190 likes | 373 Views
Measuring the Economic Impacts of Technology Transfer from Federal Labs. Strategy and Development Branch Frederick (Rick) Kijek June 12, 2007. Introduction. Presently undertaking a study to measure economic impacts of NRC
E N D
Measuring the Economic Impacts of Technology Transfer from Federal Labs Strategy and Development Branch Frederick (Rick) Kijek June 12, 2007
Introduction • Presently undertaking a study to measure economic impacts of NRC • Demonstrate the return on investment from NRC’s R&D programs/activities • Retrospective - 10 years • Develop baseline to measure impact of Renewal Strategy • Benchmark against other R&D performers • Align with S&T Strategies • Technology Transfer is one of the main channels included in the analysis • Several proposed approaches • Presently organizing consensus on methodology • No answers or conclusions yet “Greater Sophistication in Measuring the Impacts of Our Science and Technology Investments” Mobilizing Science & Technology to Canada’s Advantage, Page 88
Basic Design Tenets • Emphasis on quantitative impacts • Capture impacts in a consistent, quantitative and credible manner • Identify and conceptualize qualitative impacts • Contextualize with emphasis on relative (vs absolute) impacts • Objectivity • Adopt known and accepted analytical methods, measures and metrics • Adopt existing guidelines (TBS) for impact analysis • Involve advisorypanel of international experts, including representatives from central agencies (Treasury Board, Finance and Industry Canada) in the review of the methodology • develop “multiple lines of evidence” • Transparency & Repeatability • Understandable to NRC decision makers and central agencies • Ability to trace and repeat results • Methods and assumptions reviewed within NRC “Canada’s Federal Government will increase its accountability to Canadians by improving its ability to measure and report on the impact of S&T expenditures.” Mobilizing Science & Technology to Canada’s Advantage, Page 88
Proposed Analytical Methods • Adopt a number of analytical methods • Benefit Cost Analysis • Risk (Data-Variability) Analysis • Input-Output Analysis • Econometric Analysis • Comparative Analysis • Use of multiple sources and techniques • Multiple lines of evidence - validation of findings • Interweaving of impact story - results of one feed into the next • Spreading risk of data availability problems - depending on data captured “The government will improve its understanding of Canadian S&T developments and the impact of federally performed S&T....”Mobilizing Science & Technology to Canada’s Advantage, Page 88
Methodological Challenges • Accessing quality and reliable data • Establishing an appropriate analytic framework acceptable to stakeholders at Finance, TBS, Industry Canada • Determining the incrementality and attribution of impacts • Assigning values to difficult-to-quantify benefits (i.e. social, environmental, health benefits) and indirect (spill-over) effects of R&D activities • Limiting burden on NRC staff and stakeholders • Lack of international performance benchmarking information “… and will work with the OECD and other countries to develop metrics that will enable comparisons against international benchmarks of success.”Mobilizing Science & Technology to Canada’s Advantage, Page 88
Measuring Impacts from Technology Transfer • There are few quantitative studies on government technology transfer in Canada • Lack of reliable quantitative measures of utilization and impacts of technology transfer • Most of the studies in this area are based on qualitative measures • There are a few quantitative studies in the United States. • To measure Technology Transfer Impacts • Estimate how successful government labs are in terms of transferring the technology they produce • Estimate the impact on the technology recipients – firms, spin-off, other labs • Measure their collective economic impacts – multiple methods
Previous studies • Two qualitative and focus group studies for Canada: Warda (1999) and Zieminski and Warda (1999) • Quantitative study for Canada: CANMET Study (Partial Cost-Benefit Analysis): Belinko (1994) • Some of the qualitative studies for the United States: O'Brien and Franks (1981), Winebrake (1992), Bozeman (1992), Rogers and Bozeman (1997), Sally (2000), Link and Scott (2005) • Some of the quantitative studies in the United States: Bozeman and Coker (1991), Bozeman (1994), Bozeman (2000), Bozeman and Pandey (1994), and Adams, Chiang, and Jensen’s (2003)
Approach/Conclusions from Other Studies Focus Group Approach • The Conference Board of Canada(Warda, 1999): private sector points out six advantages for government laboratories versus universities. Econometric Approach • Measuring both the success of the transfer “out-the-door”& impact on technology recipient “market impact” • Bozeman and Coker (1991): Industry is increasingly viewing the federal laboratories as a potential technology development partner. • Bozeman (2000): Main comparative advantage of federal laboratories is interdisciplinary team research - difficult at universities. Expensive/unique scientific equipment/facilities of laboratories Benefit-Cost Approach • CANMET Study (1994): Positive B/C Ratio of 8/1
Approach/Conclusions from Other Studies (Contn’d) Partial Cost-Benefit Analysis • The CANMET Impact Study (1994): • methodology was reviewed with officials from Department of Finance and Treasury Board • The lab selected a sample of 121 research projects over a 5-year period • All projects involved industrial partners and resulted in successful technology transfer with economic return • The lab invested $100 million in the R&D for these projects, while industry invested $264 million – a leverage of 2.6 • Industry generated $1.4 billion in actual economic wealth with additional anticipated return of $1.8 billion for a total of $3.2 billion • Based on a total R&D investment for the lab of $364 million over the 5 year period (total budget), this represented an 8 fold return on investment • The average attribution was estimated to be 56%
Measuring Successful Transfer Econometric Approach • "Out-the-Door" model • Once the technical good/process has been adopted by another organization, then an instance of successful technology transfer has been accomplished • A measure of technology transfer will be regressed on variables such as lab budget, the number of researcher, administrative overhead, diversity of mission • Limitation: the model not concerned if the transferred technology will have any benefit – commercial or non-commercial – for its recipient or the economy at large • Data to be collected mainly from lab directors & program administrators
Measuring Impact on Recipient Econometric Approach • "Market Impact" model • Identifies technology transfer success in terms of commercial contributions to the technology recipient firm and its level of activity. • Model can be based on a number of metrics for commercial impact, including # of licenses issued by the gov. lab. , recipient sales, value-added, labour productivity • A measure commercial impact will be regressed on variables such as lab budget, the number of researcher, administrative overhead, diversity of mission • Data to be collected from technology recipients
Measuring Impact on Canadian Economy Benefit Cost Analysis • Decide on Partial vs Full BCA • Benefits include, license fees, sales and cost savings to technology recipeients • Risk (data variability) analysis on all data Input-Output (Impact) Analysis • Use combination of data collected from technology recipients and Statistics Canada Input-Output Tables • Impact on Jobs, GDP, Value-Added Econometric Analysis • Impact on Productivity, Value-added Comparative Analysis • Benchmarking
Extra Slides ANALYSIS METHODS
Benefit-Cost Analysis • To ultimately measure if benefits of program outweigh cost to taxpayers and by how much • Present value of benefit and cost streams • Methodology based on TB guidelines • Benefits to include revenues generated, cost savings, value of services • Attributed increased commercial revenues • Cost savings/productivity improvements • Costs will be broken down by grants, services, overhead • To address issues of wealth creation
Econometric Analysis • To assess relationships between the data • Estimate elasticities • a change in the explanatory variable (i.e. increased R&D in that sector) will cause what change in the dependent variable (i.e. increased economic wealth or productivity growth) • Estimate complimentarity and incrementality • Address issues of • relevance – program satisfies economic needs • social return of R&D greater than private return • stimulating increased private sector R&D • wealth creation using productivity growth as a proxy
Comparative Analysis • To compare relative impacts of non-NRC affected firms or similar programs (nationally or internationally) • Benchmarking NRC Clients, spin-offs & technology transfers • Compare to impacts from other R&D performers, Universities, other countries • Statistics Canada Surveys (Community Innovation Survey, Manufacturers Survey, LEAP, GIFI Data) • Identify established parameters on attribution, incrementality • Deal with issues of program reach, improved technical R&D capability, improved mngmt, mrktg, finance capabilities, supporting of new knowledge creation, enhancing of commercialization, client growth
Input-Output Analysis • To measure national & regional impacts from expenditures • Based on national account multipliers • Estimate impacts on • Job Creation (direct and indirect), • GDP, • Imports, Exports • Compare estimates with data collected from survey of companies • Provide regional/provincial breakdown • Address issue of wealth creation
Risk Analysis • To address inherent uncertainty/variability in data • Primarily to be used in Benefit Cost Analysis • Establishes ranges of data and probability distribution • Uses Monte-Carlo Simulation to identify to what extent data variability impact range and distribution of benefit & cost streams • Provides impact numbers as a distributions around a mean as opposed to a point estimate