Policy Panel- NAE Grand Challenges Summit Day 1 (video 3)

Policy Panel- NAE Grand Challenges Summit Day 1 (video 3)

you start drowning when your judgments on the fridge I'll be the phonograph that plays your favorite albums back as you like drifting laughter see I'll be the platform shoes and do our enemies done to you have to strain so empty Toby when to code what is it straight to the throat I want to take you my mystery he will kill I didn't Oh in this brand new please welcome back to the stage our moderator Miles O'Brien thank you very much crowd is thinning a little bit uh-oh let's talk a little bit about policy I am convinced when historians oh wait a minute we need to do the commercial first I forgot about the commercial let's not forget that welcome back the Grand Challenges summit student design competition I've told you a little bit about it and I'm going to clear up my mic cord too let's enjoy the commercials were two are the ideas were to come up with improving the well-being in the developing world the winners of previous competitions have been invited to present their winning projects in commercial style and we've seen two of them let's without further ado roll commercial number three we're working on commercializing a product that will transform lowdown race into high-value electricity many places the United States are affected by high cost of electricity I've listed in the developing world don't have you prefer in order to generate electricity our solution is to attach a bioreactor that feeds on readily available wastes to a hydrogen fuel cell wherever there are people there are usually waste streams these wastes can take the form of agricultural wastes paper wastes are even household wastes and sewage the challenge is how to turn these waste streams into a ready available supply of electricity really order clear publicist to created us simple robust device and prove that were standing in the laboratory Chris by creating a simple system that takes my team that's explore ability of bacteria that can digest when I acids my guess that those organic acids and for this hydrogen which is stored separately in the hatchlings and that automatically that goes to a fuel cell in order to produce electricity this entire system has many advantages the first of which mean that we don't have any hi beautiful how did it is consumed s produced by the school that means that there is no explosion hazard high pressure systems involved like with more traditional hi production and transport that same system that allows our we're on the scale music climbs obtaining obtained from our various sources such as dr. heat or aj CIT our government grants allowance to julissa and transform this laboratory prototype into a commercial prototype when we can hand over to our customers in both United States and NGOs and other organizations that are serving the development world our next major bio sam will be the system to degree recluse approximately to all the 25 Watts continuously you have power a small or a a series of LEDs and this in itself could have large positive ones read it do other tasks after by their system will be able to contribute to the consistently growing demand for energy and electricity and the world as those countries move it's very respectful of the gospel our system is a compelling approach for low costs sustainable energy all right that's number three you can let you know the winner happy at the end of the summit I policy time that's our policy panel is about to come on when historians write about our error I'm era I'm convinced i'll spend a lot of time talking about some of the failings of our political leaders frankly to forge compromises that bring solutions to the big problems we face and that are embodied in the Grand Challenges whether it's the stunning deficit national debt or inability to grapple with a healthcare crisis or climate change it seems to be a little appetite these days to do the hard things because they are hard as JFK famously challenged us about 50 years ago so is this a crisis of leadership or is it simply democracy in action and the American people are content to dig in and their respective sides and watch the country self-destruct I actually don't think it's the latter we just need to hold our leaders accountable and educate them how do we make them understand that these grand challenges are not just pie in the sky musings from some bright engineers that they are essential to our future the Grand Challenges by definition are grand and to accomplish them in many cases requires a political class that collectively thinks big and is able to enact the policies that will make these big ideas become a reality it means looking beyond the petty local short-term and political politically expedient things which seem to be at the center of our political debate these days so how we going to fix that well I think we're going to start with this panel it's my pleasure to introduce the policy keynote speaker the Chancellor of the University of California at Davis dr. Linda Katehi thank you good afternoon I would like to cover a number of issues in relation to policies and how those impact our ability to address and solve grand challenges and so I will just briefly speak about how grand challenge is motivate progress talk about national initiatives that have been created in the past in in the need because of the need to solve grand challenges I will speak about how failed solutions led to failing economies and I will end my presentation by focusing on higher education and I would like to call that the 15th grand talents if I may I hope that you see yes you see the numbers are the colors well but I wanted to say that we all know that social and technological progress has been driven by efforts to address major challenges that is historically correct and we have seen it in many different times in the US history of course in the history of many other countries I also wanted to say when we look at our country and specifically we focus at the time right after the Second World War you will see that there were a number of initiatives that were put in place specifically to address needs that we had as a nation and so the National Institute of Health was created at the time to promote health and improve quality of life also the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or NASA was created at the same time to be able to give us for us to help us a distance space and so the space program was created with NASA and we all have seen the impact of these two organizations over time and the impact of their programs in institutionalizing research in health and space and I would say as a matter of fact that these two organizations and their programs in many ways created the identity of today's research universe since the Second World War the US developed a number of policies to steer our nation's research Enterprise in different directions and I would say we have seen a number of initiatives that were created very successfully in response to needs and i would say in response to a need to solve a grand challenge so the program the man on the moon was created in the late 50s early 60s by President Kennedy specifically to give us an opportunity to address the space issue space problem the humble telescope was a program developed much later and of course the human genome and we all know that these national projects and priorities provided not just research funding but also directions into the science community and help the community in many ways to develop many exciting intellectual directions and many new ideas as a matter of fact for from almost 60 years well now we look at these successful initiatives that were driven by a grand challenge then we can more or less create an idea of what happened that made those initiatives successful and in what way the federal government was able to lead and help us succeed and so what you will identify is that first of all these initiatives were created because there was a national strategy developed so that there is of course in strategy for those then there were federal policies that were introduced as a result of these national strategies there was research funding that became available as a result of the strategy in the policies and at the end there were established national standards I would say the substantial progress has happened historically speaking when all of these factors the strategies the policies the funding and the standards were available however when we look at many other initiatives that have not succeeded equally well you will find out that some of these characteristics were not available so for example we're looking at their two specific areas i would say two specific economic markets that we lost as a country the silicon chip manufacturing and display technologies and there were very good reasons for a not for us losing these markets to other countries in fact there are many other examples that somebody could really identify in the last six years but you will find out that really the reasons that these initiatives or were not successful and the reasons we were not able to address the related challenges is because either we did not have all got slow in developing a strategy it was because we got entangled in political Wars and we were not able to establish policies or because we could not agree on standards and because of that we lost our opportunity to lead so the National Academy of Engineering recently a few years ago was able to articulate 14 very interesting challenges and we've talked about a number of them in this last two days and we spoke in the last panel about innovation and how really that can drive the solution of some of the greatest problems what I would like to do is to look at these challenges and I will take two examples and I will try now from a different angle to look at those and point to some issues that we have identified in relation to how we are proceeding today in terms of solving those challenges so I will group into one and i will call one challenge the energy climate change sustainability problem among the 14 you will find challenges that correspond to one of these three or some of those three and then I will introduce another problem the which I call educating the science and engineering workforce and I will call that a challenge and I will speak about that as well so when it comes to energy climate and sustainability we just need to remember what has happened historically in the u.s. in the 70s we had the first oil crisis and it was then when we came to realize that energy was an area of national security also at the time and because of that Christ is the science community rallied allow around for the first time on the new concept of renewables and that was in the 70s and also the science and engineering community got together an immersed in these three areas and they were able to propose propose de Vala proposed a variety of solutions however in the 80s the political climate was not really a supportive of continuing with those ideas as a matter of fact in the 80s we really compromised our ability to coalesce our efforts around pacific solutions to the problem we failed in creating a national strategy in energy and we failed in introducing policies which would sustain the strategy in the eighties however we decided to propose to adopt a massive deregulation of the energy industry so then in the 90s we see that what deregulation did specifically to the state of California with a california energy crisis and also the events related to an run and and that also led to an second energy crisis in two thousand we the oil and gas pray is going totally out of control so despite the fact that the crisis in the seventies led to many other events that reminded us constantly the dependence on foreign oil was not only bad for our economy but also for our national security and yet as a nation we were not able to adopt a national strategy in addition to the lack of strategy also the lack of policies made it very difficult for the states to advance any solutions to the energy problem to climate change problem or sustainability and of course today we need to recognize that funds have become available specifically recently with the Obama government there was the stimulus funds provided to the Department of Energy I was in fact an action they was taken because it was recognized that energy is a major challenge there needs to be addressed however funding without a strategy does not necessarily help us solve the problem funding to the ended to the to the science community specifically to solve the energy problem may help the science community create knowledge in this area but may not necessarily help us solve the national energy problem I would like now to go to the second example and I will call that the 15th grand challenge and that has to do with our ability to educate the science and engineering workforce for the future that was not included explicitly as a one of the 14 grand challenges but it was mentioned very extensively by viene a report raising above the Gathering Storm so let's look at higher education as their 15th challenge and I would like to use this as an example for the rest of the time I available today and I would like to try to help us see exactly how this how higher education today at the time when we think that we have the best higher education in the world is a grand challenge for us i will look at higher education i will look at the past and i will look specifically at least past here in the state of california and i hope that that will really help us understand what is happening in other states and around the world during the time during the 60s our parents our parents generation was dreaming the higher education was in the future for the children and it was about that time that california legislature adopted the master plan for higher education this master plan now is 50 years old and created a excellent coordination between three groups of institutions of higher education the community colleges the California state universities and the University of California campuses however today it is becoming clear that this master plan is at risk and there is no another plan to replace it so I would like to speak about higher education at present so in the University of California system and that really applies to many other public universities in the US we see a very specific trend and that is that state funding has been going down for many years just to give you some numbers in the University of California system state funding has fallen to fifty percent of what it was 20 years ago and went down by twenty percent this past year what is happening to public institutions in the state of California is not unique to the state of California is happening in other states as well and it really indicates that has been a fundamental change in the way we view higher education today our generation how our generation views higher education for our children there seems to be a drift in our social values and also a reduction of public support towards public services in addition that is also a did chat distrust of government in California we have failed to recognize the critical connection between higher education and the economy and how critical it is for the state to have a talented and competitive workforce for the economy to continue to thrive we have failed to recognize that unless we support higher education this workforce will not exist and unless we make sure that the quality of the education is very high this workforce may exist in numbers but not in quality as we all know research universities are doing the majority of research today and of course we train students to become professionals engineers doctors teachers and we create the individuals who will innovate we create those who will solve the problems of today those problems that have been articulated as the 14 grand challenges by the National Academy we also know that the workforce today must be more technologically literate and adaptable and in fact I would also say that we know the public has to be more technologically littered for us to make decisions that benefit our country so in a knowledge-based economy access to higher education is very critical and it is access for every American not just for those who can ford it so instead of funding public institutions or research universities not necessarily about now public's but those institutions that do meet the National need we have seen that in the last 25 years the federal and state governments have not supported institutions the way they used to and so there is a mismatch between state priorities and the National needs and this mismatch can be a disaster for the nation in its makin so while we have seen funding recently coming to universities i would say that what we have not seen really is a strategy about higher education the same thing that happened with energy so as we are looking at higher education and we are asking about its future i would say it is critical to really ask a very fundamental question to whom will the doors of the research university in the 21st century be open are we going to provide access to excellence for every American and how are we going to create the environment that will grow and sustain a success successfully the economy so with that I would like to conclude just by just saying that the future of our nation is dependent on our ability to solve the grand challenges and of course that requires that we do a lot of things to be able to allow those solutions to materialize we need to develop strategies for many of those Grand Challenges energy for example climate change and sustainability and I would add higher education is one of them and of course we should recognize the today even if we are living through very difficult economic times it is absolutely critical that we invest forward and we invest in those institutions that will allow provide us with the tools and the people we need to be able to solve the grand challenges so with that I would like to conclude my presentation and then now introduce the rest of the panel and first we have Amy al being the chief technical officer at the science applications international corporation saic Bill Allen president and CEO of the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation Donna Goldman director of the learner d Shepherd Center for Health Policy and economics at USC and Daniel snore chairman of the California fair political practices and director of the jcm a neuro Institute of Politics at USC thank you good afternoon I'm delighted to be here today and I was asked to say a little bit about the role of the federal government in helping stepped up step up to the grand challenges and I'll talk about that from the perspective of somebody who spent a number of years in the government at the on the DRD side as well as somebody who used to be an academic and somebody who is now in industry so I have a number of different perspectives and I'm happy to address the topic but I want to put it in perspective itself this afternoon we heard from Peter about the role of the human spirit in addressing these challenges and I agree with him fundamentally and ultimately the solutions to these problems will come from people from their energy their passion their creativity and so forth and so we also heard from Jeff and Paul who spoke about the role of industry whether the defense industry or the the entertainment industry and they have a role to play as well so I'll speak a little bit about the role of the federal government but it's not the be-all and end-all everybody has something to offer here and actually I'm going to address three categories that Linda raised the role of funding the role and policy the role of standards and then I'll put another challenge out on the table since Linda did that herself in terms of funding and I mean I think when people look to the federal government the first thing they look for is money and that's appropriate in some cases and it's not appropriate in other cases so as I walk through my examples I'll point to different challenges where what I'm talking about is especially relevant so when it comes to funding I think the role of the federal government is most clear and most easy to understand when we're talking about things at the basic research end of the spectrum so for example a challenge that says we need to reverse engineer the brain is a pretty basic research problem and though ultimately you can imagine lots of practical applications for that it might take a while to get there and so that would be an area where you would expect that the federal government may play a role in helping fund when you look at engineering the basic tools of scientific discovery I think of atom smashing machines and so forth again something that's not going to come out of industry when we start to talk about applied solutions it becomes harder to understand the role of the federal government when I was in the government I was in the defense arena and there the government actually does invest in pay for the development of the solutions and systems that the Defense Department in the military need that makes sense because we're not trying to create a viable economy around military weapon systems that are sold unconstrained to all all around the world when we're talking about making solutions economically viable there's actually a pretty tricky line between what it's appropriate for our taxpayers to pay a four and what it's appropriate for industry to pay for and so that's an important divide to keep in mind and places like the Department of Energy face that challenge every day as they try to make the right decision on where their investment should go and where their investment should stop so in funding and basic research there's a lot of role for the federal government as things get more and more applied it gets more tricky in the area of policies I'm going to pick up in part on Linda's 15th challenge if I have the count right around young stem workers or workers in science technology engineering and math companies like mine who hire a lot of scientists and engineers are stepping up all across the country to help address that shortfall of students who are getting science and engineering degrees the federal government is doing the same state and local governments are doing the same and that's very important but there's an additional role for the federal government in things like policies that happen later in the pipeline later in the life cycle of education what do I mean by that as a federal contractor we're very interested in bringing in new employees who are straight out of school with the freshest skills experience etc or the freshest skills and knowledge in the most cutting-edge technologies but as a federal contractor we can only put people to work within the constraints and rules of our customer the government and sometimes our customer is not as open to hiring people without experience because they want to get the benefit of all the experience although the long-term real-world practical history in there in the people that they hire that they possibly can and so sometimes the federal government would rather hire experienced people not people fresh out of school and so there might be a role for the federal government in helping think through how does it not only get the experienced people that it needs whether directly as government and or as contractors and at the same time also keep a pipeline of new talent coming in at the younger end because it's only if we have a demand in the hiring market that we're going to be able to convince kids to go into science and engineering and so as a policy matter we need to think through all parts of the problem and that's an important aspect that the federal government can help with Linda also talked about standards and standards are especially important in things like securing cyberspace cyber is a tricky problem because the interconnectivity that's driving the power behind the cyber or the internet revolution is now turning into a vulnerability that very connectivity was its strength and is its strength it's driven new markets innovation etc but that connectivity brings vulnerabilities with it and frankly the internet wasn't really developed developed to worry about how do you stop people from doing things that they shouldn't be doing the internet was developed to ensure connectivity and so now many decades later we're going back and realizing that connectivity is both a strength and vulnerability how do we deal with that vulnerability well we don't have standards and and policies about how we should think about that we don't have clear standards on what cyber protection businesses are expected to have if they're going to operate in a connected world we don't have clear standards for credit card clearing clearing houses for example which is a very high-profile cyber vulnerability that was exposed a couple of years ago we don't have clear standards on just how secure should your banking system be and so on and so forth so there's a role for the federal government to help in clarifying those standards and expectations especially around things like cyber and you can also think a little bit farther in the cyber arena there's there can be a fuzzy distinction but queen what's appropriate to do to protect yourself and where are you reaching too far and doing things across into a gray area so the the government has a definite role to play there in helping clarify expectations and setting standards one of the things that's tightly coupled to the topic of cyber is privacy and I'm going to take that topic a little bit farther as I used my last two minutes to lay out my own new challenge when you look at the grand challenge of advanced health informatics you can immediately start to think about questions about privacy and in fact I would say that in the health arena privacy thinking is probably the most advanced compared to any other arena that we're thinking about but but I think to really address the privacy challenge we need to step back one step and think about what does identity mean in the 21st century what do I mean by that well if you go back to say 1970 your identity was determined by in the physical world by your driver's license if you had a driver's license with your name and your picture on it people said okay that's who you are and in the electronic world which was much less advanced at the time your identity de facto became your social security number your social security number was never designed to be your entire electronic identity but it's been the only thing that we've had to date and yet as you think about it your electronic identity is getting at least as important as your physical identity all of the data records about you that are created at any point in time we know are living somewhere and they're only a google search away from somebody else finding them so what does your identity mean and who owns your identity and how do you define privacy on top of that I think is a completely or not sufficiently addressed concern so as you start to think about putting your images out on Facebook or your friend puts a photo of you out on Facebook a photo that you might not really like the whole universe see who owns that information about you is it part of your identity that you control it's a part of your friends identity that they control and what are the implications of that photo when you go off to try to get a job we know not always you don't always want those photos out there so I think one of the great unaddressed challenges in the 21st century is what does identity mean in an electronic age and that's definitely an area where the National Academy the federal government academics industry etc have a role to play and with that I will turn it over to Bill thank you Amy and good afternoon everyone it's a pleasure not only to be here with you but also to add my welcome to those of you who are visiting Los Angeles and the campus of the university of southern california USC is both my alma mater a major private employer in our region and also one of the most engaged and effective contributors to the economic vitality of our region and I was asked to speak today about the opportunity that the Grand Challenges present to regional economic development and to an organization like the one that I work with the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation I thought I'd start by just telling you a couple of things about the Los Angeles area economy first of all as many of you may know this is the creative capital of America not just the entertainment capital but beyond motion pictures and television there's furniture and fashion and music and video games and auto design employing substantially more people in the creative industries in this county than anywhere else in this country because of the creative abilities in this region we've begun over the years to manufacture more and more things beyond television shows and films military and commercial aircraft furniture toys fashion an extraordinary array of products panavision cameras Medtronic infusion pumps American Apparel's entire line of fashion projects products manufactured in this region and we are truly the manufacturing capital when you manufacture the many goods and you are in a global economy generations ago people with foresight developed a port and airport structure allowed this region to today also become the international trade capital of America the number one customs district in this nation the number one port of entry for water board and cargo coming into this nation literally the home of the first and second largest ports in North America that handled more than forty percent of all the waterborne cargo coming into this country together this has helped position Los Angeles County as the 19th largest economy in the world today in 2009 a 500 billion dollar GDP larger than that of Sweden Switzerland or Saudi Arabia it is also the most diverse economy in America some research done right here at USC a few years ago identified 17 well developed thriving clusters of economic activity in the Los Angeles area more than any other region in the u.s. this is an economy that has been built on the great engineering achievements of the 20th century it took electrification and water supply and redistribution of water in this state and air conditioning frankly to make this desert area livable and attractive to people to come from around the world the highway network the interstate highway system allowed us to connect our manufacturing and trade ports of entry with the rest of the states in this Union and then developments and airplanes and automobiles and entertainment technology aerospace technology info technology helped develop the industry clusters that today employ more than 4 million people in Los Angeles County some of the things that were created in this area we like to say born in Los Angeles you will recognize many of these as major developments in the military or the automotive or the information or the entertainment or other sectors and if you notice at the bottom of the right-hand column the modern t-shirt was invented for us see back in 1932 the grand challenges presented by the National Academy of Engineering now present new economic opportunities for a region like ours and regions across this country and across the world our innovation sector will rise to the challenge of addressing these opportunities our research universities our aerospace and defense technology companies are engineering and design terms our emerging clean technology sector just to name a few make up our innovation sector of our economy in this region we have a fairly simple economic model in the LA County area it starts with innovation it starts with ideas concepts that are generated in some of the world's leading R&D facilities and research universities located right here in LA County that are then turned into prototypes and eventually products that are also manufactured here and exported to world markets from our nation leading port complex and from one of America's leading origin and destination airports Los Angeles International Airport so we have a strong foundation of innovation on which to build in addressing the great grand challenges of the 21st century and engineering and also the economic opportunities that they present as economic developers interested in realizing economic advantage from pursuing solutions to these challenges we look at building on the foundation that we have as I mentioned world-class research universities that together graduate more PhDs than any other county in the United States of America and generate innovations from these top universities which are then commercialized leading to the formation of new companies new jobs new economic opportunity in the region our research institutions collectively receive billions of dollars each year to support their work on their main campuses as well as satellite facilities research hospitals and other facilities including the Jet Propulsion Laboratory operated by Caltech we're also a global leader in high technology innovation in the private sector with an extraordinary group of innovators such as seen on this slide and many of whom are participating in this summit this week so we do have a strong foundation on which to build but what do we need to do to support our innovative ecosystem we started a process a little more than a year ago that was unprecedented in the history of our County was a process designed to develop consensus amongst not just business and government leaders but education leaders labor leaders environmental leaders and representatives of other community-based nonprofit organizations throughout this region of ten and a half million people to develop a consensus plan for economic development for Los Angeles County the process included research inputs for more than five thousand businesses many of whom participated in focus we're their principal managers and owners identified the key challenges and obstacles for their growth we serve a best practices around the world of competitive economic regions and identified a group of ideas that we then took to 26 public workshops that more than a thousand and eighty stakeholder organizations on our region sent representatives to and they gave us feedback to create this first-ever consensus plan and the plan has five basic aspirational goal areas the first is education and workforce development ensuring that we have a highly-skilled workforce that all of our young people graduate and are proficient in their education at the 28 k through 12 level that our businesses have a sufficient supply of the skilled workers engineers technicians that they need to compete in a 21st century economy that our region is both business friendly and innovation friendly that we have created an environment that helps us attract and retain jobs businesses investment that we're leveraging our research and development facilities in the region and providing the necessary infrastructure support to encourage and facilitate the commercialization of the intellectual activities going on in those research facilities making our communities as desirable as possible places to live so as to attract and retain the creative class the innovation talent pool from all across the world using our land more wisely ensuring that we're allocating research sites commercialization sites so that as ideas grow out of these magnificent research institutions they have a place on which they can grow into new companies and new opportunities for the people who live in our region also addressing our infrastructure challenges around energy systems water systems transportation systems communication systems and others to ensure we have a foundational infrastructure that can support a 21st century innovation economy this was adopted unanimously not only by our County Board of Supervisors in December of this past year but has now been adopted by 84 of the 88 cities across Los Angeles County who are all operating from the basic principles in this plan today which is unprecedented in the history of this region we have implementation teams across the county that are now drilling deeper in developing strategies and they've talked a lot about strategies to enhance the innovation sector activities some of these include obviously increasing federal research investment in these great facilities here but also employing policies and strategies that facilitate the successful commercialization of that research to create jobs and wealth economic activity tax revenues for the people of this region a series of ideas have been identified to facilitate access to grants particularly for early-stage companies increasing the budget of the federal Small Business Innovation research program a model government program for bridging the venture funding gap developing a more hands-on programmatic approach to encourage potential entrepreneurs and mentor new ventures so they can reach a point where they can access private capital sources and maybe even including government pools of matching funds with equity ownership for the government to fund early-stage companies with seed capital in education and workforce development we need to bridge our structural skills gap and also ensure that we have a base of scientists and engineers on which to build this innovative future we must not only increase STEM education but the preparation of our stem teachers we must increase the use of technology throughout our education system prepare our students not only for college but for careers and entrepreneurial opportunities emphasize problem-based learning approaches in our K through 12 schools so that we can stimulate the creative skills of our young people encourage lifelong learning and skills training as our industries and technologies adapt so the people remain competitive productive members of our workforce throughout their lifetimes and as was mentioned on a previous panel reforming our immigration policies so that we can attract and retain our brightest international students including providing more work permits for foreign science and engineering graduates of our US universities so that our economy can capitalize on their extraordinary talents and so that we can get a return on the investment that we've made and then by educating them in our US universities we do need as we said to foster and more business-friendly and innovation friendly climate improve our quality of life along all the traditional measures of safety and mobility and health and cultural environment opportunities so that again we attract and retain the best and brightest this world has to offer in the business-friendly area you know it's important to streamline the regulatory process that often impede the growth of start-up and small and even mature businesses we're actually encouraging the conduct of economic impact policies that and analyses that help the government understand the impact of its policies regulations ordinances and laws especially those that affect capital formation R&D investment and the health of our small business is the backbone of our national economy finally we want to ensure that we're supporting policies that support creativity and ideas sharing innovation requires a policy tax and regulatory environment that support risk-taking including tax policies that are more supportive of innovation and entrepreneurship expansion and enforcement of intellectual property rights while also balancing the need to allow for intellectual property collaboration subsidizing and incentivizing firms in targeted technology areas perhaps related to Grand Challenges a more support to jump the commercialization gap and subsidies for top foreign researchers and global companies to move their laboratories to incite their R&D centers in the United States we're convinced in this LA county regional economy that in the global economy of today the places that attract and retain talent will win and those who don't will lose quoting Richard Florida from his series of books on the creative class finally if you want to follow the work that we're doing and contribute to it there's an open social media platform that is encouraging people not only from our region but from around the world to participate in the development of this new strategic plan you can do so at the website that's on the slide here LA County strategic plan com and we look forward to engaging not only in a dialogue with all of you today but in the weeks and years to come as we pursue the solutions to the grand challenges that we believe also present prevent and present a roadmap to economic recovery not only for our region but for our nation thanks very much thank you for those of you who are optimistic about the role of innovation in public policy i'm here to talk to you about healthcare so with that in mind I'm going to start by pointing out the cause of all the hand-wringing that we see and what this chart shows is the share of national income that goes to healthcare and you can see that in nineteen sixty we were spending about six percent of our gdp on healthcare and now we're spending sixteen percent or actually it's closer to eighteen percent today and the issue here though is if I had put up how much we're spending on smartphones it would look exactly the same so what is the source of the hand-wringing and actually part of the reason I think is that people believe that we have a private healthcare system but in fact this year is the first year that most more than fifty percent of healthcare is going to be financed by the government and so what we really have is a quasi private healthcare system and there are a lot of public subsidies and that raises a lot of important issues about how we transfer the transfers that we make in society but one of the issues you may see a lot as people say well what are we getting for our money and that's an important question and actually what you see here is the mortality rate drawn for people aged 40 to 75 and this is what it looked like in 1974 and of course because this is the mortality rate the goal is to get the curve down and so it turns out that this is what it looked like in 84 94 and 2004 so you can see that we're making progress what it means for instance is that the mortality rate of a 65 year old today looks something like that another way to say this is that 65 is the new 59 and so we may feel happy about this and that we're spending but of course the other thing to keep in mind is when we talk about healthcare healthcare is not the only thing that's contributing to health in fact if you look over the last century and you ask what has contributed to the great dramatic increases in long it's things like clean water clean air and other public health interventions and so we have to keep in mind that the the high cost of health care has may not be doing as much as we think and it may be driving people out of the market and of course we know that there's a problem with the uninsured we've solved that now so I won't belabor that point but I want to talk about a little bit about what's driving the increase in health care and then i'll come back to technology and the first point which may seem obvious to a lot of people is that health care spending rises with age but i should point out that in some countries that's actually not true because the argument is that when you want to make investments when we make investments in education for example we make those when people are young so that they have a lifetime to accumulate the returns so it's not clear that a society would want to have a curve that shows health care spending rising late in life and where this really manifests of course is when we start to talk about end of life but then you link that with the fact that we have more elderly people in the United States and it's clear that aging is contributing to health care spending second issue i want to point out is that what you see here is gdp per capita for several developed countries and I've irate it so that GDP is on the horizontal axis so how rich a country is and you can see that their healthcare spending rises and there's actually a remarkable linear correspondence between how much a country pays how much how wealthy a country is and how much they spend on healthcare and if you think about it it makes sense so as a country as we get wealthier as a society it turns out that the value of say and extra flat-screen TV or a third car that tends to diminish but the value of health and living longer actually goes up and so you can see I'm an economist as you can tell and as we think about the trade-offs between those you can understand why is a wealthier society we may just want to spend more on how care and then finally one of the interesting phenomenon in the United States is that the share that people pay out of pocket for health care that is how much they pay at the point of service used to be about fifty percent so one out of every two dollars they would they would pay at the time of service and over time we've actually increased the share that's insured if you will and just like when we have a sale on Apple's people use more when we have insurance we know that people use more as well now some people might say well how is it that out-of-pocket spending is rising so much if the share is going the share paid is going down and the answer is that first graph that is that we're just spending a lot more on health care and of course we pay for health care one way or the other we pay it in premiums or we pay it out of pocket so we shouldn't delude ourselves that out-of-pocket spending is what's going on so if you kind of put these things together what you find is that about ten to fifteen percent of the increase in total medical spending comes through aging about ten to twenty percent is coming from Inc income and part of it is coming from insurance and then there's an issue of prices and I think it's important to talk about prices because this is actually a place where public policy is completely gotten it wrong that is to say when you're thinking about buying your smartphone you go to the store you look at that smartphone and you say I know how much I need this how valuable it is and how much I'm willing to spend for it but when you go in for health care the price you're paying is for the visit to the doctor how much your time you're spending in the hospital the things that are being done to you but that's not the good you really want what you really want is health and so really what we're looking for is the price of health and it's actually strange to me at least that you go into the hospital and if they screw up and you die they still get paid I mean in most consumer products you would say well we're not going to pay you if you screw up but in health care for some reason we do and there's no reason actually why we shouldn't have a policy that reimburses for outcomes rather than inputs so what that leaves is a large bucket and that large bucket that's driving healthcare we tend to call technology so what I've put up here is a picture of a left ventricular assist device so this is a device it's for patients who have severe heart failure and are not candidates for a heart transplant and there's a lot of technology there an external battery power pack of prosthetic ventricle and such and there was a study done a few years ago that was published in the New England Journal of Medicine which is the preeminent medical journal and what it showed is that people who got this LVAD lived longer were significantly longer than people who got traditional medical therapy now what you can see I don't want you to understand these curves but it turns out that the fact of the matter is everyone in this study died after two and a half years and the reason why is because it's just a they were very sick and there were better performance for the LVAD though and this cost five hundred thousand dollars by the way so this device came before Medicare which covers most of the elderly in this country virtually all and Medicare had to make a decision about whether they should cover the LVAD but Medicare is not allowed to take costs into account and here was this study that was published in the New England Journal that was showing remarkable significant effects and what's interesting is Medicare decided to cover these but there's an ethicist on the Medicare coverage Commission who couldn't bring himself to vote in favor and for the obvious reason that we need to think about whether we want to spend five hundred thousand dollars to save a life let me give you some more examples anti-aging compounds for those of you who are familiar with the hypothesis of caloric restriction they'll feed rats they'll feed mice resveratrol which is the substance in red wine and if they give it to the obese mice they live as long as nor wet wet normal weight mice oh and by the way for those of you who are going to go drink red wine they gave them the equivalent of eight hundred bottles a day so you better get started now but the point is that we're on the cusp of finding solutions here that what we think are solutions that will unlock the key to aging and but it turns out that i'm going to skip through all this keep skipping through all this it turns out that if you think we have a problem with costs trying to advance here's what the Medicare would population would look like by 2030 here's how much the prevalence of heart disease and health care spending would be seventy percent higher than what we've projecting so if you think we have a problem now think about the technological risk that we have there now a lot of people have heard us right on this issue and they've said you're anti technology and the reality is we're not because it turns out society will be better off if we had such a compound of course we would we be but getting a really good deal on health care but it raises tremendous tensions in the social fabric so should medicare cover in an anti-aging compound is that a lifestyle drug suppose they come up with a drug for mild cognitive impairment should that be covered by Medicare and so these Ray's enormously complicated issues that I'm not going to solve in my print my talk I just want to conclude by saying one thing it's a little mundane but it turns out that prevention may be the one exception to that that is to say if we could prevent disease that is do things about obesity smoking etc we might actually have a chance to do something about health care the problem is it's not quite as sexy to think about public health interventions as it is to think about a surgical solution so in summary like Times out so I'm going to summarize quickly I'll just say that the key to containing costs and promoting value is really about technology and how do we ration technology and when I say rash and I don't mean it in the pejorative way that the political discourse has used it but rather to say when we ration smartphones we use prices but the problem is we don't have the right price signals in health care so maybe this key here is thinking about how we can use technology to get value by getting at what the how we can really improve health thank you first of all I'd like to thank all of you for having me here today not only to participate I think what you would all agree is a tremendously important if not critical conversation but selfishly speaking I'm very grateful for another reason as well because although you'll see on the board up there I am currently in temporarily in Sacramento is the chairman of the state's Fair Political Practices Commission I'm on leave from teaching here at USC and until I return to the classroom in three months two weeks in four days I don't get the campus nearly as often as I would like to you so I'm very very grateful for you allowing me to have an excuse to come back and come back and visit in met classes I teach classes in politics and in communications and in leadership I share on the first day of class quotes with my students a quote from former president lyndon baines johnson and the quote is the following that the second most important thing in any conversation is what i want now there are two problems without quote number one of course it's not true the most important thing in any conversation is what I want but what Johnson identified and I think what smart people in all fields of endeavor have come to realize over the years is that if you can identify what is the greatest priority for the person or people to whom you're talking it is much more likely that they will give you what you want the second problem with that quote I should admit to you is that Lyndon Johnson never said it I made it up myself but what I found is my students are more likely to write something down when they're taking notes if they think it came from a former president thin if it just came from their instructor so I'll let you guys in on that secret regardless though whether President Johnson or just me was the one who said it the principle still holds and I think the value in this panels discussion is well my other panelists have talked I think very very effectively about how to transform ideas and innovation into policy what I want to talk about for just a few minutes is how to translate that policy into reality and I guess there are three general thoughts I'd like to share with you in this area recognizing the audience that we would now face taking the idea the innovation that has become policy and taking it to an audience of policy makers of elected officials of candidates and of their advisors so there's three basic points that I would like to make number one most important is show them show your audience show the political policy making audience why your idea solves their problem and I want to be very very specific about this because one of the mistakes we tend to make in our arena is we assume number one that they already know that number two we assume that the problem that we're trying to solve is the problem that they're trying to solve as well and for better or worse than I do not mean this in the pejorative either but in a political policymaking context their problem often if not always has a lot more to do with the next election then it has to do with the broader super policy of the broader policy and technology challenge that you have identified I think one of the greatest examples we've seen in recent political history of an innovation becoming not just policy but quickly moving toward reality is in the area of green technology but I think what the leaders of this community have done very appropriately and very intelligently is rather than selling the broader societal benefits of advances in this area they have also sold very specific very tangible political benefits as well if you are a candidate if you are an officeholder what do you care about most you care most about what your vote is care about and what are those voters care most about now they care about jobs they care about economic growth and here in California in the debate over ab32 the climate change legislation that Senator Pavley passed in governor schwarzenegger signed and spurring the opposition to proposition 23 currently this November's ballot is the idea that green technology creates jobs now is that the only thing it does of course not is it the most important thing it does debatable but the second most important thing in any conversation was that I want and if I'm talking to an office holder or a candidate or a pullout policymaker in their universe recognizing that their voters are concentrating first and foremost and job creation and economic growth that is the element to this message that i sell second thing second thought out offer you is bring an interpreter bring someone who can take your idea who can take our idea and innovation and explain it to a policymaker to a candid to an office holders by who is by their very nature a generalist many years ago in the mid-late 1990s I helped start a group in silicon valley called technology network as a group of high tech CEOs that decided that they wanted to engage more forcefully and more regularly with policymakers in Washington and Sacramento and the first thing they learned is that they have spoken entirely different not only did they speak an entirely different language than the policy-making audience they were trying to reach but they really didn't know how to surmount that language gap and what helped do it what did what helped build a bridge between Silicon Valley in Washington and Sacramento was an effort at interpreting their technological innovation into policy progress that a lawmaker or a legislature could understand help the policymakers understand brief them show them what you do teach them why what you do is important and then work with them and let them translate that into a policy or political imperative that can help them achieve their objectives third and I think this is an area of particular import I would suggest to you that an innovation based community by necessity tends to be very very specifically focused in your own area and like I said that's understandable if you're devoting your life or your life's work to a particular area then that's obviously going to be of I marry import to you and by sheer necessity you're going to block out or at least you prioritize other necessities in the community and what I would suggest to you is just as important is showing the policy-making audience that I've been talking about why your idea solves their problem just as important is trying to understand why their problem their challenge needs your help and will ultimately help you achieve your challenge as well and i'll offer you one policy area that a couple of the other panels have already talked about that area being education more specifically k through 12 education we agree and bill spoke about this and i don't think anyone in the audience would argue that we need to vote more time and attention to training the next generation of engineers through a greater emphasis on math and science thick-billed pointed out nobody in this audience would disagree we need to reach out more aggressively to the best and brightest students in other countries and as plenty of smart men and women have said literally stapling a green card to their diploma when they graduate from college or from or from a graduate program but what i would suggest is in addition to that as a necessary precursor to those types of education reforms which are a particular interest to our community it's important for us to engage in the broader education reform debate engage in the discussion about teacher training and recruitment engage in the discussion about more classroom hours whether it's a longer school day a longer school week or along the school year engage in the discussion about how to develop and implement the more relevant in a more rigorous curriculum for K through 12 students again understand why their problem the policy-making community of your city or state or country needs your help and if you are able to help them solve their problems they are much more likely to engage the time and effort to understand why the innovations that you're bringing to them are necessary policy remedies to the problems that they're facing no community no community even one is brilliant as this one is an island and ironically in at age of in an age of technological innovation the most valuable tool that we can use to move from innovation to the reality is old fashioned bridge building thank you very much all right thank you very much all of our panelists we're gonna do something a little different for this one and bring the house lights up just a little bit and we have four people milling around with microphones and in addition to tweets we're going to do it's kind of old old-fashioned but its actual fully duplexed real-time conversation they call it so it should work should we'll try it see how the technology works let's begin with the tweet however while if anybody has questions if you find your way to the is too there are people in the hall in the aisles I think in all the aisles so just if you could stand next to them so i know you have question will recognize you all right so here's the big question it's kind of the elephant in the room so to speak if funding for research is declining how can policy change provide incentive for successful completion of the Grand Challenges there's the rub you talked about a fifty percent cut back in education that's just one example of how government is stressed and unable to to pay the bills how does have the Grand Challenges get paid for so there are a number of proposals out there there is of course this discussion is happening as we speak at the national level so there are a number of ideas that have been submitted on how the federal government specifically to take on responsibility for the national universities and primarily for the students and the faculty and for those individuals who will eventually become the innovators for tomorrow but there are ideas for example to uh provide funds for faculty and students to who are in graduate school to do results and those well the federal government historically in the US has provided research funding but this is very specific to contracts we have not had programs other than the limited national fellowships that the national science foundation or ni a sahrin providing we have not had a program like the GI bill for example where our da an American stood in a u.s. Student Code get funds to go to graduate school canada for example just developed very recently a major program that provides funding for glad you students and four faculty for postdocs as well and they do that so they can really create the these work force that will participate in innovation in a very very busy ball and in very critical way so there are a number of proposals out there but i would say the most critical thing before we start talking about money the most important thing will be a plan for higher education we do not have a plan for higher education in the US we are probably one of the very few countries in the world without a plan for higher education and and we need to have that before we start talking about how to support the various goals of the plan anybody else want to talk about that that notion i was like i guess i'd offer just one additional thought is when you talk about higher education to a broader not just a political audience but to a broader community audience you're really talking about two things number one you're talking about access to higher education the democratization of higher education in second and i think this is where your question was leading you're talking about outcomes you're talking about the elite who can come up with those ideas those innovations that we've been talking about for most of the day and i think as long as those conversations take place on separate and parallel tracks higher education access is always going to be a higher priority for a policymaking audience then the kind of research and innovation we've been discussing i think the key is to find a way to link them together because ultimately when a member of Congress is trying to decide where to send the money making college accessible to an individual or family or community to who to whom it is not previously been accessible is always a much more immediate a political payoff than the sort of longer-term thing that Linda is discussing well here's the real rub though how do you satisfy those expedient political designers with the overarching goals that are the focus of what we're all about here for these two days how can you make the politicians happy and still have them buy into something that frankly is well beyond the two or four or six year election cycle any thoughts on that one well we know we can write you know health care for example I was talking about prevention the budget window at most in Washington is ten years so if I wanted to invest in kids today to prevent disease and prevent it greater earnings and such down the road there's no politician it'll even show up on their budget sheets so I mean unless you want to pass a constitutional amendment that says you need to show a return on your investments over the long term there's really not much hope I think you agree with that at that grim note well the process we took here in the LA area was to try and develop some consensus around what priorities were because we have choices we have to make with limited resources and historically in the LA area we spoke from a lot of different positions business would have one position labor would have another position environmental community at another by coming together in a process where we articulated education and investment as the number one priority investment education is number one priority it helps allow our local officials some confidence that the community is speaking with one voice we're talking about prioritizing education prioritizing a more business-friendly posture enabling private sector job creation and it's the first time that our cities have come together to change the way they do business and a number of them who have been criticized as being less than business friendly or less than focused on innovation are now doing some extraordinary things so part of it was creating a consensus so there's no political risk for the elected official they didn't have to worry about making one group happy at the expense of another group would have political risk for the next election quick question for you to one of the tweeters was curious what you're doing here in la do you think it's scalable national level I do and we've been asked actually is it scalable even at the state level you know we have heard some criticism from some corners about whether we have a dysfunctional state government here in California and Brett many of our state legislators have reached out and contacted us and we've been up to visit more than 30 of them to talk about the process we went through creating this first-ever consensus plan LA County is as big as you know all but eight states there 42 states with smaller population in LA County has and it's a very diverse place and if we could bring all those people together with some consensus our state leaders are now looking to whether we can replicate that process question for the audience watch this yell there you go that works real well yes I've been dying to ask a question since the beginning of the day first panel so remaining panelists out there field I think your mic is working out and I hold it up yeah well great okay didn't we do a lot of you talks a lot about how education and research really play into this and now we're talking about policy and how those who are involved in the research need to learn the language and you know be able to translate so that those who are making decisions have something to do but mrs. alving talked about this a little bit what about those of us who have been educated or have had the opportunity to do research what should we do I know there's a bunch of seniors right here from Duke who have all been part of our Grand Challenge Scholars Program and a lot of us want to go out and work we want to do something other than sitting in our lab which we love but how else can we be an influence what else can we do do we have to go into policy can we go into industry when there's a lot of limitations on who's willing to hire those innovative creative thinkers when there's a need for experience so just some insight for these students here and the students watching um what should we do from those of you who are there and know what's happening and can kind of offer that insight hey me do you want to try that sure I'll start I think there's an opportunity to get engaged no matter where you're starting from and you know you're speaking or I'm speaking as somebody who shifted around I was I was an academic before I spent a year as a White House Fellow working in policy areas and then I went to government and then I went to industry so I believe in mobility I believe that what you're doing today is laying the groundwork for what you're going to do in the future whether it's in your work life or in other areas and so I think there's opportunities for instance in getting engaged at the grassroots level getting engaged politically getting engaged with whatever institution you're with whether it's an academic community or industry I'll just say briefly that in my company word as I mentioned a lot of companies are looking at the K through 12 stem shortfall and in my company a large part of our focus is in getting our employees 45,000 strong engaged in their communities helping at the grassroots level address the stem problem so there's opportunities at all levels whether it's locally or nationally and so I think the best solution is to to find whatever works for your particular situation your interest your stage of work etc but I think all of the examples that you mentioned are viable and it's a question of picking which one is most interesting and most accessible to you right now with an eye towards what you might want to do in the future if you had to pick and that was the most exciting innovative sector for people or studying engineering well what would it be the most exciting sector you know I have a hard time picking when I was in an undergraduate trying to pick an area for graduate school I'd face that challenge and and I didn't know I picked a reverse engineering because it was so broad I figured I could answer that question later and many years later I don't have an answer you know I think in the 90s it there's a lot of interest in biology because of the human genome and that's still although we've made a lot of progress there's still a lot of opportunity there in bioinformatics kind of a hot field these days is in cyber and cyber security because that's such an untapped field but but I'd say follow your passion I mean those are examples but all of the 14 or 15 or 16 grand challenges are certainly very fruitful areas well I'm sorry up and say you know it's young people from Duke and North Carolina North Carolina State who were part of transformative entire state economy from low-wage low-skill tobacco apparel furniture economy into a high-wage high-skill high value state economy around the research part connected by those three universities that now are world leaders in info technology and biotechnology and nanotechnology and clean technology so I think you can follow the path many of your fellow classmates had that turned an entire state economy around and you're welcome to come help do that here in California as well and I would say two things one is our aerospace employers in LA County companies like Northrop which has 20,000 jobs here in Boeing which has 12 to 15,000 jobs here in the county they're currently in the depths of this terrible recession with unemployment rates being what they are they each have hundreds of jobs open right now for engineers technicians scientists in those companies good wage good career path jobs and the clean tech sector as enormous opportunity California because of legislation such as was mentioned like a b32 where those of us in the economic development community in the state are trying to prove that we can reach these ambitious environmental goals we can reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by eighty percent below their 1990 levels by 2050 and at the same time grow a clean sector economy that will show both economic and environmental benefits associated with that ambitious bill if we are successful at that with your help with bright young engineering minds who can help us create these solutions that will meet these environmental and create the new products and services that we can bring to scale in this region because it's an enormous economy California's eighth biggest economy in the world then we believe we can get other states and other nations to follow us and pursue a path of both economic and environmental improvement Daniel there's a terrific passage in Barack Obama's autobiography Dreams from My Father and unlike the LBJ story this one actually really did happen um where young Barack Obama is a community organizer in Chicago shortly after the death of his mentor the late mayor Harold Washington and he and the people in his community are rallying on behalf of a particular candidate to replace the mere Washington and there at the city council meeting where the next mayor is going to be chosen and before the meeting starts young Barack Obama and his followers come into the meeting and cheering and they're rallying and just before the meeting starts the head of the chicago city council gentleman by the name of Fast Eddie ver Doleac comes out from a closed door arm and arm with Harold Washington's chief deputy and what young Barack Obama realizes is the decision was already made and that if he Barack Obama wanted to make a difference he had to get behind those doors he'd to get inside those gates I'm not suggesting public service as an alternative to the types of things that bill and Amy have been talking about but I think for most of you you're not about to make career choices for the next 40 or 50 years you're going to make a choice for a year or two or three or five before you go on your next thing and I guess what I would suggest that somewhere along the way a few years inside the gates in public service is the place where you can really make a dent in the universe if you look at someone like Stephen shoe or Arne Duncan as extraordinary accomplishments as they have provided in the rest of their careers by going inside the gates of policymaking even temporarily they got an audience that the rest of us can even dream of so take on every single of these grand challenges but some will on the way a year or two or three for public service is something you will never forget and you'll never regret another question for the audience um the demand for students to come out of undergrad having experience is increasingly high but there are only very few mandatory co-op or internship programs engineering programs in the nation where's the demand from the industry to say we need more kids with experience graduating already with a year or two as a foundation is laid so that you don't have to spend that time training them nearly as much you know as we as we do currently where's that demand from the industry to say that we need more engineering programs that have mandatory programs out there we have that experience that research that year and a half in industry and we already come in walking through the door with an abundance of knowledge that we wouldn't get in the classroom I tell you it's a central part of our strategic plan in employers early in the development of curriculum and the development of programs that realize those objectives and a number of industries and individual employers were involved in this process that said they want to get involved with the schools they want to get involved with the college's they want internships fellowships job shadowing programs they want exactly that so they can be sure that they have a well trained graduate coming into their company and succeeding immediately don't want to pick up a no go ahead I would like to speak about that too in fact most engineering schools will have those types of opportunities available to their students many years back there were many more schools that would make them a requirement for a graduation and of course things have changed the economy has forced companies to reduce those positions for students but I think they do want to have an opportunity to participate in the development of the curricula so there are more opportunities provided to the students throughout the four years and also during the summers and so forth so you don't necessarily find a very well structure anymore the way it used to be program where the students will go for six months or a year to work for a company but there are many opportunities to get connected companies like to come to the campuses and and find ways to participating and getting to know the students and then helping them with the senior projects and so forth so so there are opportunities but i would agree many maybe they're way too many opportunities nowadays and not necessarily just in learning more about engineering but also learning about the government and so I would suggest as I do with our students to go out and learn about all of these try to find what the opportunities are and then get the ones that really are best for you and for your own interest but there are many opportunities out there alright question the back there yes sir I grew up in in Belgium and I became an engineer because I watched the space program and I became very excited started studying engineering wanted to know more and more phoenicia PhD came to the United States worked for NASA started my own and now I'm employing 18 people doing new innovative product and I'm selling them but I also teach a bit in United States and I don't see the excitement I don't see the students being excited and a former director of the National Science Foundation sit one time the E and engineering should stand for excitement and I don't see that and the question is how will you use those grand challenges to get the students excited get these five percent up to ten or fifteen percent and really do what the space program did once before and it gets just too amplifying that is there any policy role in giving that excitement to the Grand Challenges I mean for that matter if you think you know built bill is talking about what's going on here in LA and for the end and the Research Triangle for example two great examples of things that are working but we live in a federalist nation and and it's very difficult to plan anything in this nation nationwide even building roads is all about pork barrel politics so and what what the Grand Challenges amount to her about a dozen Manhattan projects or so and which requires tremendous amount of coordination absent the kind of urgency and excitement that that we had during the space race so how do we get how did it hurt all these cats I spent the first 20 years of my career in the entertainment industry because in high school I had a teacher who was so passionate about the entertainment industry was so passionate about filmmaking he got me excited and we made horrible little high school films but it was part of developing an ability to speak in pictures as well as words that led to a career that was half with the CBS television network and half running Mary Tyler Moore's company when we made Hill Street Blues and st. elsewhere and Remington Steele so to me it's all about great teachers and when we emphasize one of our recommendations is not only increasing STEM education but increasing the preparation of teachers to be great stem teachers there's a film at right now called waiting for superman that I think buddy in this audience needs to see that talks about the challenges we are facing in American public education and the impact it's going to have on our competitiveness as a nation and Bill Gates says in the film America's position in the global economy 20 years from now and America's equity how equitable this nation will be are being determined right now in our schools and if we can't get better teachers more excited teachers and support them so that they can light a fire of excitement in our young people particularly around science engineering and math skills we're going to have a very hard time retaining our position as a real leader in innovation globally so I think it starts with getting teachers better prepared and better supported and better treated so that they can come to school every day to light a fire among students and get them passionate about these opportunities but then again teachers are hired locally not federally right so getting the education system to change on a dime is is next to impossible is doing its been next to impossible but I think something is changing I think the people who are seeing this film and the conversations that are going on when Oprah Winfrey devotes two shows in one week to this film and Time magazine devotes a cover story and NBC News devotes an entire week to covering it and the president is having a major session on Monday about it there's a change going on I think where this country is recognizing the status quo will return a blind eye to the failings of a school system where you probably know the numbers better not it something like twenty four percent of our kids are proficient in math we know that in fourth grade our kids math scores are better than the International averages by eighth grade they're below the International averages by twelfth grade they're among the lowest in the world something is very broken in our basic education system and I think people are recognizing it's time to fix it so it when you start thinking about what policy measures need to be taken to begin down that road of achieving the 14 grand challenges where do we begin well I think there are many things that need to be done in parallel but I would like to say it sometimes you need policies and some other times you need standards and when it comes to education for example providing opportunities for teachers and and helping the k to 12 system specifically with stomach education what we really need our standards that are meaningful we have standards but they do not necessarily help the teachers teach the students and excite them about the topic so in this particular case I would say we need to work for national standards not state standards that every state has its own and a set of requirements in other areas you need policies when it comes to providing support to not just the undergraduate school and undergraduates with her of course absolutely critical in that support but also graduate students and faculty because these are the ones who participate in research then some policies will help there but again in that case you don't want have too many policies without a strategy is a problem and standards without policies and without strategies are even worse so I think we need to what I would like to see us doing especially in the area of educational innovation if you like in higher education specifically he is to start with the plan for the country we are probably the only country the developed country without a plan for higher education so this goes to a tweet and what I said this morning talking about Sputnik can the Grand Challenges be our generation Sputnik moment or do we need some some sort of rallying event in order to make these things become reality Tom Friedman says he's using China as our nation Sputnik he's trying to fire up a competitive spirit I don't know if it's resonating do you think is it it is with some of us who read his writing and visit China think about I make a couple of visits a year to China to bring companies and investment back here to Los Angeles vehicle technology companies electric battery technology companies here and when I look at their five-year plan which their five-year plan for their national strategy you know nearly double I think it raised the percent of their gdp focused on R&D from one-point-three percent to two percent and you look at the way they're building entire cities focused on research and development of new technologies they create SolarCity's they create electric vehicle cities they create aerospace cities I mean that you see them their growth rate ten percent a year average over the last 30 years our position is the world's leading economy is by no means assured and we were threatened in our position as a technology leader by Sputnik it fired up the competitive spirit of this country and we did great things with it if more people recognize how extraordinarily focused and successful China is as an emerging economy maybe that's our Sputnik and maybe the Grand Challenges race between who's going to solve the Grand Challenges is it going to be American ingenuity they're going to be Chinese ingenuity we service that competitive life it helps you can do a lot of those things very quickly when you don't have one less messy democracies to consider yes so could I say that we have a number of opportunities to create a challenge like this but Nick we have climate change for example we have the energy problem and I cannot see it in his panic became such an important program because it was an issue of national security at that point in time and we have similar issues of great importance right now that we can use to rally the public around but we need the appropriate leaders to do that right but we don't want the Cold War to come back now but fear is a good motivator isn't it I go ahead question from the audience I guess I've you can call me a cynic I've seen enough of talks that but it's the implementation that really matters I mean I think mr. Charles vest talked about how they said five years ago they came up with this rising above the Gathering Storm and everything has actually gone downhill since then and now we're revisiting it again so I just want to know like what are we going to do differently now that needs to push this you know forward what we talked about here and everything and it's a great idea at all but we got to put into action before you actually see any results coming from it a young cynic in the audience listen anybody it's why we went through the process we did on our strategic plan was to bring stakeholders together and say we want you to help write this plan but you also have to be willing to help implement the plan because lots of people have come up with ideas to help improve a regional economy before but this time we tried to get stakeholders to be implementation champions and say what are you going to do to improve our schools what are you going to do to you know improve the infrastructure facilities in our region and at least in relationship to the planning process we went through people are actually implementing in a variety of different areas the infrastructure improvements that have been held up at our ports and airports for many many many years are now rapidly underway and creating jobs and infrastructure that will support our connection to a global economy there are other interventions going on in our schools the question was raised earlier about getting students involved with businesses and schools one of the worst performing schools in LA was a school called banning high school down in the port area the harbor area it didn't have a forty percent dropout rate as is sort of the average in our region it had a forty percent graduation rate sixty percent of the kids coming into that high school did not graduate and one of our board members started something called the International trade education programs five theme-based academies built around international trade where employers came in whether they were involved in port security port logistics movement hospitality associate with the cruise ship industries and they started making the kids education relevant to these career so kids understood why they were studying math why they were studying science why they were studying English why they were studying different disciplines and what the career path would lead to and those kids have now improved their graduation rate from forty percent to eighty percent in a very short amount of time because the standards are higher there are more resources being brought in to help so we're doing a number of things to implement but not enough how do we bring it all to scale is a very you know legitimate challenge to raise question from back then so this is a bit of a contrarian question there's a nostalgia for crisis we we had Sputnik and we got frightened and therefore we somehow did something good and then and if we don't have a crisis we're not able to respond that's a very dangerous paradigm to try to continue to repeat and I the other contrarian view would be the following we we led a tremendous revolution in the late 80s and early 90s there was no crisis to my knowledge in fact we were reducing crises Berlin Wall fell Cold War ended things are actually getting fairly good at that point the revolution was just driven by Moore's law and the ability to innovate on top of chips when the two revolutions were the mobile revolution and the internet revolution and it's probably one of the few times in our history when we've had to technological revolutions hit simultaneously so we had an extraordinary run in the 90s and the companies that are the new gray companies in America companies like Google and Yahoo and others plus the rebirth of Apple our companies built on that legacy we say we have such a terrible difficulty in our schools and I know that the schools always need to be improved they were needed to be improved when I was a kid but somehow we have managed through all of that to lead those most recent revolutions and we still lead the biotech revolution so we should be concerned to always make improvements but i'm wondering if we aren't over emphasizing the need for a crisis to need for something so terrible that it rocks us into action when in fact we've been able time there's been a revolution to take advantage of to do so now we should be worried that we might miss the next one no doubt about it but there was no crisis that that drove our capturing the last revolution which occurred in the late eighties in early nine and for which we are still the leaders internationally so how would you fact that those set of considerations into the conversation you've been having yeah I suppose the the Cold War II the two great motivators I can think of right here that undergird that question the Cold War it was fear and the digital revolution to clump that all together it was greed fear and greed right so if we don't have a crisis we can't get people scared how can we make them realize that there is economic opportunity money to be made in executing these challenges and maybe that's one way to make it happen more easily and make it more politically palatable well I mean they're two points here one is that when you think about the Sputnik example you're talking about government leading the way and doing things but when you talk about the digital revolution talk about Silicon Valley it's not about government it's about a market and an industry driven view and there's a need in society and people are innovating and so I think you asked the question came up earlier for instance where are the challenges I think health care presents enormous opportunity because for 50 years innovation in healthcare just meant do something better not engineer something that's more efficient because we had a third party that was paying for everything which is insurance but now we're on the cusp of something where we're going to actually want to save money and so the government can actually get out of the way and say you know so for instance if you can come to us and demonstrate that you have something that's cheaper and works just as well we'll give it expedited review at the FDA for example that creates enormous opportunities for people to innovate the key thing in that all that though is as you try to introduce the notion of a free market in healthcare you have to introduce the notion that you you're paying a certain amount for what you get and we've we've taken the price out of the picture as you pointed out that's not an easy thing to change but it's about to come back because now now that its twenty percent GDP people are worried about costs and we've priced people out of the market so plus the technology is there we just didn't know a lot about what works we have the information technology revolution in health care is is really like the Wild West people are making that analogy explicitly they're going to spend about 20 billion dollars on in that area well there's a grand challenge that might be solved huh all right we're down to 13 good I would like to address love it because I think we are mixing two separate things what I heard from the question is that they have a gentleman with and rightly so questions the need of a crisis for us to be able to bring the kids to a in school to make them interested in stem and then we talk about this in comparison to the digital revolution and and what happened in the 90s for example in the u.s. I I believe that these are two separate issues in the first in the first one when you try to bring kids to school and have them graduate then when you try to make kids in the u.s. interested in in math and science and engineering then you need to appeal to the public to the broad as public as opposed to the digital revolution that really is happening because there is a lot of innovation going on there is an understanding of the need and there are a lot of smart people coming together in an ecosystem that allowed that innovation to happen effectively and then you have that you need to do both I think what is happening is because the public does not see the importance of math and science and engineering were depleting our base from people from the US who are really interested in math and science and then you go to graduate school and people are coming from other countries like I did so you have many more who are coming from other places where they have been more successful other countries they have been a lot more successful in attracting kids to math and science and of course we have been successful in that regard but the whole population that the public needs to be educated accordingly we need a public that is literate in science and so in that regard we need to excite the public and is it health care maybe it is health in general it could be is it energy everybody distance the needs in energy is not about creating a crisis but at least bringing forward they need to address that challenge and of course then having the right environment and the ecosystems I never believe the federal government should create those ecosystems for innovation but I think we need the whole thing question I'm here could I just ensure that part of the the issue is when the next crisis comes are we prepared to respond and I think that's part of what's driving this dynamic as you look at the statistics as you look at our base etc when do we become so thin or so fragile that we're not able to respond the way we have in the past and that's an unanswerable question until the next crisis hits or the next revolution never happens because we weren't prepared to take advantage of it Americans like to take action with their backs against the wall don't they yeah right go ahead hi my name is Rick hi Malik I'm a 12th grade student at Brava high school and I just wanted to offer my perspective as somebody who's gone through the K through 12 system in California during the presentations I noticed a lot of the panelists mentioned increasing STEM education and as someone previously said increasing students excitement and fire in fields like technology and engineering and there's actually a program at my school called engineering for health academy that's the reason I'm here today observing you guys and I think that a possible solution to that just my humble opinion would be not increasing the number of math and science call or increasing the school day but making our education more concentrated and more focused on like engineering and technology so rather than having students take a bunch of math and science classes and not really understanding their future applications and where they can go with that and how that could possibly turn into a job it's better to do something like the model that we have in our high school it's a three-year program where we take the courses that of course required to graduate but they're more focused on engineering so for example we take a chemistry course but in the chemistry course we visit USC lamps and you know we go out and see industry so I think a possible solution to like increasing STEM education would be to focus the K through 12 education more on like applying the classes to how they how they can be used in like job there's an exact amount of that going on in our region Northrop Grumman is funding an innovation lab at the da Vinci charter schools over in the south bay area where they have multi-year programs in the middle and high schools and they've brought in advanced technology and young engineers not that long out of college themselves to work with these middle and high school students and show them how to apply what they're learning to careers in aerospace and there are high tech high magnet schools and theme based academies throughout the unified school district in LA in other areas of California so there's a fair amount of that going on and we need more of it Dana and that was very well spoken the only cautionary point I would make is that if you want to play in the NFL at some point you got to go into the weight room and what we're doing in K through 12 in some ways is putting people into the weight room and teaching them the basic skills and you know if it has to substitute away from some of that basic science we're going to have problems all right we're kind of over here but I just want to end it with if I could quickly with your thoughts on how we can best communicate the the challenges and the need to accomplish them to our political leadership what just if you have any thoughts or ideas in that we'll just go down the line go ahead I personally think that even if I someone said that the rising above Gathering Storm somehow did not bring too many results I think on one and there are a lot of things we can do in getting there our government representatives to understand about the needs one is by having a visible efforts that provide observations and recommendations in a way that the public can understand the issues and also the opportunities for a solution also I believe that what we need to do is to train our students to speak about science and engineering in ways that the public can understand that and I guess all of us to say but also to get them to be interested in government and spend some time to understand how government works even if they plan to a pursue careers a scientist or technologies so I think these are some of the things so I'm sure they're more than just a me okay I'm not a politician I'm not an expert on politicians but i would say that as i think some of the panelists said that politicians listen to their constituents so i would try to get the message out to the constituents and get them to talk to their politicians and the way you get that message out is through repetition you're right thing about the Gathering Storm was five or even more years ago and we're still working that message it's a question of being persistent carrying it over and over I think persistence is a very important point I think we all need to be more regular dialogue with our elected officials the lesson we learned after years of advancing ideas from largely the private sector was that these ideas were falling on deaf ears because there were other sectors that cared a lot of weight in our state and local governments namely labor sectors environmental sectors by bringing the leaders of those groups into our process of developing strategies to enhance our economic prosperity and sustainability and reaching consensus we eliminated the potential political risk for these elected officials and our conversations in just the last few months since the creation of this plan and the adoption this point have been radically different than ever before with our elected officials because they say to us this is wonderful you're presenting me an opportunity to do something that has no political risk for my career let's work together on implementing itself it's music to a politician's here no political risk data well I'm going to resist the cynical answer and say that ultimately I believe that over the long term if you can demonstrate that investments in education and RD have positive returns for society than ultimately will make those investments so it's about research yeah well and and I say this with both respecting the admiration to Dana but even the most brilliant research in the world unless its communicated effectively there's a tree that falls in the woods I talked earlier about bridge building and I think one of the real dangers that not just this community but almost every private sector community faces is we most people most normal people tend to look down at politics and politicians and so we tend to try to avoid ways of dealing with them whenever possible but if you don't make the effort if you don't tell them why what you're doing is so important there's no way they're ever going to the best and most effective outreach efforts are those that not only reach out to members of Congress the United States Senate but to state legislators to City Council people and to business and community leaders and so if the people in your community who are not engineers understand why what you do is so important ultimately the body politic is going to is going to understand also lastly I suggested to some of the college students in the audience that they devote not an entire career but a short tenure in their career to working in public service I will say ultimately the questions that you've asked miles and that many others here have raised is going to be solved if and only if the ratio of law school graduates engineering school graduates in the United States Congress is somewhat equalized but let's call that a little bit of good things all right thank you very much panelist in the kitteh a meowing Bill Allen Dana Goldman and Daniel snores stand up for your picture give him a round of applause squeeze in I'll come together next to go Beautiful's on facebook already and now to close out the day it is up starts a little late we want to live long on that one but it was fascinating thank you very much to close out this exciting day presentations we're going to hear from the host of the first Grand Challenges national summit couple of years ago the Dean of the Duke University Pratt School of Engineering Tom cats elaeis Tom come on out Thank You me loose it's great to be back with so many friends here at USC I'd like to ask you all to give a big hand to our host at USC for putting on a really fine day to day let's start with that so on a personal note I left here about two and a half years ago and I noticed that for all my Trojan friends there's been some progress in ranking so I won't mention the one about cross town but I will mention the one that that I noticed that for the first time in many years the Viterbi School of Engineering has overtaken the football team in the national rankings congratulations also on a personal note it's very gratifying for me to see this Grand Challenges summit turn into what could only be categorized as a national movement with the regional events the educational programs that interest in the White House and the momentum that's been given to this by some its summits like this it's really quite exciting and I'd say this summit is the high point in that movement to this point so far at the break today I asked several of the students what they liked about the summit and it was interesting they didn't talk about the technology although they were they did talk about it a little bit that wasn't the high point they said it was the panelists and it was hearing about their histories and how they used failure and envision success so it was really about being inspired by people and the technology was part of that inspiration and you know I'll use a metaphor here these panelists are our rock stars and I want to thank them in particular for for being the inspiration for for all of us young and old and I want to continue on that metaphor and say that if an engineering conference a typical engineering conference is like a concert then these summits are somewhat like like jam sessions and when I sit in the audience as I did today and I listen to the jam session I'm fascinated to watch how the the dialogue forms a musical piece with sometimes each of the panelists hitting resonance and saying the same thing and you notice that in themes about education and the need to educate not only future engineers but the general populace and then hitting discord as we heard in just this last session about how to maintain focus and even even some dissent about impatience about making progress on the grand challenges and then finally harmony and I'll note what I thought was interesting about harmony came about in the discussion of funding the Grand Challenges and I thought it was interesting when Peter Diamandis talked about X prizes and how they stimulate innovation and ideas that approaches to a problem that one didn't anticipate and it reminded me and since I'm a sailor and one of my passions is sailing there's a very nice book about a grand challenge from the 17th century called longitude when the big challenge was how do you tell how far west of London a ship was what your longitudinal position was and the Royal Society of London offered a very large prize which was at that time probably bigger than Peter Diamandis asst in normalized units and they thought that the winner of that prize would be an astronomer they were certain that the the path towards finding longitude was going to be in looking at the sky and it turned out it was the Harris watch that one won the prize and I think there's a similar exciting role for these prizes to play but at the same time you heard mark you Maya and talked about having his work on helping the blind to see required 20 20 years of solid funding and continuous funding in order to reach the point that he's reached so I thought there was a nice harmonizing between the different approaches and the different needs for funding the Grand Challenges I was also struck by the the interrelationships between the Grand Challenges and something that we did differently in this summit from the prior summits is rather than organized the summit by grouping sustainability into one session and health in another session we grouped it by the disciplines that approach it with technology policy and so on and so what we saw in the technologies panel was Lynn or talking about how his carbon footprint as an individual is dominated by his air travel and then Rob cook talking about the advances in immersive virtual environments and the progress they make took to reducing the need to travel and so you start to see that one Grand Challenge can impact the other and that was an interesting observation for me today that was different from from the prior summits so I want to go back to a quote though that I think John Lucia mo attributed to Einstein and his his opening remarks he and I think this quote needs to be modified Einstein said that politics is for the present and an equation is for posterity and if we really care about the posterity of this planet for our children and grandchildren it's pretty clear that we need policy for posterity in combination with equations for posterity so I think that's the update of that that quote and so with that I'm going to give a tribute to Chuck vest here and you're a call in his opening you should we should all roll up our sleeves so this is my tip of the hat to you chuck I'm ready to roll up my sleeves and get started working on these problems i know the Grand Challenge Advisory Committee is very concerned with the question of the student asked about you know the progress we're making on this thing and we've talked about some of some solutions to this part of it this communication I think you're going to hear some of that in the panel's tomorrow part of it is giving feedback to people on the progress we've made remember these are grand challenges I would say to you these are grand challenges for the 21st century so don't expect them to be solved in five years at the same time you also heard about the great progress that's being made within five years on these challenges there's headway being made on engineering better medicines and many of the other topics and social networking to bring about behavioral change that improves the environment things like that so I'll go back to chuck vests commented his opening remarks that I think these panel discussions reminded us why this is the best time ever to be an engineer I look forward personally to tomorrow we have exciting sessions coming that will just make things even better on communications education and business we'll see you there thank you that's it we'll see you tomorrow thanks very much okay euless very good Smith

Posts created 19620

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Begin typing your search term above and press enter to search. Press ESC to cancel.

Back To Top