Public goods-focused R and D is key to solve geographic and income inequality---the impact is populist nationalism
West 22, Senior Fellow @ Center for Technology Innovation, Douglas Dillon Chair in Governmental Studies (Darell, “R&D for the public good: Ways to strengthen societal innovation in the United States,” https://www.brookings.edu/articles/rd-for-the-public-good-ways-to-strengthen-societal-innovation-in-the-united-states/)//BB
Moving forward, the United States needs to be more strategic in how it invests in R&D, the kinds of priorities being pursued, and the manner in which we make the decisions associated with these investments. There are a number of steps America should consider in order to further important objectives and fulfill key national goals.
Pursue R&D for the public good
The US should not rely just on the private sector for its R&D investments because such a focus likely would place greater priority on consumer products as opposed to items needed for national security, public health, and amelioration of key social problems. The country faces many challenges ranging from income inequality and racial inequity to geographic variations in prosperity and climate change.
If we let business leaders make most of the R&D decisions, as is happening now, there is a risk they will prioritize profitable, consumer goods and services as opposed to innovations that address crucial difficulties. Where the public sector can play an important role is in identifying key problems and making sure that unprofitable but socially-needed innovations are supported and that America has the tools to address vital societal priorities.
Use federal money to redress geographic inequities
One key problem in the United States right now is the high level of geographical inequity. Brookings research shows that most of our nation’s GDP focuses on the East Coast, West Coast, and some metropolitan areas in between.
This parallels work that demonstrates most venture capital investments today focus on three states: California, New York, and Massachusetts. There is little money invested in the heartland, and this promotes geographical inequality and exacerbates societal and political tensions.
In its R&D decisions, the federal government should allocate money in a way that reduces geographical inequities and promotes the heartland. In a political system based on geographic representation, these types of inequalities fuel populism, ultra-nationalism, and political extremism. R&D allocations are not neutral but play a role either in reducing or exacerbating important challenges facing our current society. If we continue to put most of our R&D money onto the two coasts and a few metro areas in between, it will increase societal tensions and make it difficult to address important political and economic problems.