Direct and Spillover Effects of ATP-Funded Photonics Technologies

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• ATP goals inherently involve several key tensions, which make evaluation challenging:– High uncertainty and long time horizons of targeted projects may limit the utility oftraditional evaluation methods.– High market spillover and knowledge diffusion may run counter to commercialpotential and the ability of participating firms to capture value from new technologies,but successful commercial implementation is necessary for large-scale value creation.– Evaluation may tend to have a bias toward measurement of private returns, becausespillover value is broadly dispersed and significantly harder to measure than privatereturns.– High potential value areas will attract private capital investment over time, whichdynamically increases competition and price elasticities, thereby reducing realizedprivate and market spillover value.– ATP awards are relatively small in funding amount, and participating firms oftenleverage a broad portfolio of other federal, state, and local programs. This limitsthe possibility of identifying the individual impact of any single program on a firm’scompetitiveness and technical success over long time horizons.88 DIRECT AND SPILLOVER EFFECTS OF ATP-FUNDED PHOTONICS TECHNOLOGIES
AppendixSEMISTRUCTURED INTERVIEW INSTRUMENTI. Introductions. Brief overview of Lehigh University research and then of case company(employees, major markets, growth since ATP project).II. Query major results from ATP project.i. Technical, most valuable innovations/solutions?ii. Would these have occurred without ATP? If so, when?iii. How embodied?a. Patents (issued or pending?)b. Published articles?c. Trade secrets?d. Products?III. Query extensions and uses of these technical advances.a. Direct: In target markets?b. Spillover: In other areas?i. Company.a. Later technical extensions of ATP-related advances enabled?b. Past or current products using ATP-related results?c. Estimated (rough OK) net value to company of the ATP-related advances?ii. Customers. Consider the three or four customers getting the most valuecreated by ATP-related technical advances.a. Who are those customers?b. What has it enabled them to do? How valuable?c. What alternatives did they have? Why is your company’s product better?iii. Competitors. Three or four on whom ATP-related advance had the largestimpact (positive or negative) on their market or technical positions.a. Who?b. How did they adjust? What did they do differently?c. Estimated value?Appendix 89
Page 1 and 2:
NIST GCR 06-893Direct and Spillover
Page 5 and 6:
AbstractTo evaluate the impact of t
Page 7:
AcknowledgmentsThis research would
Page 10 and 11:
This report presents the findings f
Page 12 and 13:
6. This case study suggests that ke
Page 14 and 15:
3. Comparison of Displaytech and Un
Page 17 and 18:
1. Introduction and BackgroundThe A
Page 19 and 20:
the Department of Defense (DOD), Na
Page 21 and 22:
Hence, we consider two additional s
Page 23 and 24:
area because many photonics technol
Page 25 and 26:
FIGURE 2Worldwide Photonics Compone
Page 27 and 28:
TABLE 3.Matched Case Study Firms by
Page 29 and 30:
2. DisplaytechINTRODUCTIONIn June 1
Page 31 and 32:
significant interest worldwide. The
Page 33 and 34:
FIGURE 3Cross-Section of a Ferroele
Page 35 and 36:
TABLE 4.Crowded Display Competition
Page 37 and 38:
FIGURE 4.Competing Electronic Displ
Page 39 and 40:
wafer. For FLC-on-silicon microdisp
Page 41 and 42:
FIGURE 5.Within-Market Increase in
Page 43 and 44:
FIGURE 6.Estimated ATP Employment E
Page 45 and 46:
subtracted the opportunity value of
Page 47 and 48:
FIGURE 8.Historic Display Price-Qua
Page 49 and 50:
TABLE 6.Estimated Consumer Surplus
Page 51 and 52:
TABLE 7.Organizations and Groups Mo
Page 53 and 54: FIGURE 12.Patent Citations to Displ
Page 55 and 56: ColorLink’s pi-cell color switche
Page 57 and 58: FIGURE 14.Geographic Distribution o
Page 59 and 60: competitors, were added by patent e
Page 61 and 62: FIGURE 16.Citations to Displaytech
Page 63 and 64: TABLE 9.Top Organizations and Indiv
Page 65 and 66: FIGURE 19.Corporate Citations to Di
Page 67 and 68: TABLE 10.Corporations Citing Post-1
Page 69 and 70: 3. Comparison ofDisplaytech and Uni
Page 71 and 72: acklights of LCDs; and they are bri
Page 73 and 74: which was to give DuPont access to
Page 75 and 76: FIGURE 20.Timing of Displaytech and
Page 77 and 78: Table 11. Organizations and Groups
Page 79 and 80: FIGURE 23.Patent Citations to Uniax
Page 81 and 82: In summary, together with Uniax ear
Page 83 and 84: TABLE 12.OLS Regression Results on
Page 85 and 86: FIGURE 26.Corporate Citations to Un
Page 87 and 88: TABLE 13.ContinuedTop 25 Individual
Page 89 and 90: FIGURE 28.Corporate Citations to Un
Page 91 and 92: 4. Findings and ObservationsFINDING
Page 93 and 94: microdisplays. We cannot fully dise
Page 95 and 96: TABLE 15.Publication and Citation R
Page 97 and 98: social ties, distance in the sense
Page 99 and 100: FIGURE 30.Flowchart of ATP Technolo
Page 101: government policies, which establis
Page 106 and 107: iv. Suppliers. Three or four on who
Page 108 and 109: Business Journal of Phoenix, The (2
Page 110 and 111: Paul, J. (2000), A Brief History of
Page 113: ABOUT THE AUTHORSTodd A. Watkins is
show all

Direct and Spillover Effects of ATP-Funded Photonics Technologies

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?