Tutorial Paper on Quantitative Risk Assessment Mohammad Reza ...
160 Pages
English
Downloading requires you to have access to the YouScribe library
Learn all about the services we offer

Tutorial Paper on Quantitative Risk Assessment Mohammad Reza ...

-

Downloading requires you to have access to the YouScribe library
Learn all about the services we offer
160 Pages
English

Description

  • expression écrite
Tutorial Paper on Quantitative Risk Assessment Mohammad Reza Sohizadeh Abyaneh Seyed Mehdi Mohammed Hassanzadeh H˚avard Raddum Abstract This paper shows how to carry out a quantitative risk assessment, describing how each step in the process is carried out. We use the grade management system at the University of Bergen as a case study, evaluating the risk of wrong grades ending up in the university grade database. 1 Introduction Most of the current risk assessment methods are based on scoring.
  • grade protocol
  • damage levels
  • mistakes
  • likelihood
  • pdf
  • damage
  • figure
  • grades
  • risk
  • system

Subjects

Informations

Published by
Reads 75
Language English
Document size 4 MB

Exrait

The  Competitiveness  and Inno  vative
 
Capacity  of the  Uni ted State s

January  2012
Prepared  by the   
U.S.  DEPARTMENT  OF COMMER  CE
In  consultation  with the 
NATIONAL  ECONOMIC CO UNCIL Table  of Con tents
Foreword .......................................................................................................... iii

Executive Summary......................................................................................... v

1. Rising to the Challenge............................................................................... 1 – 1

Exceptional Performance .......................................................................................... 1 – 1

Alarms ....................................................................................................................... 1 – 4

Addressing the Alarms .............................................................................................. 1 – 10

2. Keys to Innovation, Competitiveness, and Jobs ...................................... 2 – 1

Concepts and Definitions........................................................................................... 2 – 2

What Made the United States So Successful in the Past? ........................................ 2 – 4

Interconnections ........................................................................................................ 2 – 9

3. Federal Support for Research and Development ..................................... 3 – 1
The Economic Justification for the Federal Government’s Role in Funding
for Basic Research .................................................................................................... 3 – 1
The Federal Government: A Key Force Driving Major Innovations ........................... 3 – 7
Cracks in the Federal Research Foundation ............................................................. 3 – 13
Preserving and Extending Federal Support for Science and Industrial R&D in the
st 21 Century ............................................................................................................... 3 – 14
Appendix 1. Definitions of Relevant Terms................................................................ 3 – 18
Appendix 2. The Theoretical Underpinnings for a Federal Role in Research
Funding...................................................................................................................... 3 – 19
4. Educating Our Workforce ........................................................................... 4 – 1

The STEM Workforce is Expanding........................................................................... 4 – 2

STEM Skills in Demand Throughout the Economy ................................................... 4 – 4

Many U.S. Universities Are Outstanding But Our Production of U.S. STEM

Graduates Is Not ....................................................................................................... 4 – 6

The High Cost of College and Poor Academic Preparation Deter Students.............. 4 – 9

Demographics Create Challenges and Opportunities for Growth ............................. 4 – 12

The Foreign-Born Are Key Members of the STEM Workforce .................................. 4 – 14

The Administration is Lowering the Barriers to a College Education......................... 4 – 15

st5. Infrastructure for the 21 Century.............................................................. 5 – 1

Introduction................................................................................................................ 5 – 1

stDefinitions of 21 Century Infrastructure ................................................................... 5 – 3

stHow Does Our 21 Century Infrastructure Stack Up? ............................................... 5 – 4

stEnsuring the United States’ 21 Century Infrastructure is Sound.............................. 5 – 12

U.S. COMPETITIVENESS AND INNOVATIVE CAPACITY i 6. Revitalizing Manufacturing ......................................................................... 6 – 1

A Strong Manufacturing Sector is Uniquely Important to the U.S. Economy.............. 6 – 1

The Current State of U.S. Manufacturing: A Crossroads for American

Competitiveness......................................................................................................... 6 – 4

Economic Rationales for Federal Government Support for U.S. Manufacturing........ 6 – 8

Longstanding Federal Government Support for U.S. Manufacturing ......................... 6 – 9

Federal Initiatives to Revive Manufacturing ............................................................... 6 – 16

7. The Private Sector as the Engine of Innovation ....................................... 7 – 1

Introduction ................................................................................................................ 7 – 1

Regional Clusters and Entrepreneurship ................................................................... 7 – 1

Startup America.......................................................................................................... 7 – 6

Promoting America’s Exports and Improving Access to Foreign Markets.................. 7 – 8

Corporate Taxes......................................................................................................... 7 – 10

Ensuring a Well-Functioning Intellectual Property Rights System ............................. 7 – 11

Moving Forward ............................................................................................... M – 1

Supplemental Materials................................................................................... S – 1

Innovation Advisory Board Members ......................................................................... S – 3

Section 604 of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010...................... S – 4

ii U.S. COMPETITIVENESS AND INNOVATIVE CAPACITY On January 4, 2011, President Barack Obama signed into law the America Foreword

COMPETES Reauthorizat on Act of 2 010 (COMPETES). Secton 6 04 o f COMPETES
mandates that the Secretary of C ommerce complete a s tudy that addresses the
economic compettvene ss and innovtave capacity of the United States (see Sup-
plemental Materials). Congress directed t hat this report address a div erse array
of topics and policy opt ons, including: tax policy; the general business climate in
the U.S.; regional issues such as the role of state and local governments in higher
educat on; barriers to setng up new firms; trade policy , including expor t promo-
ton; t he effectvene ss of Feder al researc h and developmen t policy; intellectual
property regimes in the U.S. and abroad; the health of the manufacturing sector;
and science and technology educat on.
In conduct ng this study, COMPETES specified tha t the Secretar y o f Commerce e-s
tablish a process for obtaining comments. One part of t hat process w as to estab-
lish a 1 5 m ember Innovat on Advisory Board (IAB) “for purposes of obtaining
advice with respect t o the conduct of t he study.” The Department of Commerce
announced the members of t he IAB (listed in the Supplementary Materials sec-
t on of th is report) o n May 4, 2 011, and the inaugural meet ng of t he IAB was on
June 6, 2 011, in Alexandria, Virginia. A second me et ng of the IAB was held Sep-
tember 23, 2011, in Boulder, Colorado. IAB members provided input into the pro-
cess throughout the summer. Additonally , some IAB member s generously hosted
COMPETES-related events in Washington, D .C.; Youngstown, Ohio; M organtown,
West Virginia; Philadelphia, PA; and New York, NY. These events brought together
community and business leaders, and experts in a wi de variety of areas, to share
their ideas on compettveness. Department of C ommerce and Administraton
staff a t ended all of these meetngs.
Additonall y, w e receive d input fro m a numb er of oth er group s at variou s event s.
These included an all day event wi th a gr oup of pr ominent academic economists
in Cambridge, Ma ssachuset s, and a conference at the Silicon Flat rons’ Center
for Law, Technology, and Entrepreneurship at the University of Col orado. Other
groups, a s well as the general public, provided addit onal input.
We are very grateful for the generosity of a ll contributors, but special thanks go
to the Innovaton Advi sory Board members—they passionately care about the fu-
ture of this country and have been willing to give th eir valuable tme a nd exper-
tse t o enrich this process.
Sincerely,
John E. Bryson
Secretary of Commerce
U.S. COMPETITIVENESS AN D I NNOVATIVE CAPACITY iii th The  U.S. econ  omy reigne d supreme  in the 20  centur  y , beco ming the lar gest,      Executive

most  productive, and  mo st competitiv  e in the wo rld ; amazing  new  technolog ies    
Summary
were  invented and  commer  cialized;  the wo rkforce bec ame the mo st educ  ated  in    
the  world; and  inco mes soare d while a  large midd  le  class emer  ged and  thriv ed.      
st As  the 21  century appr  oached,  however, ala rms beg an to sound  about  the  U.S.      
economy’s  ability to  rem ain in this  preeminen   t position. In comes stagna ted and      
job  growth sl owed. Oth er count ries became  better educ ated and  our manuf ac‐   
turing  sector los t groun d to for eign  competit ors.  Observers ha ve exp ressed con‐ 
cern  that the  scie ntific and technol   ogical  building block  s critic al to ou r economic     
leadership  have been  eroding  at a time  when   many  other na tions ar  e active ly lay‐      
ing  strong fo undations in the se  same ar eas. In  short, so me e lements  of the U. S.        
economy  are losi ng their  competitiv  e edge which  ma y mean  that futur  e gen era‐   
tions  of Americ  ans will  not enjo  y a  higher s tandar  d of living  than is  enjo yed in the           
United  States tod ay.  
Innovation  is the  key  driver  of compe titiv eness,  wage and  job  growt h, and long ‐  
term  economic gr owth. Ther efore, one wa y to  approach  th e question  of how  to        
improve  the co mpetitiveness  of the  Uni ted States  is to look  to  the  past and  exa m‐     
ine  the fa ctors tha t helpe d unleash  the treme ndou s innovative pot ential of the       
private  sector. Among  the se factor s, three pi llars ha ve been  key: Fed eral su pport      
for  basic res earch, educ ation, and in frastructur  e.  Federally su pported rese arch  
laid  the gr oundwork for  the in tegrat ed circuit and  the subs eque nt com puter in‐    
dustry;  the In ternet; and  advan ces in chemic als,  agriculture,  and medical sc ience.     
Millions  of wo rkers can  trace  their indus  tries  and companie  s back  to technol ogi‐   
cal  breakthroughs  funded by  the  govern ment.  The U. S. educ ational system  in the      
th 20 century pr oduced incr easing number s of high  schoo l and  college gr aduat es,    
more  so tha n anywher  e else in  the wo rld . Thes e highly  skilled wo rkers, in  turn,        
th boosted  innovation. The  trans formation  of infr astructure  in the  20 centur y was    
nothing  short of  amazing:  the cou ntry  became ele ctrified,  clean water bec ame      
widely  available, air  transp  ort became  ubiquit ous, and the in tersta te high way    
system  was planne  d and  constr ucted.  All of  the se develop ments  helped busi ‐
nesses  compete by  opening  up mark et s and keepi ng cos ts low.      
Common  to all  thre e pillars —research,  education, and  infr astructure—is  that  
they  are ar eas wher e gover nment has mad e, and  should  contin ue to mak e, signif‐     
icant  investments.  For a  vari ety of reas ons , the privat e sect or under‐ invest ins   
these  areas so  the  gover nment needs to  step in  to bring  inv estmen  t  up to the         
socially  optimal le vels. An a dditional  commo n thread betw  een the se three pi llars      
U.S. COMPETITIVENESS AND INNOVATIVE CAPACITY v is  that the  bene fits of the se in vestmen ts took years  to be fully  realiz ed.  For in ‐      
th stance,  we ar e still  benefiting  today fr om inve stment s made in the 19  cent ury,        
such  as the  Morri ll Act of  1862,  which  laid the  founda tion  for the  land grant un i‐       
th versity  system in  all state  s . In the 20  cen tury , Wo rld Wa r II‐er rea searc h became    
the  basis of  the  transi stor; and in the  1960s,   all of the  benefit s fr om in vesting  in        
science  made the  Uni ted States  the lead er of  the space  rac e as we ll as the  infor ‐        
mation  technology indus  try. This  long‐ termou tlook  should not  be forg otten.   
The  need fo r the  Federa l governm ent to play an  importan  t  role  in the first pi l‐        
lar—research,  particularly ba sic rese arch–derives  from the  fact  that ther  e is  a di‐    
vergence  between the  priv ate and so cial re turns of  research  activ ities which     
leads  to le ss innov ative activi ty in the priv at e sect or than is  what is  best for  our           
country.  However, gove  rnment support  of basic  res earch  can remedy  this pr ob‐    
lem.  The benefit  s from  Federa l researc h and deve lopmen t  (R&D) su pport are  not    
just  theoretical: as  men tioned above,  the Fed eral go vernment  has played a  cru‐    
th cial  role in  the  developm  ent  of ma ny key  innov ations of the mid ‐ to late ‐20 cen‐ 
tury.  
Federal  funding fo r basic  resea rch has been  incr easing,  but at a slower  pac e than         
economic  growth. To  impr ove the tr ajecto ry of Americ an innov  ation, though  tful,    
decisive,  and ta rgeted actio ns are ne eded , some of which  alr eady  have been  pro‐     
posed.  These ac tions include  sustaining  the levels  of fu nding fo r ba sic resear ch by       
the  Federal gove  rnment,  extending a  tax  credit  for priv ate‐ secto R&Dr to  give   
companies  appropriate and  well ‐designe dincen tives to  boos t innov ation above    
the  baseline le vel that  would  have been  reac hed ab sent these  incentive s, and im ‐    
proving  the me thods by which    basic res earch  is transferre d fr om the lab in to        
commercial  products.
Education,  the sec ond pillar , is also  critic al to  foster innov  a tion and  to increase        
th living  standards. The  adv ances in educ ation  in the 20 cen tury helpe  d  propel the       
economic  rise of  the  Unite d States as  it beca me the  riche  st nation   on  the planet.          
However,  by ma ny mea sures, the U. S. educ ation  system has  slipped. By  some  ac‐      
counts,  the Un ited Stat es’ system  of higher  educ ation r emains the be st in the          
world  and educ  ates our  count ry’s and our  comp etitor s’  future scien  tists and  engi‐ 
neers,  factors su ch as  poor  prepara tion in math and  science  and  the  high cost         
of  college tuition  and  expense s are rest ricting  the flow of  Americ an science,    tech‐    
nology,  engineering and  mathema  tics  (STEM) gr aduates from  our uni vers ities.  
vi U.S. COMPETITIVENESS AND INNOVATIVE CAPACITY