Manufacturing USA

Last updated
Logo Manufacturing USA logo.png
Logo

Manufacturing USA (MFG USA), previously known as the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation, is a network of research institutes in the United States that focuses on developing manufacturing technologies through public-private partnerships among U.S. industry, universities, and federal government agencies. Modeled similar to Germany's Fraunhofer Institutes, the network currently consists of 16 institutes. [1] [2] [3] The institutes work independently and together on a number of advanced technologies. [4] [5]

Contents

History

In June 2011, United States President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) recommended that the federal government launch an advanced manufacturing initiative of public-private partnerships to support "academia and industry for applied research on new technologies and design methodologies." The recommendation called for $500 million per year to be appropriated to the Departments of Defense, Commerce and Energy, increasing to $1 billion per year over four years. [6] [7]

The National Network for Manufacturing Innovation was proposed in the President's fiscal year 2013 budget and formally unveiled by the administration several weeks later in March 2012. The proposal called for a joint federal effort between the Department of Defense, Department of Energy, National Science Foundation and the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology to create a network of 15 regional institutes, funded by a one-time investment of $1 billion and carried out over a period of 10 years. [1] [7] [8] [9] [10] The administration reprogramed $45 million of existing resources from the Departments of Defense, Energy, Commerce and the National Science Foundation through executive action to fund a pilot, proof-of-concept institute for the program. [8] [9] [11] In May the Department of Defense solicited proposals from consortiums led by nonprofit organizations and universities to establish an additive manufacturing (which includes 3D printing) research institute to serve as the prototype facility. [9] [10] [12]

The NAMII logo National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute logo.png
The NAMII logo

In August, 2012 the government announced the winning proposal, the National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute (NAMII), also known as AmericaMakes led by the National Center for Defense Manufacturing and Machining and based in Youngstown, Ohio. [8] [10] The consortium's members include 40 companies, nine research universities, five community colleges and 11 nonprofit organizations. [10] AmericaMakes was established with an initial federal government investment of $30 million, while the consortium contributed almost $40 million in additional funding. [8] The administration stated that it expected AmericaMakes to become financially self-sustaining. [13] In May 2013, the administration announced the establishment of three additional institutes using $200 million in funding through two federal agencies: the Departments of Defense, and Energy. [12] [13] [14]

In September 2016, the program adopted the name "Manufacturing USA". [15] [16] As of 2023, Manufacturing USA consists of seventeen institutes. Nine are managed in part by the Department of Defense (MxD, BioMade, LIFT, America Makes, ARM, BioFab, AFFOA, AIM, NEXTFLEX). Seven are managed in part the Department of Energy (REMADE, RAPID, Power America, IACMI, CYMANII, CESMII, EPIX). One is managed in part by the Department of Commerce (NIIMBL). [3] : 2  In 2024, NIST announced an eighteenth institute focused on AI and a nineteenth focused on Chips and digital twin.

Model

According to the original National Network for Manufacturing Innovation proposal, it would consist of up to 45 linked institutes with unique research concentrations to serve as regional manufacturing innovation hubs with spokes that link to project locations as seen represented by the various linked activities across the network. [4] [8] Each institute would be independently run by a nonprofit organization and form a public-private partnership designed to leverage existing resources and promote collaboration and co-investment between industry, universities and government agencies. [1] [8] The network is designed to address the inconsistency in U.S economic and innovation policy in that federal research and development (R&D) investments and tax incentives are not matched by corresponding incentives to encourage the domestic manufacture of the technologies and products that arise from this R&D. [9] The goal of the institutes is to develop, showcase and reduce risks sufficiently so that commercial companies can commercialize new products and processes for domestic production, as well as to train a manufacturing workforce at all skill levels to enhance domestic manufacturing capabilities. [7] [8] Institute activities include connecting proven basic research to additional problem solving that ranges from basic to applied research and demonstration projects that reduce the cost and risk of commercializing new technologies or that solve generic industrial problems, education and training, development of methodologies and practices for supply-chain integration, and engagement with small and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises. [9]

Critics of Manufacturing USA have argued taxes and burdensome regulations are the most pressing problems facing U.S. manufacturers. [17] [18] Supporters counter that the U.S. government has a long history of successful investments in R&D to support innovation in U.S. industry. [17] Others argue that the Manufacturing USA can help alleviate two key market failures that plague industrial innovation, namely that innovators generally do not capture the full economic benefits that their innovations provide and thus achieving the optimal level of R&D investment requires government support, and the so-called "valley of death" problem in which no single business can afford the risk or the cost to invest or where businesses tend not to invest in long-term R&D projects with profits that are far in the future. [18] [19] Additionally, supporters argue that the Manufacturing USA will create a more attractive domestic environment for manufacturing, and thus will encourage manufacturers to locate production facilities in the United States. [19]

Institutes

Institute [3] Technology [3] : 2 Established [3] Location [3] : 2 
Advanced Functional Fabrics of America (AFFOA) Textiles 2016 Cambridge, Massachusetts
Advanced Regenerative Manufacturing Institute (ARMI/BioFabUSA) Regenerative medicine, tissue engineering [3] : 65 2016 Manchester, New Hampshire [20]
Advanced Robotics for Manufacturing (ARM) Robotics 2017 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
American Institute for Manufacturing Integrated Photonics (AIM Photonics) Photonic integrated circuits 2015 Rochester, New York
Bioindustrial Manufacturing and Design Ecosystem (BioMADE) [21] Biomanufacturing 2020 St. Paul, Minnesota
Clean Energy Smart Manufacturing Innovation Institute (CESMII) Smart manufacturing 2017 Los Angeles, California
Cybersecurity Manufacturing Innovation Institute (CyManII) [22] Cybersecurity 2020 San Antonio, Texas
Flexible Hybrid Electronics Manufacturing Innovation Institute (NextFlex) Flexible electronics 2015 San Jose, California
Institute for Advanced Composites Manufacturing Innovation (IACMI) Composite materials 2015 Knoxville, Tennessee
LIFT (formerly Lightweight Innovations for Tomorrow [23] ) Lightweight materials 2014 Detroit, Michigan
Manufacturing times Digital (MxD) Digital manufacturing 2014 Chicago, Illinois
National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute (AmericaMakes) 3D Printing, additive manufacturing [3] : 30 2012 Youngstown, Ohio
National Institute for Innovation in Manufacturing Biopharmaceuticals (NIIMBL) Biopharmaceuticals 2017 Newark, Delaware
Next Generation Power Electronics Institute (PowerAmerica) Wide-bandgap semiconductors 2015 Raleigh, North Carolina
Rapid Advancement in Process Intensification Deployment (RAPID) Process engineering, modularization [3] : 99 2017 New York, New York
Reducing EMbodied-energy And Decreasing Emissions (REMADE) Remanufacturing [3] : 95 2015 Rochester, New York

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Department of Energy</span> U.S. government department regulating energy production and nuclear material handling

The United States Department of Energy (DOE) is an executive department of the U.S. federal government that oversees U.S. national energy policy and energy production, the research and development of nuclear power, the military's nuclear weapons program, nuclear reactor production for the United States Navy, energy-related research, and energy conservation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Department of Commerce</span> Executive department of the U.S. Federal Government

The United States Department of Commerce (DOC) is an executive department of the U.S. federal government concerned with promoting the conditions for economic growth and opportunity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Research and development</span> General term for activities in connection with corporate or governmental innovation

Research and development is the set of innovative activities undertaken by corporations or governments in developing new services or products. R&D constitutes the first stage of development of a potential new service or the production process.

The Small Business Innovation Research program is a U.S. government funding program, coordinated by the Small Business Administration, intended to help certain small businesses conduct research and development (R&D). Funding takes the form of contracts or grants. The recipient projects must have the potential for commercialization and must meet specific U.S. government R&D needs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">SEMATECH</span> Defunct US semiconductor consortion (1987-2015)

SEMATECH was a not-for-profit consortium that performed research and development to advance chip manufacturing. SEMATECH involved collaboration between various sectors of the R&D community, including chipmakers, equipment and material suppliers, universities, research institutes, and government partners. SEMATECH’s mission was to rejuvenate the U.S. semiconductor industry through collective R&D efforts, focused on improving manufacturing processes and introducing cutting-edge technologies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Energy policy of the United States</span>

The energy policy of the United States is determined by federal, state, and local entities. It addresses issues of energy production, distribution, consumption, and modes of use, such as building codes, mileage standards, and commuting policies. Energy policy may be addressed via legislation, regulation, court decisions, public participation, and other techniques.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Defense Production Act of 1950</span> United States law

The Defense Production Act (DPA) of 1950 is a United States federal law enacted on September 8, 1950, in response to the start of the Korean War. It was part of a broad civil defense and war mobilization effort in the context of the Cold War. Its implementing regulations, the Defense Priorities and Allocation System (DPAS), are located at 15 CFR §§700 to 700.93. Since 1950, the Act has been reauthorized over 50 times. It has been periodically amended and remains in force.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Science and Technology Council</span> The NSTC establishes national goals for science and technology.

The National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) is a council in the Executive Branch of the United States. It is designed to coordinate science and technology policy across the branches of federal government.

The NIST Advanced Technology Program is a United States government program designed to stimulate early-stage advanced technology development that would otherwise not be funded.

The America COMPETES Act was authored by Bart Gordon and signed into law on August 9, 2007, by President George W. Bush. The act aimed to invest in innovation through research and development and improve the competitiveness of the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Business in Maryland</span>

Maryland's leading industries by employment are health care, social assistance, state and local government, retail trade, and professional and technical services. Maryland's Gross State Product (GSP) was $295.4 billion in 2010. The Government sector produced $52.1 billion and accounted for 18 percent of Maryland's GSP in 2009. Federal government, including military and civilian, accounted for slightly more than half at just over $27 billion, while state and local government combined for nearly $25 billion. The Fort George G. Meade military installation, which includes employees of the National Security Agency, is the state's biggest employer at 44,540. The largest private sector industry is real estate with $48.4 billion, or 17 percent of economic activity. Large private employers in Maryland include Black & Decker, Legg Mason, Lockheed Martin, Marriott International, ZeniMax Media, McCormick & Company, Perdue Farms, General Motors, IBM, Northrop Grumman, and Verizon.

The Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation was an office new to the Obama Administration, created within the White House, to catalyze new and innovative ways of encouraging government to do business differently. Its first director was the economist Sonal Shah. The final director was David Wilkinson.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Energy policy of the Barack Obama administration</span> American presidential policy

The energy policy of the Obama administration was defined by an "all-of-the-above" approach which offered federal support for renewable energy deployment, increased domestic oil and gas extraction, and export of crude oil and natural gas. His presidency's first term was shaped by the failure of his signature climate legislation, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, to pass, and then climate and energy disasters including the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010 and then Hurricane Sandy, which took place during the 2012 election. In his second term, Obama lifted the ban on crude oil exports and approved liquified natural gas exports; his planned regulatory approach to reducing greenhouse pollution in the electricity sector, the Clean Power Plan, was blocked by the U.S. Supreme Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Science policy of the United States</span> Government support and limits of scientific research

The science policy of the United States is the responsibility of many organizations throughout the federal government. Much of the large-scale policy is made through the legislative budget process of enacting the yearly federal budget, although there are other legislative issues that directly involve science, such as energy policy, climate change, and stem cell research. Further decisions are made by the various federal agencies which spend the funds allocated by Congress, either on in-house research or by granting funds to outside organizations and researchers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Networking and Information Technology Research and Development</span> NiTRD

The Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) program consists of a group of U.S. federal agencies to research and develop information technology (IT) capabilities to empower Federal missions; support U.S. science, engineering, and technology leadership; and bolster U.S. economic competitiveness.

STAR METRICS was a partnership between United States federal science agencies and research institutions to document the return on investment, research impact, and social outcomes of federally funded research and development. The federal consortium comprised the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Science Foundation, (NSF), the US Department of Agriculture, (USDA), and the US Environmental Protection Agency,(EPA). NIH was the host agency for the consortium, which was governed by an Executive Committee and an advisory interagency working group.

Exergonix Inc is an energy storage company based in Kansas City, Missouri. It was founded in 2010, after spinning out of Kokam America, Inc., which was acquired by Dow Chemical Company in 2009. Exergonix develops grid energy storage to supply peak-shaving, demand management, and smart grid capabilities to the grid and microgrid.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Advanced Functional Fabrics of America</span> A public-private partnership led by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Advanced Functional Fabrics of America (AFFOA) is a public-private partnership led by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The partnership was created as a component of the Manufacturing USA research network in April 2016, and received $75 million in 2016 from United States Department of Defense as Revolutionary Fibers and Textiles Manufacturing Innovation Hub to study smart fabric for warfighters. The members are 32 universities, 16 industry members, 72 manufacturing entities, and 26 startup incubators. Corporate members include American apparel companies Nike and New Balance, and medical device manufacturer Medtronic.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Advanced Robotics for Manufacturing</span>

Advanced Robotics for Manufacturing (ARM), also known as ARM Institute, is a consortium created in 2017 through a Department of Defense grant won by Carnegie Mellon University. ARM is structured as a public-private partnership and the Manufacturing USA Institutes, a network of 16 institutes dedicated to advancing technologies used in manufacturing. ARM was the 14th institute created and focuses on funding innovations in robotics and workforce development.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">CHIPS and Science Act</span> United States legislation promoting the semiconductor industry and public basic research

The CHIPS and Science Act is a U.S. federal statute enacted by the 117th United States Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden on August 9, 2022. The act authorizes roughly $280 billion in new funding to boost domestic research and manufacturing of semiconductors in the United States, for which it appropriates $52.7 billion. The act includes $39 billion in subsidies for chip manufacturing on U.S. soil along with 25% investment tax credits for costs of manufacturing equipment, and $13 billion for semiconductor research and workforce training, with the dual aim of strengthening American supply chain resilience and countering China. It also invests $174 billion in the overall ecosystem of public sector research in science and technology, advancing human spaceflight, quantum computing, materials science, biotechnology, experimental physics, research security, social and ethical considerations, workforce development and diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts at NASA, NSF, DOE, EDA, and NIST.

References

  1. 1 2 3 National Science and Technology Council, Advanced Manufacturing National Program Office (January 2013). National Network for Manufacturing Innovation: A Preliminary Design (PDF). Executive Office of the President of the United States. Archived (PDF) from the original on February 13, 2013.
  2. ↑ Rising to the Challenge. National Academies Press. 2012. doi:10.17226/13386. ISBN   978-0-309-25551-6. PMID   22953359.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Manufacturing USA Highlights Report (PDF) (Report). National Institute of Standards and Technology. December 2020.
  4. 1 2 "Manufacturing USA third-party assessment report of program design and impact | Deloitte US". Deloitte United States. January 2017. Retrieved 2018-08-17.
  5. ↑ "Manufacturing USA member institutes and technologies". Manufacturing USA Institutes and Technologies. Retrieved 2018-08-17.
  6. ↑ United States President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (June 2011). Report to the President on Ensuring American Leadership in Advanced Manufacturing (PDF). Executive Office of the President of the United States. p. iv. Archived (PDF) from the original on January 20, 2017.
  7. 1 2 3 McCormack, Richard A. (February 28, 2012). "Obama Will Unveil $1-Billion National Manufacturing Innovation Network Initiative Based On Germany's Fraunhofer Institute". Manufacturing & Technology News. Vol. 19, no. 3. Archived from the original on May 11, 2013.
  8. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "Manufacturing USA - includes the national network". Advanced Manufacturing Portal.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 "From Discovery to Scale-up: About the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation". Advanced Manufacturing Portal. Archived from the original on February 13, 2013. Retrieved June 17, 2013.
  10. 1 2 3 4 Sargent, John F. Jr. (August 28, 2012). The Obama Administration's Proposal to Establish a National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (PDF). Congressional Research Service. Archived (PDF) from the original on January 30, 2013.
  11. ↑ "$1-Billion National Advanced Manufacturing Network Will Take Off With Or Without Congressional Approval". Manufacturing & Technology News. Vol. 19, no. 4. March 16, 2012. p. 8. Archived from the original on June 16, 2018. Retrieved June 17, 2013.
  12. 1 2 Tonkin, Lea (May 27, 2013). "National Manufacturing Innovation Network Gains Momentum". Manufacturing Pulse. Archived from the original on June 20, 2013. Retrieved June 17, 2013.
  13. 1 2 "Obama Administration Launches Competition for Three New Manufacturing Innovation Institutes" (Press release). White House Office of the Press Secretary. May 9, 2013. Archived from the original on January 23, 2017.
  14. ↑ Palmer, Chris (May 13, 2013). "Obama administration announces manufacturing institutes". NewsBlog. Nature.com.
  15. ↑ "National Network for Manufacturing Innovation Rebrands as Manufacturing USA". IndustryWeek . September 12, 2016. Retrieved September 13, 2016.
  16. ↑ "U.S. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker Announces Manufacturing USA: New Brand for National Network for Manufacturing Innovation" (Press release). U.S. Department of Commerce. September 12, 2016. Archived from the original on June 16, 2018. Retrieved September 13, 2016.
  17. 1 2 Pisano, Gary (April 30, 2013). "Building a Strong Foundation for American Manufacturing". Forbes . Archived from the original on May 27, 2013.
  18. 1 2 McCormack, Richard A. (May 31, 2012). "NIST Director Defends $1-Billion Manufacturing Program, But Doesn't Know Where The Money Will Come From". Manufacturing & Technology News. Vol. 19, no. 9. Archived from the original on May 11, 2013.
  19. 1 2 Hart, David M.; Ezell, Stephen J.; Atkinson, Robert D. (December 2012). Why America Needs A National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (PDF). Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. pp. 8–10. Archived (PDF) from the original on June 1, 2013.
  20. ↑ Bookman, Todd (2023-11-19). "Dean Kamen's private companies reap millions from the federally funded nonprofit he runs". New Hampshire Public Radio. Retrieved 2023-11-20.
  21. ↑ "U.S. Department of Defense awards $87.5 million to EBRC-led BioMADE establishing the Bioindustrial Manufacturing Innovation Institute" (Press release). Engineering Biology Research Consortium. October 20, 2020. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
  22. ↑ "UTSA officially launches Cybersecurity Manufacturing Innovation Institute" (Press release). University of Texas at San Antonio. November 19, 2020. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
  23. ↑ "LIFT Receives $5 Million Department of Defense Grant To Expand "Operation Next" Across the Country" (Press release). LIFT. November 19, 2019. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.