The Broader Front: Innovation and Security

by Victor Hwang, larta COO

Since September 11, issues of domestic policy have mostly taken a backseat to those that appear to be related to security and defense. A quick scan of the headlines of the major newspapers in the country, on any given recent day, is easy evidence of that. America, it seems, is suffering from a mood swing of a dangerous sort. The danger of thinking in a simplified way about security issues is that so much of what goes on in areas that are seemingly not related to the security of our homeland bear greatly on our ability to act (and project power, if necessary) in furtherance of our security. There is more to security than guns and gadgets.

Today, larta premieres its 2002 Technology Innovation Index, our annual survey of the strengths and weaknesses of Southern California’s technology economy. Why this? Why now? The Tech Index is as relevant today as ever: our ability to secure our homeland is highly dependent on the technological tools that are available to us. LA VOX has described over the past several weeks many cutting-edge technologies that have already or that are likely to assist in this effort: from software solutions that managed emergency response at the World Trade Center, to bomb-sniffing technologies to be used by the FAA, to facial recognition tools for passenger screening, to electronic encryption methods. Many of these technologies have been assisted by larta over the years; only now are they coming of age. The Tech Index points out that Southern California’s research and development base remains incredibly strong, churning out innovation at a healthy pace: the region received nearly $1.4 billion in research and development funds, over 4,700 utility patents, $215 million in SBIR and STTR awards for commercialization by small businesses, and 46% of all FDA Pre-Market Notifications for biomedical devices. The size of the industry remains enormous--372,746 technology employees--a number comparable to that of the Bay Area and New York Metro.

The Tech Index, however, also points out that profound weaknesses loom. It is here that domestic concerns inevitably relate to those of our broader security. As much as technologies themselves are relevant today, the weaknesses of the technology economy should be at least equally so. Notably, primary and secondary education in Southern California is a glaring weakness in a region with a relatively strong system of higher education and an otherwise powerful technology industry. The region's SAT scores averaged about 50 points lower than the Bay Area's and about 25-30 points lower than the state of Massachusett's. The region's Stanford 9 test scores consistently were below those of the Bay Area, in all subjects, in all grade groups. Our research also examined the question of whether spending to bridge the “digital divide” (the gap between rich and poor students, for instance, in getting access to computers) is having any effect. Our data show that such investments, which have taken up great fiscal resources and great amounts of public attention, have yet to show any clear impact on overall student performance. For instance, Santa Barbara and Riverside Counties, the counties that showed the largest increases in student computer and Internet access, were the only two counties in the region to show decreases in SAT scores over the past three years (although such decreases were small). Honest and even jarring assessments about education, which bear greatly on our future technology economy and therefore our security, are missing these days. Post September 11, critical domestic issues are the roadkill on the highway of myopia and indeed paranoia. It should not be so.

In maintaining the security of our homeland, we can only prevail if we remain one-up with our technological tools. Sustaining our technological advantage is only possible, however, by sustaining the reasons that have made it possible in the first place: strong educational systems that continue to serve as a fountain of innovation. Half a century ago, the start of the Cold War spurred investments in America in science and technology; this new war, at its heart, should be no different. There will not be a “space race,” or indeed any sort of catchy way of focusing our attention. (Was it really about space anyways, or was the "space race" a convenient crucible for discussing broader security issues?) There will, however, be a profound need for a steady and patient focus on shoring up our strengths and overcoming our weaknesses to maintain the power of our technology industry. In this way, at least, a war economy can and must be built upon the strong back of the technology economy.