Public-Private Partnership as Timely Innovation Factor of the USA

PPP (public-private partnership) is traditionally considered as a  supplementary tool of spurring economic activity in specific areas.  But in innovations such a union proves to become especially vital in  modern situation of NBIC-revolution (Industrial Revolution 4.0). The  article examines why and how a Network of Radical Innovation PPPs  in USA (Manufacturing USATM) became the major zest of Obama’s  economic policy and what can be done for their more active  development under President D. Trump, should such a will become  real under his rule. As shown below, the Manufacturing USA Network  creates basis for Greenfield birth and/or sprouting of new  NBIC-technologies through traditional industrial clusters, reviving  their most perspective segments and elements and thus giving  chances for new sustainable competitive growth of USA economy  within global market. Notwithstanding general assumption of US  national innovation system as decentralized and based on private  innovation entrepreneurship (corporations), contemporary economic  reality gives little chance for US firms to be competitive in cutting- edge technologies of the future without pre-competitive cooperation  with each-others, with the State and with academic sector (research universities) using smart PPP models. Radical innovation  PPPs (RIPPPs), thus, are turning into indispensable new element of US innovation mechanism. Perspectives of US innovation and  industrial system without RIPPPs look gloomy as without joint federal and academic support US-based corporations (both  transnational corporations and nationally-oriented firms) cannot  timely obtain substantial sustainable competitive technological  advantage over their foreign counterparts. Usage of PPP tool is not uncommon for America as back in 1987 USA established world’s  first Innovation PPP called SEMATECH aimed at fostering  semiconductor industry in face of Japan growing global leadership in  semiconductors. But today such cooperation is needed throughout a bunch of mutually-dependent and interconnected NBIC- technologies among which IT is only a separate one. The article  shows that RIPPP system has both theoretical, pragmatic and  political aspects and US leading parties do not coincide on this  important subject. Author proves that RIPPP is in the interest of all  sectors of economy as RIPPPs develop mainly radical general- purpose technologies (as, for example, was ICT-technology for USA  in 1980-1990). Notwithstanding that no progress yet made in  Innovation PPPs by administration of D. Trump, Manufacturing USA  net grows and new international innovation partnerships with US  participation demonstrate growing internation al importance of such  cooperation: BRAIN Initiative declared at the Australian Academy of  Science in Canberra in December 2017 by representatives of the  United States, Australia, Europe, Japan and Korea is declared to  unite USA with major countries of former Trans-Pacific Partnership  Trade Agreement, TPP (Including USA, Australia, Japan, Korea) notwithstanding the fact that D. Trump forced USA to leave TPP in  2017. This International RIPPP is the first example of precompetitive cooperation in artificial intelligence (AI) field. International RIPPPs  tend to form an important new node in global innovation system.

1. Frolov A.V. (2010) Innovatsionnaya politika i konkurentosposobnost’ SShА [The Innovative Policy and Competitiveness of the USA]. Vestnik of Moscow University. Series 6. Economics, no 6, pp. 64–77.

2. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Terms and Conditions (2009). National Science Foundation. Available at: https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/arra/arratc_509.pdf, accessed 15.02.2018.

3. Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (2017). Available at: https://itif.org/about, accessed 15.02.2018.

4. Annual Report (2016). Manufacturing USA. Available at: https://www.manufacturingusa.com/sites/prod/files/Manufacturing%20USA- Annual%20Report-FY%202016-web.pdf, accessed 15.02.2018.

5. Lebedeva L.F. (2012) Pozitsii Rossii i SShА v politsentrichnom mire: sotsial’noekonomicheskij aspekt [Russia and U.S. in Polycentric World]. SShА-Kanada. Ekonomika, politika, kul’tura, no 11, pp 3–13.

6. Atkinson R. (2014) Winners Only the State Can Pick: Mariana Mazzucato’s The Entrepreneurial State. The Hill, June 23, 2014. Available at: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/technology/210198-winners-only-the-state-can- pick-mariana-mazzucatos-the, accessed 15.02.2018.

7. Lebedeva L.F. (2013) Gosudarstvennaya politika v sfere NIOKR v nachale XXI v.: mirovye tendentsii i natsional’nye osobennosti [Government Policy in R&D at the Beginning of XXI Century: World Trends and National Peculiarities]. Vestnik of Plekhanov University, no 4(58), pp. 95–106.

8. Avdokushin E.F., Frolov A.V. (2016) Radikal’nye innovatsii v Rossii: faktory razvitiya i rol’ gosudarstvenno-chastnogo partnerstva [Radical Innovations in Russia: Development Factors and the Role of the Public-Private Partnership]. Voprosi

9. Lebedeva L.F. (2017) Transkontinental’nye partnerstva na pereput’e: faktor, riski, posledstviya [Transcontinental Partnerships at the Crossroads: Factors, Risks, Consequences]. Outlines of Global Transformations: Politics, Economics, Law, vol. 10, no 4, pp. 54–69.

10. novoj ekonomiki, no 4, pp. 4–15.

11. Manufacturing USA. A Third-Party Evaluation of Program Design and Progress (2016). Deloitte.com. Available at: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/manufacturing/us-mfg- manufacturing-USA-programand-process.pdf, accessed 15.02.2018.

12. Budget Cuts Could Undermine Energy Innovation (2018). ITIF, February 1, 2018. Available at: https://itif.org/publications/2018/02/01/budget-cuts-could-undermine-energy-innovation-itif-says, accessed 15.02.2018.

13. National Science Board, Science and Engineering Indicators (2012). National Science Foundation, January 2012. Available at: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/pdf/seind12.pdf, accessed 15.02.2018.

14. Fitzgerald E., Wankerl A., Schramm C. (2011) Inside Real Innovation. Singapore: Hackensack, NJ . World Scientific.

15. Nauchnaya diplomatiya ili tekhnologicheskoe protivoborstvo? [Scientific Diplomacy or Technological Rivalry?] (2018). Interfax.ru, January 3, 2018. Available at: http://www.interfax.ru/russia/594072, accessed 15.02.2018.

16. Frolov A.V. (2010) Innovatsionnaya politika i konkurentosposobnost’ SShА [The Innovative Policy and Competitiveness of the USA]. Vestnik of Moscow University. Series 6. Economics, no 6, pp. 64–77.

17. Obama Administration Announces New Revolutionary Fibers and Textiles Manufacturing Innovation Hub in Cambridge, MA and New Report on $2 Billion in Manufacturing R&D Investments (2016). Whitehouse.gov, April 01, 2016. Available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pressoffice/2016/04/01/fact-sheet-obama-administration-announces-new-revolutionary-fibers-and, accessed 15.02.2018.

18. Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (2017). Available at: https://itif.org/about, accessed 15.02.2018.

19. Phelps E. (2017) Trump, Corporatism, and the Dearth of Innovation. Project Syndicate. Available at: https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trump- corporatism-innovation-economic-growth-by-edmund-s--phelps-2017-01? barrier=accessreg, accessed 15.02. 2018.

20. Lebedeva L.F. (2012) Pozitsii Rossii i SShА v politsentrichnom mire: sotsial’noekonomicheskij aspekt [Russia and U.S. in Polycentric World]. SShА-Kanada. Ekonomika, politika, kul’tura, no 11, pp 3–13.

21. Pisano G., Shih W. (2009) Restoring American Competitiveness. Harvard Business Review, July-August 2009. Available at: https://hbr.org/2009/07/restoring-american- competitiveness, accessed 15.02.2018.

22. Lebedeva L.F. (2013) Gosudarstvennaya politika v sfere NIOKR v nachale XXI v.: mirovye tendentsii i natsional’nye osobennosti [Government Policy in R&D at the Beginning of XXI Century: World Trends and National Peculiarities]. Vestnik of Plekhanov University, no 4(58), pp. 95–106.

23. Sargent J. (2014) The Obama Administration’s Proposal to Establish a National Network for Manufacturing Innovation. Federation of American Scientists. Available at: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42625.pdf, accessed 15.02.2018.

24. Lebedeva L.F. (2017) Transkontinental’nye partnerstva na pereput’e: faktor, riski, posledstviya [Transcontinental Partnerships at the Crossroads: Factors, Risks, Consequences]. Outlines of Global Transformations: Politics, Economics, Law, vol. 10, no 4, pp. 54–69.

25. Smorodinskaya N., Katukov D. (2017) Raspredelennoe proizvodstvo i «umnaya» povestka natsional’nykh ekonomicheskikh strategij [Dispersed Model of Production and Smart Agenda of National Economic Strategies]. Economic Policy, no 6, pp. 72– 101. Tech Policy To-Do List (2017). Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, April 17, 2017. Available at: https://itif.org/tech-policy-to-do-list, accessed 15.02.2018.

26. Manufacturing USA. A Third-Party Evaluation of Program Design and Progress (2016). Deloitte.com. Available at: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/manufacturing/us-mfg- manufacturing-USA-programand-process.pdf, accessed 15.02.2018.

27. Tellis G.J., Prabhu J.C., Chandy R.K. (2009) Radical Innovation Across Nations: The Preeminence of Corporate Culture. Journal of Marketing, January 2009, vol. 73, no 1, pp. 3–23. Available at: http://faculty.london.edu/rchandy/innovationnations.pdf, accessed 15.02.2018.

28. National Science Board, Science and Engineering Indicators (2012). National Science Foundation, January 2012. Available at: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/pdf/seind12.pdf, accessed 15.02.2018.

29. The Power of Partnerships (2013). American Energy & Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership, pp. 16–17. Available at: https://www.compete.org/storage/images/uploads/File/PDF%20Files/AEMC_Power_of_Partne rships_FINAL.pdf, accessed 12.05.2015.

30. Nauchnaya diplomatiya ili tekhnologicheskoe protivoborstvo? [Scientific Diplomacy or Technological Rivalry?] (2018). Interfax.ru, January 3, 2018. Available at: http://www.interfax.ru/russia/594072, accessed 15.02.2018.

31. U.S. Manufacturing: Federal Programs Reported Providing Support and Addressing Trends (2017). United States Government Accountability Office, March 28, 2017. Available at: https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-240, accessed 15.02.2018.

32. Obama Administration Announces New Revolutionary Fibers and Textiles Manufacturing Innovation Hub in Cambridge, MA and New Report on $2 Billion in Manufacturing R&D Investments (2016). Whitehouse.gov, April 01, 2016. Available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pressoffice/2016/04/01/fact-sheet-obama-administration-announces-new-revolutionary-fibers-and, accessed 15.02.2018.

33.

34. Phelps E. (2017) Trump, Corporatism, and the Dearth of Innovation. Project Syndicate. Available at: https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trump- corporatism-innovation-economic-growth-by-edmund-s--phelps-2017-01? barrier=accessreg, accessed 15.02. 2018.

35. Pisano G., Shih W. (2009) Restoring American Competitiveness. Harvard Business Review, July-August 2009. Available at: https://hbr.org/2009/07/restoring-american- competitiveness, accessed 15.02.2018.

36. Sargent J. (2014) The Obama Administration’s Proposal to Establish a National Network for Manufacturing Innovation. Federation of American Scientists. Available at: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42625.pdf, accessed 15.02.2018.

37. Smorodinskaya N., Katukov D. (2017) Raspredelennoe proizvodstvo i «umnaya» povestka natsional’nykh ekonomicheskikh strategij [Dispersed Model of Production and Smart Agenda of National Economic Strategies]. Economic Policy, no 6, pp. 72– 101. Tech Policy To-Do List (2017). Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, April 17, 2017. Available at: https://itif.org/tech-policy-to-do-list, accessed 15.02.2018.

38. Tellis G.J., Prabhu J.C., Chandy R.K. (2009) Radical Innovation Across Nations: The Preeminence of Corporate Culture. Journal of Marketing, January 2009, vol. 73, no 1, pp. 3–23. Available at: http://faculty.london.edu/rchandy/innovationnations.pdf, accessed 15.02.2018.

39. The Power of Partnerships (2013). American Energy & Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership, pp. 16–17. Available at: https://www.compete.org/storage/images/uploads/File/PDF%20Files/AEMC_Power_of_Partne rships_FINAL.pdf, accessed 12.05.2015.

40. U.S. Manufacturing: Federal Programs Reported Providing Support and Addressing Trends (2017). United States Government Accountability Office, March 28, 2017. Available at: https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-240, accessed 15.02.2018.

41.