Request for Comments on the Strategy for American Innovation, 6395-6397 [2011-2558]
Download as PDF
6395
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 76, No. 24
Friday, February 4, 2011
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Lawrence County Resource Advisory
Committee
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Lawrence County
Resource Advisory will meet in
Spearfish, SD. The committee is meeting
as authorized under the Secure Rural
Schools and Community SelfDetermination Act (Pub. L. 110–343)
and in compliance with the Federal
Advisory Committee Act. The
committee has received three formal
project proposals. The purpose of the
meeting is to solicit additional
information from project proponents
and vote on project proposals.
DATES: The meeting will be held March
6, 2011 at 5 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Northern Hills Ranger District Office
at 2014 N. Main. Written comments
should be sent to Rhonda O’Byrne, 2014
N. Main, Spearfish, SD 57783.
Comments may also be sent via e-mail
to rlobyrne@fs.fed.us, or via facsimile to
605–642–4156.
All comments, including names and
addresses when provided, are placed in
the record and are available for public
inspection and copying. The public may
inspect comments received at the
Northern Hills Ranger District office.
Visitors are encouraged to call ahead at
605–642–4622 to facilitate entry into the
building.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rhonda O’Byrne, District Ranger,
Northern Hills Ranger District, 605–
642–4622.
Individuals who use
telecommunication devices for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern
Standard Time, Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
meeting is open to the public. The
following business will be conducted:
review proposed projects. If Committee
members have enough information, they
may choose to vote on project proposals
submitted to the committee for Title II.
Persons who wish to bring related
matters to the attention of the
Committee may file written statements
SUMMARY:
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Alpine County Resource Advisory
Committee (RAC)
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
The Alpine County Resource
Advisory Committee (RAC) will hold a
meeting.
SUMMARY:
The meeting will be held on
Tuesday, March 15, 2011 and will begin
at 6 p.m.
DATES:
The meeting will be held in
Alpine County at the Alpine Early
Learning Center, 100 Foothill Road,
Markleeville, CA 96120.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel Morris, RAC Coordinator, USDA,
Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest,
Carson Ranger District, 1536 S. Carson
Street, Carson City, NV 89701, (775)
884–8140; e-mail
danielmorris@fs.fed.us.
Agenda
items to be covered include:
(1) Review and recommend funding
allocation for proposed projects. (2)
Determine timeframes for the next
round of project proposals. (3) Public
Comment. The meeting is open to the
public. Public input opportunity will be
provided and individuals will have the
opportunity to address the Committee at
that time.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: January 31, 2011.
Genny E. Wilson,
Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011–2514 Filed 2–3–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:05 Feb 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
with the Committee staff before or after
the meeting. Public input sessions will
be provided and individuals who made
written requests by Friday, March 4,
2011 will have the opportunity to
address the Committee at those sessions.
Dated: January 31, 2011.
Craig Bobzien,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2011–2518 Filed 2–3–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Office of the Secretary
Request for Comments on the Strategy
for American Innovation
Office of the Secretary,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice and request for
information.
AGENCY:
The America COMPETES
Reauthorization Act of 2010 directs the
Department of Commerce (DOC), in
consultation with the National
Economic Council (NEC), to deliver to
Congress a study by January 4, 2011 on
our nation’s innovative capacity and
international competitiveness. Section
604, Public Law No: 111–358. To assist
with that effort, the DOC is initiating a
series of public engagements, seeking
input on a range of policy matters that
can affect our innovativeness and
competitiveness. The subject area is
quite broad. As a starting point, DOC
publishes this Notice and Request for
Information (RFI) to obtain comment on
the Administration’s Innovation
Strategy (see https://
www.Commerce.gov/competes for a link
to the report). This strategy document
summarizes policy initiatives that aim
to improve our national innovation
system, and thereby accelerate our
economic growth by increasing the
international competitiveness of
American businesses and workers. This
RFI provides an opportunity for
interested parties to discuss those
initiatives. In the coming months, DOC
will create additional opportunities for
the public to comment on a range of
related topics, such as those specifically
identified in the America COMPETES
Reauthorization Act but not mentioned
in the Strategy.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\04FEN1.SGM
04FEN1
6396
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 24 / Friday, February 4, 2011 / Notices
Comments must be postmarked
or submitted by no later than April 1,
2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by ‘‘Innovation Strategy RFI’’
by any of the following methods: E-mail:
competiveness@doc.gov. Mail: Office of
the Chief Economist, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue,
NW., HCHB Room 4852, Washington,
DC 20230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sabrina L. Montes, E-mail:
SMontes@doc.gov. Telephone: 202 482–
3659.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Background
The Administration’s Innovation
Strategy details its efforts to strengthen
our nation’s competitiveness and longrun economic growth. The document
explains the essential role of innovation
in American prosperity, the central
importance of the private sector as the
engine of innovation, and the critical,
targeted roles of government in
supporting our innovation system. The
document further describes longer-run
goals and milestones for our nation. The
Strategy organizes the Administration’s
existing policy initiatives into three
parts:
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
(1) Invest in the Building Blocks of
American Innovation
The premise here is that economic
growth builds upon investments in the
basic foundations of society—such as
education, basic research, and modern
infrastructure—and that without such
investments innovation cannot thrive.
In line with the Strategy, the
Administration’s pro-innovation
initiatives seek to generate the highest
returns on investments in each of these
areas: in education and training systems
that can increase opportunities for
American workers and increase their
innovative capacity; in basic research
that can unearth and unleash
fundamental scientific breakthroughs
that, in turn, often can lead to cascades
of commercial innovations, as well as
the birth of new enterprises and
industries; and in critical infrastructure,
including our nation’s transportation
and electricity systems and the
information and computer networks that
increasingly drive 21st century
economies.
(2) Promote Market-Based Innovation
The Strategy also recognizes that
American businesses and the
marketplace are the engines of
innovation. Through its various
initiatives, the Administration seeks to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:05 Feb 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
ensure that commercial innovation
remains the driving force for our
economic growth, that businesses enjoy
the right competitive landscape for
innovation at home and abroad, and that
the government administers central
responsibilities, such as those
surrounding intellectual property rights,
competition policy, international trade,
spectrum auctions, corporate taxation,
and regulatory law, in an optimal
manner to promote innovation.
(3) Catalyze Breakthroughs for National
Priorities
Finally, the Strategy points out that in
areas of well-defined national
importance, public investments often
can catalyze advances, bringing about
key breakthroughs and establishing U.S.
leadership faster than what might be
possible otherwise. Here, the
Administration seeks to make strategic
investments beyond the ken of the
private sector, using the right
mechanisms, in the best portfolio of
national priority areas, including clean
energy, biotechnology, nanotechnology,
educational and health information
technologies, and space technologies.
Request for Information
This RFI focuses on how the
Administration can improve its efforts
in these areas. The Administration
recognizes that good ideas come from
many corners, which is a driving force
for the success of our marketplace in
generating commercial innovations and
the success of our research institutions
in generating fundamental scientific
breakthroughs. This RFI seeks to draw
on that same American ingenuity,
expertise, and insight to improve those
governmental activities that nurture the
innovation potential of our nation.
The following questions should be
seen as a framework for providing
comments on the specific policies
outlined in the Administration’s
Strategy for American Innovation.
Commenters should not feel constrained
by them. We are not only interested in
feedback on existing pro-innovation
initiatives, but also seek guidance on
how these initiatives might be adjusted
for the coming years. And, we seek
recommendations for related, new
initiatives. Commenters should not
hesitate to offer new ideas, including
new strategic priorities, for achieving
the longer-run goals of accelerating
economic growth and competitiveness.
The following list is intended to assist
in the formulation of comments but not
to restrict the issues that might be
addressed.
(1) Government research and
development: How can the economic
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
impacts of basic research funding (e.g.,
NSF, NIH) be better measured and
evaluated? What methods can the
Federal Government use to prioritize
funding areas of basic research, both
within an area of science and across
areas of science? How can existing
Federal government institutions (not
just organizations, but also programs,
policies, and laws) devoted to basic
research and innovation be improved?
Are there new institutions of these types
that are needed to achieve national
innovation goals? How could the
government increase support for
industry-led, pre-competitive R&D?
(2) Entrepreneurship: Through what
measures can government policy better
facilitate the creation and success of
innovative new businesses? What
obstacles limit entrepreneurship in
America, and which of these obstacles
can be reduced through public policy?
What are the most important policy,
legal, and regulatory steps that the
federal government could take to
expand access to capital for high-growth
businesses?
(3) Intellectual Property: What are the
key elements of any legal reform effort
that would ensure that our intellectual
property system provides timely, highquality property rights and creates the
best incentives for commercial
innovation? How can the intellectual
property system better serve the dual
goals of creating incentives for
knowledge creation while also ensuring
that knowledge is widely diffused and
adopted and moves to its best economic
and societal uses?
(4) Education: How important is
catalyzing greater interest and training
in science, technology, engineering and
mathematics (STEM) fields? What
strategies can be most effective on this
score? Can educational technologies be
better utilized to this end? What are the
critical opportunities and limitations to
the creation and adoption of effective
education technologies? How can
investments in community colleges
better leverage public-partnerships to
better train Americans for the jobs of
today and tomorrow?
(5) Incentives to innovate: How could
the government better use incentives
(including but not limited to
procurement, Advanced Market
Commitments, incentive prizes, and
aggregation of demand) to promote
innovation? Are there other
economically-sound incentives that the
government should provide?
(6) Manufacturing: What is the role of
advanced manufacturing in driving
American economic growth and
international competitiveness, and what
are the key obstacles to success at
E:\FR\FM\04FEN1.SGM
04FEN1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 24 / Friday, February 4, 2011 / Notices
advanced manufacturing? In which
manufacturing industries will our
nation have comparative advantages?
(7) Exports: How could the
government better assist small and
medium-sized domestic firms sell their
products abroad? What policies can be
pursued that would help all U.S.
businesses increase their exports?
(8) Implications of changes in the
innovative process: In recent years,
some experts have noted that the
innovation process itself is changing,
and that approaches such as user-driven
innovation, open innovation, design
thinking, combinatorial innovation,
modularity, and multi-disciplinary
innovation are growing in importance.
What are the policy implications of
these and other changes in the
innovation process? Should policy
makers be thinking differently about our
approach to industrial organization and
competition policy in light of these
changes?
(9) Innovation in the services sector:
What sectors of the economy have
gained less from innovation in the past
and—to the extent that innovation could
have sustained competitiveness—what
are the obstacles to their progress? What
are the policy issues that are raised by
the nature of innovation in the service
sector?
(10) Enhancing the exchange of ideas:
How can public policy better promote
the exchange of ideas among market
participants—that is, support ‘‘markets
for technology’’—that enhance the social
value of innovations? Similarly, how
can the government assist in the
diffusion of best practices? Given that
ideas and knowledge cannot be traded
as readily as are physical goods, what is
the government’s role in supporting
more effective markets?
We recognize that since the initial
launch of the Innovation Strategy in
2009, DOC and other parts of the
Administration have released other
Requests for Information on innovationrelated topics. For instance, DOC’s
Office of Innovation & Entrepreneurship
(https://www.eda.gov/OIE) has
collaborated with the NEC and the
Office of Science and Technology Policy
on, among other things, an RFI focused
on improving the commercialization of
university-driven basic research. See
https://www.eda.gov/PDF/
WH%20RFI%20Announcement.pdf.
Many of these inquiries are still inprocess. Commenters on this RFI are
welcome to submit materials generated
for those other matters in order to build
the record for our January 2012 report
to Congress. Additional reports, articles,
and analyses are also welcome, although
we strongly urge that they be submitted
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:05 Feb 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
electronically and that commenters
identify in their cover letters how those
other materials relate to this inquiry.
Issued in Washington, DC on February 1,
2011.
John Connor,
Office of the Secretary of Commerce.
[FR Doc. 2011–2558 Filed 2–3–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–EA–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–901]
Certain Lined Paper Products From the
People’s Republic of China: Extension
of Time Limits for the Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Cindy Robinson or Stephanie Moore,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3797 or (202) 482–
3692, respectively.
AGENCY:
6397
practicable because an issue arose late
in the proceeding regarding improperly
submitted business proprietary
information. This issue requires the
rejection and resubmission of briefs.
The Department will need additional
time to ensure proper treatment of this
information.
Given that the parties have been
provided additional time to submit a
brief and a rebuttal in this case, only
upon receipt of those submissions will
the Department be able to consider the
arguments raised by parties. This will
require additional time for the
Department to address the claims in the
case and rebuttal briefs the parties will
file. Because it is not practicable to
complete this review within the time
specified under the Act, we are
extending the time period for issuing
the final results of the administrative
review to 180 days, until April 18, 2011,
in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A)
of the Act.
We are publishing this notice
pursuant to sections 751(a) and 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: January 31, 2011.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2011–2524 Filed 2–3–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Background
On October 18, 2010, the U.S.
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) published the
preliminary results of the antidumping
duty administrative review on certain
lined paper products (‘‘CLPP’’) from the
People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’),
covering the period September 1, 2008,
to August 31, 2009. See Certain Lined
Paper Products From the People’s
Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary
Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 75 FR 63814
(October 18, 2010). The final results of
review are currently due on February
15, 2011.
Extension of Time Limits for the Final
Results
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’),
requires the Department to issue final
results within 120 days after the date on
which the preliminary results are
published. However, if it is not
practicable to complete the review
within this time period, section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the
Department to extend the time period to
a maximum of 180 days. Completion of
the final results of the administrative
review within the 120-day period is not
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–601]
Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished From
the People’s Republic of China:
Initiation of Antidumping Duty New
Shipper Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: February 4, 2011.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) has determined that a
request for a new shipper review
(‘‘NSR’’) of the antidumping duty order
on tapered roller bearings (‘‘TRBs’’) from
the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’)
meets the statutory and regulatory
requirements for initiation. The period
of review (‘‘POR’’) for this NSR is June
1, 2010, through November 30, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrew Medley, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 8, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\04FEN1.SGM
04FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 24 (Friday, February 4, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6395-6397]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-2558]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Office of the Secretary
Request for Comments on the Strategy for American Innovation
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice and request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 directs the
Department of Commerce (DOC), in consultation with the National
Economic Council (NEC), to deliver to Congress a study by January 4,
2011 on our nation's innovative capacity and international
competitiveness. Section 604, Public Law No: 111-358. To assist with
that effort, the DOC is initiating a series of public engagements,
seeking input on a range of policy matters that can affect our
innovativeness and competitiveness. The subject area is quite broad. As
a starting point, DOC publishes this Notice and Request for Information
(RFI) to obtain comment on the Administration's Innovation Strategy
(see https://www.Commerce.gov/competes for a link to the report). This
strategy document summarizes policy initiatives that aim to improve our
national innovation system, and thereby accelerate our economic growth
by increasing the international competitiveness of American businesses
and workers. This RFI provides an opportunity for interested parties to
discuss those initiatives. In the coming months, DOC will create
additional opportunities for the public to comment on a range of
related topics, such as those specifically identified in the America
COMPETES Reauthorization Act but not mentioned in the Strategy.
[[Page 6396]]
DATES: Comments must be postmarked or submitted by no later than April
1, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by ``Innovation Strategy
RFI'' by any of the following methods: E-mail: competiveness@doc.gov.
Mail: Office of the Chief Economist, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue, NW., HCHB Room 4852, Washington, DC 20230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sabrina L. Montes, E-mail:
SMontes@doc.gov. Telephone: 202 482-3659.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Administration's Innovation Strategy details its efforts to
strengthen our nation's competitiveness and long-run economic growth.
The document explains the essential role of innovation in American
prosperity, the central importance of the private sector as the engine
of innovation, and the critical, targeted roles of government in
supporting our innovation system. The document further describes
longer-run goals and milestones for our nation. The Strategy organizes
the Administration's existing policy initiatives into three parts:
(1) Invest in the Building Blocks of American Innovation
The premise here is that economic growth builds upon investments in
the basic foundations of society--such as education, basic research,
and modern infrastructure--and that without such investments innovation
cannot thrive. In line with the Strategy, the Administration's pro-
innovation initiatives seek to generate the highest returns on
investments in each of these areas: in education and training systems
that can increase opportunities for American workers and increase their
innovative capacity; in basic research that can unearth and unleash
fundamental scientific breakthroughs that, in turn, often can lead to
cascades of commercial innovations, as well as the birth of new
enterprises and industries; and in critical infrastructure, including
our nation's transportation and electricity systems and the information
and computer networks that increasingly drive 21st century economies.
(2) Promote Market-Based Innovation
The Strategy also recognizes that American businesses and the
marketplace are the engines of innovation. Through its various
initiatives, the Administration seeks to ensure that commercial
innovation remains the driving force for our economic growth, that
businesses enjoy the right competitive landscape for innovation at home
and abroad, and that the government administers central
responsibilities, such as those surrounding intellectual property
rights, competition policy, international trade, spectrum auctions,
corporate taxation, and regulatory law, in an optimal manner to promote
innovation.
(3) Catalyze Breakthroughs for National Priorities
Finally, the Strategy points out that in areas of well-defined
national importance, public investments often can catalyze advances,
bringing about key breakthroughs and establishing U.S. leadership
faster than what might be possible otherwise. Here, the Administration
seeks to make strategic investments beyond the ken of the private
sector, using the right mechanisms, in the best portfolio of national
priority areas, including clean energy, biotechnology, nanotechnology,
educational and health information technologies, and space
technologies.
Request for Information
This RFI focuses on how the Administration can improve its efforts
in these areas. The Administration recognizes that good ideas come from
many corners, which is a driving force for the success of our
marketplace in generating commercial innovations and the success of our
research institutions in generating fundamental scientific
breakthroughs. This RFI seeks to draw on that same American ingenuity,
expertise, and insight to improve those governmental activities that
nurture the innovation potential of our nation.
The following questions should be seen as a framework for providing
comments on the specific policies outlined in the Administration's
Strategy for American Innovation. Commenters should not feel
constrained by them. We are not only interested in feedback on existing
pro-innovation initiatives, but also seek guidance on how these
initiatives might be adjusted for the coming years. And, we seek
recommendations for related, new initiatives. Commenters should not
hesitate to offer new ideas, including new strategic priorities, for
achieving the longer-run goals of accelerating economic growth and
competitiveness. The following list is intended to assist in the
formulation of comments but not to restrict the issues that might be
addressed.
(1) Government research and development: How can the economic
impacts of basic research funding (e.g., NSF, NIH) be better measured
and evaluated? What methods can the Federal Government use to
prioritize funding areas of basic research, both within an area of
science and across areas of science? How can existing Federal
government institutions (not just organizations, but also programs,
policies, and laws) devoted to basic research and innovation be
improved? Are there new institutions of these types that are needed to
achieve national innovation goals? How could the government increase
support for industry-led, pre-competitive R&D?
(2) Entrepreneurship: Through what measures can government policy
better facilitate the creation and success of innovative new
businesses? What obstacles limit entrepreneurship in America, and which
of these obstacles can be reduced through public policy? What are the
most important policy, legal, and regulatory steps that the federal
government could take to expand access to capital for high-growth
businesses?
(3) Intellectual Property: What are the key elements of any legal
reform effort that would ensure that our intellectual property system
provides timely, high-quality property rights and creates the best
incentives for commercial innovation? How can the intellectual property
system better serve the dual goals of creating incentives for knowledge
creation while also ensuring that knowledge is widely diffused and
adopted and moves to its best economic and societal uses?
(4) Education: How important is catalyzing greater interest and
training in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)
fields? What strategies can be most effective on this score? Can
educational technologies be better utilized to this end? What are the
critical opportunities and limitations to the creation and adoption of
effective education technologies? How can investments in community
colleges better leverage public-partnerships to better train Americans
for the jobs of today and tomorrow?
(5) Incentives to innovate: How could the government better use
incentives (including but not limited to procurement, Advanced Market
Commitments, incentive prizes, and aggregation of demand) to promote
innovation? Are there other economically-sound incentives that the
government should provide?
(6) Manufacturing: What is the role of advanced manufacturing in
driving American economic growth and international competitiveness, and
what are the key obstacles to success at
[[Page 6397]]
advanced manufacturing? In which manufacturing industries will our
nation have comparative advantages?
(7) Exports: How could the government better assist small and
medium-sized domestic firms sell their products abroad? What policies
can be pursued that would help all U.S. businesses increase their
exports?
(8) Implications of changes in the innovative process: In recent
years, some experts have noted that the innovation process itself is
changing, and that approaches such as user-driven innovation, open
innovation, design thinking, combinatorial innovation, modularity, and
multi-disciplinary innovation are growing in importance. What are the
policy implications of these and other changes in the innovation
process? Should policy makers be thinking differently about our
approach to industrial organization and competition policy in light of
these changes?
(9) Innovation in the services sector: What sectors of the economy
have gained less from innovation in the past and--to the extent that
innovation could have sustained competitiveness--what are the obstacles
to their progress? What are the policy issues that are raised by the
nature of innovation in the service sector?
(10) Enhancing the exchange of ideas: How can public policy better
promote the exchange of ideas among market participants--that is,
support ``markets for technology''--that enhance the social value of
innovations? Similarly, how can the government assist in the diffusion
of best practices? Given that ideas and knowledge cannot be traded as
readily as are physical goods, what is the government's role in
supporting more effective markets?
We recognize that since the initial launch of the Innovation
Strategy in 2009, DOC and other parts of the Administration have
released other Requests for Information on innovation-related topics.
For instance, DOC's Office of Innovation & Entrepreneurship (https://www.eda.gov/OIE) has collaborated with the NEC and the Office of
Science and Technology Policy on, among other things, an RFI focused on
improving the commercialization of university-driven basic research.
See https://www.eda.gov/PDF/WH%20RFI%20Announcement.pdf. Many of these
inquiries are still in-process. Commenters on this RFI are welcome to
submit materials generated for those other matters in order to build
the record for our January 2012 report to Congress. Additional reports,
articles, and analyses are also welcome, although we strongly urge that
they be submitted electronically and that commenters identify in their
cover letters how those other materials relate to this inquiry.
Issued in Washington, DC on February 1, 2011.
John Connor,
Office of the Secretary of Commerce.
[FR Doc. 2011-2558 Filed 2-3-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-EA-P