scholarly journals A theory of the US innovation ecosystem: evolution and the social value of diversity

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashish Arora ◽  
Sharon Belenzon ◽  
Andrea Patacconi
Keyword(s):  
Social Value ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Us ◽  
Ecosystem Evolution

Carbon-reducing innovation as the essential policy frontier – towards finding the ways that work

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Frank J. Convery
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Price ◽  
Solar Pv ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Price Ceiling ◽  
Priority Area ◽  
The Us ◽  
Small Countries ◽  
Economics Profession ◽  
Policy Systems ◽  
Enterprise Community

Abstract Finding the ways that work to deliver the innovation needed should be given parity of esteem with getting the prices right as a focus of the economics profession and policy systems. Learn from experience as regards carbon pricing and carbon-reducing innovation; insights from the latter coming mainly from the US, China and Europe; demographically relatively small countries – Denmark (wind) and Australia (solar PV) – can make outsize contributions. A carbon price ceiling is too low to drive innovation; generating carbon-reducing innovation requires that it be explicitly recognized as a priority, and nurtured accordingly: identify the priority area(s) where innovation at scale will be necessary to make progress; baseline the elements of the innovation ecosystem which are already in place, and the gaps that need to be filled. Key elements include institutions and incentives that promote innovation, a research and enterprise community that make it happen, and a supportive public.

scholarly journals Building and leveraging the innovation ecosystem and clusters: universities, startups, accelerators, alliances, and partnerships

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Boni ◽  
Moira Gunn
Keyword(s):  
Life Science ◽  
Life Experiences ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
The United States ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Collaborative Innovation ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Future ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
Emerging Ecosystems

This article focuses on the concepts of ecosystems and clusters, with an emphasis on their importance for building vibrant a vibrant and life science/biopharma industry. We illustrate the underlying principles through work published in academic articles and in the popular press. These are highlighted in brief overviews of several mature and emerging ecosystems in the United States, Europe and Australia. The US perspective is based on our own professional life experiences in Boston, Silicon Valley, San Diego, and Pittsburgh, and, with a shorter preview of Philadelphia where we’ve both done business and have close colleagues.  The article ends with a look to the future in a concluding section titled “What’s Coming Next”.  It is our attempt to look at the future of digitally enhanced collaborative innovation.  This is based on our observations during the first 9 months of the Covid-19 pandemic, social distancing, and working from a distance. We ask, what is the potential impact of these emerging digital technologies on work and advancement of the agenda in the life sciences industries? Will the pandemic transform or disrupt the borders and mode of collaboration of traditional definitions of ecosystems and clusters as we define them today?

Bridging Theory and Practice for Commercialization and Innovation – a Market-Centered Perspective for Cross- Industry Applications

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur A Boni
Keyword(s):  
Fortune 500 ◽  
Disruptive Innovation ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Incremental Innovation ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
Fortune 500 Companies ◽  
The Us ◽  
Industry Applications ◽  
Strategic Goals

Growth thru innovation is a stated goal of organizations ranging from startups to growth companies and to mature, well-established Fortune 500 companies. Different forms of innovation may be pursued depending on the strategic goals of the organization. Smaller entrepreneurial companies, typically startups or “skunk works operations” are well suited to pursue disruptive innovation, or alternatively to create new “blue ocean” markets by exploiting the uncontested space while not unconstrained by an existing (and perhaps profitable) business model that is not well suited to the new markets – Christensen’s Innovators Dilemma. Conversely, incumbents often dominate sustained or incremental innovation for growth of existing markets or customer bases. We highlight below that need- seeking/ customer-driven innovation is predominant in the Silicon Valley innovation ecosystem. Given this success, why is a broader segment of the US economy not following this model?

scholarly journals Foreword

10.26458/1741 ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 11-15
Author(s):  
Elena Gurgu
Keyword(s):  
Industrial Revolution ◽  
Social Needs ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Disruptive Technologies ◽  
Entrepreneurial Spirit ◽  
Complex Process ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Us ◽  
Important Trend ◽  
World Economic

At the end of 2017, according to World Economic Forum Agenda, it seems that economic competitiveness matters, but not as an end in itself. It matters because nations that are more competitive are more productive, and are therefore more able to provide for the social needs of their people. The world has changed dramatically over the last decade, and measuring the factors that determine competitiveness continues to be a highly complex process. It is certainly true that the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) – new, rapidly changing technologies in many different fields – has changed the way we need to measure some aspects of competitiveness, particularly in relation to innovation and ideas. We need to stress, for example, the value of ideas and collaboration within companies; the values of open-mindedness, of connectivity, and the value of an entrepreneurial spirit. And we have had to emphasize a new kind of education: one that is more conducive to students’ creativity, their ability to observe and generate ideas. The new industrial revolution, also known as the 4IR, has forced us to put more emphasis on all these aspects of a nation’s innovation ecosystem. The appearance of very disruptive technologies has been incredibly rapid. If we go back 10 years, the iPhone didn’t even exist. We have seen huge developments in artificial intelligence, new materials, synthetic biology, big data and on-demand technologies, and all these are changing the business landscape at a planetary level. Significantly, many of these innovations did not occur in those countries where technology used to be produced almost monopolistically. It is no longer the case that only the US and Europe innovate; the new industrial revolution has created opportunities for nations across the globe. This is a hugely important trend.

scholarly journals Moving drug discoveries beyond the valley of death: the role of innovation ecosystems

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Calza ◽  
Marco Ferretti ◽  
Eva Panetti ◽  
Adele Parmentola
Keyword(s):  
Drug Development ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Case Study Analysis ◽  
The Us ◽  
Development Processes ◽  
Strategic Relationships ◽  
Valley Of Death

PurposeThe paper aims to explore the nature of initiatives and strategies of inter-organizational cooperation to cross the valley of death in the biopharma industry.Design/methodology/approachThe authors conducted an exploratory case study analysis in the Biopharma Innovation Ecosystem in Greater Boston Area (USA), which is one of the oldest, and most successful IE in the US, specialized in the Biopharma domain, by conducting a round of expert interviews with key informants in the area, chosen as representatives of the different types of actors engaged in the drug development processes at different stages.FindingsMain findings suggest that cooperation can contribute to surviving the valley of death by reducing the barriers within the drug development pipeline through the promotion of strategic relationships among actors of different nature, including the establishment of government-led thematic associations or consortia, agreements between university and business support structures, proximity to venture capitalist and the promotion of a general culture of academic entrepreneurship within universities.Originality/valueThe authors believe that this paper contributes to the literature by shedding light on the nature of the specific cooperative initiative the barriers in drug development and help to survive the valley of the death.

The Eleventh Circuit Holds that Agreements in which Pharmaceutical Companies Pay Generic Companies Not to Compete May be Valid

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 181-184
Author(s):  
Amy Garrigues
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Patent Holder ◽  
Trial Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Us ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Appeals Court ◽  
Two Sides

On September 15, 2003, the US. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that agreements between pharmaceutical and generic companies not to compete are not per se unlawful if these agreements do not expand the existing exclusionary right of a patent. The Valley DrugCo.v.Geneva Pharmaceuticals decision emphasizes that the nature of a patent gives the patent holder exclusive rights, and if an agreement merely confirms that exclusivity, then it is not per se unlawful. With this holding, the appeals court reversed the decision of the trial court, which held that agreements under which competitors are paid to stay out of the market are per se violations of the antitrust laws. An examination of the Valley Drugtrial and appeals court decisions sheds light on the two sides of an emerging legal debate concerning the validity of pay-not-to-compete agreements, and more broadly, on the appropriate balance between the seemingly competing interests of patent and antitrust laws.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document