Atlanta Conference on Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy 2007 October 19-20 :: Atlanta, U.S.A. Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta Conference on Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy 007 GREETINGS! Welcome to the Atlanta Conference on Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy 007. For the next two days, we will explore Challenges and Opportunities for Innovation in the Changing in the Global Economy. Today and tomorrow, we will examine emerging issues of science, technology, and innovation in global economy and society, including: • Innovation in new forms and formats; markets, organizations, and industries in transition • Emerging global networks of scientific communication • Work forces and workplaces of science and technology; career opportunities for scientists and engineers • Government policies for encouraging knowledge-based and learning economies, North and South • Intellectual property regimes for supporting innovation in different national contexts • Globalization of research and development and the changing roles of government policies • Impacts of China and India in the global innovation ecology • Innovation to address global energy and environmental challenges • Localization and globalization of careers for scientists and engineers • Emerging technologies and emerging societal responses In the next two days, we hope you will find the answers to these questions: • How is the landscape of global innovation shifting? • What strategies can national governments follow in this new landscape? • What works, what doesn’t, and under what circumstances in today’s global economy and society? Special thanks to go our speakers, panelists, and sponsors, whose generous support has made this event possible. Enjoy the conference and Atlanta while you are here. You will find a list of our more popular sites in addition to local restaurants near Technology Square in this program. Now, let’s get busy exploring Challenges and Opportunities for Innovation in the Changing in the Global Economy. Best regards, Susan Cozzens Professor of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology School of Public Policy SCHEDULE AT A GLANCE Friday, Oct. 19 8:30 a.m. Registration 9-10 a.m. Session 1: State of the Field : U.S., Europe, Latin America, Room 236 10:15-11:45 a.m. Session 2: Parallel Contributed Paper Sessions, Rooms 323, 324, 328, 330, 331, and 334 Noon-1:30 p.m. Session 3: Luncheon plenary: State of the Field–China and India, Georgia Tech Hotel Salon III 1:45-3:15 p.m. Session 4: Parallel Contributed Paper Sessions, Rooms 323, 324, 328, 330, 331, and 334 3:30-5 p.m. Session 5: Parallel Contributed Paper Sessions, Rooms 323, 324, 328, 330, 331, and 334 5-6:30 p.m. Session 6: Poster session and reception, Atrium Saturday, Oct. 20 8 a.m. Registration 8:30-10 a.m. Session 7: Keynotes: Emerging Concepts of Innovation, Room 236 10:15-11:45 a.m. Session 8: Parallel Contributed Paper Sessions, Rooms 323, 324, 330, 331, and 334 Noon-1 p.m. Lunch break 1:15-2:45 p.m. Session 9: Parallel Contributed Paper Sessions, Rooms 323, 324, 330, 331, and 334 3-4:30p.m. Session 10: Parallel Contributed Paper Sessions, Rooms 323, 324, 330, 331, and 334 4:30-6 p.m. Session 11: Closing plenary: The usefulness of STI policy research, Room 236 Atlanta Conference on Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy 007 CONFERENCE AGENDA Friday, Oct. 19 9- 9:15 a.m. Welcome 9:15-10 a.m. Session 1: Plenary on the State of the Field, Room 236 • United States: Kaye Husbands Fealing, National Science Foundation • Europe: Philippe Larédo, Manchester Business School and ENPC, Paris • Latin America: Eduardo Viotti, Brazil 10:15-11:45 a.m. Session 2: Parallel Contributed Paper Sessions 2.1 Basic Concepts I, Room 323 Chair: Diana Hicks, Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Public Policy • The Myth of the National Innovation System. Caroline Wagner, George Washington University, Washington, D.C., and SRI International By considering innovation as the result of national decisions about investments in research and infrastructural capacities, the national innovation system, or NIS, concept threatens to undermine the health of science & technology policies, particularly for developing countries. Since knowledge and people are mobile and do not honor political borders, it is clear from studying their mobility that innovation has little relation to national systems. Innovation is indeed influenced by system dynamics, but these systems and subsystems operate at a number of levels, including locally, regionally, globally, and within disciplines. Explore a new model of the knowledge-creating system, exploring the policy implications of a changed understanding of innovation. • Cross-Cultural Challenges in Thinking about Innovation and Creativity: The Case of Asian/United States University Partnerships in S&T. Tom Gieryn, David Hakken, and Heidi Ross, Indiana University, Bloomington Examine a challenge that must be faced by any broadly conceived study of innovation in the contemporary world: How to conceptualize innovation in ways that are valid cross-culturally. Should “innovation” or “creativity” be defined in a “universalistic” manner, or can such definitions exist only from within identifiable networks and cultures, which are likely to vary from group to group? We argue it is possible to operationalize for research workable concepts of innovation and creativity by grounding them in relevant historical and cultural discourses. This preferred approach is illustrated by reference to the Partnerships across the Pacific, or PxP, Project, a study of U.S./Asia bilateral university linkages. • Hidden Normativity of Innovation Theories. Jan Schmidt, Georgia Institute of Technology Develop an approach to the phenomena and concepts of innovation from the perspective of philosophy of technology. Until now, philosophers have remained reluctant to address issues of innovation—even though both innovation research and philosophy of technology share the same objective: the intersection of science, technology, and society/policy. I propose a classification scheme of normative issues in innovation theories. I identify five related types of normative assumptions in (and consequences of) innovation theories—in particular, I focus on normativity of “innovation” in relation to theory of society, disciplinary hegemony, the process of innovation, ethics, and the object of innovation (artifacts, processes, knowledge, problems). Conference Agenda, Friday, Oct. 9 2.2 Emerging Technologies: Nanotechnology I, Room324 Chair: Patrick Hamlett, North Carolina State University • Putting Emerging Technologies in Place: Leading Nanodistricts in America. Jan Youtie , Philip Shapira, and Pratik Mehta, Georgia Institute of Technology We probe nanotechnology research and commercialization at a regional level. By examining the top 0 “nanodistricts” or metropolitan areas in the United States with more than ,000 nanopublications in the 990-006 timeframe, we explore the factors underlying the emergence of these metropolitan areas into this top class through exploratory cluster analysis. While most of the leading nanodistricts are similar to top cities in previous rounds of emerging technologies, there is also the surfacing of new geographic concentrations of nanotechnology research. We suggest concentrated investments in nanotechnology R&D into a single institution can elevate the profile of a region that has lacked previous technological prominence. • Innovation Networks in Nanotechnology: A Framework. Mercy Escalante Ludeña, Adalberto Fischman, José de J Pérez A, and Ary Plonski, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil Examine the partial results of an ongoing research about the proposal of a framework for analyzing the status of innovation networks in nanotechnology in terms of its strong and weak points. We want to close that gap somehow, within the framework of a systemic, dynamic, flexible and transparent approach. The proposal values the existing contributions, from which new elements have been added. The framework was applied in the nano-biotechnology network in Brazil. Based on this study, we obtained a picture of its strong and weak points. The method was bibliographic, documental, and exploratory, and it is also a case study. • A.Q. Khan........ Probing Models to Address the Potential International Security Threats of Nanotechnology. Margaret E. Kosal, Georgia Institute of Technology The scientific pursuit of the minutely small–nanotechnology–is thriving in academia and in the private sector. To date, three broad topics have dominated discussion regarding nanotechnology risk: health and environmental consequences, privacy and legal implications, and uncontrolled self-replication and artificial intelligence. Security implications, both for traditional nonproliferation regimes and for potential misuse by nonstate actors, have not received commensurate attention. Recognizing and developing technically robust analyses of the potential for malfeasant use or co-option of this emerging technology is an unexplored, cutting-edge research area for international security at the 21st century. Alternatively, the future may grapple with a nanotechnology A.Q. Khan. 2.3 Innovation Indicators, Room 330 Chair: John Walsh, Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Public Policy • Innovation Indicators and Policy: Some Reflections on Limitations and Potentialities of Innovation Surveys. Eduardo Viotti, University of Brasilia, and Regina Gusmao, Center for Strategic Management and Studies– CGEE, Ministry of Science and