In the USA and various regions of the world, new government initiatives around next generation deep tech have grabbed headlines, conferences, forums and summits. The USA has launched multiple initiatives for the private-public sector. Tech Hubs for various deep tech clusters. Defense hubs for manufacturing. Research Hubs for AI, Cyber, Quantum, and various engineering projects. Saudi Arabia recently launched initiatives to become the world leader in advanced technologies in an effort to shift the centers of gravity to MENA. In the last 20 years, China has launched multiple programs which aim to accelerate global dominance in a particular field. These “tech hubs” centered their attention around provincial excellence to the parties in power. European cities have also designated their location a cluster of innovation for various technologies and societal advancements. The city/state of Singapore has proven success in expanding its manufacturing base, increasing its financial viability to the region/world with its forward looking view on technology. Success has come to some and not to others.
So how do we measure success of these governmental dictates, programs, and initiatives? The governments involved have different systems, laws, currency, talent, and missions. Can you plan creativity and innovation? What are the limits? How are one party government systems limiting and capping innovation? Can money hide the true issues? What are the best ecosystems for innovation? Is it the peoples’ mindsets or the governmental frameworks? I’m not sure there is an answer to any of these questions. Only observations, past experience and limitless opportunities.
In 2019, I published a book called The Way of the Laowai, The Importance of International Self Awareness for Businesses. The book outlined 8 lessons learned in doing business in foreign lands. One of the chapters was titled, Planning for Creativity. The content of the chapter detailed different countries’ approaches to innovation based on governmental structures. China being a big focus as special economic zones (SEZs) were hot and the FDI was flowing. These bright shiny money magnets took hold and shaped the import-export giant we see today. Fast forward to 2024 and times have changed. Monetary and societal policies failed to adapt to the ebb and flow of the markets. As a result, we see negative FDI, talent migration and start-up ecosystems vanish at the blink of an eye. The outliers seemed to have been swallowed by the very system which created it!
USA Tech Hubs
Designation of tech centers of gravity are a great first step in bringing together various stakeholders to a common goal. We can question the goals and clusters, however, innovation will happen anywhere with the right mindset and personal drive.
Listed is the recent announcement of the designated cities, regions and domains. This is one of many batches of designations. The DOD itself has designated critical manufacturing hubs and states have their own designated ecosystems outside of the federal programs.
The Phase 1 winners were selected from nearly 400 applications from regional consortia that include industry, academia, state and local governments, economic development organizations, and labor and workforce partners. As part of the Tech Hubs competition, each consortium outlined plans for strengthening its region’s capacity to manufacture, commercialize, and deploy critical technologies.
The Tech Hubs Program aims to strengthen U.S. economic and national security with investments in regions across the country with assets and resources with the potential to become globally competitive in the technologies and industries of the future—and for those industries, companies, and the good jobs they create, to start, grow, and remain in the United States.
This program brings together diverse public, private, and academic partners into collaborative consortia focused on driving inclusive regional growth. With their existing innovation assets as a foundation, these Tech Hubs will build the workforce of the future; enable businesses to start and scale; and deploy and deliver critical and emerging technologies.
There are 31 Tech Hubs designees across Autonomous Systems, Quantum, Biotech, Energy Transition, Critical Minerals, and Future Manufacturing:
Headwaters Hub – smart photonic sensor systems in MT
Ocean Tech Hub – ocean robotics, sensors, and materials in RI, MA
Trustworthy & Equitable Autonomous Systems Tech Hub – secure autonomous systems in OK
Elevate Quantum Colorado – quantum information technology in CO
The Bloch Tech Hub – quantum computing and communications in IL, IN, and WI
Advanced Pharma Manufacturing Tech Hub – active pharma ingredient manufacturing in VA
ReGen Valley Tech Hub – cells, organ, and tissue biofabrication in NH
iFab Tech Hub – precision fermentation and biomanufacturing in IL
Kansas City Inclusive Biologics and Biomanufacturing Tech Hub– vaccine-related biologics and manufacturing in MO and KS
Heartland BioWorks – biologics manufacturing in IN
PRBio Tech Hub – biopharmaceutical and medical device manufacturing in Puerto Rico
Wisconsin Biohealth Tech Hub – personalized medicine in WI
Baltimore Tech Hub – predictive healthcare in MD
Birmingham Biotechnology Hub – equitable AI-driven biotechnology in AL
Greater Philadelphia Region Precision Medicine Tech Hub- end to end precision medicine in PA, DE, MD, and NJ
Minnesota MedTech 3.0 - smart medical technologies in MN and WI
Gulf Louisiana Offshore Wind Propeller – offshore wind and renewable energy in LA
Intermountain-West Nuclear Energy Tech Hub– small modular reactors and microreactors in ID and WY
SC Nexus for Advanced Resilient Energy – clean energy supply chain in SC and GA
South Florida Climate Resilience Tech Hub – sustainable and climate resilient infrastructure in FL
New Energy New York (NENY) Battery Tech Hub – end to end battery development and manufacturing in NY
Critical Minerals and Materials for Advanced Energy (CM2AE) Tech Hub– critical mineral processing in MO
Nevada Lithium Batteries and Other EV Material Loop – lithium batteries and electric vehicle materials in NV
Texoma Semiconductor Innovation Consortium – fablet-based semiconductor manufacturing in TX and OK
Corvallis Microfluidics Tech Hub – microfluidics platforms in OR
Advancing GaN Tech Hub – gallium nitride-based semiconductors in VT
NY SMART I-Corridor Tech Hub – end-to-end semiconductor manufacturing in NY
Sustainable Polymers Tech Hub – sustainable plastics and rubbers in OH
Forest Bioproducts Advanced Manufacturing Tech Hub – sustainable wood biomass polymers in ME
American Aerospace Materials Manufacturing Tech Hub – aerospace materials manufacturing in WA and ID
Pacific Northwest Mass Timber Tech Hub– mass timber manufacturing and design in WA and OR
Read more about the Tech Hubs program at TechHubs.gov
Trust = Action
So the question remains, can you plan creativity and innovation? Do one party government systems have advantage vs dynamic multi-party governments? I was recently at a conference listening to a mixed panel of experts. One of the university experts commented on how bright and shiny the government programs were from the MENA region. Comparing the organized flow of a monarchy system to the decentralized systems in free markets. It got me thinking back to the early days of the China rise when GDP goals by province where badges of honor. Yes, it’s shiner and easier in a one party system. Creating and executing a plan becomes the end and not the means. What’s missing are voices of the people. The sounds of checks and balances, and most important, the accountability of the people.
Many factors play into the success and failure of governmental programs which aim to boost leadership in a particular area. Programs and money come and go. Success comes around common missions. When people trust the goals. When the programs touch every aspect of society. And when the technology aligns to a practical problem. Building trust among all stakeholders takes time and unique conduits. Trust among government leaders, private industry, university systems, economic development teams, and most of all the people in the communities.
Who do you trust to make decisions on your behalf?
TJ