by Rob White
I was privileged to be part of several exciting activities this week, which put the City of Davis (and UC Davis by proxy) right in the middle of discussions on advanced manufacturing and sustainability.
The first activity was a two-day series of Congressional and federal agency briefings on the state-wide collaborative partnership known as the California Network for Manufacturing Innovation (CNMI). It is a nascent organization made up of California-based organizations including the federal labs, MEPs (a federally funded manufacturing assistance program), universities and community colleges, municipalities and economic development organizations (including the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development [GO-Biz]).
We met with several CA congressional representatives from both sides of the aisle and US Economic Development Administration (EDA), US Department of Energy (DOE) and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). Each of these meetings focused on describing the broad coalition and boot strap nature of the CNMI partnership.
The second activity was a White House-Industry-Chinese delegation reception and dinner that was coordinated by the McDonough Cherokee Advisors as part of a multi-day forum at the White House on US-Chinese partnership in sustainability technology advancement and investment. Again, I was the only representative from a municipality in a room of about 75 people and in high ranking positions from primarily Fortune 500 companies (like Coke and Johnson & Johnson), US federal government administration and Chinese officials. And I was honored to be able to give a few minute overview on why the City of Davis and UC Davis were material to the discussion and the offering of partnership opportunities in research, tech transfer, and leadership in sustainability.
So why is Davis involved? I am going to premise that it is because of our emerging vocalization in the area of innovation and social entrepreneurship. These terms may not be material to you right now, but I think they go to the idea of a long-held Davis belief in the triple bottom line in economic development efforts – That is economic, environmental and societal.
With regards to Innovation, a community blessed with a globally-recognized research university has many areas of new opportunity from which to draw. Obvious areas of discovery are in agriculture, medicine, engineering, bio-science and manufacturing. But what the university really represents is a way of thinking. A restlessness that doesn’t accept the status quo and leads to discovery of new and disruptive ways of doing things.
A great example of innovation is the research being done on nitrogen application for crop production, currently being assessed at Russell Ranch by several UC Davis researchers (see the recent article in Discover Magazine, July/August 2013). The research is not only informative to the process by which crops use nitrogen, but the work is disruptive to an entire industry built around the creation of nitrogen and other fertilizer additives derived from fossil-fuels. With new application techniques for fertilizers being assessed, there is the potential for a decreased demand for these additives while still maximizing crop yield. And this is one of many examples from the university, research labs, and companies in Davis that area daily assessing new ways to better our daily lives.
In the social entrepreneur space, we are also breaking down barriers and creating new opportunities. A recent article by Andrew Wolk of Root Cause, entitled Social Entrepreneurship & Government (http://rootcause.org/documents/SE_and_Gov.pdf) describes social entrepreneurship as “the practice of responding to market failures with transformative, financially sustainable innovations aimed at solving social problems.”
The article goes on to say that it has “emerged at the nexus of public, private and nonprofit sectors” and is “a new breed of entrepreneurship” focused on “innovation, risk-taking and large-scale transformation.” This is a complicated way of describing what we commonly now call public-private partnerships. Our relationship with Siemens to find new energy saving/generating solutions is a good local example. The national volunteerism efforts created by the organization CityYear (www.cityyear.org/CityYear/Home_New_2011/Home_A_2011.aspx) is another example of this social entrepreneurial activity, where a multi-sector approach has resulted in better outcomes than if any one sector tried to solve the issue on its own. CityYear has generated thousands of hours of volunteer work across the nation, primarily funded by private industry in coordination with government.
These ideas of innovation and social entrepreneurship were fresh on my mind while I was in DC, where I heard over and over again that the current congressional gutting of the research and development budgets from many of our federal agencies was knocking us backwards, not helping us run forwards as a nation. But I couldn’t help but think that we have been here before… and I think this time could be different. Maybe it’s no longer the role of the feds to fund the bulk of research. Maybe industry is revving back up the proverbial engine and the idea of social entrepreneurship and cross-sectorial approaches can fill some of the gap. We are a smart and creative culture… we have been on hard times and made decisions that seemed counter-productive to our national interest. But haven’t we spent the last few centuries as a nation in finding a way to conduct the necessary actions to move forward?
Federal and state governments don’t have the means to finance research and development in the ways we know are valuable. But if there is one thing our American history tells us is that if government can’t, industry most certainly will. And with a new appetite by governments to be better calculated risk-takers and supportive of disruptive opportunities in order to save funds, we may be witnessing a new ‘industrial revolution’ of sorts. And when multi-sector entrepreneurial efforts come together, we have significant and positive outcomes.
Look at Mori Seiki’s new manufacturing plant, a clear example where industry, academia and government worked together for a positive outcome. One that has important upsides to job creation, revenues to the city and a positive image for the Davis community as host to a leading and globally recognized advanced manufacturing facility.
And maybe the most illustrative example of these ideas over the last few days was a conversation I had with an executive from Coke whose job it is to identify how to completely replace PET in their containers with organically derived fibers by 2020. He has been working on relationship building with UC Davis to establish a research partnership because of their global leadership in agriculture sciences. And he asked how we might be helpful in moving that relationship building forward and hopefully accelerate the potential for partnership. A true industry-academia-public sector effort at building what might amount to a whole new industry.
My point here might be best summarized this way… Davis is a unique community, which is still recognized globally as an early adopter of sustainability measures that are disruptive, innovative and can certainly trace their roots to social entrepreneurship. We can (should) claim this space more robustly and charge forward. It is our responsibility (and right) to be at the forefront in development and deployment of new technologies and innovative ideas. And it is our community-based efforts that will fill the gaps where government is unable to fund or provide for the services due to our entrepreneurial spirit.
Great piece Rob. Thank you for your good work and participation in these collaborative events and organizations established to move the needle on innovation and economic development.
Related to your points about the connections with economic and social development, there is a level of dysfunction in our current social and economic relationship that is fomented by our political processes. The politics of Davis exemplify this. Part of it has to do with the recent Great Recession. In fact, as you know, historically all significant downturns in the economy have generated increased animus against business and more demand for policy addressing social services.
But the dysfunction has grown and taken root.
One side of our two-sided political system has gravitated toward a populist model which denigrates and demonizes business. Instead of communicating the absolutely necessary symbiotic relationship between a strong economy and a great society, business has been used as a scapegoat for the decline of individual economic opportunity and the increase in economic despair.
So the brand of business has been tarnished by weak-leader politicians leveraging populist frustration over the crash of the economic opportunity. This in turn is leveraged by the change-averse people in our community to block any meaningful economic development.
Of course the rational thinkers among us can connect the circle of logic, and clearly see that tendency is damaging to the very people throwing their tantrum and blaming business for their troubles. A great society does not fund itself. It derives its revenue inputs from business activity. From the perspective of social program funding, the more business activity the better the outcome.
My thinking is that you and others with knowledge, time and energy should be spending it at a more grassroots level. Especially young people need to be helped to understand the purpose and returns for a healthy economic development program that leads to a robust economic circumstances for the city… which in-turn helps them. Instead of advocating for government tuition assistance, how about advocating for new business locating in Davis that would provide jobs and would contribute to education and other social program funding through taxation and donations?
I think those that get the need are already here and have been involved in enough visioning discussions. Then there are those lined up politically to block anything significant that this first group might attempt. I don’t see us making much progress bringing over people from the blockers group to the innovators group. Instead what we need is more young people to vote for economic development because they know it serves their interests. Anything significant will end up as a Measure J initiative vote. That is where the battle will be fought.
Having dealt with large organizational change for most of my professional career, I found that the stakeholders of significant change was separated into thirds. One third were for it, one third were against it and one third didn’t know. Next was the 90/10 rule that said working to bring over 10% of the 1/3 currently against the project it would take 90% of the effort… and hence would derail the effort. So, instead the best path toward success was to target the 1/3 that didn’t know with an education and awareness effort.
The blockers in this city are well-organized and will never change their mind. Again, I see the economic development battle being fought at the ballot box. I think it can only be won by inspiring young people to vote for their true and factual future self-interests.
Rob,
I just want you to know that I read your articles here with interest, even if I don’t comment on them. Glad to see you doing this kind of communication.
[quote]And he asked how we might be helpful in moving that relationship building forward and hopefully accelerate the potential for partnership. [/quote]
What was your answer?
Thanks Don for letting me know!
My answer was that we can help with several levels of contact at UCD, including the College of Ag. Chancellor’s Office of Research, Community Relations, School of Engineering and Gad School of Management. This morning I let Community Relations know of the contact and will be following up with the others over the next few days.
I will also be relaying the info straight in to the Chancellor’s Office and following up with Coke reps to be sure that follow up is happening on their end as well.
And thanks Frankly for the thoughts.
I try to keep all options open as I am sure there is a way to get most of what the community collectively wants and meet the objective of keeping Davis as a unique place with a high standard of living and quality of life.
Rob, I echo Frankly’s and Don’s positive comments. Thank you for what you are doing for Davis.
I have long felt that there is an overabundance of mistrust between UCD and the City (both the formal City and is residents). It is very clear to me that you are a real and tangible force in breaking down some of that mistrust. The combination of UCD and the City and the residents is truly an example of “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” . . . if we can only learn to play well together. Thank you for the superb example you are setting in that arena.
Thank you Matt!