001 to more than $1.8 billion in 2006, with MEMS-based product offerings extending beyond switches to include tunable lasers and filters, variable optical attenuators, and dynamic gain equalizers. (In-Stat/MDR, MEMS and Optical Networks: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, April 2002) According to the Optoelectronics Industry Development Association, photonic components constituted a $56 billion market in 2001, but the components' economic influence was far greater because of the technology's contribution as a key enabling technology for the Information Age (see Figure 9). Figure 9: Optoelectronics Industry Development Association Market Estimates (2001)
Optoelectronics revenues by product type (2001) Combined components and equipment markets, by application (2001)
Photonic components enabled an additional $114 billion worth of photonics-based products used in telecommunications, computing, displays, etc. That makes a total of $170 billion of products that are either photonic or enabled by photonics technology.
Wireless U.S. expenditures on high-speed wireless data networks were $24 billion in 2000. The market is likely to increase at a 30.4 percent average annual growth rate between 2000 and 2005 to reach nearly $91 billion by 2005. Mobile data, the largest single area of wireless high-speed data spending in 2000, will continue to hold that distinction in 2005, growing at a projected average annual growth rate of 30.6 percent to reach $76 billion. Fixed wireless networks, which accounted for just under $2.5 billion in 2000, will grow at a projected 32.5 percent average annual growth rate to top $10 billion by 2005. The smallest category of wireless data network spending in 2000, paging, will remain the smallest in 2005, accounting for just over $5 billion, based on an average annual growth rate of 25.5 percent through the period. (Business Communications Company, Broadband Opportunities: Wireless Highlights, July 2001) The wireless infrastructure market was valued at about $100 billion at the end of 2000. The market is conservatively estimated to increase to more than $186 billion by 2005 growing at an annual average growth rate of 13.9 percent through 2005. (Business Communications Company, Wireless Infrastructure in the World Market,, September 2001) Expenditures on high-speed or broadband Internet access equipment and services are estimated at $8.5 billion in 2001. This market is forecast to increase at a 25.4 percent average annual growth
59
rate to cross $26 billion in 2006 despite the recent sharp downturn in economic growth and technology spending in late 2000 and 2001. (Business Communications Company, Broadband Opportunities: Wireless Highlights, July 2001) Despite the overall technology spending slowdown, the broadband (2.5G and 3G) wireless, digital, data-enabled devices and services market is anticipated to grow at roughly twice the pace of the wireless and telecommunications sectors overall. This growth will be driven by several factors including: • An increasing migration of business and consumer wireless phone users from voice-only services to voice- and data-enabled wireless services; • The mass marketing of Internet-enabled mobile computing devices, including handhelds and personal digital assistants (PDAs), which together will become the fastest-growing sector in personal computer sales, even in the face of a slowdown of traditional desktop PC sales; and • The need for more bandwidth, which will encourage inexpensive devices that can be used in wireless systems at millimeter frequencies. (Business Communications Company, Broadband Opportunities: Wireless Highlights, July 2001) Worldwide service revenues for Public Wireless LANs is forecast to be worth $9.5 billion ($2.6 billion in North American) in five years time, with last mile WLAN revenues reaching almost $5.5 billion ($1.9 billion in North America) by 2007. The ability of 802.11, and other WLAN technologies, to provide last mile and public hotspot access has catapulted the technology to the forefront of both the broadband and mobile internet sectors. It is the simplicity of wireless LAN that makes the technology so attractive, with no licenses to win (or pay for), no nationwide infrastructure to build (or pay for), and no significant technology risks to gamble. The equipment is standards-based, very low cost (relatively) and simple to deploy, producing an attractive business case and some repositioning to be done with 3G. Reminiscent of the early pioneering days of the internet, small wireless Internet service providers, or WISPs, now number in their thousands, offering free community connections or full commercial services to businesses and residential customers. Despite potential market inhibitors like radio interference and line of sight limitations, the sector has a vast growth potential. Additionally, hotspot numbers are also growing rapidly, with deployment announcements being made almost weekly (e.g., BT-4000, Boingo- 5000, and McDonalds Restaurants/Softbank-4000). (Juniper Research, Broadband Wireless LAN, July 2002) Free space optics (FSO), a technology that transports data from point to point and multipoint via laser technology, will grow from a nascent technology to a strong niche player in the broadband market, with global equipment revenues in the FSO market projected to reach $2 billion by 2005, up from less than $100 million in 2000. Benefits of the technology include quick deployment time and high-capacity links. FSO equipment currently is being deployed for a variety of applications, including last-mile connections to buildings, mobile networks assist, network backup and emergency relief. Last-mile access provides the greatest opportunity because FSO provides the high-speed links customers need without the costs of laying fiber to the end user. However, FSO must overcome technology issues such as line-of-sight requirements and weather degradation and market issues including the lack of knowledge or understanding of the technology. (The Strategis Group (commNOW), Free Space Optics: Fixed Wireless Broadband, October 2000)
60
Embedded Systems Largely invisible to us, embedded systems provide the intelligence behind every non-PC computing device. Traffic lights, automated teller machines, and automobiles contain any number of embedded microprocessors that execute specific functions. (Red Herring, December 1998) During the next 10 years, OEMs will embed intelligence into all sorts of products: appliances, automobiles, machine tools, medical equipment, packaging machinery, and office systems, among others. The burgeoning embedded systems market is expected to jump from $2.5 billion in 2001 to more than $40 billion in 2006 (Global Design News, April 2001). Embedded Systems are rapidly becoming a catalyst for change in the computing, data communications, telecommunications, industrial control, and entertainment sectors. The market for embedded systems is expected to grow at an average annual growth rate (AAGR) of 13 percent, rising from $32 billion in 1998 to nearly $67 billion in 2004. The market is divided into 4 segments: Embedded Software (AAGR of 16 percent); Embedded Processors, including microcontroller, (MCU) microprocessor (MPU), and digital signal processor (DSP) segments (AAGR of approximately 11 percent); Embedded Memory, such as various types of random access memory (RAM) and programmable read-only memory (PROM) memory, as well as Flash memory (forecast to have an AAGR of close to 18 percent); and Embedded Boards (at an AAGR of just over 13 percent) (Business Communications Company, Future of Embedded Systems Technologies, October 1999). Real time embedded processors, the use of microprocessors or controller chips to add smarts to products and services, are found in appliances, PDAs, toys, process controllers, smart cards, cell phones, and cars—every “smart” product is looking for competitive advantage. Embedded processors sales have been growing at an annual rate of 30 percent for the past few years. However, no single vendor occupies the position of gatekeeper in any of these sectors and many of these individual sectors are growing at 20 to 50 percent, attracting both capital and investors (Internet World, June 15, 2001).
Satellites The explosion of the Internet in the 1990s and subsequent demand for high-speed Internet connections has put an immense strain on terrestrial communications networks. Consequently, satellite broadband technology is now emerging as an important alternative to land-based services such as cable or DSL. Major players are entering the satellite based broadband internet market looking for niches to exploit. For example Boeing has announced its Connexion broadband communications service for air travelers and Hughes Electronics has launched its two-way DirectPC service to household consumers. Despite stagnant growth for most IP-based satellite services, opportunities are emerging through solutions development and penetration of unique vertical market segments. Enterprises and (to a lesser extent) consumers now show an increased willingness to implement a satellite solution for specific IP-related applications. Enterprises alone generated $720 million in global IP-related satellite revenue in 2001, which represented 45 percent of the total broadband satellite market. Consumer broadband satellite revenue was estimated to be $89.2 million in 2001 and was realized almost wholly through the launch of new two-way platforms. With an additional $752 million in global ISP backbone revenue in 2001, it is clear that broadband satellite revenue is not minor in size. Despite the large amount of current revenue in the sector, significant hurdles exist
61
for future revenue generation. However, it is clear that both a current and future broadband satellite market exists, though is expected to still be constrained by supply, high costs, intense competition and technology limitations. Total sector revenue is expected to conservatively grow at 26 percent annually and thus reach $6.48 billion in global revenue in 2007 (Northern Sky Research, Broadband Satellite Markets 2002, July 2002). Two-way satellite broadband Internet access will be the fastest growing single-access technology, with expenditures growing at an AAGR of 36.6 percent from $1.14 billion (or 12.8 percent of all broadband related expenditures) to $5.42 billion, or 20.5 percent of expenditures. This rapid growth will reflect the introduction and aggressive marketing of several high-profile satellite Internet services to the residential market during the 2002 to 2004 period, as well as the continued expansion of the installed base of satellite dishes in U.S. households for satellite TV broadcast services such as DirecTV (Business Communications Company, Inc., Broadband Opportunities: A Mini Series - Internet Access: Devices/Services, December 2001). As the constraints of current network connections weigh on users, many will turn to satellite- based solutions, which can provide higher throughput. After a tentative start, markets for broadband satellite solutions will show impressive growth as this technology truly enters the mainstream. The total market reached $300 million in 2000 and is expected to reach $1.6 billion in 2007. Although broadband satellite technologies offer advantages over many land-based network solutions, they still face competition from emerging solutions. “Broadband wireless has penetrated the marketplace. With the lower costs associated with deploying a broadband wireless network, this technology poses a serious threat to the satellite platform,” according to a Frost & Sullivan report. As competition intensifies among satellite providers, market participants must tap new markets to stay alive. The presence of large rural populations in the globe offers important opportunities for broadband satellite providers if companies can overcome challenges inherent to those markets (World Broadband Satellite Service Markets, Frost & Sullivan, June 2001).
Niche Areas for Arizona In the telecom market space, Arizona universities’ core competencies are being used to produce innovative technologies/products in three niche areas, all of which play into the telecom system of the future (see Figure 8, page 56): High bandwidth, high-speed wireline technologies (0–5 years) – mainly capitalizing on the materials capabilities in the Optics Center (and proposed Photonic Technology Center) at UA to advance optical telecommunications, including: • Hybrid structures of sol-gel optics for applications in micro-optical elements, waveguides, pixel arrays, DWDM components, combiners and routers, and high-speed modulators. • Advanced semiconductor lasers and photonic integrated components, including high power unstable resonator lasers, grating-coupled surface-emitting lasers, sol-gel based integrated optical components and heterogeneous integration of photonic components. • A high bandwidth (more than 100 GHz), active polymer/glass electro-optic modulator that will optimize the optical mode confinement in the polymer and optical mode transition to and from the composite waveguide. Unification of wireless & wireline systems (0–5 years) – Centered in Connection One, a new NSF Industry/University Cooperative research center led by ASU, but involving UA, other
62
universities and industry; and the Consortium for Embedded and Internet Working Technology (CEINT), a partnership between ASU, Intel and Motorola. The ASU programs would be greatly augmented if UA is successful with its bid for an NSF Center for “Intelligent Optical Networks.” The overall goal is the advancement of integrated circuits and systems for wireline and wireless communications to produce unlimited services everywhere. A key focus is integration of analog/digital components, and transceiver components into one small package, a “system on a chip.” Achieving smaller, less costly communication chips could revolutionize micro- communications. Promising hardware and software research includes: • Smart antennas for mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs); • Gigabit wireless networks; • Thin film bulk acoustic wave (BAW) resonator design; • High-Q radio-frequency MEM resonator design; • Power management for mixed-signal integrated circuits; • Ultra-wide band receiver and matching circuitry; • Multi-mode wireless transceiver design; and • Task scheduling for battery-powered systems. Micro/nano satellites (approximately 10 years) – UA and ASU are both engaged in next generation space and satellite technology to enable their astronomy and planetary science research. As part of the effort to reduce costs, work is going in to miniaturizing both the transporters (buses) and satellites, and making them lighter. Small satellites, known as microsatellites (less than 200 pounds) or nanosatellites (less than 55 pounds), may soon be the norm for communications. Made possible by miniaturization advances, commercial and military microsatellites bode well for the coming century, because they are cheaper to manufacture and have less mass, so launch costs are lower. (Spaceflight currently costs about $10,000 per pound and the long term goal is $10 per pound.) Launching satellite clusters that interoperate cooperatively will eventually replace the function of a single, larger satellite. Also, redundant components for reliability, as well as spreading gradual subsystem degradation across the entire cluster rather than in just one large satellite, increases the odds of mission success. As noted earlier, the Air Force has the demonstration of autonomous rendezvous of microsatellites as a number one development program. ASU is a key member of the University Nanosat Program, which links together the Air Force, DARPA, NASA, and Universities of Colorado and New Mexico State. ASU is already working on projects to demonstrate nanosatellite possibilities such as miniature bus technologies, formation flying, enhanced communications, and maneuvering. In addition, both UA and ASU are planning for the very large ground-based telescopes and the next generation space telescopes, which will result in bigger collector areas and detector areas that will push materials/optics limits and expand the need for more sophisticated computer modeling and simulation. The move to space-based systems is also driving the development of lighter materials in general and lightweight optics in particular (e.g., very large lightweight mirrors).
63
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Platform Characteristics Like the preceding platform, the Information Technology Platform addresses the anywhere, anytime promise of the next generation Internet, but from the perspectives of computers and peripherals, semiconductors and software. The Internet of the future will provide us with a networked intelligent environment that will give us complete control over our world, our privacy and property. Industry and academia are investing heavily in creating this new cyber- infrastructure. Just two examples are Motorola’s Intelligence Everywhere initiative and MIT’s Project Oxygen. Key to this promise is computing power and software that can make sense out of the vast quantities of data that appliances, sensors, and machines will continuously produce. Because of the hardware and software dimensions, this platform embraces the electronics and optics, chemistry and materials and computer modeling and simulation core competencies. For Arizona the key characteristics of the IT platform are: • Ubiquitous computing; • Semiconductor materials/manufacturing technology; • Software applications; • Optical computing and storage; and • Nano (Molecular) electronics.
Research Opportunities and Challenges Ubiquitous computing will be the dominant paradigm in information technology, largely due to advances in underlying technologies such as semiconductor manufacture and networking software. Already, we are seeing peer-to-peer programs that link PC users together for common interests; at the other end of the computing scale is grid computing that links many large computers together across the country to process large scientific problems (i.e., NSF’s TeraGrid). IBM has staked its IT future on computer networks that will produce on-demand computing. A key factor in the success of these new systems is the software that will run on them and realize the dream of fast data processing and presentation. The most important imperative in chip design is the drive toward miniaturization. Both Intel and Taiwan’s TSMC have announced nanochips (0.09 microns). Intel’s version, a microprocessor code-named Prescott, will contain more than 100 million transistors. Developments involving EUV lithography have the goal of even smaller features, < 0.07 microns (i.e. 70-nm) in the next 3–5 years. Recent developments in silicon technology have solved the challenge of insulation when circuit lines shrink to less than 10 nanometers. Researchers at Agere Systems have discovered that the silicon dioxide insulation used today actually changes for the better as dimensions shrink; and IBM researchers have made a working transistor only 6-nm wide using ultra thin insulation, which is one-third smaller than the size projected to enter production in 2016.
64
Chip designers are turning increasingly to reconfigurable hardware—integrated circuits where the architecture of the internal logic elements can be arranged on the fly to fit particular applications. Basic reconfigurable circuits already play a huge role in telecommunications, but the challenge for personal information devices is to be able to reconfigure in a millisecond or less. Reconfigurable computing, as it is known, will soon be within reach as speed and density of reconfigurable logic circuits improve over the next few years. Speed demands for chips (over 3 Gigahertz) will revolutionize the semiconductor industry and bring about the convergence of electronics and optics in new materials combinations. Several groups are developing miniature optical devices capable of being integrated right into the silicon chip, using gallium arsenide, for example. Motorola has started a new company devoted to this area. Intel is investing in semiconductor components based on a new silicon-germanium-carbon process. The ultimate goal is an all-in-one wafer (Figure 10), in which compound semiconductors are not just layered on top of a silicon substrate, but the different semiconductors are integrated together on the chip (i.e., on board lasers that replace the wires to shuttle information). Intel has announced plans to build radio transceivers into all of its silicon chips by 2010. Figure 10: A New Superchip Design from Motorola
Nanotechnology will likely make its biggest near-term impact from nanoelectronics (or molecular electronics), because smaller, faster, and cheaper are the watchwords of this industry. Some day we will have transistors that are the size of single molecules. Researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology have already demonstrated a new type of nanometer-scale optoelectronic device based on silver nanoclusters that performs addition and other complex logic operations, is simple to fabricate and produces optical output that can be read without electrical contacts. The integrated circuit will essentially be reinvented with its logic and memory and interconnects being part of a consistent molecular manufacturing process. Growing nanoelectronics through the convergence of nanoscience and biology, in the form of bionanomaterials that self assemble, is a possibility down the road. With self-assembly, extremely small devices might be constructed in large quantities for commercial applications. Early experiments at MIT with molecular electronics have shown the feasibility of fitting molecules with tiny antennas, then sending simple instructions by radio.
65
Key Market Trends and Drivers Ubiquitous Computing The goal of a ubiquitous computing environment is the creation of a system that is pervasively embedded in the environment, completely connected, intuitive, effortlessly portable, and constantly available. Among the tools expected to be supported are technologies such as wearable computers, smart homes, and smart cars made possible by application-specific integrated circuitry (ASIC). After sales slid in 2001, the ASIC market is set for long-term growth, according to the latest report from iSuppli Corp. Worldwide ASIC sales fell by 28 percent in 2001. The sales slide was prompted by the downturn in the electronics industry in general, particularly in communications equipment, which depressed demand for semi-custom chips. ASIC is expected to enjoy overall sales growth but two ASIC segments, standard cells and Gate Arrays, are going in different directions. Standard cell ASICs that offer high performance using more advanced process geometries will find good opportunities for growth in the next five years. Gate Arrays, meanwhile, are facing competition from Programmable Logic Devices. While some Gate Array companies will be offering higher performance, Semico Research believes that they are facing a stagnating market. Gate Array sales are projected to continue to decline from about ten percent of total ASIC revenues, or $1.34 billion, in 2001, to less than four percent of ASIC revenues, or less than $1.2 billion, by 2006. This will occur despite efforts by some gate array vendors to provide easy migration paths from more costly field programmable gate array devices. Middleware is another important aspect of the ubiquitous computing environment. Middleware is a general term for any programming that serves to connect two separate programs. Middleware programs provide messaging services so that different applications can communicate. Gartner Dataquest’s Software Industry Research group predicts the middleware and portal markets to grow from $5.1 billion in 2001 to $10.5 billion by 2006. It is estimated that by the end of 2002 the market will reach sales of $6 billion, an increase of 16.6 percent from 2001. Analysts believe middleware vendors must focus on application integration services that provide higher rates of return and quicker time to market for customers rather than mere technology benefits. In the next several years the application integration and middleware industry will be redefined by movement towards low-cost, low-end integration packages around Web services technology and Web service center value propositions Mobile middleware is a specific niche market. Revenues for mobile middleware—the software residing on corporate servers that allows users to tap enterprise applications remotely by way of wireless networks—are expected to reach $1.5 billion by 2006, according to a report by the Aberdeen Group. This represents an increase of 117 percent from 2002 revenues, which are estimated to be $552 million. The market research firms of Frost & Sullivan and IDC, mirror Aberdeen’s forecast. Frost & Sullivan and IDC foresee mobile middleware sales to grow from $227 million in 2001 to $1.7 billion in 2006. Despite downturn following the recession in March 2001, a surge of user adoption of wireless applications is projected, due in part to ongoing harmonization, steadily declining price points, and improved functionality in handheld devices.
66
Semiconductor Materials/Manufacturing Technology Currently, semiconductor based integrated circuits (ICs) enjoy a wide lead over integrated optical chips based on MEMS, nanotechnology, and related technologies. But there is some doubt as to whether this will continue indefinitely. After two years of contraction, worldwide semiconductor capital spending and wafer fabrication equipment spending should return to double-digit growth in 2003. Worldwide semiconductor capital spending is projected to grow 15 percent in 2003 to $32 billion, up from $27.8 billion in 2002 according to Dataquest Inc, a division of Gartner Consulting. Worldwide wafer fabrication equipment spending is now expected to total $18.5 billion, a 16 percent increase from 2002 revenue of $15.9 billion. The 2002 global semiconductor materials market will reach $23 billion on a worldwide basis according to Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International (SEMI). Wafer fabrication materials represent $14 billion in 2002, while package materials will reach $9 billion in 2002. The materials segments expected to see the strongest growth include silicon germanium (strained silicon), silicon on insulator, 300 mm wafers, chemical mechanical planarization (CMP) consumables, low materials, high materials, anti reflective coatings (ARC’s), 248 and 193 nm photoresists, liquid encapsulants and substrates for flip chip. Further, the movement to flip chip packaging using solder bumps for package interconnects is performed at the wafer level, blurring the distinction between traditional fabrications and packaging operations. Compared to conventional silicon-based semiconductors, compound semiconductors produce integrated circuits that are faster, operable to higher frequencies (hence greater bandwidth), capable of emitting or detecting visible light and infrared radiation, radiation resistant, and heat resistant. Silicon Germanium (SiGe) semiconductors are faster, more power efficient, and have superior noise characteristics when compared to standard silicon transistors. Historically, demand for SiGe products was slow to develop due to their higher cost and design challenges. Semico Research Corporation forecasts a whopping 49 percent compound annual growth rate for SiGe revenue from 2001-2006, leading SiGe to becoming a $2.7 billion market by 2006 The market for integrated circuits (ICs) used in optical switches will increase worldwide sales from $654.3 million in 2002 to $5.4 billion in 2006, according to a report by Pioneer Consulting. Nanotechnology is one of three chip technologies vying for a piece of the pie. While chips based on nanotechnology are still primarily in the laboratory stage, Pioneer's report shows an increase in MEMS usage, which will only grow to 2006. Other research firms are also bullish on MEMS chips. In-Stat/MDR forecasts that revenues for MEMS in optical networking will grow from $33.1 million in 2001 to more than $1.8 billion in 2006. MEMS-based product offerings are also expanding beyond switches to include tunable lasers, tunable filters, variable optical attenuators, and dynamic gain equalizers.
Software Applications The spectacular growth in the software industry of the late 1990s has been followed by a severe hangover—backlash and decline. Yet, software is the centerpiece of the trillion-dollar information technology industry, an indispensable component of commerce and government worldwide.
67
Software remains one of the most innovative and fastest growing sectors of the global economy, generating revenues of more than $150 billion every year according to Hoovers Inc. About half of those sales come from software applications, with the remainder split between development tools and infrastructure software (operating systems, network management, middleware, and security software). International Data Corporation (IDC) says global sales in 2002 of all packaged software, excluding services, could have increased 10.7 percent, to $202.5 billion, about double the growth rate for 2001. IDC found that consumer software led the growth. Gartner Consulting forecasts worldwide corporate spending on software to grow 3.6 percent in 2002, with revenue of totaling $76.9 billion, and increase to $81.8 billion in 2003. In 2001, worldwide software revenue declined 5.7 percent, with revenue of $74.2 billion. The first-half 2002 license revenue performance of enterprise software companies was lackluster because of the continued bad news around the U.S. and global economy, which is inhibiting corporate purchases and stalling investment decisions. In-depth understanding of key market drivers and market sizes for the hottest areas (such as business intelligence and application integration) is essential to have across the whole software spectrum of infrastructure software, knowledge and content management, and business applications packages. The application development and deployment market was expected to experience the greatest reduction in worldwide growth in 2001, with growth of 4.7 percent, down 10.5 percent from IDC's original 2001 forecast of 15.2 percent growth expectancy. The applications market was also expected to grow less than predicted, from 12.7 percent originally projected in 2001 to 9.4 percent, and a decrease from a forecast of 14.6 percent to 9.1 percent in 2002. Gartner Dataquest analysts projected that the worldwide application software license market to have declined 6 percent in 2001, to decline 1 percent in 2002, and then the market grow 8 percent in 2003. System infrastructure software market increases were only anticipated to be 4.6 percent in 2001 instead of the originally 8.4 percent projected by IDC. But system infrastructure software is likely to grow to 11.8 percent in 2002, just 1.2 percent lower than previously forecast. Gartner Dataquest forecasted the worldwide infrastructure software license industry to drop 3 percent in 2001, but recover with 6 percent growth in 2002 and 8 percent increase in 2003. Business intelligence (BI) and its related markets are among the few bright spots in the otherwise depressed IT market. BI as a concept of management by quantitative data analysis has been gaining steady popularity among business software applications. BI software serves as the enabling technology in providing all knowledge-workers with timely access to relevant data reporting and analysis The business intelligence tools (BIT) market is expected to continue its healthy growth following a temporary slowdown over 2000 and 2001. The market for BI software tools has experienced rapid growth over the past several years. In 2000, despite the general lackluster year for the economy, the BI software market grew by 22 percent to $3.6 billion. IDC forecasts this market to grow to $11.8 billion by 2005 for a compound annual growth rate of 27 percent. (See “Information Access Tools Market Forecast and Analysis: 2001-2005,” IDC#24779, June 2001.) The BI software market is dominated by end-user query and reporting and OLAP tools which account for 65 percent of the overall market. As software users moved to unlock their data assets
68
from enterprise resource planning (ERP), customer relationship management (CRM), supply chain management (SCM), and legacy systems, the demand for BI software has increased. Such demand is expected to continue as organizations increasingly move from relying on software just to process transactions to using it to understand their enterprise data and thus be able to make better and faster decisions. Among the BI software tools IDC identifies are: • End-user query and reporting tools are designed specifically to support ad hoc data access and report- building by even the most novice users. This category does not include production-level report-building tools aimed at professional developers. • OLAP tools provide a multidimensional data management environment and are typically used for modeling business problems and analyzing business data. (OLAP is also known as multidimensional analysis.) • Data mining software uses technologies such as neural networks, rule induction and clustering to discover relationships in data and make predictions that are hidden, not apparent or too complex to be extracted using statistical techniques. • Packaged data mart/warehouse products are preconfigured software that combine data transformation, management and access in a single package, usually with business models included. • Executive information systems (EISs) are data access and analysis tools that employ the navigation and analysis features of drill down, trending and exception reporting. These systems provide an intuitive, visual environment for understanding business trends and identifying problems and opportunities. According to IDC, end-user query and reporting and online analytical processing (OLAP) will perpetuate growth in the BIT software market. Revenues from these two segments will increase in 2000-2005 at compound annual growth rates of 30 percent and 22 percent, respectively. In terms of market share, end-user query and reporting will capture 52 percent of BIT software revenues in 2005, and OLAP will fetch 27 percent. The EIS market will decline by 11 percent as users move to multi-dimensional modeling.
Optics in Computing and Storage The optical drive market had an excellent 2002 third quarter. Evans Research Corporation indicates that shipments in the optical drive market were up 10 percent in Canada, compared to the third quarter of last year. The continuing prevalence of multiple optical drives is fueling this increase. DVD adoption picked up in the third quarter, after slowing in Q2. The ratio of CD-ROM drives to DVD-ROM drives dropped to 2:1 from 3:1. The ratio is expected to drop below 1.5:1 next quarter, as CD-ROM drives give way to DVD-ROM technology. Indeed, digital media and iAppliance applications-including digital cameras, digital camcorders, digital video recorders, digital VCRs, DVD recorders, digital audio recorders, and smart handheld devices-are projected to propel the growth of optical storage devices from approximately 18 million units in 2000 to 96 million in 2004, according to data compiled by market research firms CIBC, IDC, and In-Stat. For the digital audio market alone, IDC forecasts optical recording to grow from 3 million units in 2001 to nearly 31 million in 2004.
69
CD-RW (compact disc, re-writeable) is leading the way in optical storage. However, the optical recording opportunity continues to grow as penetration in PCs increases year over year. The growth of the CD-RW market is dependent more on the attach rate expanding within the PC market than on the growth of the overall PC market. In 2000, approximately 37 million CD-RW drives were shipped, compared with a total PC market of about 130 million units. This represents an attach rate of about 28 percent. CD-RW units are estimated to ramp to 55 million units, based on an expanding attach rate as the technology becomes standardized, first within the consumer market, as well as within the business PC market. (Young Sohn, “iAppliance Apps Will Push Optical Storage Growth” EBN-online) Market-wide, these products are projected to propel growth of consumer electronics optical storage devices to 96 million units in 2004, according to various market research firms. Innovations such as this mark the beginning of a new growth curve. IDC forecasts a compound annual growth rate of 139 percent for combination optical storage solutions during the next four years. IDC also sees shipments of notebooks with optical recording capability growing from 322,000 in 2000 to 28 million in 2004, a 206 percent CAGR.
Nano (Molecular) Electronics Nanotechnology is a branch of engineering that deals with the design and manufacture of extremely small electronics circuits and mechanical devices built at the molecular level. Within the field of nanotechnology, U.S. federal departments and agencies have focused on three new R&D areas: manufacturing processes at the nanoscale, use of nanotechnology for chemical- biological-radioactive-explosive detection and protection, and development of instrumentation and metrology at the nanoscale. The National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) pulls together the combined collaborative interests in nanoscale science, engineering and technology of the major government agencies. The FY 2003 President’s budget request for the NNI of about $710 million ($679 million reported on February 4, 2002, plus $31 million in associated programs at NASA and USDA), is a 17 percent increase over FY 2002. (NNI Budget Briefing, February 2002) “A case could be made that nanotech is just so much peer-reviewed discovery and media hype in search of a commercial application… Yet, nanotech is too powerful and too broadly applicable to ignore in the medical, materials, and electronics fields. This year, governments worldwide will spend $2 billion on nanotech research; 150 VCs will invest at least a few hundred million dollars in nanotech companies; hundreds of startups will be created; and every major university will solidify plans for a nanotech department. Some estimates put the number of firms at least experimenting with nanotechnology at 450 worldwide.” (Red Herring, May 6, 2002) Nanotechnology will likely affect vast sectors of the economy, from biotechnology and health care to energy. But the biggest impact will likely come from nanoelectronics. For electronics manufacturing, the promise is smaller, faster and cheaper products than conventional approaches could ever achieve. And advances have come with remarkable speed. In 1998, researchers struggled to rig up a single nanoelectronic component: a molecule that acted as a rudimentary switch. Research teams now are connecting dozens of these nanoscale components and are looking to the next step: how to assemble entire devices, such as memory chips. (MIT Technology Review, June 2002) Today, there are more than 300 nanotech companies at work in the US alone. Nanotechnology revenues are expected to exceed $200 billion by 2006 and a $1 trillion global market is projected
70
by 2015. The Hitachi Research Institute has estimated that nanostructured materials will be a $340 billion or more market within a decade. Micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) is often discussed along with nanotechnology, but is a subject that may also include technologies at a higher level than the molecular. The total overall MEMS and micro-systems applications world market is expected to grow from approximately $30 billion in 2000 to approximately $68 billion by 2005. This forecast includes overall revenue growth due to the field of MEMS and other micro-systems technologies, including all products that are microstructure in design and micro-machined products fabricated in plastics or metal. Current leading applications include inkjet print-heads, read/write heads for hard disk drives, cardiac pacemakers, hearing aids, test strips for in vitro diagnostics, pressure sensors, and accelerometers. Predicted new and emerging applications that will garner market share over the next few years include: micro-machined flat panel displays, the optical mouse, optical telecommunications components, RF-MEMS, implantable drug delivery systems, bio-chips, and fingerprint sensors. (NEXUS! Network of Excellence in Multifunctional Microsystems, Market Analysis for Microsystems 2000-2005 – A Report from the NEXUS Task Force, 2002) MEMS use in medical applications is blossoming—and while it’s overall impact on medicine and healthcare has been, and will continue to be, subtle, it is nothing short of revolutionary. As a result, revenues for MEMS in medical applications are forecast to grow at a compound annual growth rate of more than 11 percent reaching just under $1.1 billion in 2006. (In-State/MDR, BioMEMS: Revolutionizing Medicine and Healthcare, February 2002) The continued shift from sensor-driven revenues to non-sensor driven revenues continues—in 2001, non-sensor devices comprised nearly a third of total MEMS revenues, whereas by 2006, they will account for almost half. (In-Stat/MDR, It’s Raining MEMS: 2002 Industry Overview, July 2002) Unit shipments will double over the next five years from 1.85 billion units in 2001 to 3.61 billion units in 2006. This is the result of both the introduction of new devices, as well as the emergence of new application opportunities. While VC funding is certainly down, it is by no means out, and MEMS start-ups continue to emerge. However, considerable fabrication overcapacity currently exists, and it appears that the situation will only worsen over the next year. (In-Stat/MDR, It’s Raining MEMS: 2002 Industry Overview, July 2002) While MEMS may hold a technological edge, lower cost conventional technologies that provide an adequate outcome are often being used instead. As a result, MEMS are not currently being used in areas where one would expect to find them. However, MEMS will be utilized in more next-generation products, particularly as the technology continues to drive the development of brand new product categories. The greatest market opportunity for MEMS in this segment will continue to be for a variety of sensors, and their incorporation into surgical instrumentation is on the rise. Other MEMS devices (particularly needles/probes and lab-on-a-chip) are also on the verge of very rapid growth—with condition monitoring and new, novel means of drug delivery being two key end-uses. (In-State/MDR, BioMEMS: Revolutionizing Medicine and Healthcare, February 2002)
71
Niche Areas for Arizona In the IT market space, key commercialization opportunities for Arizona’s technologies are: Ubiquitous Computing Environments (0–5 years) – ASU’s work spans across ubiquitous computing, networking, and middleware, tying these areas together with: • Situation-aware communication: A situation-aware Object Request Broker (ORB), a situation-aware interface definition language (IDL), and related object communication frameworks are being developed. • Ephemeral group management: A situation-triggered group communication service with impromptu group addressing scheme is being developed to facilitate ad hoc formation of communities of devices. • Autonomous coordination for information dissemination: Use of a cellular automation computational model to design a simple, energy efficient, and scalable information dissemination service. UA is working on an Adaptive Distributed Virtual Computing Environment (ADViCE). The prototype ADViCE architecture uses two web-based servers, Visualization and Editing Server (VES) and Control and Management Server (CMS), to provide the parallel and distributed programming environment. Fault tolerance service is provided to applications transparently based on the technology of Jini and Mobile Agent. Software Systems (0–5 years) – ASU and AU groups are developing novel software for manufacturing, distributed computing and visualization applications, including: • A Formal Framework for Scalable Enterprise Design – an integrated prototype agent-based modeling and simulation environment based on DEVS (Discrete Event System Specification) framework. • Database/Multimedia Systems – Human recognition and event detection. • Computer Aided Geometric Design/Graphics – Multiresolution flow visualization software. • Distributed Operating Systems – Self repairing Computing Communities (CC). • Facial recognition algorithms. • Intelligent interactive systems for the hearing and sight impaired. ASU is bringing together its interdisciplinary capabilities in systems-scale software in a new Information Sciences and Engineering Institute, which will be housed in a new facility. Semiconductor Materials/Manufacturing (0–5 years) – A focal point for this technology area is the combination of UA-led NSF Centers, also involving ASU, other universities and industry partners, which are producing a number of new technologies/products that are being transferred to the semiconductor industry on a regular basis: • Center for Electronic Packaging Research is developing new simulation tools for parameter prediction (capacitance and inductance) for multiconductor, multidielectric high- speed interconnect systems, and for predicting the electrical response of driven, coupled lines for typical high speed interconnect geometries both on-substrate and on-chip.
72
• Center for Environmentally Benign Semiconductor Manufacturing is integrating Design for the Environment into new processes and tools for the industry. Examples include Perfluoro compound (PFC) alternatives for wafer patterning and chamber cleaning, solventless chemistries for deposition of low-k dielectric films, and development of solventless lithography for patterning integrated circuits (IC). • Center for Microcontamination Control is improving thin oxide quality via nanotechnology; and producing enhancements to the CMP (chemical-mechanical polishing) process. Optics in Computing/Storage (5–10 years) – Optical devices, systems, and algorithms in support of optical and optoelectronic information processing and storage are centered at UA, and include: • Lens design and configuration for Volume (3D and 4D) optical memories. • Optical Interconnects for the Design of Large Scale Symmetric Multiprocessors for use in high- speed massively parallel computer systems, including a novel, highly-integrated, highly-scalable optical interconnect architecture call the Scalable Optical Crossbar Network (SOCN). • Opto-electronic VLSI chip for a scalable CC-NUMA Design, which affords a much greater connectivity than standard VLSI chips since more I/O channels can be implemented with optics rather than wire connections. The OE-VLSI chip also offers power and speed advantages over electrical connections. • Optical data storage technologies, which include advanced optical head designs involving waveguides and the integration of micro-optic, holographic, and other novel optical elements; applications of nanotechnology to data storage; and the new field of biological data storage. The newly proposed Photonic Technology Center at UA will help integrate these components into systems. Nano (Molecular) Electronics (over 10 years) – ASU’s new Arizona Biodesign Institute will catalyze this emerging area. The Institute will house a new NanoBiosystems Center and a Center for Single Molecule Biophysics. Both centers will have interdisciplinary teams, involving other university and industry partners, working on self-assembly and design of supramolecular structures, biomolecular electronics and bio-inspired new materials. The move of a key research team from Motorola Research Lab to ASU will enhance this new Institute. ASU and UA are already collaborating on the synthesis of molecules for custom device applications. A new program in biomolecular nanotechnology will focus research on the use of biomimetic or photosynthetic techniques to produce novel optoelectronic materials. Several classes of molecular photovoltaic species are being synthesized and studied. These include porphyrin-fullerene dyads, carotenoid-fullerene dyads, a carotenoid-porphyrin-fullerene triad, carotene-porphyrin-imide triads, and molecular dyads and triads containing two porphyrin moieties. A second project, which is a collaboration between UA and Cornell University, is looking at biological or molecular storage, that is, storing information in DNA molecules.
73
BIOENGINEERING
Platform Characteristics Bioengineering is the intersection of materials, electronics and information technology with the biosciences. This relatively new discipline is a major area for growth and investment worldwide, and many states in the US have major research and technology initiatives to build a biomedical industry. This area was identified in the Flinn Foundation study as a major opportunity for Arizona, and a Phase II effort is underway to develop a roadmap for the bioengineering sector. We include it as a technology platform in this study because it depends critically on the core competencies that we have identified for Arizona. Inasmuch as bioengineering is an interdisciplinary area, it uses four of the six core competencies, plus connections to other university units, such as Mechanical Engineering, the Manufacturing Institute (design and manufacturing), Industrial Engineering (e.g., human factors, ergonomics), Systems Science and Engineering Research Center (for neuroengineering), and Exercise Science and Physical Education (for motor control and biomechanics). This technology platform is broad and includes: • Neural engineering; • Biomechanics, motor control, and rehabilitation engineering; • Molecular, cell, and tissue bioengineering; • Biomaterials; • Bio-imaging; • Biosensors, bio-nanotechnology, and micro-sensors (Bio-MEMS); • Cardiovascular engineering; • Computational biology; and • Medical informatics.
Research Opportunities and Challenges Human therapeutics has historically focused on progressively smaller spatial scales and increasingly complex system behavior (Figure 11). Within this sector, the biomedical device field is being driven by miniaturization that is possible now through micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS), nanomaterials and their integration. “Minimally invasive therapies,” both diagnostic and treatment strategies, are being developed to reduce the trauma, cost and duration of medical care. A wide range of technologies, including high definition imaging, robotics, miniaturized sensors, high intensity sound waves, lasers, tissue engineering, and stem cell manipulation are involved.
74
Figure 11. The Increasing Complex Science of Human Therapeutics
The advent of biomimetic materials, which are synthetic materials produced by mimicking the biological process, has greatly increased the safety of implants to replace bone and joints, because they can be added as protective coatings, are biocompatible and are, therefore, less likely to suffer infection or rejection. Another class of such materials is stimuli sensitive polymers, a class of hydrogels, which will form a solid gel when subjected to stimuli such as temperature, pH, or ionic strength. Potential medical applications that are currently being developed include localized delivery of therapeutics (drugs, medical isotopes), delivery of imaging agents, and in vitro matrix for cell growth. The very new field of nano-biomaterials promises some unique applications in diagnostics and treatment, because of the fusion of inorganic materials that conduct electricity or emit light with biological materials that can bind with other molecules and self assemble into complex structures. Already prototype nano-wire sensors are being tested for diagnostic use (e.g., cancer screening). The next wave of regenerative medicine will involve implanting tissues grown outside the body. Patients will be given replacement organs made from their own cells to restore damaged organs. Scientists can already build implantable sections of human bladder, blood vessels, trachea, and cartilage in the laboratory. One of the great, modern-day challenges is to understand brain function and disease. Significant advances are being made by Arizona researchers and other groups in new instruments to measure brain function, developing powerful new algorithms for neural control and processing, and tissue engineered approaches for nerve regeneration or repair. Spinal cord microstimulation to aid recovery from a stroke, and neuroprosthetic systems that are brain activated are all possible in the near future.
75
Market Trends and Drivers Overall, the global medical device and products industry is a major sector, reaching sales of $165 billion in 2000, according to Standard & Poor’s reports. The overall growth prospects are strong. U.S. Industry & Trade Outlook for 2000, prepared by the U.S. Commerce Department and DRI, expected a very positive market for the medical device and products industry for five years, with 5 to 8 percent annual growth projected through 2004. Key market drivers for medical devices and products is the aging of the population and increasing life expectancy with its related increase in chronic illness and degenerative diseases. With the aging of the baby boom, there is also a heightened awareness of health and a strong ability to pay for services. Holding back break-through innovations into the market place is the regulatory requirements for introducing new products and need to gain acceptance for insurance reimbursement. This places a strong focus on incremental improvements, which face lower barriers to market entrance. For Arizona, we are focusing on three key market segments: implants, biomaterials and prosthetics, medical imaging and diagnostics, and analytical instruments.
Implants, Biomaterials and Prosthetics Orthopedics and Prosthetics is a $2 billion market worldwide with half of the market found in the U.S. It involves the design and fabrication of body parts to improve function or prevent or correct deformities, as well as to ameliorate pain. The focus of this market is to focus on function rather than curing a disease. Key to the development of this sector is development of sensory feedback, functional electrical stimulation and development of new materials. The use of MEMS in medical applications is blossoming—and while its overall impact on medicine and healthcare has been, and will continue to be, subtle, it is nothing short of revolutionary. As a result, revenues for MEMS in medical applications are forecast to grow at a compound annual growth rate of more than 11 percent reaching just under $1.1 billion in 2006. (In-State/MDR, BioMEMS: Revolutionizing Medicine and Healthcare, February 2002) Another key sector is development of microelectronic medical implants, which provide for internal implants and prostheses which can both replace body parts as well as serve as a replacement for drug therapy. This market began with cardiac pacemakers in the 1970s. Overall the market is expected to reach $9 billion by 2003 according to Business Communication Company, with cardiovascular implants representing over 80 percent of the market involving implantable defibrillators and ventricular assist devices. The fastest growing segment, however, is the emerging use of implantable devices to treat neurological conditions, which is expected to grow at over 30 percent annually and reach over a $1 billion by 2003. These neurological implantable devices include neurostimulators, drug infusion devices. Biomaterials are critical for these implantable devices—they need to be non-toxic, resistant to corrosion, able to bond effectively and be strong and not fatigue. Another fast growing market is found in non-implantable neurological devices, which is growing at over 20 percent annually over 1998 to 2000 period, according to Dorland Biomedical and reached a market size of nearly $2.5 billion by 2000. Key products today include electrical stimulation and spinal fixation devices.
76
Medical Imaging and Diagnostics Currently imaging and diagnostics comprises one of the largest sectors of the medical device industry. Based on data from AMTA, in vitro diagnostics stands at $20 billion, and diagnostic imaging at $10 billion. In the in vitro diagnostics marketplace, high-growth segments include glucose monitoring, point- of-care, flow cytometry, and genomic-based diagnostics and other nucleic acid testing. But, generally fast-growing segments are still a small part of the overall diagnostics market. In diagnostic imaging, the mature market for X-ray imaging continues to be the primary imaging modality; but, more sophisticated techniques involving ultrasound, magnetic resonance, and computed tomography are close in revenues—especially in the United States—and are growing at much higher rates. Increasingly, focused, specific imaging and diagnostic techniques are being developed for specific medical conditions, such as use of electron beam computerized tomography for coronary calcification or use of fusion imaging techniques to identify cancer or use of magnetic resonance imaging to identify progress of strokes. A key market driver of these new innovations in imaging and diagnostics is that they support minimally invasive techniques for providing medical care. For instance, ultrasound-guided interventional techniques are increasingly being used in place of more invasive and expensive surgery techniques for open-abdomen procedures as well as being used to break up blood clots and to guide localized drug development
Analytical and Biotechnology Instrumentation Worldwide analytical instruments are estimated to be nearly $18 billion industry and $7.58 billion in the U.S., according to Dorland Biomedical. This area of instrumentation is best understand as two discrete areas—one an evolving area focused on molecular and cellular manipulation and the other more traditional analytical instrumentation. Well over 80 percent of the revenues is found today in the traditional analytical instrumentation area. The fastest growing segment of traditional analytical instruments is lab automation, involving use of robotic systems and integration with information systems, with annual growth at 14.5 percent annually from 1998 to 2000. Mass spectrometry is another area of fast growth at 14.2 percent. There is a growing emphasis on the use of analytical instruments in biopharmaceutical applications from laboratory automation involving high throughput screening approaches using micro-plate readers to genotyping and gene sequencing to protein analysis. Key trends are towards development of smaller high performance systems, growing combinations of instruments coupled together as “hyphenated instrumentation” such as high performance liquid chromatography mass spectrometry for biological and pharmaceutical applications and refinement of existing techniques to make them faster, easier to use and less expensive. Analysis of the analytical instruments market by Strategic Directions International suggests that the industry remains both concentrated and fragmented because of the diversity of technologies. Manufacturers can be classified as broad-line, multi-product or specialized.
77
In newly emerging biotechnology instrumentation is growing at a hefty 17 percent per year from 1998 to 2000, according to data from Dorland Biomedical, led by microarray technologies and DNA sequencers. Similar to the larger analytical instrumentation area, focus is on high- throughput, simpler to use and more automated systems. There is also variety of new techniques being advanced including use of mass spectrometry for genotyping and DNA analysis.
Niche Areas for Arizona As noted earlier, this area was identified in the Flinn Foundation Bioscience study and a Phase II effort is underway to more fully flesh out these bioengineering niches to insure that Arizona can increase its research and technology competence in this area. The Arizona Biodesign Institute, newly formed by ASU, promises to achieve this growth by leveraging new research collaborations with complimentary research thrusts at UA, NAU, the Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen) and the International Genomics Consortium (IGC), and the emerging biosciences industry in Arizona. Some near-term opportunities (0–5 years) and some longer-term areas (approximately 10 years) that Battelle will be considering for Arizona leadership in this rapidly growing and crowded field include the following.
Near Term ASU, in cooperation with UA and Barrow Neurological Institute, is gaining a leadership position in neural engineering, the interface between the nervous system and artificial devices that replace lost senses or missing limbs. (e.g., using thoughts to instruct robots for an advanced prosthetic interface; and spinal cord stimulation to restore gait.) The emerging technologies include direct brain control of a motor prosthesis, investigation of neural plasticity in the auditory system, development of advanced neuroprosthetic systems for high capacity, two-way communication with the nervous system, development of BioMEMs devices for neuroprosthetics systems, spinal cord microstimulation, and development of bioactive coatings for implantable microelectrodes. The links between biomechanics, motor control and rehabilitation are strong; there is a seamless pipeline from laboratory research to clinical applications. UA’s Optical Sciences Center has unique capabilities to bring to the medical field. Besides providing new imaging modalities, lasers are seeing applications in regenerative medicine, modifying healing responses. One breakthrough technology is the diode laser for tissue ablation, which could make a great impact on cancer treatment and tissue remodeling.
Long Term Looking to the future (approximately 10 years or more), the developments in molecular electronics, noted earlier, may well provide the ability to implant biocompatible devices to control organ function or replace diseased organs. The instruments that will be developed for biogeochemical characterization of materials collected on earth and mars will yield atom level sensitivity that could further advance medical diagnostics.
78
SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS
Platform Characteristics This technology platform is clearly long-term and “technology push” in nature, but we include it because the ecological sciences are Arizona’s top core competence and the plant and agricultural sciences competence is strong. Therefore, this is an area where we believe Arizona has an opportunity to be a market creator. This platform is based on the thesis that if we want economic progress to continue, we must systematically restructure the global economy to make it environmentally sustainable. An economy is sustainable only if it respects the principles of ecology. An eco-economy would be one that satisfies our needs without jeopardizing the prospects of future generations to meet their needs. However, over the last half century, the global economy has pushed the demand on local ecosystems beyond the sustainable yield in country after country. The technology platform for Arizona is very broad, encompassing: • Hydrology and water • Agricultural sciences • Anthropology resources • Environment and human • Engineering • Earth and soil sciences health • Manufacturing • Forest management • Weather and climate • Materials • Plant sciences • Renewable energy
In addition to these key technical disciplines, the Arizona universities have developed strong capabilities in distance learning, outreach to both urban and rural communities, and cross- disciplinary collaborations that support a sustainable systems perspective. The latter include geospatial collaborations that help to meet common analytical needs, and anthropological and community-based interactions, which bring in the human dimension that allows the affected human populations to be effectively included in studies that otherwise, would focus predominantly on the natural world.
Research Opportunities and Challenges The scientific challenges are complex and daunting—to cleanup our environment, maintain our natural resource base, and reverse the effects of global warming, while at the same time ensuring economic growth and an acceptable quality of life worldwide. Widespread environmental degradation throughout the developed and developing world threatens human health and impairs ecosystem function. Disturbed environments are subject to multiple stressors (including interacting pollutants at chronic and acute levels, physical stresses, and habitat loss) operating at different temporal and spatial scales over the long term. Current approaches have failed to address this complexity and therefore protection, remediation and restoration of these resources have not been accomplished. New and fundamentally different approaches are needed, which would include collaboration between industry, policy makers, the academic community, the public and other stakeholders. Innovative research on remote sensing,
79
data analysis and modeling, bioremediation and restoration is urgently needed in order to manage and restore these complex systems and to anticipate system responses to perturbations in real time. Global climate change is one of the most complex environmental, energy, economic, and political issues confronting the international community. The impacts of climate change are likely to vary considerably by geographic region and occur over a time scale of decades to centuries. The actions needed to manage the risks ultimately require substantial long-term commitments to technological change on the part of societies worldwide. Energy is central to the climate issue. Energy demand will continue to climb two percent per year over the next 15 years. The future evolution of the energy system—dominated today by coal, oil and gas—is the key determinant of the magnitude of future human influence on the climate. Managing the risks of climate change will require a transformation in the production and consumption of energy. Technology is critical to such a transformation. Improved technology can both reduce the amount of energy needed to produce a unit of economic output and lower the carbon emissions per unit of energy used. But, there is no single, easy solution. To achieve a carbon concentration limit of 550ppm, which some believe is essential by the year 2050, will require a portfolio of energy production options, as well as major conservation and efficiency improvements. Living in a carbon-constrained world will necessitate that, in the near-mid term, we maximize use of renewable energy (e.g., solar, biomass, wind), nuclear power, and fossil power with carbon capture/sequestration; and, in the long term, introduce a hydrogen economy. Opportunities for distributed power generation, inherently safe fission power, hydrogen-powered fuel cells and other innovative systems abound. Environmental protection and restoration and energy supplies will impact industrial expansion in a negative way unless technologies are introduced, which reduce the industrial footprint, that is the quantity of natural resources, energy and materials consumed making product, plus the waste discharged. This is where research to miniaturize systems, replace materials with environmentally benign, recyclable materials, or to shift to bio-based products will pay off. This is the ultimate goal of the nanotechnology and bio-nanotechnology revolutions. Arizona not only has the research capacity to make a major impact on sustainability, but the state is a “living laboratory,” since arid and semi arid lands represent the majority of developable land in the world. Arizona has both large cities (Phoenix and Tucson) and small rural communities (Flagstaff); and a highly diverse population. Therefore, we believe that this technology platform should produce a stream of knowledge, technologies, and products that address both sides of the equation—economic growth and environmental protection. As some say, sustainability is the triple bottom line—people, the planet and profits—all are necessary for livable and prosperous communities.
Market Trends and Drivers Since the concept of environmentally sustainable development evolved a quarter century ago, focusing on restoring carbon balances, environmental protection of air and water, hazardous waste management, stabilizing water tables, and conserving forests, soils and diversity of plant and animal life, significant advances have been made but substantial progress is still needed. In terms of markets relating to sustainable systems, there has emerged over the past twenty to thirty years a major environmental industry. A comprehensive study by the U.S. Department of
80
Commerce places the size of the environmental industry by the late 1990s at $181 billion with more than 110,000 companies, employing over 1.3 million Americans and more than $16 billion in exports. This translates into the environmental industry being larger than paper and allied products, petroleum refining, aerospace and nearly as large as motor vehicles. The environmental industry includes revenue-generating activities associated with: • Compliance and environmental regulations; • Environmental assessment, analysis, and protection; • Pollution control, waste management and remediation of contaminated property; • Provision and delivery of the environmental resources of water, recovered materials and clean energy; and • Technologies and activities that contribute to increased energy and resource efficiency, higher productivity, and sustainable economic growth. Key market segments of the environmental industry include: • Services from analytical services, wastewater treatment works, solid waste management, hazardous waste management, remediation services and consulting and engineering services; • Equipment including water equipment and chemicals, instruments and information systems, air pollution control equipment, waste management equipment and process and prevention technology; and • Resource provision involving water utilities, resource recovery and environmental energy sources. Key market characteristics for the environmental industry are as follows: • The environmental industry is unusual because it involves both public sector and private sector organizations. Public sector includes those organizations involved in the traditional public infrastructure services of potable water, wastewater treatment and waste management. The private sector largely originated in response to major environmental regulations and provides the equipment and services needed for compliance with pollution control, remediation and other environmental requirements. • Small and medium-sized organizations (under $100 million in sales) generate a majority of industry revenues. • By the late 1990s the environmental industry had reached a level of maturity growth as environmental regulations that created much of the market growth in the 1980s and early 1990s are now more stable and no longer driving growth. That is the strong growth of the industry was regulation-induced growth, which no longer is a key driver. With maturation of the industry has come slower growth: o Median profit margins routinely exceeded 10 percent in the late 1980s slipped in the 1990s to two to three percent range. o Average annual return in the stock market of 240 environmental companies tracked by the Environmental Business Journal in the 1990s well under-performed the market with environmental company annual stock value
81
growth at 6 percent compared to 22 percent for NASDAQ and 14 percent for the S&P 500. o Venture capital investment in environmental technology companies fell steadily from more than $200 million in 1991 to less than $20 million in 1996. More recent market forecasts suggest continued mixed performance: • Commercial hazardous waste containment and disposition is expected to fall in revenues from $2.35 billion to $2.32 billion by 2007, according to Business Communications Company, Inc (BCC) due to a decline in volume of tonnage managed. By 2007, the market for commercial hazardous waste containment and disposition will be 37 percent below the peak of business reached in 1993. Not surprisingly, this industry has gone through a period of consolidation, with the top three firms accounting for over 45 percent of the market. • The global advanced wastewater treatments, on the other hand, is expected to grow a healthy 5.5 percent annually, growing from $3.5 billion in 2001 to $4.6 billion in 2006, according to BCC. Roughly one-third of the advanced wastewater treatment is found in the U.S., which is also the fastest growing geographic market. Europe and Asia, each represent over 20 percent of the market. A key growing segment of these advanced wastewater treatment business is the use of membrane technologies to selectively separate particles found in wastewater. • There are also still growing market niches such as the use of biotechnology for environmental management. BCC reports that this nascent industry reached $103.5 million in 2001 and is expected to record annual growth of 8.3 percent, reaching $154 million by 2006. The largest segment of the industry, as well as the fastest growing, is microbe blends, followed by use of nutrients and enzymes. • Environmental Business International projects major growth in small, technology dependent segments involving process and prevention technology and environmental energy sources (such as wind, solar and fuel cells), with growth rates in revenues from 2000 to 2010 of 83 percent and 82 percent, respectively—or roughly 8 percent per annum. Clearly the future of sustainable development from a market perspective depends on how nations focus on sustainable development as a priority. Denmark is the eco-economy leader. It has banned the construction of coal-fired power plants, banned the use of non-refillable beverage containers, and is now getting 15 percent of its electricity from wind. In addition, it has restructured its urban transportation network; now 32 percent of all trips in Copenhagen are on bicycle. But, Denmark has not fully addressed living in a carbon-constrained world. Europe, Canada and Japan have signed the Kyoto Protocols, which call for a major reduction in carbon emissions (approximately 35 percent). Developing nations are also reducing emissions through a combination of economic modernization and lower birthrates. President Bush has proposed a voluntary program in the US, which will reduce greenhouse gas intensity by 18 percent over the next decade (compared to14 percent today). His reason for not going along with the rest of the developed world was the huge impact such reductions would have on the economy. The future growth of environmental businesses, however, may depend more on shifting from a paradigm of regulation-induced growth to productivity and economic value supported growth. Several multinational companies are seizing the opportunity for sustainable development, because
82
they see opportunities for new business. There are four drivers that make the business case for sustainability: right to operate; cost reductions; market share; and new markets. Much has been done with the first two: for the former, living well within environmental regulations helps reputation and trust with stakeholders that increases access to markets and customers; for the latter, companies have achieved substantial savings through waste reduction, improved quality, and reduced liability for cleanups. General Electric is taking an approach that getting ahead of regulations is good for business. Late in 2002, they announced a high horsepower locomotive design that will meet more stringent EPA emissions requirements not scheduled to go into effect until 2005. Also, they are testing a new, larger airplane engine that has reduced emissions and fuel consumption. However, it is the last two drivers that hold the most opportunity and the most risk for business. A sustainable enterprise is a company that anticipates and meets the needs of present and future generations of customers and stakeholders, encompassing three dimensions known as the triple bottom line: • Economic prosperity and continuity for the business and its stakeholders; • Social well-being and equity for both employees and affected communities; and • Environmental protection and resource conservation, both local and global. The World Business Council for Sustainable Development has 150 members from 30 countries. The “Natural Step” movement also has an impressive membership, all of whom commit to sustainable industrial practices. To date, much of it has been incremental improvement, such as Intel’s “Green Design” program that addresses material substitution/recycle/reuse, and water and energy conservation in manufacture of advanced chip designs. A more disruptive development was announced this year by Honda and Toyota with the introduction of the world’s first commercially available cars running on hydrogen fuel cells. At $1 million each to build, these early models are clearly not economically viable, but use by early adopters under a lease arrangement, will enable the companies to accumulate invaluable experience to reduce manufacturing costs, while building brand recognition. Importantly, these two companies are profitable and can afford to stay the course. And an even more disruptive approach was recently taken by Dupont and Monsanto, whose CEO’s have announced a long term strategy to “reduce their industrial footprint” by moving towards products based on non-depletable resources. Dupont has set four goals for 2010, which might well shape the sustainability marketplace from an industrial perspective. They are: • To derive 25 percent of revenues from non-depletable resources, up from 10 percent today; • To reduce global carbon-equivalent greenhouse gas emissions by 65 percent using 1990 as a base year; • To hold energy use flat using 1990 as a base year; and • To source 10 percent of the company’s global energy use in the year 2010 from renewable resources. DuPont has adopted a companywide sustainability indicator (shareholder value added per pound of product) that reflects the overall goal of creating greater value with fewer resources.
83
Shifting company operations from a traditional, resource-intensive, and volume-maximizing business model to a more eco-efficient, socially responsible, and value maximizing model increases shareholder value by raising profits while reducing the use of capital and resources— doing more with less. The Battelle process for integrated life cycle management (Figure 12) is helping companies like Ford, General Motors and Visteon to implement economically viable, socially responsive product development and manufacturing strategies. Figure 12. Battelle’s Integrated Life Cycle Management Model
A critical indicator of success for this kind of strategy is stock market performance. The empirical evidence for such sustainability investments is hopeful. Investment funds and rating services focused on leaders in sustainable development, e.g., The Dow Jones Sustainability index, suggest that leaders in this arena outperform market benchmarks. For example, since its inception in 1991, the U.S. Domini Social Equity Fund has realized an annualized return of 18.25 percent for the Standards and Poors (S&P) 500 benchmark. Finally, an important market trend in an eco-economy is the decline of some industries and expansion of others. An article in the Futurist, March-April 2002, suggests that we will see decline in coal mining, oil pumping, nuclear power, clear-cut logging, manufacture of throwaway products, and automobile manufacturing. On the other hand, they say we will see growth in fish farming, bicycle manufacturing, wind-farm construction, wind-turbine manufacturing, hydrogen generation/distribution, fuel-cell manufacturing, solar-cell manufacturing, light-rail construction and tree planting.
Niche Areas for Arizona Against this backdrop, there are several areas that Arizona could take the lead in. We describe a few examples here, but they are clearly just the tip of the iceberg. In developing this platform, it is important to look beyond the traditional measures of commercialization. The knowledge gained from environmental research will play a critical role in land use planning, siting of industrial and residential developments, agricultural policies and so on, which will have a different but no less
84
important impact on economic development. Arizona could well become the go-to state for the best solution on sustainable growth. Sustainable manufacturing – both incremental and disruptive technologies will provide a flow of opportunities for commercialization by Arizona based companies: • The UA led Center for Environmentally Benign Manufacturing (CEBM), mentioned earlier, is working to remove polluting chemicals from chip manufacturing and to substitute environmentally friendly materials. Their thrust is environmentally compatible products and manufacturing processes that fit into current fabrication plant designs; these are incremental improvements that will see commercial application within 5 years. • From their base of experience, CEBM could taking a broader perspective and address the entire computer. As many as 1,000 materials can be used to fabricate a computer. Some are metals and other chemical compounds that could be toxic to animals and humans if they leach into the groundwater or are otherwise released into the environment (e.g., barium, beryllium, brominated flame retardants, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, lead, mercury, phosphor and plastics). A few companies are seeking ways to eliminate most of these materials. In summer 2002, NEC Solutions America introduced its PowerMate eco, which is the first desktop PC designed with the environment in mind; it is housed in recyclable plastic, contains no boron or lead solder, and the flat-panel monitor requires no lead because no radiation is emitted. • The truly disruptive technologies will, however, come from starting fresh and designing the next generation fabrication plant to take advantage of miniaturization that micro/nano systems provide, which will radically reduce the plant footprint. Arizona has the basic components to achieve this goal. The integration of ASU’s Manufacturing Institute and Design Automation Laboratory with the CEBM and the nanotechnology experts could well produce such designs in the 5-10 year timeframe. • Beyond 10 years, the emerging areas of bio-nanomaterials and molecular electronics could well disrupt manufacturing processes once again. The ASU:UA team is poised to produce chemically synthesized molecules that self assemble for specific applications such as electronic circuits, catalysis and so on. The opportunities here are boundless. High Value Bioproducts – Advances in plant genomics and photosynthesis at UA and ASU, respectively, can have a major impact on a number of industries that must become sustainable in the future. The concept, as the CEO of Monsanto has described it, is that the greenhouse will become the factory of the future. • In the near term (0–5 years) Arizona can capitalize on the “green factory” with edible vaccines (Arizona Biodesign institute at ASU) and anti-cancer drugs (UA’s Natural Products Center). • In the mid term (5–10 years), integrating the capabilities in plant genomics and photosynthesis could produce families of new, environmentally friendly industrial products such as chemicals for plastics, solvents and fibers. Water resources – By 2050, water supplies in the western states could be reduced by as much as 30 percent because of global warming. The concentration of hydrology and water expertise in the state makes this a potentially very rich area to mine for technology that will help solve this problem and also create economic benefit. Today, the knowledge, measuring and data analysis capabilities resident in the various UA Water Centers can supply Arizona’s existing
85
Environmental Engineering industry with tools to advise state and local governments and industry on water resources and quality, and land use management. In the longer term (approximately 5 years), there are new technologies for real time water use monitoring (UA), new sensor platforms for sensing biospecies in water, air and soil (NAU), and water cleanup (ASU) that could start local companies. The ASU invention, DEWVAPORATION—a combination of the words “dew formation” and “evaporation,” could bring affordable water from the oceans to worldwide communities—turning deserts into gardens. And ASU/UA research on self- assembling molecules could lead to highly efficient membranes to improve water purity. A driver for this will be new EPA regulations on arsenic levels in drinking water required in 2006. Research and technical assistance provided by NAU in the area of water re-use at community and watershed scales could be very important to the development of technologies, standards, and best practices that could be applicable across the Western U.S. and beyond. The city of Phoenix’s interest and leadership in this area could provide an urban model that can be replicated around the US and world, creating new business for Arizona. Remote sensing – In the near term the strong remote sensing and data analysis capabilities of the Arizona universities would be an asset to the state’s environmental engineering/consulting cluster, providing new capabilities to assess water resources, land use, forest health, etc. In the longer term, these capabilities could be linked to the micro/nanosatellite competence to produce a new business of monitoring and control. Companies could access their own personalized satellite- based remote sensing system to control water use for irrigation and energy use in buildings, for example. New construction materials – The investments being made in new materials technology that fuses chemistry, biology and physics can produce new construction materials, as well as new electronics. Bio-inspired materials will not need the high energy input to fabricate, yet will have the strength of traditional steels or concrete. They can be designed to be biodegradable after their useful operating lifetime. Substituting these lightweight, durable materials in buildings and roads will save energy and labor. Arizona already has experience with construction materials development and testing for industry in ASU’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and the Del Webb School of Construction, which could provide a foundation for a new thrust in “sustainable construction materials”. Sustainable agriculture – NAU and AU are already engaged in sustainable agriculture, which can be further enhanced through integration with the plant genomics advances. Knowledge of plant genomes obtained in the Plant Genetics Institute can enable manipulation to achieve different attributes. Agricultural biotech is already well established to produce crops that are resistant to temperature and moisture fluctuations or diseases. In addition, the nutritional content of crops can be substantially enhanced through the adjustment of the relative proportions of molecules such as oils, proteins, fats and carbohydrates. But, much more can be done here, not only to address Arizona’s particular challenges, but to seek economic gain by transferring this knowledge to other states and countries. Food supply will remain a major societal issue for a long time and new sustainable food sources are vital to economic growth. Sustainable forests – NAU and UA are studying a broad range of forest issues that range from fire management to tree growth. A viable consulting business could be made from this body of knowledge, advising the timber industry. An especially important factor in sustainable forest management is the inclusion of economic development and cultural parameters of small, isolated
86
rural communities. NAU’s successful Center for Sustainable Environments provides a model, developed on the Colorado Plateau, which could benefit a much broader geographic base. In addition, collaborative work at NAU, if broadened to include the engineering and commercial capabilities at ASU and UA, could likely address new product possibilities emanating from changing forest management policies on public lands. For example, the wood products industry could benefit from technology that would enable clearcut, low-grade wood to be made into quality products. Also, improvements in wood quality through genetic modification is a possibility. Renewable Energy – Arizona has abundant wind and solar resources to tap, so it makes sense to include renewable energy in the state’s sustainability portfolio. However, today, renewable energy research in Arizona is small and the renewable energy industry is fragmented. NAU has a leading national effort in wind energy technology research. They have some small funding from Sandia National Laboratory, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the State of Arizona. Interestingly, there is only one other university in the country, U. Mass-Amherst, with such a dedicated research effort. The semiconductor and optics research and development capabilities at UA, which also include major mirror design and fabrication facilities, are very impressive, but very little work is focused on solar applications. To add to this research base, Arizona has the largest small wind turbine manufacturer (Southwest Wind) in the world located in Flagstaff, and a number of solar energy manufacturers have facilities in the Phoenix and Tucson metropolitan area (BP Solar, Unisolar, Kyocera). The state also has policies that help to bolster these industries. The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) formally approved Arizona’ Environmental Portfolio Standard (EPS) in May of 2000 and it became operational on March 30, 2001. Under the standard, regulated utilities are required to provide a certain percentage of their electricity from renewable energy. The standard began with 0.2 percent renewables for 2001 and increases to 1.1 percent renewables by 2007, 50 percent of which must be solar based. Certainly, the basic research and deployment infrastructure is in place. What is needed is significant growth of the research base and some well designed pilot programs that will demonstrate the economic benefits of renewable energy as an industry. Infectious disease treatments – Concerns over environmental variability and change (e.g., in land use and climate) and its impact on human health are steadily growing around the world. Many of the possible threats are becoming more widespread in arid and semi-arid regions around the world, and it is no surprise that the rapidly growing, borderland and arid state of Arizona is on the front line in terms of both infectious disease and other health risks that could increase in the future. UA is best known for its work with Valley Fever. Now a new research program is focused on insect-borne infectious diseases (Dengue Fever, West Nile, and Encephalitis), which, if successful, could have a large economic payoff. Also, the amphibian, bird and animal models studied at ASU as part of the Phoenix urban ecology program are being looked at as the basis for studying urban environmental human health effects. Both these activities fit nicely into the overall health/bioscience program being mapped through the Flinn Foundation Project.
87
Identification of Gaps, Options, and Opportunities to Further Improve Competitiveness in the Technology Platforms
In the previous sections, several technology platforms were identified. To address in a preliminary way how Arizona’s public research universities can further build both research excellence and potential for technology commercialization, Battelle undertook a further effort to identify the gaps within these platforms and options to be addressed to build and strengthen each platform. We have identified approaches that can be taken by the private and public sectors, including research universities, to address three of the platforms. The fourth platform, bioengineering, is the subject of the Flinn Foundation Phase 2 project. In the last section of this chapter Battelle identifies opportunities that cut across these three platforms to position Arizona’s public research universities and the State in the future. These macro-level opportunities will require multi-institutional efforts as well as the participation of the public, private, philanthropic and non-profit sector for their implementation. Our approach to complete this gap, options, and opportunity analysis was to: 1) interview key research and management professionals in the three universities and private sector to gain the benefit of their experience and views; and 2) review comparable programs elsewhere that might be adapted to the conditions in Arizona. The synthesis of this analysis is presented below. It should be understood that the team did not undertake a full roadmap effort to identify gaps, options and opportunities. A disproportionate number of interviews were with faculty and research university administrators, and far fewer with industry representatives. And we are listing only some of the options, each of which would need to be further analyzed and researched. Their linkages to each other will need to be determined and the level of resources and timeframe required for their implementation remain to be identified. Battelle also did not address priorities among these options. These steps would require completion of a roadmap for each area, building on this core competency review and initial gap/options/opportunity analysis.
PLATFORM-SPECIFIC GAPS AND OPTIONS
Communications This platform addresses the telecommunications challenge, with four core competencies that can be integrated into next generation telecom systems—electronics and optics, computer modeling and simulation, chemistry and materials, and space sciences. All four of the core competencies, if carefully integrated and nurtured, could give Arizona a world leadership position in telecommunications. In this market space, Arizona universities’ core competencies are being used to produce innovative technologies/products in high bandwidth, high speed wireline systems, unification of wireless and wireline systems, and micro/nano satellites—all of which play into the telecom system of the future. Dr. Sayfe Kiaei of ASU sees the future merge of internet and wireless as shown in Figure 13.
88
Figure 13: Merger of Wired and Wireless Worlds
Wired Information World Wireless Information World Home 3G Data Rates
Anytime, Anywhere Office Any Place
World Wide Web 1990 - Today Wireless Browsing Capabilities
Internet 1970 - 1990 2000 - 2010
Next Generation Enhanced Network Capacities
Gaps Our interviewees identified the following nine gaps related to the communications platform: Communication Gaps • Limited coordination • There is a limited coordinating function that will • Limited collaboration at system integrate complimentary communications initiatives scale across the universities. For example, currently limited • Quality and depth of graduate efforts are underway to bring the optical networking student pool capabilities of UA together with the wireless capabilities • Facilities for interdisciplinary of ASU. Newly proposed centers in these areas (e.g., showcases Center for Intelligent Optical Networks at UA and • Faculty gaps in specialty areas Connection One at ASU) need to be linked to capitalize • University-industry differences in on each other’s competencies to create a world class interest/time frames center of excellence in advanced communications. • System capabilities need enhancement to draw industry • There is insufficient current collaboration to • Deficiencies in tech establish a systems-scale computer science set of transfer/commercialization applications capabilities across research universities. process Applications of computational sciences are fragmented • Limited strategic alliances and across many different departments, with no real core, in partnerships with leading out of each research university. A new Information Science and state universities currently Engineering Program being proposed for ASU would move toward addressing this at one university, but it needs to embrace the other universities across the state. • The quality of graduate students within communications related areas needs to be enhanced. Today, this quality appears to be mixed and varies greatly from department to department and university to university. • There is no core communications facility to house everyone and showcase the products of the interdisciplinary research, as well as to engage industry. However, the universities have ideas and proposals for such facilities into the state legislature.
89
• To build world class communications research excellence there remain several faculty gaps that need to be filled with research leaders. Particular areas identified include wireless circuits, RF, Analog/Mixed Signal, computer engineering for VLSI and digital systems, and MEMs. • There remains a gap between the long-term basic research view of universities and the near-term applications views of industry. Insufficient numbers of industry experts are engaged as advisors, adjunct faculty or in some other capacity, which will enable them to bring the market perspective to the programs. A key industry gap that universities could help fill, for example, is inexpensive devices that can be used in wireless systems at mm. frequencies. • Arizona has to have strength across the entire research system underlying communications, including materials, design, circuitry, software and antennas, if it is to draw more industry interest and partnerships. It is systems strength that industry values. While the universities recognize this requirement, more needs to be done to be competitive nationally. • Inefficiencies in the technology transfer/IP management/commercialization process need to be addressed. The lack of communication between faculty and the Technology Transfer Offices leads to faculty being unaware of new systems and policies put in place to facilitate the process. The universities have limited budgets for intellectual property protection and technology maturation (i.e., pre-seed funds). Other key parts of the commercialization system are also deficient, including incubators, and innovation assistance centers. • There are insufficient alliances/partnerships with other leading universities and research institutes. Such partnerships can help to increase Arizona’s reputation and credibility, and make it a national and international player.
Options Considerable progress is being made at Arizona’s public research universities to create the essential interdisciplinary programs and centers in communications, as a result of targeted investments in Communications Options new faculty hires and laboratories. There is already • Statewide umbrella enormous energy in this platform area at this time, from communications entity both university leadership and faculty, and many ideas • Showcase facilities for for further advancement are in process. Clearly, this is interdisciplinary, systems labs to an opportune time to bring all these assets together in a engage industry cohesive technology platform that will both further • Recruit world-class faculty from position Arizona’s research excellence as well as serve higher education and industry • the economic development interests of the state. Establish statewide program of graduate student excellence in This preliminary review of possible options to further communications position Arizona’s public research universities in • Improve communications between research excellence and as strategic partners with researchers and technology industry suggests that the following be considered: transfer function
90
• Create a statewide umbrella organizing entity. For example Dr. Sayfe Kiaei of ASU has proposed the organizing theme “Advanced Ventures in Communications” that will embrace the contributing centers at UA, ASU and NAU, and ensure effective communication, coordination, integration and marketing of assets. • Establish showcase facilities at each university to house the interdisciplinary teams, provide systems-oriented laboratories and engage industry in the process of product development. Examples that could become such showcase centers include the proposals for a Center of Excellence in Wireless Nanotechnology at ASU and the Center for Intelligent Optical Networks at UA. The universities have plans for new facilities but they rest on the Legislature’s approval of additional financing authority. • Recruit more world class leaders, e.g., endowed chairs, for specific areas within the communications platform. This includes further building stature in key elements of communications, but also building strengths in areas currently deficient such as embedded systems. Such talent should not only be recruited from higher education but from industry as well. This would improve credibility with both federal agencies and industry. Given the competition nationally in this area, more competitive university salary packages will have to be created, including endowed positions, as well as startup funds for outfitting labs and having sufficient technical support. Other key positions, as outlined in the crosscutting section of this chapter, in business development/marketing and commercialization, are also suggested to reposition Arizona’s research universities not just in this platform area but also in all platform areas. To accomplish this, the research universities will need to partner with the state, industry, foundations and private individuals to secure necessary resources. • Establish a statewide program to attract and retain the best students in communications. The nationally recognized student satellite program must be expanded into a nationally recognized research and technology program that will help grow the area’s satellite industry. Other funds would be used for stipends and internships. In addition, efforts might be undertaken to enhance and unify the graduate programs so that, uniformly across the disciplines, the top graduates can be hired. The CEINT program at ASU, with Intel and Motorola, is a good model that should be expanded to more companies and sites in Tucson and Flagstaff. • Close the communications gap between the faculty and Technology Transfer Office. Assign expert commercialization/business staff to the communications platform; increase the pre- and prototype development funds available as well as business incubation space.
Information Technology Like the preceding technology platform, the information technology (IT) platform addresses the anywhere, anytime promise of the Internet, but from the perspectives of computers and peripherals, semiconductors and software. Because of the hardware and software dimensions, this platform embraces the electronics and optics, chemistry and materials and computer modeling and simulation core competencies. In the IT market space, key commercialization opportunities for Arizona’s technologies are ubiquitous computing environments, software systems, semiconductor materials/manufacturing, optics in computing/storage, and nano (molecular) electronics.
91
Gaps Interviewees identified similar issues to those in communications but also distinct issues as well. Similar gaps as found in communications included: • No clearinghouse exists across the university system to facilitate information exchange and coordination, and sharing of research resources. Similar in nature to that found in communications, coordinating efforts, assets and interests is more ad hoc than systematic. • Arizona universities are more effective at collaboration within each institution than they Information Technology Unique Gaps are across institutions. Joint appointments are not • Address talent base at K–12 encouraged and it’s rare to find co-principal • Not nationally competitive in major investigators across Arizona’s research universities. federal research awards • The technology transfer climate has room for • Limited hardware/software system improvement. No good model of reward sharing infrastructure across universities to interest industry exists that provides incentives for both the • No software focus to build critical department and the faculty, and issues of pre- mass across state prototype development and prototype development • Aging non-competitive IT labs and funds as well as incubator space are of concern. materials • There is limited space to house interdisciplinary • Chip development fragmentation of centers. Such space is critical to enable faculty focus/interests teams to work together and engage industry partners. • To build world-class information technology research excellence there remains several faculty gaps that need to be filled. There is a need a few more faculty who can develop demonstration level devices, i.e. end-to-end science. There is also a need for new faculty hires in bio-nanotechnology to capitalize on applications for both advanced electronics and bioengineering. • Balancing university basic science interests with applications interests of industry is still a challenge in the IT systems areas as well. Industry relations are transient due to market demands and need constant attention. Faculty finds it hard to devote the time to invest in maintaining industry interest. IT interviewees did identify some more distinct gaps affecting the research stature and technology commercialization potential of the information technology platform in Arizona: • The future talent base must be educated, informed and engaged at the K–12 level. The next generation workforce is not being trained in interdisciplinary sciences such as nanotech and biotech at high school senior and undergraduate levels. • Arizona is not yet nationally competitive in information technologies research awards. This is reflected in several ways: Nanoscience research groups are not competing at the top level and capturing the key federal National Nanoscience Initiative (NNI) Centers, despite teaming with universities outside the state. A key win or new breakthrough discovery is needed to put Arizona on the nanotech map.
92
• Hardware and software components are not yet optimally integrated across universities to produce systems of interest to industry. While the embedded system research of CEINT is the best opportunity to date, more work must be done. • Software interests are very broad and therefore no clear theme exists within and across Arizona’s research universities to build a critical IT software research mass. ASU is attempting this with the Information Science and Engineering Institute concept, which will group capabilities in database systems, algorithms, and multimedia under one umbrella. But, more coordination and integration is required across campuses as well. • Basic laboratory semiconductor materials and electronics tools in undergraduate and graduate labs are aging and need replacement. Industry equipment is generally too sophisticated for university use and so their donations do not close this gap. • There is a proliferation of centers dealing with elements of the chip development and manufacturing process, but no integrating organization across the universities. This could represent an opportunity to work collaboratively, however.
Options Computer hardware and software based university research is highly competitive nationally and several states have special centers and initiatives. To name just a few examples, Sematech, the industry consortium, is making significant investments in university consortia for both software and hardware and is establishing a new facility at SUNY Albany. Cornell University, MIT and UC Santa Barbara Information Technology Options and Berkeley all have major NSF funded centers. Also, • Enhance faculty gaps five nanotechnology centers are being created at the • Improve technology DOE’s national laboratories, and most have electronic transfer/commercialization components. To position Arizona in this highly processes • competitive information technology platform, the Compare and follow Sematech Roadmap to Chart Arizona’s IT following options might be considered: Future • Fill key gaps in faculty and enhance graduate • Focus IT efforts around translational quality (as for the Communications Platform). research/product development key areas • Engage the Technology Transfer Office early and • Increase IT collaboration across frequently in licensing and commercialization research universities opportunities (as for Communications Platform). • Attract industry IT research operations to Arizona • Overlay Arizona’s research university assets with those of the industry-created Sematch Roadmap to undertake bold approaches that set Arizona research universities apart nationally. Given the maturity of the information technology industry, its own technology leadership, and the already developed industrial base in Arizona, Arizona’s best approach may be to overlay its higher education IT research assets with the Sematech Roadmap to see where Arizona can make potentially disruptive enhancements for industry (i.e. next generation materials and devices, such as nitrides). • Focus Arizona’s IT higher education research on core areas and develop translational research and product development centers in each. Showcase centers should be established to engage other key universities and industry in translational research and product
93
development (e.g., optoelectronics packaging, environmentally benign manufacturing). Arizona’s universities have niches of competitive research in environmentally benign semiconductor manufacturing, at the optics-electronics interface and in nanoelectronics. These need to be emphasized at the expanse of less competitive areas. • Build Arizona’s public research university IT efforts in the future through more collaboration across institutions. Arizona needs more co-PI’s from different Arizona universities to promote coordination and integration of capabilities. Joint appointments for interdisciplinary research need to be encouraged and accepted across all departments in the three universities • Build and attract industry basic research operations to Arizona related to the information technology platform. Because of the need to link IT research to industry drivers, given the maturity of the industry, it would much improve Arizona public research university potential if they had nearby industry IT research units, rather than primarily their manufacturing plants.
Sustainable Systems This platform revolves around the need and opportunity to systematically restructure the global economy to make it environmentally sustainable. The ecological sciences are Arizona’s top core competence and the plant and agricultural sciences competence is also strong. Therefore, this is an area where Arizona has an opportunity to be both a market creator and leader. There are several areas of sustainability that Arizona could take the lead in, including sustainable manufacturing, water management, high value bioproducts, and sustainable agriculture. With a concerted and coordinated government-university-industry effort, Arizona could well become the “Go-to State” as the industry and university research center for sustainable growth.
Gaps Whereas there were some similarities in Battelle’s findings as to gaps, options and opportunities regarding the communications and information technology platforms, in the case of sustainability this platform is at a much more formative or developmental stage, necessitating a different set of needs and requirements. In the case of research, efforts to date have been primarily focused on public service and public health, due to lack of industry drivers and funding support. This is projected to change dramatically over the next decade or more, permitting Arizona, in both the short and long term, to further build its research base, while positioning itself to identify and develop linkages to industry and other future research drivers interested in technology commercialization. Interviewees identified the following gaps surrounding this platform that need to be identified and addressed: • There is a current limited set of established markets for information and products supporting sustainability. There is little awareness in the private sector for the need for sustainable systems. Therefore, no drivers or demand for work exists beyond the federal government or public service missions. In the near term this makes the technology commercialization aspects of this platform more difficult to achieve.
94
• A key gap for applications is the absence of detailed knowledge of climate change and impacts to the ecosystem at local/regional levels; federal research emphasizes national/global effects and impacts. This represents an opportunity for local/regional pilot Sustainability Gaps projects, for example to address rangeland issues • Limited markets for sustainability for ranchers, or urban growth issues for cities. • Applications at local/regional levels missing • No single national center of responsibility for • No single national center of leadership sustainability, therefore leadership and funding and responsibility has to be drawn across both private and public • Building research quality through sectors and within the public sector, from faculty/student excellence needed several agencies and adapted to sustainability • Technology commercialization support issues. Sustainability topics are found in many critical to “building your own” federal agencies—Department of Energy (e.g., • Green manufacturing niche area for Renewable energy, Hydrogen/fuel cells), EPA AZ through research collaboration (e.g., Environmental remediation), Department of • Many examples of areas on which AZ Commerce and NASA (e.g., Climate change universities can build international effects) and Department of Agriculture (e.g., research excellence through collaboration Sustainable agriculture), to name just a few. In • No industry association linking users addition, some large private foundations, like and products of sustainability Bullitt and Murdock, fund sustainability research. • Losing star researchers outside the All are largely uncoordinated. state • Sustainability is highly interdisciplinary and • Need for central user facility crosses many university departments. It is • No federal research anchor for difficult to attract the best graduate students into sustainability in Arizona now such programs, and faculty (particularly the younger faculty) needs to be provided sufficient incentives to participate. NAU has a Center for Sustainable Environment and ASU has a Sustainable Development Graduate course in their Environmental Management Program, neither coordinated with the other, and more such programs are needed to build the base of qualified people for sustainability research and applications. • Technology Transfer Offices do not have all the expertise and training to help faculty entrepreneurs create new business opportunities in this area. It is very difficult to determine commercial potential in an emerging market and universities’ risk adverse attitude is an obstacle. • There is not enough emphasis on “green manufacturing” outside of UA. This platform needs balance between natural resource management and reducing the industrial footprint. A case in point is the potential for research in water use and recycling to give Arizona a competitive edge in recruiting and retaining high tech manufacturing industries. Both ASU and UA have strong interest here, but it is not sufficiently linked. • There is a need to bring the various components together across the state to create the sustainable systems technology platform. Two examples are: o The plant science/agriculture components at UA and ASU are not coordinated to provide critical mass in the high value bioproducts component. As a result,
95
Arizona is not taking full advantage of its unique position for growing pharmaceutical crops. o There is little or no renewable energy research in Arizona universities despite the strong component capabilities (e.g., strong optics design and fabrication program at UA, the materials research and fabrication capabilities at ASU, and the broad electronics capabilities at all three universities). While there is a small wind program at NAU, it is poorly funded. Distributed generation systems based on solar and wind power should have good market potential in Arizona, but the fact that research and development is not being pursued aggressively by any university is a major gap. • There is no sustainable industries association, in contrast to Oregon, which has a strong Natural Step movement. The Environmental Business Industry association is perhaps closest to providing a home for sustainability. Furthermore, Arizona has not attracted big industry in this area, so there is no nucleus for a sustainability cluster. For example, there is no water industry of significance in Arizona despite several leading university-based water research centers. • Some research units are losing faculty to other institutions in California and Colorado because of better salaries, infrastructure, etc. • There are no central user facilities to create critical mass and interdisciplinary developments. Unique facilities are needed to serve as magnets for quality staff and funding support. Currently, each department has its own set of capabilities and facilities, which are generally adequate, but there is no sustainability showcase facility in any city. • The absence of a significant federally Funded Research and Development Facility (FFRDC) in Arizona limits growth of the overall research base in this area.
Options Only a few people are thinking the overall picture of how to integrate the enormous ecological, engineering and natural science assets of the state into a sustainability movement that will make Arizona the go-to state for sustainable systems and industries in the future. Therefore, the focus for this Sustainability Options platform has to be on building the sustainable systems • Establish statewide sustainability foundation, building awareness and creating and organization linking state responding to global market demand. Correspondingly, government and universities options for this area are much more developmental and • Establish or reposition a state investment oriented than was the case for industry association communications and information technology, which • Attract major federal sustainability must marry with an existing set of robust markets and center/institute to Arizona industries. • Establish pilot regional projects in Arizona
96
Options that might go into an investment plan or strategy to develop a full technology platform in the future include: • Establish a statewide umbrella sustainability organization that helps integrate the three universities’ research and education interests in sustainable systems. It would provide coordinating, integrating and collaboration functions (both within the three research universities and within state government), and lead the awareness programs. In this regard, the ISPE concept at UA should be considered for expansion statewide. Special showcase centers would also be established in Phoenix, Tucson and Flagstaff, exhibiting different themes. • Establish an industry association around sustainability. Sustainable industries would be those companies that either employ sustainable practices (users) or sell “green” products and services (producers). While the Environmental Industry business cluster could be the core of this new organization and would help create the market demand, it must be defined in a broader fashion. • Anchor the sustainability research base in Arizona by attracting or forming a new Federal Center/Institute devoted to sustainability. This would necessarily engage government (state and federal), industry and universities at the highest levels. One hook for Arizona to consider is the combination of arid/semiarid lands and water resources as a focusing theme. Potential federal agency supporters include NOAA, NASA, EPA and DOE. • Initiate a few high visibility pilot projects to put Arizona on the sustainability map worldwide. Some examples have already been proposed: l) environmentally benign manufacturing (addressing energy and water usage); 2) a sustainable community in the Phoenix area that is constructed from green materials and powered by solar/wind; and 3) crop-based pharmaceuticals around plant science/agricultural components for high value bioproducts. Also, Arizona universities need to collaborate on key enabling technologies such as remote sensing and sensor systems, which can create a manufacturing base in the state. A further example would be to use Phoenix and the border cities as “living laboratories.”
CROSS CUTTING OPPORTUNITIES Although we have proposed specific platform options to address gaps for each platform, there are options and opportunities, which are generic to all platforms (see Table 33). We call these “cross cutting opportunities” that address all three technology platforms just discussed. This does not negate the options specific to each platform but represent “macro” level solutions across all three areas. What is very encouraging is that many of the solutions have already been initiated in part by at least one university, so there is momentum and a base to build on.
97
These crosscutting opportunities are presented in five categories: • Creating a Collaborative Environment; • Attracting the Best and Brightest; • Application Centers; • Business Development and Marketing; and • Technology Transfer and Commercialization. Table 33: Summary of Platform Gaps Expressed in Interviews
Information Sustainable GAPS Communications Technology Systems Creating a Collaborative Environment Limited coordinating function across institutions X X X Need better collaborative models for systems oriented X X X disciplines Need incentives for graduate students and faculty to X collaborate Capabilities are spread across campus and across X X institutions with no linkages or major theme Need more co-PIs from different universities in system X No “clearinghouse” to share information and coordinate X X research Attracting the Best and Brightest
Overall mixed quality of graduate students X X X Not training next generation workforce in X interdisciplinary science Faculty gaps exist in a number of key interdisciplinary X X areas – need more “world class” research leaders Need research strengths across entire research system X underlying communications
More joint faculty appointments needed X X
Losing faculty to other institutions GAPS X Application Centers No facilities to conduct and showcase interdisciplinary X X X research No facilities for faculty/students to work with industry on X X products Hardware and software components of research are not X being optimally integrated Basic lab equipment is aging and not being replaced X
98
GAPS Communications Information Sustainable Technology Systems Business Development/Marketing Huge gap between basic research and near term needs X X of industry Too few industry experts are engaged in university research, curricula development and commercialization X advice More alliances with leading universities out of state X X needed to grow reputation Nanoscience groups are not capturing key NNI centers X Limited near-term market for sustainable systems; no X industry association in AZ No single federal agency controls sustainability research X budgets Limited knowledge of climate change and impacts to X ecosystem at local/regional levels Technology Transfer/ Commercialization Lack of communication between TT Office and faculty X X Perceived need more equitable “reward sharing” X between university, department, and faculty team. Little or no pre-seed funds to capture IP and mature X X inventions Few business skills and support available for X X entrepreneurial faculty Incubator space is sparse X X
99
CREATING A COLLABORATIVE ENVIRONMENT Of all the gaps identified in our interviews, the challenge of starting and maintaining collaborations across the universities in the state was mentioned most frequently.
Cross-Institutional Collaborations The six core competencies identified in this current study, combined with areas of strength in biosciences identified in the companion Flinn Foundation study, make an impressive university- based research foundation for Arizona’s economic roadmap. Battelle found several cross- institutional collaborations, both formal and informal, which enhanced each participating organization’s research and training capabilities. Particularly noteworthy are the collaborations to manage NSF Centers, the collaborations supported by NASA and the Air Force, and the virtual teams working on neural engineering, molecular electronics and sustainable water resources. Over 19 interdisciplinary programs were found at UA alone! All of these collaborations and more should be nurtured to sustain the core competencies and ensure the pipeline of innovations and trained professionals for existing and new industries in the state. However, the key to success for Arizona’s economic plan is the Technology Platforms, because these are translational research engines, taking raw science and technology and integrating it into systems that industry can use. By their very nature these platforms are where collaborations are essential, not only among the university researchers, but with industry practitioners. Therefore, this section of the report identifies opportunities for enhanced cross-institutional collaborations that the state can encourage and invest. Fortunately for Arizona, in most cases a collaborative effort exists, which can be build on to include all three state universities. Opportunities for near term state attention are as follows:
Telecommunications A university-industry collaboration might be considered around the technologies needed for the telecommunications system of the future—the unification of wireless systems with the conventional wireline infrastructure. This collaboration should be built on the foundations provided by three university initiatives, including: • Connection One, a NSF industry/university cooperative research center. The University of Arizona will be joining Connection One, along with UC San Diego, University of North Carolina and University of Hawaii, and as many as 17 industrial affiliates are projected to be signed up by next year. Four patents have been filed and two licenses are under discussion, so it is proving its commercial potential. • Consortium for Embedded and Internetworking Technology (CEINT). CEINT has Intel and Motorola as major partners, and has just completed its second year of a NSF grant. UA and several major companies (e.g., TI, Raytheon) have expressed interest in joining, to produce a component in the Tucson area. • Further enhancement will be provided if UA is successful with its bid for an NSF Engineering Research Center for Intelligent Optical Networks (ION), and it is linked to the other telecom centers. The vision of ION is to become the national research and education resource for
100
photonic and communication communities. UA is leading a team including UC San Diego, USC, California Institute of Technology, UC Davis and Stanford University.
Information Technology A major opportunity area in IT would be a university-industry collaboration to capitalize on the convergence of electronics, optics and nanoscience, which will yield new optoelectronic materials, semiconductors, lasers, molecular/nanoelectronics and optical computing and storage systems that will revolutionize the world’s cyber infrastructure. The State’s universities will need a new initiative if the State is to embrace all the research at ASU, NAU and UA that can contribute to this convergence. A start in this direction is being made by UA with a proposed Photonic Technology Center, which will integrate that university’s capabilities in photonics, optoelectronics, materials science and engineering, electrical and computer engineering, chemical engineering, physics, chemistry, molecular biology, mathematics and physiology to address new opportunities in photonics industries.
Sustainability This broad area is the wave of the future, and so now is the time to bring the contributing components together into a systems approach that can address community and industry needs and provide answers that are backed by good science. The foundation for a statewide collaboration could be the Institute for the Study of Planet Earth (ISPE), formed at UA. Already this Institute has captured 80 percent or more of the UA ecology/sustainability researchers, and Dr. Jonathon Overpeck, ISPE’s Director, has started discussions with ASU and NAU. Possibly making ISPE the Arizona Institute for Planet Earth is a next step, with coordinating offices at ASU and NAU. These centers would not only coordinate interdisciplinary research but also serve as extension services (similar to the Ag Extension Services), providing information and best practices to both public and private sectors. Collaborative activities across the three universities should also make optimal use of the major urban and rural resources already being focused upon for a variety of research activities: the Phoenix urban area environment, the Colorado Plateau, and multiple arid lands environments. These resources provide significant research value to many of the critical questions that must be addressed for sustainable development, across the Western U.S. and in many other regions of the world.
Improving Connectivity With the major research and development resources in Arizona being geographically dispersed, it is difficult to maintain regular communications and cooperative research that would capitalize on the different strengths and capabilities of the various groups. In particular, NAU faculty feel disconnected from major research operations at Tucson and Phoenix, and faculty in Phoenix and Tucson can’t find the time to make the trips necessary to sustain collaborations. Accordingly, we believe that there would be great value to creating a Collaboratory for each platform, in which the state’s researchers can work cooperatively to further research and develop applications for technology without regard to geographical location. Hardware and software is now available that can enable researchers to interact with their colleagues, access instrumentation, share data and computation resources, and access information in digital libraries. By providing access to instruments, data, and computer display sharing, the Collaboratory would enable researchers in different geographical locations to interact as closely as if they were just down the hall.
101
The Collaboratory would integrate new communications technologies, including shared computer displays, electronic notebooks, and virtual reality collaboration spaces with videoconferencing and e-mail capabilities. These communication technologies could also be integrated with scientific and engineering resources, including instruments, data, analysis software, and the scientific literature. They would allow for remote experiments, testing, and real-time data analysis.
The Collaboratory toolkit that could be used in Arizona A Collaboratory might include: Provides access to instruments, • CORE2000 or Real-Time Group Collaboration – data and computer display sharing An open, cross-platform, collaboration system for to enable researchers in different geographical locations to interact multi-tool collaborative sessions. It includes a as if they were located much more whiteboard, a chat room, desktop videoconferencing, closely. and application sharing of computer screens. Collaboratory toolkit allows for remote experiments, testing and • Virtual Network Computing or VNC – A secure real time data analysis. collaborative (remote) instrument control application Software includes tool. VNC provides the authorization control and • Real-time Group Collaboration privacy essential for the safe control of expensive • Virtual Network Computing instruments or the sharing of sensitive data. • Electronic laboratory notebook • • Electronic Laboratory Notebook – A Web version Collabrasuite of web-based tools to manage multi-location projects of a traditional paper laboratory notebook that collaborators can share in real time. • Collabrasuite – A suite of Web-based tools that makes it easier for people from different organizations and in different locations to work together. The tools are used to manage resources, simplify coordination and development of information products, and facilitate communication and collaboration. They allow dispersed groups to work on common projects in real-time. Collaboratory sites should be established in Phoenix, Technical Network Best Practices* Tucson and Flagstaff at a minimum. Technical networks should • Be competency based Technical Networks • Align technical capabilities with the business strategies of their Networks are becoming a vital force within and across organization organizations as a way of linking technology and • Link people across organizations technologists, promoting information flow, and and geographical boundaries increasing efficiency. The foundations for strong • Provide value to its membership technical networks exist in Arizona in the form of • Be responsible for achieving a informal scientific networks among the three major common set of goals and held accountable. research universities. However, these informal networks *Source: Battelle, based on networking need to become technology platform-centric and experiences of companies such as expanded to include research institutes and industry DuPont, Battelle, 3M, Hughes Electronics, Siemens, and Lockheed participants, and enhanced beyond simple information Martin. exchange. It is proposed that Arizona organize and provide support for formal technical networks that will foster the collaboration needed between research and industry to achieve the state’s technical and
102
economic goals. The value to participants includes the expansion of their knowledge base, access to resources not available in their home institutions, and increased opportunities for collaborative R&D funding. Each technical network would include specialists from the universities, research institutions, and industry in Arizona. One approach would be to have each participating organization identify a Technical Network Leader for each network in which it wants to participate. The Technical Network Leader could serve as the in-house champion and point of contact for network members. All key scientific, technical, and engineering staff should be encouraged to participate in technical networks in their areas of competency. Technical network activities could include developing and maintaining an inventory of network capabilities, conducting topical workshops or seminars sponsored by the partners, and developing joint research opportunities and contributions to new intellectual property and capabilities. The Collaboratory environment discussed above would be very useful in enabling the networks. The state could assist in organizing the networks and make funding available to support network activities such as Web sites, workshops, and other gatherings.
ATTRACTING THE BEST AND BRIGHTEST
Recruiting Incentives While recruitment of some stars has been successful (e.g., Jeff Trent), there are still major opportunities to enhance the depth of research, management and entrepreneurial capacity in Arizona. Specific actions might include: • Develop the Arizona Executive Corps, to bring serial entrepreneurial managers to the State to manage prototype development, seed and pre-seed funds, and offer business counseling and mentoring, a problem common to each platform. Individuals would be recruited to Arizona to run these programs temporarily as well as being entrepreneurs in residence in the public research university business schools, with the understanding that within 18–24 months they would take a senior position in a technology firm started or attracted to the state. • Expand the entrepreneurial assistance role contained in the Flinn-sponsored Biosciences Roadmap to non-bioscience arenas. A number of groups and organizations, including each university are working on a similar initiative. Complementary programs can be developed and in-depth training and networking programs can be established to help to develop qualified CEOs and help train companies in various aspects of business management, technology assessment and project planning, company formation and capitalization, regulatory requirements, and other skills. To this end, Arizona’s Business Schools must be fully engaged in technology based economic development.
Growing Your Own For long-term sustainability, a state must have a system that continuously yields first class students, researchers, entrepreneurs and business leaders. Clearly, this requires a very strong education system, from K–12, through undergraduate and graduate training. This is the foundation on which to add new programs that encourage innovation and commercial deployment. A few that are compatible with Arizona’s capabilities and culture include:
103
• Advanced science courses for high schools that are developed in the universities and taught in their laboratories with university/private sector mentors. These would be interdisciplinary courses such as nanotechnology, biotechnology, and information technology. • Science Fairs that encourage high school students to invent. The Intel International Science Fair, held annually, attracts over 1200 students in a top-level competition that, in the past, has produced patentable inventions and new companies. Arizona should increase the number of local state fairs that would produce teams for this international competition; and consider hosting the fair in future years (http://www.sciserv.org). • Arizona’s universities do a reasonable job of winning undergraduate and graduate research training grants, but more are needed for the platform areas that are contained herein. Arizona needs to be able to expand on the Flinn Scholars program and tap other Foundations, offering scholarships and/or internships to the best students in advanced communications, information technology, biosciences and ecological sciences. • Arizona and its public research universities need access to additional resources for pre- prototype development and for technology commercialization support if they are to succeed. The Flinn-sponsored Arizona Biosciences Roadmap does include a proposed BioSeed Fund and a Prototype Development Fund. Approaches to address capital gaps in the other platform areas would benefit from similar development of full roadmaps. For example, it may make some sense to encourage the private sector to establish private equity funds focused on seed and early stage investing in each platform area • Another approach to build stronger industry relationships and partnerships in each non- bioscience platform is formation of applied matching grant programs, whereby industry would provide 3:1 match. These programs, now found in at least 20 states, help increase communication and interactions between industry and higher education.
Application Centers APPLICATION CENTERS Provide access to equipment and facilities to enable Facilities infrastructure for interdisciplinary research and universities and industry to collaboration is either missing or deficient for all the work collaboratively to adapt, platforms. This gap was the second most frequently mentioned develop and utilize platform in our interviews. Therefore, Arizona may want to consider technologies: • creation of one or more Application Centers for each platform. One of a kind equipment • Application Centers would provide access to facilities, Operate as user facility • equipment and experts to enable industry, working in Focus on translational research to produce new partnership with academic researchers, to adapt, develop, and products utilize discoveries from the state’s research institutions. They • Provide training for would be key components of the platform Collaboratory, students and mentioned previously. entrepreneurs • Leverage federal and The Application Center could serve many purposes: industry funding • Include one-of-a-kind equipment or facilities (e.g., wet labs, clean rooms) that enhance the current or planned capabilities of Arizona’s research institutions and industry. It would be a “showcase” for the platform;
104
• Operate as a user facility, shared by both research institutes and private industry; • Focus on translational research, i.e., activities undertaken to increase the commercial value of Arizona’s innovations; • Provide a training ground for undergraduates and graduates; • Emphasize the development of products that will support the growth of emerging markets and the creation of brand new markets; • Seek to leverage and influence federal investments in research and development; and • Be networked to institutions conducting basic science research and the companies that are the end users of the technology being developed. The Centers could provide demonstration and test-bed facilities as well as testing and evaluation services. Examples of the type of services that could be provided by the Centers include capabilities to allow for the manufacture of limited quantities of prototypes for testing, and further development or access to a computer-aided design facility to provide software development and simulation. An additional attractive feature could be availability of space to incubate entrepreneurial startup companies. Such an infrastructure would help Arizona pass its competitors in these areas by reducing time from laboratory to market. Given the dispersed nature of Arizona’s research institutions and technology industries, the Application Centers will need to be geographically dispersed virtual scientific facilities located in proximity to or within existing or planned research centers. As a central feature of the platform collaboratory, the Application Centers will combine the secure remote operation of the special instruments with real-time videoconferencing, real-time computer display sharing, and other capabilities to make the Center’s instrumentation accessible to remote users. Application Centers are in operation or are being proposed in many states. Two that have experienced several years of successful operation include the Washington Technology Center in Seattle, Washington (http://www.watechcenter.org), and Georgia Centers for Advanced Telecommunications Technology, Atlanta, Georgia (http://www.gcatt.org). A new state initiative termed Third Frontier, sponsored by the State of Ohio, will fund 3-6 Innovation Centers representing collaboratory ventures of higher education and industry in Ohio’s core competency areas. Two other new initiatives of relevance to Arizona represent extremes of organization and management: • Infotonics Center – A partnership has been formed between industry, university and government to establish the Infotonics National Center of Excellence for Photonics and MOEMS (micro-optical, electrical, mechanical systems). The goal of the Center is to establish a unique, world-class research and development center in the area of photonics and related micro-systems. In support of this endeavor, a state-of-the-art prototype and pilot fabrication facility will be created to enable the rapid commercialization of new products. Management of this Center will provide by an industry consortium, headed by Xerox, Corning and Kodak. • SignatureResearchCenter for Multiscale Materials and Devices – An initiative led by Oregon State University and University of Oregon, and supported by Pacific Northwest National Lab, will create a government-university-industry partnership to exploit the
105
integration of nanoscale materials into microscale devices for energy, environmental, medical and national security applications. In Arizona, several center concepts have already been proposed that respond to the technology platform needs. These include the Photonic Technology Center and the Institute for the Study of Planet Earth at UA, and the Wireless Nano Technology Center, and the Information Science and Technology Institute at ASU. Any or all of these could be expanded into Application Centers. A Federal Center/Institute Candidate – Given Arizona’s leadership in ecological sciences, consideration should be given to integrating critical aspects of ecological research across the state into an “application center” that could evolve into a Federally Funded Research and Development Corporation (FFRDC) candidate (but need not be this as Battelle’s experience suggests that this anchor can be a Federal Center, institute, or a private research anchor as well). The presence of a federal or private research anchor could expand both the research and development business volume and intellectual capacity much more than can be achieved by incremental growth in the universities. An obvious single purpose laboratory example to emulate would be the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, with approximately 1000 staff and approximately $400 million annual budget, created 25 years ago in Colorado. This will not be an easy task, but, with the right hook (e.g., climate change impacts on water and arid/semi arid lands management), support from the responsible federal agencies and appropriate elected official support from Arizona and neighboring states, it would be an appropriate grand challenge for the state.
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT AND MARKETING
Growing the R&D Business Despite the success experienced by Arizona universities with federal research grants, all agree that more can and needs to be done, even in the highly competitive climate that exists today. To move to the next level, Arizona’s public research universities might push the envelope of securing federal research dollars. More market intelligence is needed to create awareness of large opportunities before they become wired to other institutions. Centralizing this function at the university, or better still, having a single office for the Arizona university system would be advantageous. University assignments to key federal agencies would help build mind share within those agencies. Also, a continuous Washington presence is required to work with Arizona’s delegation. Strategic hiring of key government officials after they have retired is one way to open doors. Finally, each platform should have at least one business development professional to work with faculty on large procurement opportunities. While competitive intelligence is very important, the key to success is building the team that can deliver the winning proposals. This is an art, more than a science, and takes a different type of person than a typical faculty member—a mix of project manager, entrepreneur and scientist. Again, strategic hires of professional project managers who can pull together university-industry partnerships would be a differentiating approach for Arizona’s public research universities to collaboratively form.
106
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND COMMERCIALIZATION This area is the Achilles heel of most universities and research institutes and Arizona is no exception. While this is a subject of much interest to faculty, there appears to be a general lack of knowledge of the university’s current programs, policies, and changes in personnel and practice in recent years. Both UA, ASU, and NAU (through its agreement whereby ASU manages its intellectual property) have recognized the need to improve this part of their system and each has made critical new hires and changed policies and procedures to reduce the barriers to successful exploitation of inventions. Nevertheless, problems with capturing and exploiting inventions were mentioned many times during our interviews, indicating a general communication problem between faculty and the Technology Transfer Offices, and gaps in the overall system that will need to be addressed. Unfortunately, there is no tried and true model for successful technology transfer. But one can help this random process by creating an environment for innovation. The following are approaches taken by other universities and research institutes, each responding to a particular part of the innovation cycle. The key to success is to integrate these into a repeatable system, such as the stage-gate system developed by Battelle (Figure14). Figure 14: A Stage-Gate Commercialization Pipeline
Recycle Evaluation leads to exit of Investment Council Pipeline. IP Docketing, Returns to owner: License, FFS, Recycle, Drop, etc. & Circulation
Identify, Eval., Opportunity Conceptual Business Implement- Exit & Develop Identification Business Plan ation Manage Business Ideas 1 & Screening 2 Case 345Development -ment and IP Development Opportunities*
Ideas & IP from External Gate 1 Gate 2 Gate 3 Gate 4 Gate 5 Sources • Scope • Strategic fit • Strategic fit •Plan Strength •Portfolio notification • IP position • Techno/product •Funding Capacity management • Request ISS • Scope clear concept strength and approach •Liquidity event *ISS support support if • Request ISS & • Mgt and execution available for needed CBD support as capacity these activities needed •Commercial Value
Key staff functions and services that must be available, not necessarily in the Technology Transfer Office or even in the university, include: • Adequate funding for patent protection, including a system to capture the IP, and evaluate its market potential. • Education and training of the faculty and graduate students. • A discretionary proof of principle pre- prototype development fund to ascertain whether there is value from the research for commercial applications.
107
• Ability for staff to take entrepreneurial leaves to start up companies, to hold stock or options and to navigate the state’s conflict of interest laws. This whole area has to be user friendly and cannot jeopardize tenure track. A committed faculty is key to success of any program. • Access to business management expertise such as market analysis, business plan preparation and business management. • Flexible licensing agreements that properly address the state of the technology and the market, and the industry partner needs (i.e., one size does not fit all). • Ability to bundle IP with other universities or research institutions to create a competitive package for commercialization. An Arizona-wide system for bundling IP will be critical to the success of the platforms. • Mechanisms to engage the private sector on a regular basis. Industry needs regular exposure to the science and technology opportunities; venture capitalists need to be exposed to business investment opportunities. • Methods to give wide exposure to IP. IP can be posted on websites that function as brokers, matching technology to needs of individuals or companies.
108
Summary and Conclusions
Arizona has a considerable research base in its three public research universities on which to build a strong technology based economic development program. Combining this analysis with the earlier Arizona biosciences roadmap suggests six technology platforms on which Arizona’s public research universities can focus: • Communications; • Information technology; • Sustainable systems; • Bioengineering; • Neurological sciences; and • Cancer-therapeutics. These six platforms represent: • Competitive research areas nationally for the state’s three public research universities, as measured by the “market place” of academic research, e.g., citation analysis and federal funding concentrations (e.g., multiple PI awards), and augmented by Battelle’s “Starlight” cluster analysis of linkages within and across these areas. • Interdisciplinary areas, for the most part, which take advantage of a wide range of disciplines and whose enhancement is more likely through collaboration across Arizona’s public research universities. • The basis for sustained and growing industry, government, and academic partnerships in both research and knowledge and technology commercialization. The six core competencies were blended into four technology platforms that have the potential of catching the next major technological waves—advanced communications, gene-based medicine and sustainable systems. Gaps and options for enhancement of three of the platforms— communications, information technology, and sustainability—were identified through interviews and analyses of similar programs elsewhere. The fourth platform, bioengineering, is the subject of a Flinn Phase 2 study. Finally, we identified five crosscutting opportunities and actions that might be considered and needed to address all technology platforms. Because a core competency analysis led to the identification of these platforms, this study can only address gaps, options and opportunities in a preliminary fashion. To further generate and create an implementation plan, an overall strategy or roadmap must be developed for each platform.
109
Appendix: University Research Profiles—Grants, Funding, Publications and Degrees
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
CLUSTER TITLE TOTAL NUMBER NUMBER AT UNIVERSITY OF OF GRANTS AT 3 UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA SHARE OF MAJOR AZ ARIZONA TOTAL GRANTS AT TOP 3 INSTITUTIONS AZ UNIVERSITIES ECOLOGICAL SCIENCES 338 215 64%
AGRICULTURAL 95 80 84% SCIENCES EARTH SCIENCES 128 73 57% (GEOLOGY)
SPACE SCIENCES 69 55 80%
COMPUTER MODELING 200 82 41% & SIMULATION SOFTWARE
ANTHROPOLOGY 57 36 63%
MATHEMATICS 61 22 36% EVOLUTIONARY 75 56 75% BIOLOGY
ELECTRONICS/ 54 38 70% OPTICAL SCIENCES
N
CHEMISTRY AND 120 61 51% MATERIALS SCIENCES
110
University of Arizona FY 2000 NSF Funding (Nominal Dollars) Total Research FY 2000 Expenditures Field Funding Location Quotients ALL DISCIPLINES 345,090 N/A ALL NON-LIFE SCIENCE DISCIPLINES 147,615 1.21 PHYSICAL SCIENCES 83,227 2.68 Astronomy 68,160 15.19 Chemistry 9,699 0.88 Physics 5,368 0.39 Other 0 0.00
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 10,343 0.51 Atmospheric 3,203 0.97 Earth 7,140 1.10 Oceanography 0 0.00 Other 0 0.00
MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES 2,999 0.77 COMPUTER SCIENCES 4,686 0.46 OTHER SCIENCES 14 0.00 ENGINEERING 46,346 0.92 Aeronautical 908 0.31 Chemical 4,933 1.15 Civil 7,921 1.16 Electrical 15,230 1.19 Mechanical 12,482 1.72 Metallurgical 2,501 0.55 Other 2,371 0.20
111
University of Arizona Cluster Area Publication Indexes Field Publications Publication Percent Higher Concentration Relative Citation Ratio Impact than US Ecological Sciences Entomology/Pest Control 202 2.85 84% Environmental Studies, Geography & Development 79 1.60 -9% Environment/Ecology 615 1.91 31% Environment Engineering/Energy 71 0.94 198% Environment Medical & Public Health 55 0.70 67% Agricultural Sciences Agricultural Chemistry 38 0.50 26% Agriculture/Agronomy 108 1.06 12% Aquatic Sciences 55 0.36 23% Plant Sciences 301 1.23 131% Earth Sciences Earth Sciences 718 2.16 82% Geology/Petroleum/Mining Engineering 19 0.67 177% Space Sciences Physics 650 1.11 62% Space Science 1,168 7.29 53% Computer Modeling and Simulation Computer Sciences & Engineering 94 1.06 2% Information Technology & Communication Systems 55 0.87 143% Mathematics Mathematics 137 0.60 52% Electronics & Optics Sciences Optics & Acoustics 318 2.35 34% Electronics & Electronic Engineering 142 0.68 175% Instrumentation/Measurement 50 0.50 41% Spectroscopy/Instrumentation/ Analytical Sciences 150 0.51 19% AI, Robotics & Auto Control 63 0.61 25% Chemistry and Materials Sciences Applied Physics/Conductive Materials/Materials Sciences 698 0.73 66% Chemical Engineering 26 0.17 10% Chemistry 142 0.47 116% Materials Science and Engineering 149 0.36 88% Organic Chemistry/Polymer Science 183 0.49 -1% Physical Chemical/Chemical Physics 288 0.60 26%
112
Total Degrees at The University of Arizona AY 1999-2001 Arizona Core Competency Associates Bachelor's Master's Ph.D's Total Number Group of Degrees Agricultural Sciences 161 86 68 315 Anthropology 271 53 41 365 Chemistry and Materials Sciences 384 81 77 542 Computer Modeling and Simulation 146 146 Earth Sciences (Geology) 134 51 53 238 Ecological Sciences 386 152 87 625 Electronics/Optical Sciences 219 189 90 498 Mathematics 96 57 37 190 Planetary Sciences 40 19 18 77 Total 0 1837 688 471 2,996
113
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
CLUSTER TITLE TOTAL NUMBER NUMBER AT ARIZONA STATE OF GRANTS AT 3 ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY SHARE OF MAJOR AZ UNIVERSITY TOTAL GRANTS AT TOP 3 INSTITUTIONS AZ UNIVERSITIES ECOLOGICAL SCIENCES 338 80 24%
N
AGRICULTURAL 95 9 9% SCIENCES EARTH SCIENCES 128 48 38% (GEOLOGY)
SPACE SCIENCES 69 13 19% COMPUTER MODELING 200 114 57% & SIMULATION SOFTWARE
N
ANTHROPOLOGY 57 16 28% MATHEMATICS 61 28 46%
EVOLUTIONARY 75 13 17% BIOLOGY ELECTRONICS/ 54 16 30% OPTICAL SCIENCES CHEMISTRY AND 120 52 43% MATERIALS SCIENCES
114
Arizona State University FY 2000 NSF Funding (Nominal Dollars) Total Research FY 2000 Expenditures Field Funding Location Quotients ALL DISCIPLINES 108,117 N/A ALL NON-LIFE SCIENCE DISCIPLINES 75,731 1.21 PHYSICAL SCIENCES 19,021 1.95 Astronomy 217 0.15 Chemistry 8,979 2.60 Physics 3,893 0.90 Other 5,932 10.48 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 11,532 1.81 Atmospheric 0 0.00 Earth 11,532 5.66 Oceanography 0 0.00 Other 0 0.00 MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES 1,677 1.37 COMPUTER SCIENCES 3,224 1.02 OTHER SCIENCES 5,073 2.68 ENGINEERING 35,204 2.24 Aeronautical 172 0.19 Chemical 2,690 2.00 Civil 8,723 4.07 Electrical 10,469 2.62 Mechanical 7,813 3.44 Metallurgical 0 0.00 Other 5,337 1.47
115
Arizona State University Cluster Area Publication Indexes Field Publications Publication Percent Higher Concentration Relative Citation Ratio Impact than US Ecological Sciences Entomology/Pest Control 33 0.89 34% Environmental Studies, Geography & Development 91 3.53 -24% Environment/Ecology 261 1.56 42% Environment Engineering/Energy 33 0.84 44% Environment Medical & Public Health 70.17-38% Agricultural Sciences Agricultural Chemistry 17 0.43 23% Agriculture/Agronomy 16 0.30 -55% Aquatic Sciences 58 0.73 47% Plant Sciences 113 0.89 14% Earth Sciences Earth Sciences 276 1.60 28% Geology/Petroleum/Mining Engineering 2 0.13 -100% Space Sciences Physics 245 0.81 4% Space Science 269 3.22 69% Computer Modeling and Simulation Computer Sciences & Engineering 92 2.00 -19% Information Technology & Communication Systems 37 1.12 7% Mathematics Mathematics 156 1.32 19% Electronics & Optics Sciences Optics & Acoustics 52 0.74 99% Electronics & Electronic Engineering 236 2.18 5% Instrumentation/Measurement 31 0.59 26% Spectroscopy/Instrumentation/ Analytical Sciences 100 0.65 44% AI, Robotics & Auto Control 88 1.64 -7% Chemistry and Materials Sciences Applied Physics/Conductive Materials/Materials Sciences 736 1.49 34% Chemical Engineering 25 0.31 -1% Chemistry 86 0.55 285% Materials Science and Engineering 196 0.90 37% Organic Chemistry/Polymer Science 25 0.13 9% Physical Chemical/Chemical Physics 292 1.16 42%
116
Total Degrees at Arizona State University AY 1999-2001 Arizona Core Competency Associates Bachelor's Master's Ph.D's Total Number Group of Degrees Agricultural Sciences Anthropology 194 62 22 278 Chemistry and Materials Sciences 319 55 55 429 Computer Modeling and Simulation 389 244 25 658 Earth Sciences (Geology) 30 26 11 67 Ecological Sciences 35 17 52 Electronics/Optical Sciences 377 372 66 815 Mathematics 112 41 9 162 Planetary Sciences 0 Total 0 1456 817 188 2,461
117
NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY
CLUSTER TITLE TOTAL NUMBER NUMBER AT NORTHERN ARIZONA OF GRANTS AT 3 NORTHERN UNIVERSITY SHARE OF MAJOR AZ ARIZONA TOTAL GRANTS AT TOP 3 INSTITUTIONS UNIVERSITY AZ UNIVERSITIES ECOLOGICAL SCIENCES 338 43 13%
N
AGRICULTURAL 95 6 6% SCIENCES EARTH SCIENCES 128 7 5% (GEOLOGY) SPACE SCIENCES 69 1 1% COMPUTER MODELING 200 4 2% & SIMULATION SOFTWARE
ANTHROPOLOGY 57 5 9% MATHEMATICS 61 11 18% EVOLUTIONARY 75 6 8% BIOLOGY ELECTRONICS/ 54 0 0% OPTICAL SCIENCES CHEMISTRY AND 120 7 6% MATERIALS SCIENCES
Total Degrees at Northern Arizona University AY 1999-2001 Arizona Core Competency Associates Bachelor's Master's Ph.D's Total Number Group of Degrees Agricultural Sciences 0 Anthropology 82 64 146 Chemistry and Materials Sciences 84 28 112 Computer Modeling and Simulation 0 Earth Sciences (Geology) 80 35 115 Ecological Sciences 227 36 11 274 Electronics/Optical Sciences 41 41 Mathematics 31 29 60 Planetary Sciences 0 Total 0 545 192 11 748
118
Northern Arizona University FY 2000 NSF Funding (Nominal Dollars) Total Research FY 2000 Expenditures Location Field Funding Quotients ALL DISCIPLINES 108,117 N/A ALL NON-LIFE SCIENCE DISCIPLINES 3,101 1.21 PHYSICAL SCIENCES 1,395 1.23 Astronomy 252 1.54 Chemistry 721 1.80 Physics 375 0.75 Other 47 0.71 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 1,068 1.44 Atmospheric 9 0.07 Earth 670 2.83 Oceanography 364 1.38 Other 25 0.21
MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES 63 0.44 COMPUTER SCIENCES 24 0.07 OTHER SCIENCES 12 0.05 ENGINEERING 539 0.29 Aeronautical 37 0.35 Chemical 250 1.60 Civil 158 0.63 Electrical 76 0.16 Mechanical 10 0.04 Metallurgical 8 0.05 Other 0 0.00
119
Northern Arizona University Cluster Area Publication Indexes Field Publications Publication Percent Higher Concentration Relative Citation Ratio Impact than US Ecological Sciences Entomology/Pest Control 22 4.46 17% Environmental Studies, Geography & Development 10 2.90 -39% Environment/Ecology 134 5.99 105% Environment Engineering/Energy 61.15170% Environment Medical & Public Health 30.55-73% Agricultural Sciences Agricultural Chemistry 10.198% Agriculture/Agronomy 2 0.28 2212% Aquatic Sciences 23 2.15 -41% Plant Sciences 74 4.34 54% Earth Sciences Earth Sciences 59 2.55 -1% Geology/Petroleum/Mining Engineering 1 0.50 -100% Space Sciences Physics 2 0.05 -100% Space Science 45 4.03 22% Computer Modeling and Simulation Computer Sciences & Engineering 2 0.32 -100% Information Technology & Communication Systems 1 0.23 -100% Mathematics Mathematics 12 0.76 61% Electronics & Optics Sciences Optics & Acoustics 1 0.11 -100% Electronics & Electronic Engineering 00.00N/A Instrumentation/Measurement 1 0.14 -100% Spectroscopy/Instrumentation/ Analytical Sciences 70.34-55% AI, Robotics & Auto Control 20.28-67% Chemistry and Materials Sciences Applied Physics/Conductive Materials/Materials Sciences 70.118% Chemical Engineering 00.00N/A Chemistry 60.29-26% Materials Science and Engineering 9 0.31 85% Organic Chemistry/Polymer Science 3 0.12 10% Physical Chemical/Chemical Physics 9 0.27 21%
120