Support Sestry
Even a small contribution to real journalism helps strengthen democracy. Join us, and together we will tell the world the inspiring stories of people fighting for freedom!
Panels of experts discussed the technological innovations developed in Ukraine at the "Berkeley - Ukraine: Innovative Startup Hub"; conference at the University of California.
Technologies that will be useful during the war, as well as after it ends. No country has had a similar experience in building a special hub where scientists and entrepreneurs come together to create new technologies in a war-torn country. Thanks to the collaboration between the University of California, the Bakar BioEnginuity Hub (BBH), and scientists and economists from the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy (NaUKMA), Ukraine has had this opportunity.
Anastasia Fedyk, one of the initiators of this project, Professor of Finance at the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley, Chief Economist of the AI for Good Foundation, and co-founder of the charitable foundation Economists for Ukraine, talked with Sestry about the prospects for an innovative hub to grow in Ukraine and what impact it will have on the development of science and modern technologies.
When Scientists and Businesspeople Collaborate
This initiative started last year when the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy signed a cooperation agreement with the University of California to carry out joint projects. At this year's meeting, other scientists and entrepreneurs from Ukraine joined the initiative, explains Anastasia Fedyk.
Mr. Serhiy Kvit, the NaUKMA President attended the meeting, as well as, Mr.Tymofiy Mylovanov, President of the Kyiv School of Economics. The University of California was represented by the newly appointed Chancellor Mr. Richard Lyons, Professor of Economics Yuriy Gorodnichenko, and myself. From the American side, Ms. Janet Napolitano, former President of the University of California, Berkeley, and now a member of the Advisory Board for Intelligence under the President of the USA, was also present.
There were founders of startups and operating businesses among the guests as well. For example, a British entrepreneur developing gliders (a type of hypersonic weapon) that can play a vital role in the war in Ukraine.
In Ukraine, we want more innovations like gliders to appear
Is this hub a place for collaboration among scientists from different countries? A scientific laboratory? A technological innovation center?
It's about the collaboration between scientists and businesses. It's no coincidence that our conference began with an introductory tour of the BBH, as this center operates on the principle of such cooperation. In our case, scientists develop a concept needed by businesses so it is easily commercialized, and thus, not only ready for implementation but practically immediately implemented. At BBH, this works as follows: a professor with a group of scientists develops a technology, which receives funding from a private company. It still is academic work, as they know how their technology will be used. It is not theoretical science (which without practical application does not have much impact), it is a readily available technology.
The ownership of intellectual property rights is clearly defined — what specifically belongs to the university and what to the company.
In BBH, this collaboration between business and science works like this. In Ukraine—given the circumstances—it might look a bit different, but there is a strong interest in creating an innovation center with this principle of operation. At BBH, the focus is on biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, and neurotechnology.
In Ukraine the focus could be on the development of military or digital technologies.
Will the innovative hub in Ukraine only conduct scientific and business activities? Are there any other options for the development of science and technology?
At the conference, there was a panel where Mr.Yuriy Gorodnichenko, Mr.James Hodson, founder of the AI for Good Foundation, and I discussed what the activities of the Innovative Hub might look like. We also identified three levels of its operations.
The first is what we mentioned earlier: the collaboration between scientists and businesspeople to create and implement new technologies needed in the country. Such collaboration is possible in the center that will be set up in Kyiv, and perhaps later in Lviv and Kharkiv.
The second level is programs: courses, training, seminars, workshops, and events where people can meet. We practice this in Berkeley: meetings of scientists from different universities with business representatives.
The third direction is business-oriented activities. These are investments in Ukrainian startups aggregated in this hub. If, for example, American investors want to invest in demining (a relevant topic in Ukraine now), then developing new methods such as using robots is the way to go. In the future, this might become of interest to other countries as well.
Are foreign investors interested in Ukrainian startups?
We have ready solutions for this type of collaboration, that’s why we can act as managers of these processes. Our reputation encourages and attracts foreign investors to Ukraine. Some investors might want to invest in Ukrainian companies or ideas but don't know how to do it or where to start.
If we take a centralized approach and, for example, they invest in us as they do in Berkeley, taking into consideration our experience working with Ukraine, we can propose investments in the joint hub—this will be both convenient and interesting for them.
Can we already be certain that American investors are willing to operate in Ukraine?
Yes.
At our conference there was an investor who admitted he was interested in opening a fund and investing in Ukraine.
I would like to mention that hubs flourish due to cooperation between investment and business. That is also level three of the hub’s operations. How was it with BBH? They first opened the hub. They received grants and facilities. Currently, there are 35 partner companies (since these are neuro- and biotechnologies, these are mainly laboratories). And there is already investor interest in putting funds into these companies. They are indeed cherry-picked. They cooperate with scientists, and businesspeople want to invest in them.
In my opinion, this combination works best: having infrastructure, programs that help businesses grow and expand, and the ability to invest in this business—it is the definition of sustainable.
As for investors, we plan to involve the International Monetary Fund, USAID, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the Center for Private Enterprise in this hub because their representatives expressed high interest in the entire initiative.
“We want to provide Ukraine with as many resources as possible”
Should the investments come mostly during or after the war?
Why should we wait for the war to end? Innovations are needed now. For example, what startups in the USA come up with in the field of mine clearance is not cutting edge anymore. Someone has already come up with something better in Mykolaiv.
Demining and drones are developing best in eastern Ukraine. I think that within a year, such a hub will appear in Kyiv.
You have been researching this for years. Are there enough scientists now to develop and implement such innovations? How severely has the war impacted this sector of science?
We are keen to support Ukrainian scientists. During the conference, we talked about the scholarships that Ukrainian researchers have received. The way I see it, inviting Ukrainian scientists to the USA for a year or more is not very effective. First, they fall out of their environment, and second, they often decide to stay here to work and live. Our goal is to help Ukrainian scientists develop in Ukraine and make scientific discoveries for Ukraine. We aim to provide your country with as many resources as possible. Various kinds.
Many scientists have left Ukraine: they found remote jobs or moved within the country, from Kharkiv to Kyiv or Lviv. But those who stayed are working very effectively. Compared to how the system usually works—in times of peace, when
everyone feels pretty comfortable and calm, and innovation might come at slower paces—now that need is quite dire. For example, the destruction of the energy system in Ukraine. It's not just a matter of rebuilding;—it can potentially lead to creating new, state-of-the-art, energy-saving, eco-friendly technologies.
There are such people in Ukraine—a select few for now, but they are effective and impressive in what they do
If Ukrainians want to win this war, they need to start doing things they have never done before...
We noticed this in the first months of the war when everyone was already working on something and had lots of ideas.
Isn’t it how the Economists for Ukraine Fund was created? You raised $1.6 million for various aid programs in Ukraine over the past two years.
Yes. My friends, my husband, and I couldn't just read the news about what was happening in Ukraine—we have relatives, acquaintances, and friends there, so we had to start this initiative, which is now growing. We are still finding new areas where we could do something more.
Your fund is involved in a wide variety of activities....
We couldn't choose just one type. We can help people in many different ways.
For example, the LifeForce platform, which brought together the efforts of many people with a wide spectrum of capabilities to meet real-time needs: food, shelter, medicine, and transportation. People fled from bombings, arrived in cities where they didn't know anyone, had never been before, and had to organize their lives and secure their basic needs. And someone living in that city knows where to rent a room or an apartment, find food for children, or even deliver medical equipment—and on our platform, these people met, exchanged necessary items, and helped each other.
Then financial donors appeared, who paid for the delivery of medicine to the elderly or disabled, single mothers, bought necessary items, and distributed them through a network of volunteers.
Let’s not forget about Svidok.org. This platform preserves the living memories of Ukrainians about the war. Anyone can go online and leave their story—anonymously or not. It is important to preserve these stories for the future, for historians, psychologists, and researchers who will work with the materials from this war. The stories of people from occupied territories are particularly moving. It is pain, horror, and at the same time, courage to talk about it.
This is a unique experience. For example, participants and survivors of WWII were mostly written after the war. But on Svidok.org, anyone can write in real time. Our feelings and memories change. Over time, they either become less intense, embellished, or entirely fade away. We want to preserve these impressions as they are now.
Photo: Tetiana Rudenko
Journalist, editor. She has lived in Poland since 2015 and has worked for various Ukrainian publications: «Postup», «Livyi Bereg», «Profil» and «Realist.online». She is the author of publications on Ukrainian-Polish cooperation, covering topics such as economic and border issues, cultural heritage and commemoration. She is also a co-organiser of journalistic initiatives promoting Ukrainian-Polish friendship. She has worked as a trainer for the EU programme «Women’s and Children’s Rights in Ukraine: Communication Component». Her interests include personal development and neurolinguistic programming, among others.
