Innovation Indicators Project 2016

I N N OVA T I O N I N D I C A T O R S P R O J E C T
2 0 1 6
Metro Atlanta

About this Project
The Metro Atlanta Innovation Indicators Project is the second comprehensive evaluation of innovation data for the 29-county
region. It illustrates how Metro Atlanta is performing on different measures of innovation relative to its own history and compared
to other regions throughout the U.S. that are recognized as innovation leaders. This project was commissioned to establish
baseline metrics to inform actions and measure the impact of current and future efforts designed to build the region’s innovation
capacity. For more information about the Metro Atlanta Innovation Indicators Project and its findings, visit www.macoc.com.
Special thanks to members of the Innovation Advisory Group:
Sam Adams
Invest Atlanta
Troels Adrian
Metro Atlanta Chamber
Mike Alexander
Atlanta Regional Commission
Kornelius Bankston
Evelyn Bolden
Cox Enterprises
Jen Bonnett
ATDC
Mike Cassidy
Georgia Research Alliance
Hillery Champagne
Johnson Cook
Boom Ventures
Tom Cunningham
Charlton Cunningham
Startup Atlanta
Christina De Giulio
David Duncan
Clark Atlanta University
Mark Farmer
Gwinnett Chamber
Stephen Fleming
Boostphase
MaryBeth Flournoy
Georgia Power
Jacob Gluck
Goza Tequila
Marshall Guest
Adam Harrell
Nebo Agency
Amanda Hendley
Technology Association of Georgia
Derek Howard
Louis Jourdan
Clayton State University
Ayesha Khanna
Points of Light
Katie Kirkpatrick
Eloisa Klementich
Invest Atlanta
Sandeep Luke
Surya, Inc.
Brooks Mathis
Cobb Chamber
Ann McDonald
Morris, Manning & Martin
Heather Miner
Amy Moore
Georgia Research Alliance
Charles Moses
Clark Atlanta University
Catherine Pearson
IgniteHQ
Jean Marie Richardson
iFolio Corp
Charles Ross
Kennesaw State University
Amanda Seals
Kennesaw State University
Jennifer Sherer
Sarah Shoup
Kelly Sydney
Peter Tokar
City of Alpharetta
Grant Wainscott
Pierce Walker
Youth Entrepreneurs Georgia
Jim Weyhenmeyer
Georgia State University
John Yates
Morris, Manning & Martin
Report developed and prepared by Collaborative Economics
Principal researchers and authors:
John Melville, Co-Chief Executive Officer
Doug Henton, Co-Chief Executive Officer
Elizabeth Brown, Project Manager
Janine Kaiser, Senior Consultant
Designed by:
Bridget Gibbons
coecon.com
This project was made possible
by funding from:
Invest Atlanta

Summary of Key Findings.......................................................................................................................................................................4
Innovation Indicators Dashboard..........................................................................................................................................................6
Why and How Innovation is Important for Metro Atlanta..............................................................................................................7
Introduction to Comparison Regions...................................................................................................................................................8
Innovation Resources...............................................................................................................................................................................9
Adult Education Levels....................................................................................................................................................................9
Adult Population Growth by Education Level.............................................................................................................................9
Change in Adult Population by Education Level....................................................................................................................10
STEM Higher Education...................................................................................................................................................................11
High-Tech Occupations....................................................................................................................................................................11
Innovation Processes..............................................................................................................................................................................12
Idea Generation
Academic Research and Development (R&D) Expenditures.............................................................................................12
Patents....................................................................................................................................................................................................13
Commercialization
Academic Licenses........................................................................................................................................................................14
Startups Spinning Out of Universities.......................................................................................................................................15
Productivity of Academic Research Dollars.............................................................................................................................15
Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer Grants (SBIR/STTR).....................16
Early Stage Funding.......................................................................................................................................................................17
Venture Capital and Total Private Investment........................................................................................................................18
Funding Sources.............................................................................................................................................................................19
Business Innovation
Mergers & Acquisition Activity....................................................................................................................................................20
IPO Activity......................................................................................................................................................................................20
InnovationResults...................................................................................................................................................................................22
Innovation Industry Churn..........................................................................................................................................................22
Entrepreneurship.................................................................................................................................................................................23
Employment.........................................................................................................................................................................................24
Wages....................................................................................................................................................................................................25
Appendix...................................................................................................................................................................................................26
Contents

Summary of Key Findings
Talent that Drives Innovation
Metro Atlanta has a large and growing pool of
highly-educated workers, gradually closing the
gap with comparison regions.
Metro Atlanta's adult population became more highly
educated as it grew 18 percent between 2005 and
2014. The proportion of adults with some college or
an associate degree rose 24 percent and adults with a
bachelor's degree or higher climbed 23 percent.
Metro Atlanta added more than 50,000 adults with a
bachelor's degree or higher between 2013 and 2014.
Metro Atlanta added far more adults with bachelor's
degrees than any other comparison region except San
Diego–almost 40 percent more than Boston, close to
50 percent more than Denver & Boulder, approaching
60 percent more than Austin, and about 85 percent
more than Research Triangle.
Metro Atlanta has one of the largest pools of regional
high-tech talent. The region employed nearly 163,200
individuals in high-tech occupations in 2015, ranking
second-highest among comparison innovation regions
behind Boston.
However, Metro Atlanta’s concentration of workers
in high-tech occupations is much lower than other
comparison regions. The region has 17 percent more
high-tech workers as a share of all workers than the
national average, which is well behind Austin (79
percent more than the national average), Research
Triangle (75 percent), and Boston (52 percent).
Nevertheless, Metro Atlanta is closing the gap, as its
concentration of high-tech workers grew the fastest
of the comparison regions, increasing by 30 percent
between 2006 and 2015.
In 2014, Metro Atlanta recorded the second-highest
number of STEM degrees awarded among comparison
regions, with just over 9,960. This represents a 40
percent increase in the number of STEM degrees
awarded annually compared to a decade earlier,
ranking Metro Atlanta third in growth rate among
comparison regions. Between 2012 and 2014, Metro
Atlanta’s growth rate in STEM degrees accelerated to
15 percent, which compares to its growth of 22 percent
in the seven years leading up to 2012.
Commercialization that Creates
Businesses, Products, and Jobs
Metro Atlanta is experiencing mixed results
on licensing and spinoffs, but fast growth and
diversification in private investment.
Over the past decade, the number of licenses executed
by Metro Atlanta research universities grew by 38
percent, compared to Research Triangle’s 123 percent,
Boston’s 12 percent, and Denver & Boulder’s six percent.
In 2014, Metro Atlanta universities executed 208
licenses for intellectual property created at their
institutions, down from 282 in 2013 and a high of 406 in
2012. Meanwhile, the number of academic licenses from
Research Triangle institutions continued to grow, while
Boston and Denver & Boulder experienced a one year
set back before resuming their growth trajectories.
Idea Generation that Seeds Innovation
Metro Atlanta's university R&D and patent
production are lagging most comparison
regions.
Investment in academic R&D in Metro Atlanta has
increased 24 percent between 2005 and 2014,
outpacing only San Diego and Austin. A concerning trend
is the decline in academic R&D investment in recent years
in all comparison regions except Research Triangle.
Metro Atlanta’s patent production fell eight percent
from 2,433 in 2014 to 2,250 in 2015. Patent production
also slipped in Austin and Denver & Boulder between
2014 and 2015 by only two percent in both regions. In
comparison, the number of patents issued grew by two
percent in Boston and San Diego and held steady in
Research Triangle since 2014.
The number of patents has grown the most in Metro
Atlanta’s Technology and Bioscience & Health areas over
the past decade. Together, they comprised 37 percent of
all patents produced in Metro Atlanta between 2006 and
2015. Between 2014 and 2015, Metro Atlanta’s patenting
activity increased most in Supply Chain Logistics (+45%).
4

Metro Atlanta’s academic institutions are more
productive with their research dollars than the other
comparison regions when measured in terms of
licenses executed. Research expenditures per license
executed have continued to decline in Metro Atlanta,
from $9.5 million per license in 2006 to $5.5 million in
2014, indicating increased research productivity over
time. During this period, research productivity also
improved but to a lesser degree in Research Triangle,
while decreasing in both Boston and Denver & Boulder.
The number of startups spinning out of universities in
Metro Atlanta averaged 16 per year between 2005 and
2014, totaling 162 spinoff companies over the decade.
The region’s total was higher than Denver & Boulder’s
109, comparable to Research Triangle’s 164, and well
behind Boston’s 599.
Angel and Seed investment in Metro Atlanta totaled
$225 million between 2006 and 2015, more than
double Research Triangle’s total investment, but below
that of the other comparison regions. Metro Atlanta's
Angel and Seed investment slid eight percent to $62
million in 2015 from more than $67 million in 2014.
Metro Atlanta companies raised $735 million in venture
capital funding in 2015, up 45 percent from 2014. All
but one comparison region experienced increases in
venture capital funding between 2014 and 2015, including
Boston rising 117 percent to $5.9 billion. Metro Atlanta
lagged all other comparison regions except Research
Triangle in total venture capital raised in 2014 and 2015.
In 2015, Metro Atlanta ($3.5 billion) ranked
second among comparison regions in total private
investments, behind Boston ($9.5 billion) and ahead
of Austin and San Diego (both $2.6 billion), Denver &
Boulder ($2.2 billion), and Research Triangle ($800
million). Metro Atlanta's total private investment spiked
in 2014 with a large private equity investment in First
Data and then declined 31 percent in 2015.
Metro Atlanta-based companies continue to experience
high rates of mergers and acquisition (M&A) activity,
second only to Boston in 2015. Between 2013 and
2015, the region’s M&A activity increased substantially
from 84 deals in 2013 to 134 deals in 2014, then
sustained that gain with 136 deals in 2015. The amount
of M&A activity in San Diego and Boston declined
between 2014 and 2015, while Denver & Boulder,
Austin, and Research Triangle experienced gains.
Metro Atlanta produced 13 IPO deals between 2006
and 2015, with an average value per offering of
$399 million, the highest average IPO value of the
comparison regions. However, the total value of Metro
Atlanta's 13 deals was $5.2 billion, third behind Boston
($8.3 billion) and Denver & Boulder ($6.2 billion).
Summary of Key Findings
5
Regional Results from Innovation
Entrepreneurship and business formation
slowing but jobs rising in innovation industries.
The rate of new entrepreneurship in Metro Atlanta
was the highest of the comparison regions between
2008 and 2012. However, the region’s rate of new
entrepreneurship fell 34 percent between 2010 and
2014.
Over the long term, Metro Atlanta has experienced a
net increase in the number of business establishments
in Innovation Industries: from 2007 to 2015, it gained
about 3,300 more firms in these industries through
starts and move ins than it lost in establishment
closures and regional move outs. There has been a
constant churn in these industries, with Metro Atlanta
every year adding on average about 2,815 establishments
through starts and move ins while losing approximately
2,450 firms to closing or leaving the region. More than
95 percent of gains and losses come from new business
starts and business closures, with only a small portion
resulting from business move ins or move outs.
More recently, between 2013 and 2015, Metro Atlanta
has experienced a decline in total establishments
in Innovation Industries due to both a slowdown in
new business starts and an acceleration of business
closures. The total number of establishments in these
industries declined by nine percent from 18,870 in 2013
to 17,150 in 2015, reversing a five-year trend in which
business starts exceeded business closures in Innovation
Industries every year.
Metro Atlanta added about 20,300 Innovation Industry
employees between 2012 and 2015. Growth in the
absolute number of Innovation Industry employees
placed Metro Atlanta third behind San Diego and Boston.

Metro Atlanta Innovation Indicators
66
Innovation Indicators Dashboard
How Does Metro Atlanta Compare?
In rank relative to Comparison Regions?
• = lowest • = middle • = highest
To its prior
performance?
To Comparison
Regions over time*?
INNOVATION
RESOURCES
Higher Education Attainment  
STEM Degrees Awarded  
Concentration of High-Tech Occupations*  
INNOVATIONPROCESSES
Academic Research and Development (R&D) Expenditures  
Patent Production  
Academic Licenses  
Academic Research Productivity (Licensing)  
Startups Spinning Out of Universities  
Academic Research Productivity (Startups)  
Small Business Innovation Research and Tech Transfer Grants
(SBIR/STTR)
 
Angel and Seed Funding  
Venture Capital Investment  
Total Private Investment  
Merger and Acquisition Activity  
IPO Activity  
INNOVATIONRESULTS
Rate of New Entrepreneurs  
Innovation Industry Employment as Share of Total Employment  
Innovation Industry Wage Growth*  
Prior Performance
 Improvement
 About the same
 Slippage
Over Time
 Gaining Ground
  Little Change
 Losing Ground
*The dashboard evaluates Metro Atlanta’s recent performance over time and relative to other regions, i.e. within the last one to two years and no more
than five years, depending on available evidence. Due to the availability of evidence, two indicators marked by an asterisk were evaluated over ten
years: Concentration of High-Tech Occupations, and Innovation Industry Wage Growth.

7
Resources: The wellspring of innovation is people. A region’s talent
base of scientists, researchers, entrepreneurs, and other professionals
are the key to creating new ideas, turning ideas into technologies
and products, and building innovation-based businesses. A highly-
educated population and the concentration of talent in high-tech
occupations are important indicators of whether a region has the
human resources to drive innovation. Also important is a region’s
commitment to expanding and replenishing the talent pool, particularly
individuals in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
(STEM) fields.
Results: Strong innovation resources and processes do not always
translate into regional benefits, as talented people and promising
companies can move or grow elsewhere. It is important to track
measures such as job creation and wages, particularly in innovation-
based industries, to determine if innovation resources and processes
are translating to regional benefits. Strong performance in these areas
has a positive ripple effect on the rest of the economy, including
increasing public revenues that enable continuing investment in
innovation resources and quality of life. Also critical is the level of new
business formation and entrepreneurship, tangible evidence that the
impacts of innovation are being captured locally.
Processes: A highly-educated population by itself does not guarantee
high levels of innovation. How effectively a region is able to generate
and commercialize ideas and move them to the marketplace is the
key. At the front end, important indicators of idea generation include
levels of academic research and patent activity. Measures such
as university licensing and startups, early-stage investment, and
venture capital show us how well promising ideas are moving into the
commercialization stage. Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) and mergers
and acquisitions (M&A) are signs that regional innovations are valued
by the marketplace.
INNOVATION
PROCESSES
INNOVATION
RESOURCES
INNOVATION
RESULTS
Why and How Innovation is Important for Metro Atlanta
Innovation is the most important catalyst driving regional prosperity. In Metro Atlanta—like other regions—innovation is the result of a
complex interaction of inventors, entrepreneurs, companies, investors, universities, service providers, and government leaders. It is an
“ecosystem” that is at once difficult to measure and indispensable for economic success. In fact, in an era of rapid technological change
and fast-moving global markets, innovation increasingly determines which regions prosper and which places fall behind.
The innovation ecosystem can be viewed as a dynamic interplay of resources, processes, and results (see figure). The Metro Atlanta
Innovation Indicators Project is an ongoing effort to identify and track measures that reflect these three dimensions. Innovation resources
(people, ideas) are the fuel for innovation processes (R&D, commercialization, investment) that produce innovation results (jobs,
businesses).
The good news is that innovation is neither a finite commodity nor a fixed advantage for a select few: it is something that is
substantially shaped by local decisions. While the level of innovation ebbs and flows with federal and state policy and investments,
regional differences exist because some places are better than others at building up their innovation resources, accelerating their
innovation processes, and capturing the results. While there is no artificial limit on the number of regions that can have a strong
innovation ecosystem, some regions have made innovation a priority by increasing investment in education and research, expanding
connections between entrepreneurs and investors, and focusing on other aspects of their innovation ecosystem that need attention.
This is why it is important to measure not only Metro Atlanta’s changing performance over time, but also its performance relative to other
regions that have chosen the innovation path—places like Austin, Boston, Denver & Boulder, Research Triangle, and San Diego.

8
Population Change
Population Change
Core Atlanta*, Metro Atlanta and Select Innovation Regions - 2005, 2010 and 2015
Population
Population Change
(2005-2015)
Region MSA(s)** 2005 2010 2015 Absolute Percent
Core Atlanta* - 3,746,895 4,121,651 4,450,487 703,592 19%
Metro Atlanta
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-
Roswell, GA Metro Area
4,770,870 5,303,758 5,710,795 939,925 20%
Austin
Austin-Round Rock-San
Marcos, TX Metro Area
1,453,358 1,727,627 2,000,860 547,502 38%
Boston
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy,
MA-NH Metro Area
4,418,046 4,565,410 4,774,321 356,275 8%
Denver & Boulder
Greeley, Boulder and
Denver-Aurora-Broomfield,
CO Metro Areas
2,835,869 3,104,620 3,418,876 583,007 21%
Research Triangle
Durham-Chapel Hill and
Raleigh-Cary Metro Areas
1,653,047 1,922,137 2,117,103 464,056 28%
San Diego
San Diego-Carlsbad-San
Marcos, CA Metro Area
2,938,375 3,104,386 3,299,521 361,146 12%
*Core Atlanta is comprised of Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, and Rockdale Counties.
** The U.S. Office of Management and Budget updated Metro Area definitions in 2013. The 2013 definitions have been used to sum population figures for all regions over 2005-2015 to ensure a
consistent data series.
Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division
Analysis: Collaborative Economics
Metro Atlanta’s population has grown 20 percent over the past decade, ranking it in the middle of comparison regions in terms
of population change between 2005 and 2015. Austin (38 percent), Research Triangle (28 percent), and Denver & Boulder (21
percent) grew faster, while San Diego (12 percent) and Boston (8 percent) grew more slowly. Metro Atlanta's growth has slowed from
about 11 percent during 2005-2010 to eight percent from 2010-2015. Yet Metro Atlanta's population change of 939,925 represents
the largest absolute population gain among the comparison regions.
Introduction to Comparison Regions

9
Adult Education Levels
Adult* Education Levels
Core Atlanta, Metro Atlanta and Select
Innovation Regions, 2014
Boston Research
Triangle
Austin Denver &
Boulder
Core
Atlanta
San
Diego
Metro
Atlanta
Bachelor’s
degree or
higher
Percentofpopulation25yearsandolderbyeducationlevel
Some
college or
associate
degree
High school
diploma or
less
45% 44% 41% 41% 39% 37% 36%
22% 27% 28% 28% 27% 31% 28%
32% 29% 31% 30% 34% 32% 36%
*Adult population 25 years and older
Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey
With 39 percent of adults holding a bachelor's degree or higher,
Core Atlanta continues to outpace San Diego (37 percent) but
trails other comparison regions. At the other end of the spectrum,
both Core Atlanta and Metro Atlanta continue to have the highest
percentage of adults with educational attainment at the high school
level or less among comparison regions. Since 2012, Metro Atlanta
increased its share of adults with bachelor's degrees or higher (+1
percent).
*Adult population 25 years and older
Relative Growth of Adult* Population by Education Level
Metro Atlanta, 2005-2014
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
Bachelor’s degree
or higher
Some college
or associate
degree
High school
diploma or less
Adult population*
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Relativegrowthofpopulation25yearsandolderfrom2005(2005=100)
Adult Population Growth by Education Level
Metro Atlanta's adult population became more highly educated
as it grew 18 percent between 2005 and 2014. The proportion of
adults with some college or an associate degree rose 24 percent
and adults with a bachelor's degree or higher climbed 23 percent.
In the last 10 years, Metro
Atlanta’s highly educated adult
population grew 23 percent.
Innovation Resources

10
Metro Atlanta
Boston
Austin
San Diego
Denver & Boulder
Research Triangle
+51,816
+4.1%
+0.6%
+1.4%
+2.1%
Core Atlanta
Absolute change in adult population with a bachelor's degree or higher
Percent change in adult population with a bachelor’s degree or higher
Percent change in adult population with some college or associate degree
Percent change in adult population with a high school diploma or less
Percent change in total adult population
+7,566
+1.5%
+6.4%
+0.6%
+2.5%
+31,782
+2.2%
+1.1%
+0.1%
+1.3%
+21,987
+4.3%
+4.1%
+4.6%
+4.3%
+26,998
+3.0%
+0.4%
+4.0%
+2.6%
+72,563
+9.9%
+0.4%
-3.3%
+2.4%
+42,759
+4.0%
-0.3%
+2.1%
+2.1%
Change in Adult Population* by Education Level
Core Atlanta, Metro Atlanta and Select Innovation Regions, 2013-2014
Change in Adult Population by Education Level
Metro Atlanta added more than 50,000 adults with a
bachelor's degree or higher between 2013 and 2014. Metro
Atlanta added far more adults with bachelor's degrees than
any other comparison region except San Diego–almost 40
percent more than Boston, close to 50 percent more than
Denver & Boulder, approaching 60 percent more than Austin,
and about 85 percent more than Research Triangle.
*Note: Change in adult population 25 years and older includes persons who become 25 years old and regional net migration of adults 25 years and older.
Between 2013 and 2014, Metro and Core Atlanta's highly-
educated population grew roughly twice as fast as the
region's adult population. Among comparison regions
during this period, only San Diego's higher educated
population grew faster relative to total population than Metro
and Core Atlanta.
Metro Atlanta added far more
adults with bachelors’ degrees
than all but one comparison
region between 2013 and 2014.

11
*Metro Atlanta includes the University of Georgia and Mercer University
**STEM degrees include bachelor’s degrees and higher
Data Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
Boston Metro Atlanta* Research Triangle Denver & Boulder San Diego Austin
2005 2012 2014
TotalnumberofSTEMdegreesawarded
Total STEM Degrees Awarded
Metro Atlanta* and Select Innovation Regions
2005, 2012 and 2014 Percent Change in STEM Degrees Awarded
2005-2014 2012-2014
Boston 45.2% 15.4%
Metro Atlanta 40.5% 15.4%
Research Triangle 47.0% 10.4%
Denver & Boulder 33.7% 9.3%
San Diego 39.4% 6.8%
Austin 28.8% 9.4%
STEM Higher Education
In 2014, Metro Atlanta recorded the
second-highest number of STEM
degrees awarded among comparison
regions, with about 9,960. This
represents a 40 percent increase in
the number of STEM degrees awarded
annually compared to a decade earlier,
ranking Metro Atlanta third in growth
rate among comparison regions.
Between 2012 and 2014, Metro
Atlanta's growth rate in STEM degrees
awarded accelerated. It was the fastest
growth rate over this two year period
among the comparison regions at 15.4
percent, even with Boston.
High-Tech Occupations
Concentration of High-Tech Occupations*
Metro Atlanta and Select Innovation Regions, 2006-2015
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
Denver &
Boulder
134,210
Metro Atlanta
163,180
RegionalemploymentconcentrationrelativetoU.S.,2015
-10% 0% 10% 20% 50%40%30%
Change in employment concentration, 2006 - 2015
Boston
225,110
Austin
93,430
San Diego
112,430
Research
Triangle
83,880
*Employment concentration is calculated as (Regional High-Tech Emp/Regional Total Emp)/(National High-Tech Emp/
National Total Emp). The U.S. employment concentration = 1.0.
Data Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics
How to Read a Bubble Chart
This bubble chart presents three dimensions of high-tech occupational employment: size, current year employment concentration*, and growth
in employment concentration over time. The bubble's size corresponds to employment in high-tech occupations in 2015. The y-axis is the
region's 2015 employment concentration relative to that of the U.S. The x-axis is the change in employment concentration between 2006 and
2015. A concentration of 1.0 is equal to the U.S. average.
Metro Atlanta has one of the largest
pools of regional high-tech talent.
The region employs nearly 163,200
individuals in high-tech occupations,
ranking second-highest among
comparison regions. Boston, which
employed more than 225,100 individuals
in high-tech occupations in 2015, is the
only region that outpaced Metro Atlanta.
The region has 17 percent more
high-tech workers as a share of all
workers than the national average.
However, Metro Atlanta’s concentration
of workers in high-tech occupations is
the lowest among comparison regions,
including Austin (79 percent more than
the national average), Research Triangle
(75 percent), Boston (52 percent),
San Diego (48 percent) and Denver &
Boulder (45 percent). Nevertheless,
Metro Atlanta’s concentration grew
the fastest of the comparison regions,
increasing by 30 percent between 2006
and 2015.

12
Academic R&D Expenditures by Source, in Billions of Dollars
Metro Atlanta* and Select Innovation Regions, 2014
Federal
government
State
and local
government
Institution
funds
Business
Nonprofit
organizations
All other
sources
TOTAL
Boston $1.75 $0.02 $0.50 $0.22 $0.28 $0.13 $2.90
Research
Triangle
$1.36 $0.13 $0.49 $0.34 $0.14 $0.03 $2.49
Metro Atlanta* $1.07 $0.06 $0.54 $0.09 $0.07 $0.02 $1.85
San Diego $1.05 $0.06 $0.25 $0.10 $0.11 $0.10 $1.66
Denver &
Boulder
$0.65 $0.02 $0.07 $0.07 $0.06 $0.01 $0.87
Austin $0.35 $0.02 $0.13 $0.07 $0.04 $0.01 $0.63
*Metro Atlanta includes University of Georgia and Mercer University
Data Source: National Science Foundation
Academic Research and Development (R&D) Expenditures
IDEA GENERATION
Metro Atlanta’s total
academic R&D expenditures
were $1.85 billion in 2014, up
1.3 percent since 2012 when
the region’s expenditures
were $1.83 billion (after
adjusting for inflation). This
total places the region well
behind Boston and Research
Triangle, but well ahead of
San Diego, Denver & Boulder,
and Austin whose total R&D
expenditures all declined since
2012. However, between 2013
and 2014, Metro Atlanta and all
comparison regions except the
Research Triangle experienced
a drop in academic R&D
expenditures.
Innovation Processes
Among the comparison regions, Metro Atlanta ranks first in the amount and proportion of academic R&D funding that was provided by the
institutions themselves. This level of self-funding ($540 million) is comparable to that of the top regions (Boston $500 million) and Research
Triangle ($490 million) and makes up to 30 percent of Metro Atlanta’s total academic R&D expenditure.
One of the biggest differences in the academic R&D investment pattern between Metro Atlanta and top regions such as Boston and
Research Triangle is the amount of funding coming from the business community. In 2014, Research Triangle ($340 million) and Boston
($220 million) far outpaced Metro Atlanta ($90 million) and other comparison regions ($70-100 million). In fact, the share of total academic
R&D funding that businesses provided to Metro Atlanta’s higher education institutions was the lowest among the comparison regions. Just five
percent of Metro Atlanta's academic R&D funding came from business compared to 14 percent in Research Triangle, 12 percent in Austin, 8
percent in Boston and Denver & Boulder, and 6 percent in San Diego.
Relative Growth of Academic R&D Expenditures
Metro Atlanta* and Select Innovation Regions, 2005-2014
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
RelativegrowthofR&Dexpendituresfrom2005(2005=100)in2014dollars
Research Triangle
Metro Atlanta*
San Diego
Austin
Boston
Denver & Boulder
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2012 2013 20142011
* Metro Atlanta includes University of Georgia and Mercer University
Data Source: National Science Foundation
Investment in academic R&D
in Metro Atlanta has increased
24 percent between 2005
and 2014, outpacing only
San Diego and Austin. A
concerning trend is the decline
in academic R&D investment in
recent years in all comparison
regions except Research
Triangle.

13
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Austin
Research Triangle
Metro Atlanta
Boston
Numberofpatentsissued
San Diego
Denver & Boulder
Numberofpatentsissued
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Other
Supply Chain
Logistics
Advanced
Manufacturing
Bioscience &
Health
Telecommunciations
Technology
10%
16%
13%
14%
24%
24%
Data Source: USPTO, includes utility patents only
Total Patents Issued
Patents
Metro Atlanta’s patent
production fell eight percent
from 2,433 in 2014 to 2,250
in 2015. Patent production
also slipped in Austin and
Denver & Boulder between
2014 and 2015 by only two
percent in both regions. In
comparison, the number of
patents issued grew by two
percent in Boston and San
Diego and held steady in
Research Triangle since 2014.
Metro Atlanta’s patent
production increased 63
percent between 2006 and
2015. All other comparison
regions except Austin
outpaced Metro Atlanta in
this measure. San Diego
experienced the highest
patent activity growth over
the past decade at 135
percent, followed by Denver
& Boulder at 78 percent,
and Boston and Research
Triangle, both at 69 percent.
Total Patents Issued by Major Technology Areas
Data Source: USPTO, including Utility Patents Only
A majority of Metro Atlanta’s
patents are concentrated in
Telecommunications (24%)
and Technology (24%),
a broad category which
includes computing and
data management (storage,
security & processing). Three
additional areas—Bioscience
& Health (14%), Advanced
Manufacturing (13%), and
Supply Chain Logistics
(10%)—account for most of the
remaining patent production.
The number of patents has grown the most in Metro Atlanta’s Technology and Bioscience
& Health sectors over the past decade. Together, they comprised 37 percent of all patents
produced in Metro Atlanta between 2006 and 2015. Between 2014 and 2015, Metro
Atlanta’s patenting activity increased most in Supply Chain Logistics (+45%).

14
Academic Licenses*
Metro Atlanta** and Select Innovation Regions, 2010-2014
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Totalnumberoflicenses
Metro Atlanta** Denver & Boulder Boston
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Research Triangle
Academic Licenses
COMMERCIALIZATION
In 2014, Metro Atlanta
universities executed 208
licenses for intellectual
property created at their
institutions, down from
282 in 2013 and a high of
406 in 2012. Meanwhile,
the number of academic
licenses from Research
Triangle institutions
continued to grow, while
Boston and Denver &
Boulder experienced a
one year set back before
resuming their growth
trajectories.
Relative Growth of Academic Licensing Activity*
Metro Atlanta** and Select Innovation Regions, 2005-2014
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 20142005
Boston
Metro Atlanta**
Denver & Boulder
Relativegrowthofacademiclicensingactivityfrom2005-2014(2005=100)
Research Triangle
*Data for licensing and startups comes from a survey that the Association for University Technology Managers (AUTM) administers to its
membership. The response rate from participating institutions varies across innovation regions and regional information for both San
Diego and Austin is not available. The University systems of California and Texas report their licensing activity at the state level so that the
individual contributions of UC San Diego and UT Austin cannot be extracted. San Diego and Austin have been excluded from the analysis
as a result.
**Metro Atlanta includes University of Georgia
Data Source: Association of University Technology Manager's Statistical Access for Tech Transfer (STATT) Database
*Data for licensing and startups comes from a survey that the Association for University Technology Managers (AUTM) administers to its
membership. The response rate from participating institutions varies across innovation regions and regional information for both San
Diego and Austin is not available. The University systems of California and Texas report their licensing activity at the state level so that the
individual contributions of UC San Diego and UT Austin cannot be extracted. San Diego and Austin have been excluded from the analysis
as a result.”
Data Source: Association of University Technology Manager's Statistical Access for Tech Transfer (STATT) Database
Over the past decade,
the number of licenses
executed by Metro Atlanta
research universities grew
by 38 percent, compared
to Research Triangle’s
123 percent, Boston’s 12
percent, and Denver &
Boulder’s six percent.
Metro Atlanta’s
academic licensing
activity has grown
over the long term,
though experienced
a decline in recent
years.

15
*Data for licensing and startups comes from a survey
that the Association for University Technology
Managers (AUTM) administers to its membership. The
response rate from participating institutions varies
across innovation regions and regional information
for both San Diego and Austin is not available. The
University systems of California and Texas report
their licensing activity at the state level so that the
individual contributions of UC San Diego and UT
Austin cannot be extracted. San Diego and Austin
have been excluded from the analysis as a result.
Data Source: AUTM Licensing Activity Survey
Startups Spinning Out of Universities
Metro Atlanta and Select Innovation Regions*, 2005-2014
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Metro Atlanta** 15 12 18 14 16 16 15 19 21 16
Denver & Boulder 10 10 10 12 11 10 13 13 9 11
Research Triangle 9 15 8 17 9 14 16 19 31 26
Boston 51 57 60 67 51 48 73 59 66 67
The number of startups spinning out of
universities in Metro Atlanta averaged 16
per year between 2005 and 2014, totaling
162 spinoff companies over the decade.
Annually, the number of spinoffs varied
from as few as 12 in 2006 to as many as 21
in 2013.
Metro Atlanta was competitive with other regions on this measure of academic
intellectual property commercialization. The region performed better than Denver
& Boulder, which averaged 11 university startups annually and produced a total of
109 university startups between 2005 and 2014. Metro Atlanta was about even with
Research Triangle, which spun out 16 startups on average annually, and 164 total.
Boston far outpaced other comparison regions with an average of 60 spinoffs annually
and a total of 599.
Productivity of Academic Research Dollars
Research Expenditures per
Academic License
Research Expenditures per
University Startup
Metro Atlanta and Select Innovation Regions - 2006, 2010 and 2014
$0
$3
$6
$9
$12
$15
Rollingaverageoverfouryearsofresearchexpendituresperlicenseexecutedinmillionsof2014dollars
$9.5
$10.1
$8.8
$12.0
$7.5
$7.9
$7.6
$10.9
$10.4
$10.5
$5.5
$14.1
Metro
Atlanta**
Denver &
Boulder
Research
Triangle
Boston
Average of
2003-2006
Average of
2007-2010
Average of
2011-2014
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
Metro
Atlanta**
Denver &
Boulder
Research
Triangle
Boston
Rollingaverageoverfouryearsofresearchexpendituresperstartupinmillionsof2014dollars
$86.9
$80.7
$108.7
$105.8
$88.8
$80.6
$160.7
$82.3
$90.6
$96.9
$90.9
$91.0
*Data for licensing and startups comes
from a survey that the Association for
University Technology Managers (AUTM)
administers to its membership. The response
rate from participating institutions varies
across innovation regions and regional
information for both San Diego and Austin
is not available. The University systems of
California and Texas report their licensing
activity at the state level so that the
individual contributions of UC San Diego and
UT Austin cannot be extracted. San Diego
and Austin have been excluded from the
analysis as a result.
Data Source: AUTM Licensing Activity Survey
Metro Atlanta academic institutions are more productive with their
research dollars than the other comparison regions when measured
in terms of licenses executed. The region spent about $5.5 million
per academic license executed in 2014, as compared with $14
million in Denver & Boulder, and over $10 million in Boston. Research
expenditures per license executed have continued to decline in Metro
Atlanta, from $9.5 million per license in 2006 to $5.5 million in 2014,
indicating increased research productivity over time.
Metro Atlanta’s research productivity when measured in terms of
university startups declined by five percent from 2006 to 2014
(after adjusting for inflation). In comparison, expenditures per
startup remained steady in Denver & Boulder, and fell 18 percent in
Research Triangle and 15 percent in Boston during this time period. In
2014, research expenditures per university startup were comparable
for all regions ($90-91 million per startup), except Denver & Boulder
which performed better on this measure ($82.3 million per startup).

16
Metro Atlanta and Research Triangle are the only comparison regions that experienced an increase in federal SBIR/STTR
funding over the past decade. The inflation-adjusted value of Metro Atlanta’s SBIR and STTR awards grew 14 percent from $23.7
million in 2005 to $27.1 million in 2014. In sharp contrast, the value of SBIR and STTR awards dropped in Austin (-33 percent), Boston
(-29 percent), and Denver & Boulder (-20 percent), while remaining about the same in Research Triangle and San Diego. While the
gap narrowed over the past decade, Metro Atlanta’s SBIR and STTR funding remains the lowest of the comparison regions.
Data Source: U.S. Small Business Administration
SBIR/STTR Funding in Millions of 2014 Dollars
Metro Atlanta and Select Innovation Regions
2005, 2010 and 2014
2005 2010 2014
Metro Atlanta $23.7 $27.8 $27.1
Austin $47.1 $40.9 $31.4
Boston $337.4 $324.6 $240.2
Denver & Boulder $103.1 $104.4 $82.3
Research Triangle $43.2 $44.0 $43.4
San Diego $117.0 $106.3 $115.5
Small Business Innovation Research and
Small Business Technology Transfer Grants (SBIR/STTR)
Metro Atlanta
experienced an
increase in SBIR/
STTR funding over
the past decade
while most other
regions experienced
declines, but total
funding remains
the lowest among
comparison regions.

17
Metro Atlanta
Boston
Austin
San Diego
Denver & Boulder
Research Triangle$225M
-8%
$0.9B
-11%
$390M
-24%
$1.4B
-7%
$351M
+25%
$1.5B
-48%
$260M
-50%
$2.8B
-18%
$102M
+37%
$0.6B
+139%
$936M
+8%
$8.2B
+27%
Total Angel and Seed Funding, 2006-2015
Percent change - Angel and Seed, 2014-2015
Total Series A Investment, 2006-2015
Percent change - Series A, 2014-2015
Metro Atlanta recorded more than $146 million in
combined Angel and Seed, and Series A investment
in 2015. The average amount of Angel and Seed and
Series A investment was $211 million between 2013 and
2015, which represents a 3-fold increase in early stage
funding over the 2006 to 2012 average of $70 million.
Series A investment in Metro Atlanta totaled
$900 million between 2006 and 2015. Series A
investments fell in four of six regions between 2014
and 2015, including in Metro Atlanta where it declined
by 11 percent.
Angel and Seed investment in Metro Atlanta totaled
$225 million between 2006 and 2015, more than
double Research Triangle’s investment in this
category, but below that of the other comparison
regions. Metro Atlanta's Angel and Seed investment
slid eight percent to $62 million in 2015 from more
than $67 million in 2014.
Angel and Seed, and Series A Funding
Angel and Seed investment
increased substantially and
reached 42 percent of total early
stage funding in 2014 and 2015.
Data Source: CB Insights
Angel and Seed, and Series A Investment
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
AngelandSeed,andSeriesAFunding
inmillionsof2015dollars
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
$80 $78
$39
$74
$96
$65 $62
$324
$162
$146
Angel and Seed
Series A
Early Stage Funding

18
VC Investment
$0
$1.3
$2.6
$3.9
$5.2
$6.5
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Austin $855M
Denver & Boulder $760M
Metro Atlanta $735M
Boston $5.9B
VentureCapitalfundinginbillionsof2015dollars
San Diego $1.4B
Research Triangle $635M
Metro Atlanta companies raised $735
million in venture capital funding in
2015, up 45 percent from 2014. All but
one comparison region experienced
increases in venture capital funding
between 2014 and 2015, including
Boston rising 117 percent to $5.9
billion. Metro Atlanta lagged all other
comparison regions except Research
Triangle in total venture capital raised in
2014 and 2015.
Metro Atlanta's average private
investment deal size was highest
among the innovation regions at $16
million in 2015.
In 2015, Metro Atlanta ($3.5 billion)
ranked second among comparison
regions in total private investments,
behind Boston ($9.5 billion) and ahead
of Austin and San Diego (both $2.6
billion), Denver & Boulder ($2.2 billion),
and Research Triangle ($800 million).
Metro Atlanta's total private investment
spiked in 2014 with a large private
equity investment in First Data and then
declined 31 percent in 2015.
*Total private investment does not include IPO or M&A deals.
Total Private Investment*
$0
$2
$4
$6
$8
$10
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Austin $2.6B
Denver & Boulder $2.2B
Metro Atlanta $3.5B
Boston $9.5B
Privatefundinginbillionsof2015dollars
San Diego $2.6B
Research Triangle $800M
Venture Capital and Total Private Investment
Metro Atlanta’s total VC investment
doubled between 2010 and 2015
and its total private investment was
second-highest of all the comparison
regions in 2014 and 2015.
Average Private Investment Deal Size**
2015
Region Millions of Dollars
Metro Atlanta $16.0
Boston $10.5
Austin $9.1
San Diego $7.6
Denver & Boulder $6.0
Research Triangle $5.0
**Excludes M&As and IPOs, includes debt

19
Funding Sources
Funding Sources
Funding Sources
Metro Atlanta and Select Innovation Regions,
2010-2015
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Other
Grants
VC
Private Equity,
Corporate
Debt
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Percentageoffundingperinvestmentcategory
54%
18%
23%
4%
1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Other
Grants
VC
Private Equity,
Corporate
Debt
Boston San
Diego
Austin Research
Triangle
Denver &
Boulder
Metro
Atlanta
Percentageoffundingperinvestmentcategory
27%
33%
34%
4%
2%
In Metro Atlanta, the share of investment
from different funding sources has been
shifting towards a combination of private
equity, corporate, and debt financing.
These sources accounted for an average of
50 percent of total investment from 2010 to
2013, and about 80 percent between 2014
and 2015. Venture capital as a share of total
investment in Metro Atlanta declined from
2010 to 2015.
Metro Atlanta’s investment pattern looks
different from most comparison regions,
with much more reliance on private equity,
corporate and debt financing and less on
venture capital. Sixty percent of the region’s
investment between 2010 and 2015 came
from private equity, corporate, or debt
financing sources, while the proportion from
these sources in comparison regions ranged
from 23 percent to 44 percent. Only one-
third of Metro Atlanta investment is venture
capital, versus 45 percent to 66 percent in
comparison regions.
Metro Atlanta has the
most diversified portfolio
of funding sources
among comparison
regions.

20
Mergers & Acquisition Activity
0
50
100
150
200
250
Boston Denver & Boulder San Diego Austin Research TriangleMetro Atlanta
NumberofM&Adeals
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Metro Atlanta-based companies continue
to experience high rates of merger and
acquisition (M&A) activity, second only to
Boston in each of the last five years. The
region's M&A activity increased substantially
from 84 deals in 2013 to 134 deals in 2014,
then sustained that gain with 136 deals in
2015. San Diego and Boston experienced
declines in the amount of M&A activity
between 2014 and 2015, while Denver &
Boulder, Austin, and Research Triangle
experienced gains.
BUSINESS INNOVATION
U.S. M&A activity was strong in 2015,
surging 43.3 percent above comparable
2014 levels, according to Thomson
Reuters. In the M&A Trends Report for 2015,
Deloitte projected that high levels of cash
on corporate balance sheets, and a positive
economic outlook are contributing to
companies' interest in acquisitions.1
1
Deloitte. M&A Trends Report, 2015. April, 2015; and Thomson Reuters. Mergers & Acquisitions Review, Full Year 2015.
2
2015 U.S. IPO Annual Review. Renaissance Capital. December 18, 2015.
IPO Activity
0
5
10
15
20
25
Boston Metro Atlanta Denver & Boulder Austin Research TriangleSan Diego
NumberofIPOdeals
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
IPO Activity
Metro Atlanta produced three initial public
offerings (IPO) in 2015, competitive with
Denver & Boulder, Research Triangle, and
Austin. The leading comparison regions
(Boston and San Diego) experienced steep
declines in the number of IPOs in 2015
compared to 2014, a trend mirrored across
the U.S. in 2015 according to Renaissance
Capital.2
Only Metro Atlanta and Austin
increased their number of IPOs between
2014 and 2015 among comparison regions.

21
$10
$9
$8
$7
$6
$5
$4
$3
$2
$1
$0
TotalvalueofIPOofferings2006-2015,inbillionsof2015dollars
0 20 40 60 80 100
Bubble size is the average value per offering 2006-2015, in millions of 2015 dollars
Boston
$92M
Austin
$177M
San Diego
$80M
Research
Triangle
$148M
Denver &
Boulder
$271M
Metro Atlanta
$399M
Total number of IPOs 2006-2015
Total Number and Value of IPO Offerings, and Average Value per Offering
Metro Atlanta produced 13 IPO deals between 2006 and 2015, with an average value per offering of $399 million, the highest average
IPO value of the comparison regions. While Metro Atlanta had the fewest IPOs among comparison regions between 2006 and 2015, the
average value of its IPOs was much higher than these regions. The total value of Metro Atlanta's 13 deals was $5.2 billion, third behind
Boston ($8.3 billion) and Denver & Boulder ($6.2 billion).

22
Innovation Results
Innovation Industry Churn
Components of Innovation Industry Establishment Churn
Expansion, Start, Move in, Move out, Closure, and Total
Components of Innovation Industry Churn
Metro Atlanta, 2013 - 2015
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
-5,000
-4,000
-3,000
-2,000
-1,000
0 10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Start
Expansion
Move In
Closure
Move Out
Total
establishments
InnovationIndustryestablishmentsbycategoryofchurn
TotalInnovationIndustryestablishments
NOTE: Innovation Industries are based on the BLS definition of high-tech Industries, and also include additional
scientific industries. A list of the 4-digit NAICS codes included in this definition are provided in the Appendix.
Data Source: Business Dynamics Research Consortium and Infogroup
INNOVATION
INDUSTRY
ESTABLISHMENTS
18,870 in 2013
to
17,150 in 2015
2013-2015 CLOSURE
-8,140 establishments
2013-2015 MOVE OUT
-240 establishments
2013-2015 MOVE IN
270 establishments
2013-2015 START
5,930 establishments
2013-2015 EXPANSION
210 establishments
A small number of Innovation Industry establishments switched their primary industry code in each year. These switchers are not captured
in the components of churn but are captured in the total number of innovation industry establishments in each year. Therefore readers
may note differences (of < 1 percent of total number of Innovation Industry establishments) between the net Innovation Industry churn
obtained by summing the components of churn, and the total number of Innovation Industry establishments in the subsequent year.
Over the long term, Metro Atlanta
has experienced a net increase
in the number of business
establishments in Innovation
Industries: from 2007 to 2015, it
gained about 3,300 more business
establishments in these industries
through starts and move ins than
it lost in establishment closures
and regional move outs. There
has been a constant churn in these
industries, with Metro Atlanta every
year adding on average about
2,815 establishments through
starts and move ins while losing
approximately 2,450 firms to
closing or leaving the region. More
than 95 percent of gains and losses
come from new business starts and
business closures, with only a small
portion resulting from business
move ins or move outs.
More recently, between 2013 and 2015, Metro Atlanta has experienced a decline in total establishments in Innovation Industries due to both
a slowdown in new business starts and an acceleration of business closures. The total number of establishments in these industries declined
from 18,870 in 2013 to 17,150 in 2015. The number of business starts dropped 21 percent, while the number of business closures more than tripled
during this period, reversing a five-year trend in which business starts exceeded business closures in Innovation Industries every year.
The total number of Innovation
Industry establishments in Metro
Atlanta contracts or expands
over time, depending on how
many establishments move out
or close, and how many start,
expand, or move in to the region.
Metro Atlanta’s Innovation Industry
establishments contracted
from roughly 18,870 in 2013 to
17,150 in 2015 as the number of
establishments that moved out
(-240) or closed (-8,140) exceeded
the number that started (5,930),
expanded (210) or moved in (270).*

23
Entrepreneurship
*Adults include members of the population between twenty and sixty-four years of age.
**Data are available only for the largest Metropolitan regions by population size, which excludes Research Triangle; and Boulder, CO;
and Greeley, CO; which are components of the Denver & Boulder region.
NOTE: The rate of new entrepreneurship is a three-year moving average measuring the percentage of a region’s population that
became entrepreneurial in a given month.
Data Source: Kauffman Foundation
*Adults include members of the population between twenty and sixty-four years of age.
**Data are available only for the largest Metropolitan regions by population size, which excludes Research Triangle; and Boulder, CO;
and Greeley, CO; which are components of the Denver & Boulder region.
NOTE: The rate of new entrepreneurship is a three-year moving average measuring the percentage of a region’s population that
became entrepreneurial in a given month.
Data Source: Kauffman Foundation
Rate of New Entrepreneurs per 100,000 Adults*
Metro Atlanta and Select Innovation Regions**, 2008-2014
200
300
400
500
600
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Austin
Denver
Metro Atlanta
Boston
Montlhyrateofnewentrepreneursper100,000adults
San Diego
Opportunity Share of New Entrepreneurs
Metro Atlanta and Select Innovation Regions**, 2010-2014
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Austin
Denver
Metro Atlanta
Boston
Percentageofnewentrepreneursmotivatedbyopportunity
San Diego
The rate of new entrepreneurship
in Metro Atlanta was the
highest of the comparison
regions between 2008 and
2012. However, the share of
adults starting a new business
on a monthly basis in the region
declined by 34 percent between
2010 and 2014. San Diego and
Denver also experienced a
downward trend starting in 2010,
but Metro Atlanta recorded the
steepest decline. In contrast,
entrepreneurship rates actually
increased in Austin and Boston
between 2010 and 2014.
Metro Atlanta's rate of new
entrepreneurship rose three
percent from 2013 to 2014, the
first increase since the 2010
recession. The rate rose to 0.37
percent in 2014--meaning that
roughly 370 of 100,000 adults
in Metro Atlanta started a new
business every month in that
year. Among comparison regions,
Austin had the highest rate of new
entrepreneurship in 2014 at 0.55
percent, with about 550 of 100,000
adults starting a new business in
every month that year.
Approximately seven of every 10 entrepreneurs in Metro Atlanta
started a business based on opportunity rather than necessity
in 2014. Because opportunity entrepreneurs were employed or in
school prior to starting a new business, they are more likely to be
pursuing a market opportunity rather than choosing entrepreneurship
as an alternative to unemployment. Thus, the rate of opportunity
entrepreneurship is a proxy measure for new business formations with
growth potential.
Reversing a decline, Metro Atlanta's rate of opportunity
entrepreneurship increased from over 63 percent in
2013 to 69 percent in 2014. Metro Atlanta's rebound
still left the region behind comparison regions in
2014. Between 2010 and 2014, the rate of opportunity
entrepreneurship increased in Boston, San Diego, and
Denver and fell in Austin and Metro Atlanta.

24
Employment
Metro Atlanta reached approximately 190,000 in Innovation
Industry employment (189,300 in 2015), second only to Boston
among comparison regions. As of 2015, nearly 10 percent of
the region’s employment was in Innovation Industries, up from
8.4 percent in 2012, with a somewhat higher percentage in Core
Atlanta (10.4 percent), up from 9 percent in 2012.
Both Metro and Core Atlanta have smaller proportions of
Innovation Industry employment than the comparison regions.
While absolute Innovation Industry employment is much smaller in
Austin and Research Triangle, for example, the share of Innovation
Industry employees is much higher at 18.5 percent and 17.5 percent,
respectively.
Innovation Industry Employment
NOTE: Innovation Industries are based on the BLS definition of high-tech Industries, and also include additional scientific industries. A list of the 4-digit NAICS codes included in this definition are provided in
the Appendix.
Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Quarterly Workforce Indicators
Metro Atlanta added about 20,300 Innovation Industry
employees between 2012 and 2015. Growth in the absolute
number of Innovation Industry employees placed Metro
Atlanta third behind San Diego and Boston. However, the rate
of Innovation Industry employment growth in Metro Atlanta
was 12 percent between 2012 and 2015, slower in comparison
to the other innovation regions with the exception of Boston.
Metro Atlanta
Boston
Austin
San Diego
Denver & Boulder
Research Triangle
189,300
9.9%
+20,292
+12%
Core Atlanta
173,395
10.4%
+18,073
+12%
117,276
18.5%
+16,851
+17%
152,004
12.3%
+19,090
+14%
155,402
15.5%
+23,991
+18%
112,997
17.5%
+13,833
+14%
269,429
14.2%
+20,970
+8%
Total employment in Innovation Industries, 2015
Percentage of total jobs that are in Innovation Industries, 2015
Absolute change in Innovation Industry employment, 2012-2015
Percentage change in Innovation Industry employment, 2012-2015
Change in Innovation Industry Employment, 2012-2015
Metro Atlanta has one of the
biggest pools in Innovation
Industry talent among
comparison regions.

25
Average Annual Wage by Cluster
Metro Atlanta, 2005 and 2014
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
2005 2014
Average Annual Wages,
All Industries
Bioscience and Health IT
Supply Chain and
Advanced Manufacturing
Corporate Operations
and Business Services
Technology
$58,205
$58,023
$67,762
$67,514
$67,075
$75,577
$86,000
$99,139
$82,495
$96,977
Averageannualwages,adjustedto2014dollars
*Boston data is available for 2011 and after.
Average Innovation Industry Annual Wages in 2014 Dollars
Metro Atlanta and Select Innovation Regions, 2005 and 2014
2005 2014 % Change
2005 - 2014
Metro Atlanta $92,143 $93,247 1%
Core Atlanta $95,117 $96,191 1%
Austin $100,530 $95,935 -4%
Boston* - $126,390 -
Denver & Boulder $90,242 $92,898 3%
Research Triangle $102,845 $106,589 4%
San Diego $87,672 $115,700 32%
Having weathered the impact of a major recession,
inflation-adjusted wages for Innovation Industry
employees in Metro and Core Atlanta changed little
over the past decade. Comparison regions, with the
notable exception of San Diego, also experienced
little change in wages, or worse, such as inflation-
adjusted wage decline in Austin.
While inflation-adjusted wages in Metro Atlanta were flat for all industries
combined as well as for the Bioscience and Health IT Innovation Industry
cluster, other Innovation Industry clusters experienced gains over the last
decade. Wages in the Supply Chain and Advanced Manufacturing cluster
increased by the greatest amount, rising 13 percent between 2005 and
2014 to $75,577. Inflation-adjusted wages also increased in Metro Atlanta's
Corporate Operations and Business Services cluster (up four percent to
$86,000) and Technology clusters (up two percent to $99,139).
Wages
Wages have
increased in Metro
Atlanta’s Supply
Chain & Advanced
Manufacturing cluster
over the past decade,
but wages for all
Innovation Industries
combined have
remained flat.

26
Chart Name Data Source
Population Change
Population Division of the U.S. Census Bureau, County
Population Estimates
Adult Education Levels
U.S. Census Bureau's American Community SurveyRelative Growth of Adult Population by Education Level
Change in Adult Population by Education Level
Total STEM Degrees Awarded
National Center for Education Statistics' Integrated
Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) Completions
Survey
Concentration of High-Tech Occupations
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics' Occupational Employment
Statistics (OES)
Academic R&D Expenditures by Source National Science Foundation's (NSF) Higher Educaation
Research and Development Survey (HERD)Relative Growth of Academic R&D Expenditures
Total Patents Issued
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Total Patents Issued by Major Technology Areas
Academic Licenses
Association of University Technology Manager's Statistical
Access for Tech Transfer (STATT) Database
Relative Growth of Academic Licensing Activity
Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business
Technology Transfer Grants (SBIR/STTR)
Small Business Administration's (SBA) Award Listing database
Angel and Seed, and Series A Investment
CBInsights. www.cbinsights.com
Venture Capital Investment
Total Private Investment
Funding Sources
IPO Activity
Total Number and Value of IPO Offerings, and Average Value
per Offering
Components of Innovation Industry Establishment Churn Business Dynamics Research Consortium and Infogroup
Rate of New Entrepreneurship Kauffman Foundation's Kauffman Index of Startup Activity for
Metropolitan Area and City TrendsOpportunity Share of New Entrepreneurs
U.S. Census Bureau's Quarterly Workforce Indicators (QWI)
dataset
Average Annual Wage by Cluster
Average Innovation Industry Salaries in 2014 Dollars
Appendix*
*A detailed Appendix is available upon request from the Metro Atlanta Chamber

27

Innovation Indicators Project 2016

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Innovation Indicators Project 2016

Similar to Innovation Indicators Project 2016 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Innovation Indicators Project 2016