Investigating a New State-level Trend in Science & Technology (S&T) Policy University of Nevada, Reno Office of Undergraduate Research, Dep. of Political Science & Chemistry Supported and Sponsored by National Science Foundation Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research, EPSCoR ( ) Patricia Piedad Segura, Research Student Dr. Derek Kauneckis, Research Advisor by Presented at the Nevada Undergraduate Research Symposium, April 16, 2008

2 End of WWII and during the Cold War Scientific research was absolutely essential to national security Beginning of 1980s Federal government increased interest in promoting university-business technology transfer Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 Historical trends in S&T policy in the U.S.

3 By 2000 a new trend in S&T policies was reported States are increasingly, in scope and scale, supporting S&T The significance of measuring this trend A structural change in federal government and state governments relationships might be necessary Research Question: Does empirical evidence of a new trend in S&T policies at State-level exist? A new trend in S&T policy?

4 Content Analysis Source of the data Weekly news reports from the State Science and Technology Institute (SSTI) SSTI reports for 1997, 2002, and 2007 were coded SSTI reports that indicated States S&T initiatives were code Method

5 Results S&T Initiative in the West Region

6 Results S&T Initiative in the Midwest Region

7 Results S&T Initiative in the Northeast Region

8 S&T Initiative in the South Region Results

9 Overall Results States with high S&T initiatives l________l l_______________l l___________________l l_____________________l __ West Midwest Northeast South Region Region Region Region

10 Without doubt, in the five years period between 1997 and 2002, empirical evidence of a new trend in state-level S&T policies was found Between 2002 and 2007 a slight decrease but, a significant increase in in states S&T initiatives was found Thus we can conclude that significant empirical evidence of a new trend in S&T policies at State- level exist Conclusions

11 Continue to clean the reported raw dataset Corroborate the general pattern with actually funding patterns Future Directions

12 Acknowledge -Research Team: Dr. Derek Kauneckis Dr. Scott Hauger Sasha C. Thurman Patricia Piedad Segura -University of Nevada, Reno Office of Undergraduate Research, Dep. of Political Science & Chemistry -National Science Foundation Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research, EPSCoR ( ) -Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program

13 References 1.Vannevar Bush, “The Endless Frontier,” Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science, Vol. 48, No. 3, (1945), pp David C. Mowery, Richard R. Nelson, Bhaven N. Sampat, Arvids A. Ziedonis, “The Growth of Patenting and Licensing by U.S. Universities: an Assessment of the Effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980,” Research Policy, Vol. 30, (2001), pp Henry Chesbrough and Jim Spohrer, “A research manifesto for Service Science,” Communications of the ACM, Vol. 49, No. 7, (2006), pp Roger L. Geiger and Creso Sá, “Beyond Technology Transfer: U.S. States Policies to Harness University Research for Economic Development,” Minerva, Vol. 43, (2005), pp