Off Tangent Comix

DSM-V Update
 
Leave a comment.
 
See continuing updates on the APA, DSM, and the upcoming DSM Fifth Edition (DSM-V).
 
See our Annotated List of DSM-related news, research reports, analyses, and opinion pieces.
 
Visit the TS-Si Article Archive for reports on science, medicine, government, society, and other topics.
Chad A. Mirkin, Northwestern University, George B. Rathmann Professor of Chemistry in the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences. Photo by Bill Arsenault. 

DNA Blueprints Guide The Construction Of Specific Human Structures

Chad Mirkin discusses using DNA to build a three-dimensional structure out of gold, likening the process to building a house. Starting with basic materials such as bricks, wood, siding, stone and shingles, a construction team can build many different types of houses out of the same building blocks.
 
The article includes an audio recording of the full interview. Photo courtesy of the UCSD School of Medicine.
Top States Cited For Tech Transformation Print E-mail
Living - Workplace
Pamela M. Prah   
Wednesday, 19 November 2008 09:00
Massachusetts GreetingsWashington, DC, USA. Massachusetts once again leads all other states in moving its economy away from the old industrial “smokestack chasing” model to one based on technology, creativity and innovation, according to a new report released on Nov. 18.
 
Washington, Maryland, Delaware and New Jersey round out the top five states, while Mississippi and West Virginia ranked lowest in making the transition to the new economy, according to The “2008 State New Economy Index,” released by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation and the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), both nonpartisan groups that focus on innovation.
 
The other states scoring at the bottom include Arkansas, Alabama and Wyoming, according to the 88-page report that provides state-by-state rankings.
 
States at the top of the list tend to have a high concentration of workers in “knowledge jobs” that require at least a two-year college degree, are at the forefront of the information technology and Internet revolutions and have institutions and residents that embrace the digital economy, the report said. The groups used 29 indicators to rank each state on how well its economy is structured to compete regionally, as well as globally.
The 2008 State New Economy Index: Benchmarking Economic Transformation In the States. Robert D. Atkinson and Scott Andes. Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF). November 2008.
STATES AND THE ECONOMY

The 2008 State New Economy Index ranks the ability od US states to thrive in an information-driven economy. There are 29 measures, including the number of jobs in a state that require at least some college education and how well its economy is structured for regional and global competition.

  1. Massachusetts
  2. Washington state
  3. Maryland
  4. Delaware
  5. New Jersey
  6. Connecticut
  7. Virginia
  8. California
  9. New York
  10. Colorado
  11. Rhode Island
  12. Utah
  13. New Hampshire
  14. Minnesota
  15. Oregon
  16. Illinois
  17. Michigan
  18. Texas
  19. Vermont
  20. Arizona
  21. Georgia
  22. Pennsylvania
  23. Florida
  24. North Carolina
  25. Nevada
  26. Idaho
  27. Nebraska
  28. Maine
  29. New Mexico
  30. Ohio
  31. Kansas
  32. Alaska
  33. Wisconsin
  34. South Carolina
  35. Hawaii
  36. Indiana
  37. Missouri
  38. Tennessee
  39. North Dakota
  40. Montana
  41. Louisiana
  42. Iowa
  43. Oklahoma
  44. South Dakota
  45. Kentucky
  46. Wyoming
  47. Alabama
  48. Arkansas
  49. West Virginia
  50. Mississippi

Source: "The 2008 State New Economy Index," by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation and the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF) (November 2008).

Massachusetts, which also topped the list in earlier reports issued in 1999, 2002 and 2007, widened its lead over states, again due largely to its concentration of software, hardware and biotech firms supported by world-class universities, such as Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard.
 
Washington scores high thanks to its strength in software and aviation from its hometown companies of Microsoft and Boeing. Maryland comes in third because of its concentration of contractors and workers in the federal government. Delaware climbed from ninth in 2002 to fourth in 2008, in part, because of its long-standing state policies to build a strong financial services industry. New Jersey’s pharmaceutical industry, coupled with high-tech presence around Princeton, helped land it fifth place.
 
Robert D. Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation and primary author of the report, said that states on the lower end of the rankings tend to be “still stuck using the conventional model” that focuses on dangling tax breaks to lure big new plants to their states rather than creating an environment for entrepreneurship and innovation.
 
Sujit CanagaRetna, senior fiscal analyst for the Council of State Governments, said that while states are currently struggling with shrinking revenues and tight credit, focusing on creating new-economy jobs can help them recover through the downturn.  “In this fiercely competitive global economy, creating broad-based economic opportunities that attract and retain high-tech, high-wage jobs can only come through pursuing the kind of new-economy jobs and professions enumerated in the report,” he said.
 
Regionally, the new economy has taken the strongest hold in the Northeast, mid-Atlantic, Mountain West and Pacific regions; 14 of the top 20 states are in these four areas. In contrast, 16 of the 20 lowest-ranking states are in the Midwest, Great Plains and South. California and New York, two states especially hard hit by the tanking economy, rank eighth and ninth, respectively.
 
When she was chair of the National Governors Association (NGA) in 2007, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano (D) made “Innovation America” her year-long initiative that prodded governors to move their states toward the new economy. Atkinson said he gives Napolitano credit for bringing a spotlight on the issue “but it hasn’t sunk in as it should” among governors, he said.
 
FundingThe Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation provided funding assistance for preparation of the report.
CitationThe 2008 State New Economy Index: Benchmarking Economic Transformation In the States. Robert D. Atkinson and Scott Andes. Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF). November 2008. Download PDF

Abstract

In the midst of economic slowdowns, it’s often hard to think beyond the near term. But, just as the most effective companies take advantage of slowdowns to better position themselves for subsequent periods of strong economic growth, so, too, should states. For the current slowdown, caused in large part by higher energy prices and excesses in the housing market that have spurred turmoil in the financial services industry, will not last forever. In fact, given the experiences of past New Economy slowdowns (the early 1990s and at the turn of this century), the slowdown could be less severe than many past slowdowns. As a result, the more important economic question states should be focused on is whether their economies are well positioned for robust growth and innovation over the next decade.

Being well positioned means that state economies need to be firmly grounded in the New Economy. These New Economy factors have become a fundamental capacity that states need to have to find success and navigate the shoals of economic change. This report uses twenty-nine indicators to assess that capacity and, in particular, to measure the differences in the extent to which state economies are structured and operate according to the tenets of the New Economy. In other words, it examines the degree to which state economies are knowledge-based, globalized, entrepreneurial, IT-driven, and innovation-based. With these indicators as a frame of reference, the report then outlines a state-level public policy framework aimed at helping states master forthcoming challenges and take advantage of opportunities. The report builds off three earlier reports (The 1999 State New Economy Index, The 2002 State New Economy Index, and The 2007 State New Economy Index).
 
Articles sourced from Stateline are prepared and printed with permission and do not necessarily convey an official position of TS-Si, its partners, or affiliates. TS-Si thanks The Pew Charitable Trusts for support and cooperation.
 
Comments (0)Add Comment
feedSubscribe to this comment's feed
min/maxShow/Hide comments

Write comment
feedShow/Hide comment form

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
Next >
Last Updated on Wednesday, 19 November 2008 17:04