The Innovation Commons: The Nanotechnology Innovation Network, Phoenix, AZ

Resource System
Innovation
Resource Units
Nanotechnology
Location
Phoenix Arizona, USA

 The nanotechnology innovation network of Metropolitan Phoenix ranks among the top thirty across US cities focused on nanotechnology development. The present case examines the structure of the innovation network, consisting of approximately 400 diverse organizations, between 2011 and 2012. The commons dilemma revolves around managing future risks and benefits from nanotechnology development; the resource is a heterogenous mix of natural and human-made infrastructures.

Metropolitan Phoenix, 2011-2013
Resource System

Nanotechnology, a heterogenous mix of natural infrastructure, soft-human infrastructure, and human-made infrastructure.
Nanotechnology applications include, personalized medicine, renewable energy solutions, semi-conductors and electronics, automobile enhancements, aerospace and defense, and water filtration.

Resource Users

The Metropolitan Phoenix nanotechnology innovation network involves approximately 400 organizations. In total, some nine actor groups are represented in Phoenix, including government funders and regulators, academia, businesses, insurance firms, the media, and non-governmental organizations. Key participants in the Metropolitan Phoenix nanotechnology innovation network include academia, industry, and government representatives.

Public Infrastructure Providers

Federal government PIPs include agencies responsible for funding (Department of Defense, National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health), and regulation (Environmental Protection Agency, Occupational Health and Safety Administration, Food and Drug Administration).
State of Arizona regulation and City of Phoenix jurisdiction also provision nanotechnology development in Metropolitan Phoenix.
Private infrastructure providers include resource-user-organized, voluntary initiatives and funding ventures.

Public Infrastructure

Research funding (public, or private); tax credits.
Laboratory Space.
Information and communication, satellite, and transportation infrastructures.

Relationship 1

Distinct phases of the innovation process: discovery of technology, recognition of applications, proof of concept, demonstration of scalability, commercialization, iteration, disposal/reuse. Although described linearly, the process is non-linear and dynamic, with outputs of one phase becoming inputs of another phase, and differing arrangements of participants across phases.

Relationship 2

Private property rights and rules governing technology transfer.
City-level zoning affects the physical location of research facilities.

Relationship 3

State of Arizona EO 2011-05 curtailing state rule making to promote job creation and retention severely limits state authority to regulate nanotechnology development.

Relationship 4

Federally funded research for the study of nanotechnology research, itself, examines research products and patent applications. This link helps act as a "sensor" of the resource.

Relationship 5

Clean air and water act, safe drinking water act, toxic substance control act, and other federal conservation measures.

Relationship 6

Research grants; small business innovation research grants, small business technology transfer programs.

Exogenous Drivers 7 (Resource System)

Technological breakthroughs; disruptive technologies.

Exogenous Drivers 7 (Public Infrastructure)
(none specified)
Exogenous Drivers 8 (Resource Users)

Metropolitan Phoenix policies to recruit and retain high-tech companies.

Exogenous Drivers 8 (Public Infrastructure Providers)

Uncertainty over federal nanotechnology regulatory efforts.

Human Infrastructure, Private and Human-Made (Resource Users)
(none specified)
Human Infrastructure, Private and Human-Made (Public Infrastructure Providers)
(none specified)

Bernstein M,  Arizona State University. 

Brady U,  Arizona State University.