Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T09:33:34.783Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Biotechnology and Economic Development: The Role of the States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

John Portz  and
Peter Eisinger
John Portz
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Northeastern University, 303 Meserve Hall, Boston, Massachusetts 02115
Peter Eisinger
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of Wisconsin, 110 North Hall, Madison, Wisconsin 53706
Get access

Abstract

In recent years policymakers in a number of American states have chosen biotechnology as a key element in their economic development efforts. With visions of business growth and new jobs, state officials have targeted biotechnology as an important industry of the future. In this paper we focus on the political dynamics that underlay the choice of biotechnology in eleven states. With those states providing examples, we identify three major models of policy choice. The first involves an interest-based process in which state policymakers respond to explicit or implicit pressures from different parties. The second involves a strategic planning exercise in which state officials analyze the economic structure of the state and seek to develop a comparative advantage in the field of biotechnology. And the third starts with a strategic analysis but then relies upon a competitive, interest-based process to determine the allocation of state funds. We conclude by briefly discussing major issues for science policymaking at the state level.

Type
Articles and Commentaries
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , February 1991 , pp. 225 - 239
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (1985). The Question of State Government Capability. Washington, D.C.: GPO.Google Scholar
Applied Genetics News (1987). “Report: Ice-Minus Update,” (March).Google Scholar
Baba, M., and Hart, S. (1986). “Portrait of a New State Initiative in Industrial Innovation: Michigan's Industrial Technology Institute.” In Gray, D., Solomon, T., and Hetzner, W., (eds.), Technological Innovation. Amsterdam: North- Holland, pp., 89–110.Google Scholar
Barfield, C. and Schambra, W., eds. (1986). The Politics of Industrial Policy. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
Berry, J. (1989). The Interest Group Society, Second Edition. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Brooks, H. and Cooper, C. (1987). Science for Public Policy. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Bureau of National Affairs (1990). State-by-State Biotechnology Directory: Centers, Companies, and Contacts. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Bureau of National Affairs (1989). U.S. Biotechnology: A Legislative and Regulatory Roadmap. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Burrill, G. S. and Arthur Young High Technology Group (1988). Biotech 89: Commercialization. New York: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.Google Scholar
Burrill, G. S. and Arthur Young High Technology Group (1981). Biotech 88: Into the Marketplace Washington, D.C.: Arthur Young.Google Scholar
California State Assembly, Economic Development and New Technologies Committee (1984). The Future of Biotechnology Industries in California. Committee Report and Record of Hearing San Francisco (June 28).Google Scholar
California Senate Office of Research (1985). Silicon Valley II: A Review of State Biotechnology Development Incentives. Sacramento, CA, August.Google Scholar
Cigler, A. and Loomis, B., (eds.), (1986). Interest Group Politics, Second Edition. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Clarke, M. (1986). Revitalizing State Economies. Washington, D.C.: National Governors' Association.Google Scholar
Dibner, M. (1988). Biotechnology Guide, U.S.A. New York: Stockton Press.Google Scholar
Eisinger, P. (1988). The Rise of the Entrepreneurial State. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Fosler, R. S., (ed.) (1988). The New Economic Role of American States. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Garson, G. D. (1978). Group Theories of Politics. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Genetic Engineering Newsletter (1985). “It's Hard to Find a Winner in NIH-Rifkin Ruling,” Vol. 5 (March 10).Google Scholar
George, R. (1983). Targeting High-Growth Industry. Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy.Google Scholar
Goldstein, H. and Bergman, E. (1986). “Institutional Arrangements for State and Local Industrial Policy.” Journal of the American Planning Association 52:3(Summer): 265–276.Google Scholar
Hansen, S. (1989). “Targeting in Economic Development: Comparative State Perspectives.” Publius 19 (Spring): 47–62.Google Scholar
Indiana Department of Commerce (1983). In Step With the Future. Indianapolis.Google Scholar
Indiana Department of Commerce (1987). Looking Back. Indianapolis.Google Scholar
Johnson, C., (ed.) (1984). The Industrial Policy Debate. San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, R. and Edwards, C. (1987). Entrepreneurial Science: New Links Between Corporations, Universities, and Government. New York: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
Jones, M. (1989). “Helping States Help Themselves.” Issues in Science and Technology 6 (Fall): 56–60.Google Scholar
Kenney, M. (1986). The University-Industrial Complex. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Kenney, M. (1987). “Biotechnology: Industrial Growth in a Period of Crisis.” Economic Development Quarterly 1 (August): 293–300.Google Scholar
Logsdon, J. (1986). “Federal Policies Towards Civilian Research and Development: A Historical Overview.” In Gray, D., Solomon, T., and Hetzner, W., (eds.), Technological Innovation Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp., 9–26.Google Scholar
Mahood, H.R. (1990). Interest Group Politics in America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Maryland Ad Hoc Committee (1982). Report of the Governor's Ad Hoc Committee on High Technology. Annapolis.Google Scholar
Minnesota Council on Biotechnology (1986). Four Year Plan of the Minnesota Council on Biotechnology. St. Paul.Google Scholar
Minnesota Office of Science and Technology (1988). State Technology Programs in the United States. St. Paul.Google Scholar
Minnesota Task Force on Biotechnology (1985). Report of the Governor's Task Force on Biotechnology. St. Paul.Google Scholar
National Conference of State Legislatures (1986). Directory of Science, Engineering and Technology Expertise Available to State Legislators, Science and Technology Committee Report. Denver.Google Scholar
New Jersey Governor's Commission (1983). Report of the Governor's Commission on Science and Technology. Trenton.Google Scholar
New Jersey Commission on Science and Technology (1988). Annual Report. Trenton.Google Scholar
New York Science and Technology Foundation (1982). Development of High Technology Industries in New York State, prepared by Battelle Columbus Laboratories. Albany.Google Scholar
New York State Legislative Commission On Science and Technology (1989). The Centers for Advanced Technology and the Creation of New Frontiers in Science and Technology. Albany.Google Scholar
North Carolina Legislative Research Commission (1984). Biotechnology Development. Raleigh.Google Scholar
North Carolina Biotechnology Center (1987). Directory of States' Biotechnology Centers. Research Triangle Park, NC: NC Biotechnology Center.Google Scholar
North Carolina Biotechnology Center (1989a). Directory of Biotechnology Centers, 1989. Research Triangle Park, NC: NC Biotechnology Center.Google Scholar
North Carolina Biotechnology Center (1989b). 1989 Annual Report. Research Triangle Park, NC: NC Biotechnology Center.Google Scholar
Olson, S. (1986). Biotechnology: An Industry Comes of Age. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Osborne, D. (1988). Laboratories of Democracy. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Osborne, D. (1989). State Technology Programs: A Preliminary Analysis of Lessons Learned. Washington, D.C.: Council of State Policy & Planning Agencies.Google Scholar
Pelham, A. (1988). “States Scurry to Cash In on Biotech Bonanza.” Governing 2 (October): 68–70.Google Scholar
Pennsylvania Department of Commerce (1982). Advanced Technology Policies for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Harrisburg.Google Scholar
Roessner, J.D. (1989). “Evaluating Government Intervention Programs: Lessons from the U.S. Experience.” Research Policy 18: 343–359.Google Scholar
Ronayne, J. (1984). Science in Government. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, S. (1987). “Sowing the Seeds for Growth: State Supprt for R&D in the South.” Economic Development Quarterly 2 (May): 136–48.Google Scholar
Sapolsky, H. (1971). “Science Policy in American State Government.” Minerva 9 (July): 321–48.Google Scholar
Schmandt, J. and Wilson, R. (1988). “State Science and Technology Policies: An Assessment.” Economic Development Quarterly 2 (May): 124–37.Google Scholar
Schmandt, J. and Wilson, R., (eds.) (1987). Promoting High-Technology Industry. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Solo, R. (1974). The Political Authority and the Market System. Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing.Google Scholar
Solo, R. (1982). The Positive State. Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing.Google Scholar
Tanski, P. (1989). “The Special Needs of Small States.” Issues in Science and Technology 6 (Fall): 61–65.Google Scholar
Teitelman, R. (1989). Gene Dreams. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Truman, D. (1971). The Governmental Process, Second Edition. New York: Alfred Knopf, Inc.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. and Hrebenar, R. (1990). “Interest Groups in the States.” In Gray, V., Jacob, H., and Albritton, R., (eds.), Politics in the American States, Fifth Edition. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman/Little, Brown.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (1984). Commercial Biotechnology: An International Analysis. Washington, D.C.: GPO.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (1988). New Developments in Biotechnology, No. 4: U.S. Investment in Biotechnology. Washington, D.C.: GPO.Google Scholar
U.S. Congressional Budget Office (1983). The Industrial Policy Debate. Washington, D.C.: GPO.Google Scholar
University of Maryland (1983). Task Force on High Technology/Biotechnology, Report to the Board of Regents Adelphi, MD.Google Scholar
Wachter, M. and Wachter, S., (eds.) (1981). Toward a New U.S. Industrial Policy? Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Wisconsin Department of Development (1988). Phase 1 Report: Governor's Council on Biotechnology. Madison.Google Scholar
Zysman, J. (1983). Governments, Markets, and Growth. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar