Maine has a lot to be proud of in its recent investments in research and development, and the message is clear that the state must maintain its momentum in this area in order to best help its residents. That’s why now, more than ever, Maine policymakers must look at the strategic research and development priorities they have set and ensure that they make the most sense for the residents they are charged to serve and protect.

It is a daunting task that the University of Maine, the state’s primary research university, stands ready to help the state undertake. But there’s no time to waste.

According to the State Science and Technology Institute, Maine led all states in the percentage increase of academic research funds acquired from the period between 1992 and 2006. Not coincidentally, this increase (547 percent) has occurred, for the most part, since our state began investing in research and development 10 years ago. This state funding, mostly through the Maine Economic Improvement Fund, has catalyzed the efforts of Maine’s creative researchers, most of whom are on the University of Maine faculty, giving them the foundational support to bring in the outside funding (from sources such as the National Science Foundation) that accounts for this eye-popping increase.

The Corporation for Enterprise Development also ranks Maine first among states in creating spinoff companies from university research – per dollar of state research and development investment. This suggests that those same Maine researchers have the good ideas that can lead to new businesses and new jobs, which are the economic development goals that caused state leaders to invest in research and development in the first place.

However, at the same time, we have not effectively enough developed the straightforward, common sense explanations of why research and development and higher education are among the best investments Maine can make. A 2001 state report demonstrated that Maine’s income level will increase only by adopting the twin strategies of graduating more people from four-year colleges and investing in research and development. In my opinion, nothing has changed to alter the logic of this approach, yet our state has not followed it in a consistent manner.

As the SSTI and CFED data indicate, Maine has seen a noticeable increase in federal research funds awarded and in the number of fledgling businesses created over the past decade. While those new businesses are starting up, they are not yet producing the high-paying jobs that will measurably improve Maine’s economy. That takes time. It is my contention that we also need to consistently invest in those areas that will stimulate the current economy – and in amounts that will make a difference. I offer three suggestions.

First, some investments have not resulted in jobs or improved the state’s economy because the relationship between investment and economic effect takes longer in some areas (genetics, marine sciences) than others (forest products, agriculture). Both short-term and long-term initiatives are needed, but our state should adjust its approach and invest more heavily in the kinds of projects that will yield quicker returns. The research and development bond initiative approved in November is a step in the right direction, but these types of investments will succeed only if they are made on a regular basis and in those areas that will have an economic effect.

Second, basic scientific discoveries are the foundation for innovation and revolutionary discoveries. That kind of research is necessary for developing practical outcomes that directly affect people. The transition from the “interesting, but so what?” to “this really makes a difference” is called translational research. Maine can accelerate translational research by requiring partnerships between the private sector and universities and nonprofits. Well-supported state universities can better afford to take the economic risks associated with research and development, while the partnering private entities can ensure relevancy that will facilitate economic impact. In my opinion, this will expedite the establishment of new jobs and improve the state’s economy.

Third, it is obvious that there is not enough money for Maine to meet all of the legitimate needs of its residents. I say this having spent 20 years as a clinical psychologist in private practice assisting people dealing with severe pain and suffering. Maine needs to invest in clinically relevant, health-related research. If we don’t find a way to bring down our state health care costs, they will continue to increase. Moreover, this added burden will make it difficult for new businesses to relocate to Maine. The federal government is investing in changing people’s unhealthy behavior, but Maine is unable to participate because it has chosen not to invest research funds into innovative new approaches or in the development of new and more efficient delivery of health care services.

Whether we move forward or remain in a downward spiral is in all our hands. I suggest that we should invest our hard-earned money in our only publicly funded research university, the University of Maine, and in research and development projects that will affect our state’s economy in the near future.

Michael Eckardt is vice president for research at the University of Maine. He previously spent 25 years at the National Institutes of Health conducting clinical research and assisting in the planning and evaluation of biomedical research at the national level.