Title : Six States Account for Majority of R&D Spending, New NSF State Science and Engineering Profiles Available Type : 1995 Data Briefs NSF Org: SBE / SRS Date : November 13, 1995 File : sdb95338 By John E. Jankowski, Jr. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The 20 states with the largest shares of total U.S. R&D expenditures collectively account for 87 percent of the R&D conducted nationwide; the 20 states with the smallest shares, for just 4 percent of total. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Recently compiled statistics available from the National Science Foundation (NSF) detail the geographic distribution of the 1993 U.S. research and development (R&D) spending total ($166 billion). The data include R&D performance by industry, academia, and the Federal Government and the federally funded R&D activities of nonprofit institutions. Substantial state-specific information also is available on the Federal agency sources of R&D support and on the R&D-performing sectors that receive Federal funding. These and many more statistics have been compiled in a set of 51 State Science & Engineering Profiles (including one for the District of Columbia) recently released by NSF. State Distribution of R&D Performance Roughly one-half of the $166 billion of R&D spending in 1993 occurred in just six states (California, New York, Michigan, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania) and 10 states (adding Texas, Illinois, Ohio, and Maryland) accounted for more than two-thirds of the national effort (chart 1). In each of these 10 states, more than $6 billion was spent on R&D. Performance in California alone reached $28 billion, one-fifth of all U.S. funds. R&D performance in each of the next 10 states totaled more than $2 billion; when combined with the first 10 states, they collectively accounted for 87 percent of R&D conducted nationwide in 1993. In contrast, the 20 states with the smallest instate R&D performance collectively accounted for just $6 billion, 4 percent of nationally performed R&D. [Graphic Chart 1 is omitted in this ASCI version.] Not coincidentally, states that are national leaders in total R&D performance usually are leading sites of industrial and academic R&D performance (table 1). Table 1. R&D performance by state and sector and ratio of R&D to gross state product: 1993 ______________________________________________________________________ Largest 10 performers (ranked by size of R&D in sector) R&D intensity ______________________________________________________________________ Rank Total Total Industry Universities Federal Largest R&D/ R&D1 & colleges2 Gov't2 10 GSP ______________________________________________________________________ [Millions of dollars] [Percent] ______________________________________________________________________ 1 $33,721 CA CA CA Md NM 8.1 2 10,975 NY MI NY CA MD 6.2 3 10,778 MI NY TX DC DC 6.1 4 9,468 MA NJ MD VA MA 5.7 5 9,182 NJ MA MA AL MI 5.1 6 8,278 PA PA PA FL DE 4.9 7 7,442 MD IL IL OH CA 4.3 8 6,966 TX OH MI NJ WA 4.2 9 6,768 IL TX NC NM NJ 4.0 10 6,395 OH WA OH TX CO 3.2 _______________________________________________________________________ 1 Includes instate R&D performance of industry, universities, federally funded research and development centers (FFRDCs), and Federal agencies and the federally funded R&D performance of nonprofit institutions. 2 Excludes R&D activities of FFRDCs located within these states. KEY: GSP = gross state product SOURCE: NSF/SRS, National Patterns of R&D Resources, annual series • All but Maryland ranked among the top 10 industrial performers-Washington State ranking 11th for total R&D) held the 10th spot for industrial R&D. • All but New Jersey ranked among the top 10 academic performers-North Carolina (ranking 18th overall) ranked ninth among the academic listings. The top 10 sites for R&D performed in Federal labs include 5 of the 10 states ranked highest in total R&D. Washington, DC, and Virginia are listed among the Federal top 10, a fact that-along with the number one ranking for Maryland-reflects the concentration of Federal facilities and administrative offices within the Washington, DC, metropolitan area. Alabama, Florida, and New Mexico-with major space- and defense-related research activity-also were ranked among the Federal R&D top 10, but not among the 10 largest total R&D performers. Ratio of R&D to Gross State Product These state rankings change when R&D expenditures are normalized by the size of each state. Just as the ratio of R&D expenditures to GDP is used to gauge a country's commitment to R&D, the ratio of instate R&D performance to gross state product (GSP) measures the R&D intensity of a state's economy and facilitates more meaningful interstate comparisons. For example, whereas the U.S. R&D/GDP ratio was 2.6 percent in 1993, the largest R&D/GSP ratio was achieved in New Mexico (8.1 percent) even though the state ranked 17th in terms of total R&D spending. The high research intensity of New Mexico's economy grew primarily from the considerable Federal support provided by the Department of Energy to the several federally funded R&D centers (FFRDCs) located in the state. On the other hand, California-ranked first each in total, industrial, and academic R&D spending-ranked seventh in terms of R&D intensity, 4.3 percent. Most small performers, however, have low R&D intensities. There were 20 states with less than $0.5 billion of R&D spending, and 14 of them had an R&D/GSP ratio of less than 1.0 percent. Federal Support for R&D The Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) collectively provided 70 percent of the Federal Government's R&D support in 1993 to all performers, including firms, universities, nonprofit institutions, and Federal labs. California and Maryland were the two largest recipients of each of these agencies' funds (table 2) and thereby were also ranked first and second in total Federal R&D support. Performers-primarily industrial firms-in California received 7 percent of DOD's R&D support, and Maryland received 22 percent of HHS funding primarily in support of the intramural activities undertaken at its National Institutes of Health biomedical research facilities. California also received more of the R&D funds than any other state from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (the main recipients being firms and FFRDCs) and the National Science Foundation (support going to universities and colleges). Maryland led all other states in receiving 30 percent of R&D funds from the Department of Commerce (DOC). Again, intramural research activities accounted for most of Maryland's DOC funding, here undertaken at the agency's National Institute of Standards and Technology. Table 2. Federal R&D obligations, by agency and state: FY 1993 __________________________________________________________________________ Agency Total R&D Primary Percent Secondary Percent recipient recipient __________________________________________________________________________ [Millions of dollars] __________________________________________________________________________ Total, all agencies.....65,744 California 23 Maryland 11 Department of Agriculture..1,323 Dist. of Columbia 11 Maryland 8 Department of Commerce.......656 Maryland 30 Colorado 11 Department of Defense.....35,677 California 27 Maryland 10 Department of Energy.......6,258 New Mexico 20 California 18 Dept. of Health & Human Services........10,297 Maryland 22 California 11 Department of the Interior.................618 Colorado 8 Virginia 7 Department of Transportation...........544 Massachusetts 15 New Jersey 13 Environmental Protection Agency...................495 North Carolina 19 Virginia 12 National Aeronautics & Space Admin............7,995 California 32 Alabama 12 National Science Foundation........... 1,880 California 15 New York 10 _________________________________________________________________________ SOURCE: NSF/SRS, Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Years 1993, 1994, and 1995, volume 43, NSF 95-334 (Arlington, VA, 1995). State Science & Engineering Profiles In addition to the state statistics on R&D expenditures summarized above, NSF's Division of Science Resources Studies (SRS) collects a variety of state-specific data in its surveys of science and engineering (S&E) personnel and institutions. All this material is summarized in a set of 51 one-page state S&E Profiles available in hard copy or over the World Wide Web. Comparative statistics and rankings are provided for states' R&D and S&E resource bases, as well as for broader economic variables from non-SRS sources. The SRS-surveyed indicators include- • doctoral scientists and engineers; • S&E doctorates awarded, including by major S&E fields; • S&E graduate students and post-doctorates; • Federal R&D obligations, by agency and performer; • total and industrial R&D expenditures; and • academic R&D expenditures, including by major S&E fields. The indicators from non-SRS sources include population, civilian labor force, per capita personal income, Federal expenditures, higher education expenditures, patents, small business innovation research awards, and gross state product originating in manufacturing, agriculture, trade, government, and services. User Notes U.S. and state R&D expenditures data were assembled from a number of ongoing NSF surveys. For information about, and copies of, State Science & Engineering Profiles, please contact- Richard J. Bennof Research and Development Statistics Program Division of Science Resources Studies National Science Foundation 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 965 Arlington, VA 22230. For free printed copies of SRS Data Briefs, write to the above address, call 703-306-1773, or send e-mail to databrief@nsf.gov.