Federal and state government roles in science and technology

Economic Development Quarterly

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 283-295

  Feller, Irwin ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031531641     PISSN: 08912424     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/089124249701100401     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. Bohlander, R. A. (1994). Analysis of dual use technology development/technology transfer at the Georgia Tech Manufacturing Research Center (Final technical report prepared for the U.S. Army Missile Command). Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology.
2. Brace, P., & Mucciaroni, G. (1990). The American states and the shifting locus of positive economic intervention. Policy Studies Review, 10, 151-173.
3. Brown, C., Hamilton, J., & Medoff, J. (1990). Employers large and small. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4. Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government. (1992). Science, technology, and the states in America's third century. Washington, DC: Author.
5. Carter, J. (1979). Science and technology message to Congress, reporting on the U.S. government's international activities. Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, 15, 528-546.
6. Coburn, C. M. (Ed.), & Berglund, D. (with R. Dunbar, M. Filner, D. Brown, & M. Skinner). (1995). Partnerships: A compendium of state and federal cooperative technology programs. Columbus, OH: Battelle Memorial Institute.
7. Cohen, L., & Noll, R. (1991). The technology pork barrel. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
8. Cohen, W., Florida, R., & Goe, R. (1994). University industry research centers in the United States. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University Press.
9. Council of State Governments. (1972). Power to the states. Lexington, MA: Author.
10. Eisinger, P. (1988) The rise of the entrepreneurial state. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
11. Eisinger, P. (1995) State economic development in the 1990s. Economic Development Quarterly, 9, 146-158.
12. Feller, I. (1990). An assessment of the Intergovernmental Science and Technology System and its state government component (Report to the National Science Foundation, Grant RII-8506018). University Park: Institute for Policy Research and Evaluation, Pennsylvania State University.
13. Feller, I. (1992). American state governments as models for national science policy. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 11, 288-309.
14. Feller, I., & Anderson, G. (1994). A benefit-cost approach to the evaluation of state technology development programs. Economic Development Quarterly, 8, 127-140.
15. Feller, I., & Roessner, D. ( 1995). What does industry expect from university partnerships? Issues in Science and Technology, 12, 80-84.
16. Fosler, S. (Ed.). (1988). The new economic role of American states. New York: Oxford University Press.
17. Gibbons, J. (1995, January 26). Remarks to the state-federal S&T partnership symposium. Unpublished remarks, Washington, D.C.
18. Gibson, D., & Smilor, R. (1991). The role of the research university in creating and sustaining the U.S. technopolis. In A. Brett, D. Gibson, & R. Smilor (Eds.), University spin-off companies (pp. 31-70). Savage, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
19. Gold, S. (Ed.). (1995). The fiscal crisis of the states. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
20. Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, 18 U.S.C. 922(q)(1)(A).
21. Hetzner, W., Gidley, T., & Gray, D. (1989). Cooperative research and rising expectations. Technology in Society, 11, 335-345.
22. Jones, G. (1991). State science and technology initiatives in a time of fiscal crisis. In M. Meredith, S. Nelson, & A. Teich (Eds.), Science and technology policy yearbook-1991 (pp. 225-231). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
23. Kleinman, D. (1995). Politics on the endless frontier. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
24. Lambright, W. H., & Teich, A. (1989). Science, technology, and state economic development. Policy Studies Journal, 18, 135-147.
25. Lepkowski, W. (1995, February 6). States acquiring stronger role in science and technology policy. Chemical and Engineering News, p. 17ff.
26. Malecki, E. (1991). Technology and economic development. Essex, UK: Longman.
27. Muchmore, L. (Ed.). (1982). Gubernatorial policy making through science advice. Washington, DC: National Governors' Association.
28. National Academy of Sciences. (1995). Allocating federal funds for science and technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
29. National Science and Technology Policy Organization and Priorities Act, Pub. L. No. 94-282 (1976).
30. Nixon, R. M. (1972). Science and technology message to the Congress, reporting on the U.S. government's international activities. Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, 10, 89-99.
31. Peterson, P. (1995). The price of federalism. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
32. Price, D. (1965). The scientific estate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33. Rivlin, A. (1995). Reviving the American dream. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
34. Roush, W. (1995, December 15). Tech funding: If U.S. bows out, states may come up short. Science, 270, 1749.
35. Schmandt, J. (1990). Regional roles in the governance of the scientific estate. In J. Schmandt & R. Wilson (Eds.), Growth policy in the age of high technology (pp. 14-38). Winchester, MA: Unwin Hyman.
36. Shapira, P. (1990). Modern times: Learning from state initiatives in industrial extension and technology transfer. Economic Development Quarterly, 4, 186-202.
37. Shapira, P., Youtie, J., & Roessner, J. D. (1993). Review of literature related to the evaluation of industrial modernization programs. (Paper prepared for the Workshop on Evaluation of Industrial Modernization Programs: Developing Best Practice). Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology.
38. Smith, B. (1990). American science policy since World War II. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
39. State-Federal Technology Partnership Task Force. (1995, September 5). Final report. Washington, DC: Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government; National Governors' Association; American Society of Mechanical Engineers; the White House Office of Science and Technology; and the National Conference of State Legislatures (in collaboration).
40. Storpor, M. (1995). Regional technology coalitions: An essential dimension of national technology policy. Research Policy, 24, 895-911.
41. Tassey, G. (1991). The functions of technology infrastructure in a competitive economy. Research Policy, 20, 345-361.
42. Teich, A. (1995). An introduction to R&D in the federal budget. In Research & development, FY 1996 (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] Report No. 20). Washington, DC: AAAS.
43. Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. (1991). Review of the Advanced Research Program and Advanced Technology Program. Austin, TX: Author.
44. Ulen, T. (1995). The economic cycles of federalism (Working Paper No. 45). Chicago: University of Illinois, Institute of Government and Public Affairs.
45. U.S. General Accounting Office. (1988). Engineering Research Centers, NSF program management and industrial sponsorship (GAO/RCED-88-177). Washington, DC: Author.
46. U.S. v. Lopez, U.S. 93-1260 (1995).