|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Volume 6, Issue 4 :: January-February 2002 |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Traditional
Industries Program Receives Strong Vote of Confidence During the fall of 2001, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget initiated an evaluation of Georgia’s Traditional Industries Program (TIP). The evaluation was conducted by SRI International, a pioneer in the creation and application of innovative solutions for businesses, governments, and other organizations. The evaluation covered TIP’s proposal review and selection process and procedures for the distribution of research findings, whether the Georgia wood products industry might be added to the program, and what indicators of success might be developed and regularly used by TIP in the future. SRI conducted interviews, analyzed publicly available data, and conducted two surveys, one of TIP researchers and one of industry participants, to develop the data and information that were used in developing conclusions. SRI’s major conclusion was that the Traditional Industries Program is a sound public investment and should be continued with equal or greater funding support. In regard to the evaluation areas covered, the following specific results were reported. Research agenda-setting, proposal review, and project selection These TIP processes draw generally favorable responses from both industry and researchers, and are consistent with processes used by federal and state research funding agencies. However, a significant proportion of university researchers report some weaknesses. Adequate pre-proposal communication appears to be taking place, including industry specification of research problems for TIP and the TIP Request for Proposal process. Distribution of research findings Researcher and industry assessment of technology transfer from TIP projects is mostly “excellent” or “good.” Most technology transfer mechanisms are rated “very effective” or “moderately effective” by a majority of both TIP researchers and industry participants (higher by researchers than industry). More interaction between researchers and industry during all phases of the TIP research process is desired by all. Impact of TIP Benefits to partner firms are mostly in terms of access to expertise, knowledge, and ideas (a finding typical of programs to promote industry-university cooperative research). Secondary benefits are improved ability to comply with regulations and developing and improving new products/processes. Half the industry participants described TIP projects as having either “considerable” or “moderate” impact on their firms and on their industries. More than 80% of industry respondents believe that the impact of TIP projects is mostly within Georgia. Almost 70% of industry respondents said their firms would not have done the TIP-supported research in the absence of the Program. Nearly all (88%) of industry participants in TIP report that TIP has become a valuable forum for intra-industry discussions about common technical problems. Addition of new industries to TIP SRI studied the Georgia wood products industry to evaluate whether TIP could make a significant contribution to its competitiveness. The available data and information about the industry do not indicate clearly whether the wood products industry could benefit significantly from participating in TIP. The majority of firms in the industry are quite small, probably have minimal internal scientific or engineering staff, and may not be able to absorb and implement research outcomes effectively. In fact, many of the technology problems of the industry may be better addressed through units such as the Business and Industry Services Group of Georgia Tech’s Economic Development Institute, the Engineering Outreach Program at the University of Georgia, and the Georgia Environmental Partnership. Nonetheless, there are some large firms in the industry, and according to a recent report on the Georgia wood products industry, many of them already use external sources of research. Source: Executive Summary of “Evaluation of the Georgia Traditional Industries Program (TIP),” prepared for the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia by SRI International, December 17, 2001. For a full copy of the report, visit TIP’s website at http://www.gatip.org. |
|
FY 2001-2002 Report to Industry Now Available
The report is available to all members of Georgia’s food processing industry, and can be obtained by calling Lucy Johnson at (404) 894-3412 or e-mail lucy.johnson@gtri.gatech.edu; the report can also be downloaded online at http://foodpac.gatech.edu. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Remember… . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
FoodPAC’s
Fiscal Year 2001-2002 Report to Industry is now available. The report gives an overview
of the Traditional Industries Program, provides the FoodPAC organizational chart
and calendar of events, and highlights the research results of 12 projects conducted
during FY 2001 as well as activity plans for FY 2002. In addition, the report gives
a detailed listing of the FY 2002 program projects with contact information. 
|
For
further information on FoodPAC, please contact: Environmental
Technical Committee Food
Safety Technical Committee Process
& Product Competitiveness Technical Committee |
|
|
|
Making
Georgia the national and international leader |
|
|
|
Return to the What's New at FoodPAC . . . . . . . . . . Return to FoodPAC Publications
Copyright © 2002
FoodPAC
|
