Mexico US collaboration in Mems Nems

México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS Guillermo FOLADORIa, Edgar ZÁYAGO LAUb1, Remberto SANDÓVALa, Richard APPELBAUMb, and Rachel PARKERc a Doctoral Program on Development Studies Autonomous University of Zacatecas, México b Center for Nanotechnology in Society, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA c Science and Technology Policy Institute, Washington, D.C., USA Abstract. This chapter explores binational collaboration between Mexico and the United States on MEMS (microelectromechanical systems). MEMS are increasingly associated with nanotechnologies; indeed, federal funding for nanotechnology in the U.S. includes research in MEMS. These devices are already being combined with nanostructures, leading to the NEMS (nanoelectromechanical systems). Development and production of these devices requires a significant investment of resources, justified by high-demand markets. MEMS are technologies for civilian and military use, and synergies between these interests made cooperation in this field easier. Binational collaboration networks were established with the participation of research organizations, such as the U.S.–Mexico Foundation for Science (FUMEC) and military laboratories, such as Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). The Mexican government justifies its support for MEMS/NEMS with the argument that these products will serve as substitutes to imports for the communication and automobile industries, which are the major part of the maquiladora industry and highly susceptible to market fluctuations. Introduction Ever since the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative was launched in the year 2000, MEMS (microelectricalmechanical systems) have been associated with nanotechnology. MEMS, with regard to size, are micro rather than nano, and they do not entail the different chemical or physical attributes associated with nano applications.2 Nonetheless, there are three elements that link MEMS with nanotechnologies. First, MEMS are intimately involved in the trend towards miniaturization, and there are MEMS that include nanostructures. The acronym NEMS (nanoelectricalmechanical systems) is used to describe devices that combine mechanical and electrical functions at the 1 Research for this chapter was funded by the UC MEXUS-CONACYT grant CN 10-420. Edgar Zayago Lau would also like to thank CONACYT for the funding provided for his postdoctoral visit at CNSUCSB (179518). 2 MEMS technology involves working at the microscale (1 to 100 micrometers); a micrometer is a millionth of a meter. Nanotechnology involves working at a scale of less than 100 nanometers, where individual molecules and atoms can be designed that have novel properties (a nanometer is a billionth of a meter; by way of reference, a sheet of newspaper is roughly 100,000 nanometers thick). There are 1,000 nanometers in a micrometer. For more information on nanotechnology, see the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative’s webpage at http://www.nano.gov/nanotech-101/what/definition. 108 México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS nanoscale, reflecting the natural transition from MEMS to NEMS. Second, both nanotechnology (including NEMS) and MEMS involve similar infrastructure and equipment, such as the use of clean rooms and atomic force microscopes (AFMs). Third, both often use the same raw materials. While silicon is the principal raw material used in MEMS manufacturing, the novel chemical, physical and mechanical attributes that emerge at the nanoscale hasten the transition from MEMS to NEMS. Finally, in terms of public funding, the National Nanotechnology Initiative spends significant amounts on MEMS and sensors, supporting laboratories with equipment used by and for MEMS (Plunkett 2010, Materials Modification Inc. n.d.) The objective of this article is to explore binational cooperation between Mexico and the U.S. regarding MEMS and NEMS. While this cooperation is relatively recent—it began less than a decade ago—its development illustrates at least two important issues. First, there is a strong confluence between military and civilian interests in the research and development (R&D) of this technology. This common purpose has both facilitated and guided human resource training, as well as specialization within the institutions involved. Second, it shows that despite having little historical experience in such high-tech areas, Mexican institutions are nonetheless able to effectively develop new technologies, as long as the political will is present. Nonetheless, Mexico’s MEMS technology has not yet gone beyond the first steps, and reaching a production process level remains uncertain. The argument of this article is organized as follows. We begin by explaining the general characteristics of MEMS and NEMS, along with the stages of R&D involved in manufacturing prototypes. This is key to understanding the requirements and equipment needed to manufacture these systems. In the second section, we illustrate the dual-use purpose of MEMS technology, both for civilian and military purposes. This dual-use feature has allowed the creation of joint programs between military laboratories and civil research clusters in both the U.S. and Mexico. The third section explores the institutional reach and actions of the U.S.-Mexico Foundation for Science (FUMEC–Fundación México-Estados Unidos para la Ciencia), a binational non-profit institution oriented to the development of S&T, for which NEMS are one of the most important areas of scientific collaboration. This section shows the socio-political environment in which the agreements were fostered, as well as the changes that FUMEC had to go through to adapt itself to endorse industrial innovation. In the fourth section, we describe how FUMEC organized MEMS-related technology transfer to Mexican institutions, in collaboration with U.S.-based agencies. We also map the current capabilities related to MEMS, and how these are distributed in Mexico. We conclude with a summary of our principal findings, noting that when the Mexican government makes a strong political commitment to advancing scientific research, significant advances can be made. 1. General characteristics of MEMS/NEMS 1.1. What are MEMS/NEMS? Microelectromechanical systems or nanoelectromechanical systems (MEMS/NEMS) are tiny devices composed of electrical, electronic and mechanical components at the micro- or nanoscale. MEMS range in size from a few tenths of a micrometer to several millimeters, depending on the complexity of the system. They are capable of interact- México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS 109 ing with physical, chemical, biological and other processes in the microscopic realm, in such a way as to detect and/or manipulate physical properties at the microscale. They can generate detectable effects on the macroscale as well (PRIME Faraday Partnership 2002). The term MEMS was coined in the United States, while in Europe they are known as microsystems (microsystems technology, or MST) and in Japan as microengineered devices. The term MEMS is the most widely used, and therefore is employed worldwide to identify these devices (Banks 2006, Maluf and Williams 2004, PRIME Faraday Partnership 2002, Senturia 2001). NEMS are understood as those devices at a scale under 100 nanometers that can exploit the advantage of size and the physical-chemical properties that materials exhibit at that size.3 To better understand what MEMS are, consider their macroscopic counterpart, electromechanical systems. We can think of a system made up of a reservoir, a tank, a pump and an electric level sensor. The system as a whole functions in such a way as to ensure that the tank is never empty. To achieve this, the sensor located in the tank detects the quantity of water; as it drops below a certain level, the pump—located in the cistern—is activated, which sends water to the tank. The water level begins to rise until the sensor detects sufficient quantity (before overflowing the tank and leaking water) and turns off the pump. In this system we can identify three important parts: the sensor, the pump and the control (the connections that activate and disengage the pump). In the same way, a MEMS can contain one or more of these components at a microscopic scale and interact with a macroscale system. In a wider sense, MEMS consist of microstructures (or arrays of microstructures), micro-detectors, micro-actuators and micro-electronics, all integrated into a single integrated silicon circuit (PRIME Faraday Partnership 2002). Some examples of MEMS include accelerometers located in air bags in automobiles or in some “smart phones,” pressure sensors in vehicle tires, printer ink-jet cartridges, etc. MEMS fabrication employs silicon-based integrated circuit technology, with the difference being that the micromechanical components are constructed using sophisticated silicon manipulation and/or other materials via micro- or nano-engineering processes, such as surface micromachining or large-volume micromachining. While integrated circuit technology utilizes electrical characteristics, MEMS employ mechanical traits and features specific to silicon and other materials (PRIME Faraday Partnership 2002). The advantages offered by MEMS over macroscopic processes are those inherent to their scale: reduced weight, low power consumption, portability, high functionality, appropriate for high-volume production at low cost, reliability, new solutions and new applications. Additionally, they make possible a greater integration of “intelligence” in any single device, increasing reliability, since fewer parts are employed and therefore fewer opportunities for system failures. Also, miniaturization makes it possible to develop new applications and enter new markets, including modern videogame control interfaces such as the Nintendo Wii, the use of accelerometers in “smart phones,” DNA analysis in biotechnology, or mechanical filters for wireless communications, among many other uses (MNX n.d.). 3 “[W]hen particles are created with dimensions of about 1–100 nanometers (where the particles can be “seen” only with powerful specialized microscopes), the materials’ properties change significantly from those at larger scales. This is the size scale where so-called quantum effects rule the behavior and properties of particles…by changing the size of the particle, a scientist can literally fine-tune a material property of interest” (http://www.nano.gov/nanotech-101/special). 110 México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS 1.2. The production process of MEMS The development and production of low-cost MEMS are processes that require significant investment in funding, time and human resources. As a consequence, it can only be suitable in markets where the demand is high (on the order of 10 million devices). Few MEMS-based products make the transition from prototype volumes to large-scale production (Da Silva et al. 2002). Some examples include gyroscopes, pressure sensors, ink injectors, accelerometers, RF or optical communication networks, data storage and disposable chemical analysis systems (Fedder 1999, Mukherjee 2003). An examination of MEMS-based product development is important in understanding the MEMS value chain, since the final outcomes are determined by the very first steps taken. A typical product development process consists of the following five major stages: Design and Modeling  Micro-manufacturing  Characterization  Reliability  Prototype Let us consider the development of a smartphone with a MEMS gyroscope. The first stage we call design and modeling. This is a completely virtual stage that only requires computer equipment and the knowledge of the product’s characteristics. Such minimal requirements allow for the existence of many research centers without a need for large capital investments. (By way of contrast, the subsequent stages incorporate material processes at the micro- and nanoscale, necessitating the use of clean rooms and sophisticated equipment.) As design and modeling is a virtual stage, it is easily subcontracted by large corporations. The first step in the design and modeling stage is the definition of a product’s specifications, that is, the characteristics that it must possess to make a positive impact. For the smartphone, this means a touchscreen of a certain size, lightweight or weighing no more than a prescribed limit, with the ability to react to changes in position, among other attributes. Next, the product design is undertaken based on those specifications, in which the process of product development is divided into smaller, manageable parts in which the components are defined (for example, the screen, communications equipment, control equipment, gyroscope, microphone, speaker, etc.). It is at this stage of product design that MEMS play a key role in innovation, contributing to minimize size and power consumption, or making the product more attractive. For example, the smartphone utilizes the MEMS gyroscope to respond to changes in the device’s orientation, permitting the now taken-for-granted capability to orient the picture screen as either portrait or landscape, depending on the device’s handheld orientation. The MEMS component (gyroscope) is independent of the technological specifications of the device in which it will be included, in other words, its operating objective; up to this point, the development of the smartphone could be undertaken by a different company than that tasked with the design of the MEMS component. The second step in the design and modeling stage involves determining the specifications and sketching out the layout of the MEMS elements (microstructures such as hinges, clips, gears, etc.). It is important to note that the measurements in the layout are in microns, and that each layer of material used in its manufacture has its own layout.4 4 To take one example that shows the complexity of this process, Sandia National Laboratories—a major designer of EMS—employs a proprietary “ultra-planar, Multi-level MEMS Technology 5 (SUMMiT México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS 111 Once the design and modeling stage has been finalized, we move on to the second stage, micro- or nano-manufacturing. This stage involves the handling of material in which the development process ceases to be completely virtual and requires the use of sophisticated equipment, clean rooms and methods of control and security. The process of micro-manufacturing can be undertaken according to the chosen technical methodology.5 At the end of the manufacturing stage, the MEMS component is completed, along with external connections with which the MEMS gyroscope can be incorporated into the final product architecture. In the case of the smartphone, the gyroscope will connect to a micro-controller that changes the orientation of the displayed image on the screen. The third stage in this product’s development is characterization, during which the MEMS’ functionality in response to input signals is determined. Is the device performing according to the design parameters established at its specifications stage? The objective at this stage is to validate the model of the MEMS device, calibrate the device for proper functioning, and perform an analysis of its response in the presence of noise, among other factors. In the case of the MEMS gyroscope, sensitivity tests may be employed at different magnitudes of change in orientation, and thus measure the intensity of its response. The fourth stage of the MEMS product development is the reliability test. The device is subjected to the extreme conditions in which it is expected to function, in order to identify possible faults that could appear in daily use. These might include structural failure, material stress, wear and tear, and extreme temperatures. For the smartphone, this stage could range from the response to RF radio signals, to the quality of the audio signal, and to sensitivity in changes of orientation on the screen produced by the signal created by the MEMS gyroscope. Similarly, reliability tests are performed on the product where possible faults are studied, and in this way, the original design may be corrected, leading to changes in the original product specifications and restarting the development process. Once the reliability test is finished a prototype, which is the final stage, can be created. The prototype is a MEMS that can be reproduced in large scale by the final producer. One third of the world production of MEMS is concentrated in four giant firms: Texas Instruments (10.0%), Hewlett-Packard (9.4%), Robert Bosch (7.4%), and STMicroelectronics (7.0%) (Yolé 2011). These stages are not necessarily linear, in that each one may result in the process being reinitialized or stepping back to a previous stage. This can be seen as a process of trial and error. Thus, several cycles are involved in the manufacturing process, leading to extended production delays, primarily when testing prototypes (Da Silva et al. 2002, Fedder 1999). As more data is generated in the testing and reliability stages, there is greater opportunity to correct the design, validate the chosen model, and avoid repeating the same unnecessary mistakes in manufacture, with the aim of reducing the time and development costs of the MEMS device (Lawton et al. 2000, Prasanna n.d.). There VTM) Fabrication Process” that involve “a five-layer polycrystalline silicon surface micromachining process (one ground plane/electrical interconnect layer and four mechanical layers)” (http://www.mems.sandia.gov/tech-info/summit-v.html). 5 These include Sandia’s SUMMiT V process, X-ray Lithography Electroforming (or LIGA), and volume micro-mechanization, among others. 112 México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS are specialized tools that help to improve this stage, simulating the manufacturing process (e.g., IntelliSense or Coventor Suite).6 These stages of product creation represent the processes of research and development that eventually lead to the construction of a prototype. Once the entire process is proven, it is applied on an industrial scale. There is no returning to earlier stages of production. These kinds of processes are involved in such popular products as those created by Apple Inc., such as the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad, where new versions are introduced each year as improved design and device capabilities are innovated. This rapid turnover also serves to shorten the investment cycle to one year, thereby pressuring competing firms to continually update their products in order to obtain the newly developed devices. 2. MEMS/NEMS as dual-use (civilian and military) technologies The first commercial MEMS appeared in computers and ink-jet printers in the 1980s. From the beginning of the 1990s, the U.S. government invested significant funds in MEMS research for military application. The AFOSR (Air Force Office of Scientific Research) and DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) financed projects in military laboratories in this field. The Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) were among the first to receive considerable funding for MEMS research, and by the end of the decade of the 1990s, they had developed technical processes to produce MEMS layers (“SUMMIT” technology). A DoD report estimated that, in 1995, the government invested $35 million in MEMS R&D, with almost all ($30 million) directed to military institutions (ODDRE 1995). The SNL operates under the GOCO (government-owned/contractor-operated) framework, based on state property with private administration.7 It has passed from various administrations to its current operator, Lockheed-Martin. Lockheed-Martin is the world’s largest arms producer, with more than 70% of its earnings coming from arms sales. The SNL has an annual budget of around $2.5 billion, of which some 60% is supplied by the DoE (Department of Energy) (SNL n.d.). Beginning in the 1990s, it began to intensively research MEMS/NEMS. Their reduced size makes MEMS/NEMS of strategic importance in military industries, especially for the production of smart or precision weapons. In 2001, the Forbes website noted that the U.S. government had invested some $200 million in MEMS annually, through two agencies: DARPA and the SNL. The SNL director was quoted as saying “anything that's good for MEMS is good for national defense,” signaling their strategic military importance (Freiburghouse 2001). The boost that military industry gave to MEMS has been an important accelerant in diversifying the technology for civilian use. One director linked to DARPA noted:“In 1992, there was little industry involvement and virtually no MEMS fabrication infrastructure anywhere in the world. DARPA's MEMS investments have generated that infrastructure” (quoted in Rhea 2000). 6 For example, IntelliSense, which promises “Total MEMS Solutions” (http://www.intellisense.com/). 7 The first GOCO was the Alamos National Laboratory, operated by the University of California and a part of the Manhattan Project, which created the atomic bomb during the Second World War. México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS 113 MEMS are dual-use technologies. Civilian sector spending on the technology is greater than military spending, with the military often depending on civilian sector research and development to yield military payoffs. This approach has tradeoffs for both sectors. Since military spending is guided by concerns of performance rather than profitability, relying on the civilian sector may cut costs—but it may also adversely affect performance, as noted by an article in Military & Aerospace Electronics (2003): Military developers and contractors also are looking to reduce costs by offering some of the evolving MEMS technology to commercial users, such as the automobile industry, essentially completing the development circle, as some MEMS technology came from that sector originally. “We have to make sure the military application of the technology isn't proliferated, of course, but in the auto industry the accuracy they are looking for is nowhere near what the military requires,” Panhorst [manager for MEMS programs at Picatinny Army facility] says of the MEMS IMU (Wilson 2003). Another implication is that, in the civilian sector, when a product reaches maturity and profits decline, investment in further research may also suffer. This is not the case, however, with regard to military investment in devices that are deemed to have national security implications. Yet despite these disadvantages, civilian industry MEMS development and production can be important for military purposes for several reasons. First, it permits extended product testing, as noted by the SNL’s director of the Microsystems Science, Technology, and Components Center: Before we can use MEMS and microsystems in critical weapons systems, it must be shown they are manufacturable and reliable. The best way to demonstrate this is to commercialize them and use them in everyday products (SNL 2001a). Civilian usage also permits private industries to develop large-scale production infrastructures, even though the military’s ultimate objective remains the production of weaponry—an advantage highlighted by the administrator of the SNL’s MEMS project: Ultimately, Sandia wants to use MEMS in weapons systems. But Sandia can't manufacture all the necessary parts itself, so the lab is offering its own MEMS technology and fabrication services to the industry, hoping to seed the MEMS market . . . . (Matsumoto 1999). Such dual-use production was facilitated in 1998 with the creation of the Sandia Science and Technology Park, a facility associated with businesses involved in technology transfer. In 2001, an agreement was made with Ardesta, a private equity and venture capital firm, for the production and sale of MEMS, with the SUMMiT technology developed at the SNL (SNL 2001b). A permanent program of courses and training in SUMMiT technology for commercial use, known as SAMPLES, was established (McBrayer 2000), and the dialogue began with FUMEC to initiate the MEMS project in Mexico. These synergies between MEMS dual-use civil and military technology have contributed to U.S.-Mexico collaborations in MEMS development. In 1998, a highranking Reagan administration officer created and directed the Advanced Concept Group (ACG) inside the SNL, with the goal of confronting problems of terrorism and internal security through the socio-economic development of the Mexico-U.S. border through high-technology parks.8 This was far from a new idea. From the signing of the NAFTA accords (North American Free Trade Agreement), various binational political 8 Gerry Yonas was Vice President and Principal Scientist at Sandia National Laboratories. 114 México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS agreements were made with the border states of the U.S. and Mexico to foster economic development in a coordinated manner. The specificity of the SNL’s proposal was to support high-tech creation and research, something the maquiladoras do not provide. In order to achieve this purpose, a Mexican counterpart was needed. FUMEC served making the connections with the Mexican government and supported the initiative to create the Bi-National Sustainability Laboratory (BNSL). The BNSL began operations in 2003, although it was officially launched in 2005. It is “a bi-national non-profit organization that creates and promotes technology-based businesses along the Mexico-United States border, whether these are recently created, medium- or small-scale, or even large, well-established companies” (BNSL n.d.). At its inauguration, the SNL vice president said: “This will be a wonderful opportunity for collaborative technical efforts to enhance border security … This is a perfect opportunity to follow up on work with Canada and Mexico to foster a continental approach in dealing with terrorism” (Eurekalert 2005). Although named “Laboratory,” the BNSL is a technology commercialization bureau, linked with many S&T research centers in the U.S. and México. The agreement for the implementation of the BNSL was driven on the American side by the Department of Commerce and the Agency of Economic Development, the Department of Economic Development of the State of New Mexico, and by the SNL, which came up with the plan. The Mexican counterpart is CONACYT (National Council of Science and Technology), under the direction of then-President of Mexico, Vicente Fox. The negotiations were managed by FUMEC (Eurekalert 2005). Presently, the BNSL works in the area of MEMS/NEMS; clean fuels and nanomaterials, and environmental technologies (BNSL n.d.). 3. FUMEC, the U.S.–Mexican Foundation for Science The Mexico-U.S. Science Foundation (FUMEC) was created in 1993 to promote and support S&T collaboration between Mexico and the United States. It was developed under the auspices of the Science, Technology and Space Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives, under the leadership of committee chair George E. Brown, Jr. (Democrat of California). Brown’s team understood that the end of the Cold War required a new relationship between the United States and the developing world. In his view, that relationship should be built on S&T collaborations in which developing countries could set their own agendas, rather than the typical postwar top-down technical assistance from the U.S. which he saw as stifling independent capacity-building in those countries (Brown & Sarewitz 1991, p. 70). Brown, a pacifist, saw the end of the Cold War as an opportunity to push scientific research beyond military interests (Brown 1993, p. 8). The FUMEC proposal came into being at a time when there was increasing recognition that sustained R&D investments could achieve significant economic development gains, as was the case in such East Asian countries as Taiwan and South Korea; yet at the same time, according to Brown and Sarewitz, it was important to assure the independence of the scientific research agenda of each country: What we require are new approaches that encourage developing nations to define their own R&D agendas and then implement them in collaboration with the developed world. (Brown and Sarewitz 1991, p.71). México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS 115 Applied to Latin America, which had just emerged from the “lost decade” of the 1980s, this idea would require some creativity to attract financial support. The proposal suggested copying a program that had previously been applied in the environmental area—one that wrote off Latin American foreign debt, converting it into local currency at market prices with the proviso that the savings be put into programs that would foster environmental protection. The idea was to apply the same policy of exchanging foreign debt, but in this case, for S&T instead of environment. Mexico was the test case, and the U.S. National Science Foundation was to support it with a special fund: In Congress, new legislation (H.R. 3215, the Inter-American Scientific Cooperation Act of 1991) has been introduced to establish a U.S. Mexico binational science endowment in 1992 and permit the National Science Foundation to provide grants for debt-for-science swaps. (Brown and Sarewitz 1991, p. 76). The funding source did not turn out to be the exchange of debt for science, but rather a collaboration agreement. FUMEC was created in 1992 as a non-governmental body with a governing board made up of ten members, five from each country. Mexico chose representatives from the Academy of Sciences; Medicine; Engineering; CONACYT; and the coordinator of the Sciences Consultation Board of the Presidency. The U.S. sent representatives from the House of Representatives’ Committee on Space, Science and Technology; the Smithsonian Institute; the National Academy of Sciences; the Institute of Medicine; and the National Engineering Academy. Mexico and the United States shared equally the startup funding costs (FUMEC 1997).9 Between 1993 and 2001, projects focusing on sustainability, public health and socioeconomic problems were given priority. Investments were concurrently made in the training of policy specialists and S&T strategies (FUMEC 1999). The U.S. counterparts to these projects were for the most part universities. In the 2001-2002 FUMEC Activity Report, the various projects were grouped according to programmatic areas: Health and Environment, Sustainable Industrial Development, and Development and Human Resources in Science and Technology (FUMEC 2002). Since 2001, two years after the death of Brown, an important policy change occurred within FUMEC. Technological innovation came to be a key phrase, and the industrial cluster with its geographic center at the border area near the Paso del Norte Industry Cluster, where the Sandia National Laboratories are headquartered, was a strategic location. The role of U.S. partner in these projects fell to the SNL, whose initial purpose was the launching of the Bi-National Laboratory that the SNL had been developing. One of FUMEC’s efforts to promote binational scientific collaboration with Mexico arose from workshops (organized by FUMEC, Sandia laboratories and the University of Texas–El Paso) that had identified the scientific and technological capabilities to develop MEMS in the El Paso and Ciudad Juarez border zone (FUMEC 2002). Although the workshops found few scientific capabilities on the Mexican side, it did find a number of industries willing to take on the challenge—one that would require both human resource training and the building up of specialized MEMS technological capabilities (Robles-Belmont 2010). The result of these efforts was the FUMEC microsystems program that focused efforts on the implementation of MEMS systems. 9 Some of the Board of Governors members are directly named by the president of each country, which carries with it a degree of political strategy; and some FUMEC directors and members of its Board were also directors of U.S. military corporations and members of the Board of the SNL, creating personal alliances among the two institutions. 116 México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS Its mandate would later expand to include embedded systems (MEMS inserted into larger systems) and FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) designs, a category of reconfigurable hardware. FUMEC began to integrate industries, academia and government across various themes, with MEMS/NEMS being one of the principal areas. FUMEC’s Bi-annual Report 2002-2003 identified as its overall strategy: The Foundation focused its efforts during 2002 and 2003 in facilitating awareness and collaboration in order to develop key actions that can facilitate the development of bi-national technology based clusters, specifically in the Paso del Norte region (Advanced Manufacturing, MEMS—Micro Electromechanical Systems). FUMEC has supported the efforts of Sandia National Laboratories, CONACYT and Border States, especially in the Paso del Norte region, to create the Bi-National Sustainability Laboratory. These efforts have expanded its impact to other regions, as in the case of the strategies to develop MEMS capabilities in Mexico. (FUMEC 2003, p.40). The integration of the SNL in the action plans of FUMEC, and the drive toward activities tied ever more closely to business-oriented research and commercialization of products, owed a great deal to the political context guided by Mexican President Vicente Fox (2000-2006) and the World Trade Center attacks in New York in September 2001, with the resulting expansion of concern with security matters. The Fox Presidency emphasized the development of free markets, the role of private business in development, and closer integration with the United States. In Mexican S&T matters, the 2001-2006 National Science and Technology Program was approved, making explicit the strategic role of innovation and S&T in improving international competitiveness. This program, with the 2002 S&T law, gave greater power to CONACYT, freeing it from oversight by the Secretary of Public Education, awarding it an independent budget and guaranteeing a series of projects across different economic sectors oriented toward improving the bond between private business and publiclyfunded R&D (Lewis 2006). Although research funding had always been scarce, the private sector managed to secure some 10% of CONACYT research funds in 2002, increasing to 21% within four years (Martínez et al. 2009). With regard to international relations, corporations and governments from the U.S.A, Mexico and Canada undertook an intense lobbying effort in the initial halfdecade of the 21st Century toward deepening the economic integration under NAFTA. These efforts were tied to the heightened post-9/11 U.S. national security concerns, resulting in the 2005 Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, which was signed by the three countries. It is within this context that FUMEC undertook agreements with the SNL with the aim of creating a binational business agency called the Bi-National Sustainability Laboratory (BNSL): The success in the BNSL and in other initiatives, as well as the close interaction with key government and business organizations in the United States and Mexico, gave FUMEC the credibility to work with the U.S. Council on Competitiveness, and the Partnership for Prosperity Initiative, providing us with the opportunity to be involved in the process of establishing a new bi-national vision of the role of innovation in the work of the Mexican Institute for Competitiveness. During this period President Bush launched the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) initiative which also includes Canada; this is a crucial step forward to make progress in commerce in a true tri-national way within a framework that underlines security. (FUMEC 2006). México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS 117 The location of the BNSL in New Mexico, a few scant kilometers from the border between El Paso and Ciudad Juárez, gave significant weight to the role of the SNL, which—close to Albuquerque—was well situated geographically. Yet the SNL was not the only interested party in the MEMS program being pushed by the BNSL. In Mexico, President Fox was explicit in his desire to link development of MEMS to the maquiladora industry in the area of information and communication technologies being established in Mexico. 4. FUMEC’s MEMS Program FUMEC’s MEMS program offered opportunities for Mexico to address industrial challenges and needs by developing enhanced scientific-technological and business capabilities. These efforts were focused on industrial sectors that had an opportunity to create applications based on MEMS: automotive, medicine, energy, and foodstuffs. Some of the results of this program are (CMM n.d.): • • • • • • • • Training of MEMS-specialized human resources, with approximately 120 researchers, professors, engineers with knowledge of the area, located in seventeen universities and research centers across seven Mexican states. This was achieved through the introduction of various workshops and degrees offered in MEMS technology, some of which were offered at Mexico’s National Institute of Astrophysics, Optics, and Electronics (INAOE). Creation of ten MEMS Design Centers (2002) oriented to the development of multidisciplinary projects in technological innovation based on MEMS application. Creation of the previously mentioned Bi-National Sustainability Laboratory (BNSL), a non-profit institution that cultivates technological businesses mainly along the border (2005). Collaboration for the creation of the first MEMS business in Mexico: TEAM Technologies A.C de C.V. (FUMEC 2008). Creation of the binational Cluster in MEMS Packaging in the Paso del Norte Region (FUMEC 2008). Creation of the Laboratory Network in MEMS Innovation. Creation of the Mexican Consortium of Microsystems (CMM) in 2007, as a FUMEC spin-off taking as a model the Canadian Microsystem Corporation, to promote competitiveness in businesses and research centers through the use of microsystems (FUMEC 2010). Establishment of strategic alliances with international associations in MEMS, such as MANCEF (United States), the Canadian Microsystems Corporation (CMC) as well as various universities in the U.S. and Spain. To reach the results noted above, FUMEC began with the creation of an infrastructure for the development of MEMS in its first stage: the design. The design and modeling of MEMS devices require, principally, computer equipment and specialized CAD software. While being the lowest-cost production stage, these initiatives represented important capital investments to maintain necessary software licenses. In 2002, FUMEC—through an agreement with Mexico’s Ministry of the Economy—launched a call for the creation of a national network of MEMS design centers: 118 México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS the CD-MEMS Network. This initiative initially addressed only the border region, though it was later decided to expand the call to the entire country. The research centers selected in the call met at the end of 2002. Early in 2003, a series of meetings were held with MEMS specialists from the United States, mainly from the Sandia National Laboratories, the University of Texas at Arlington, the University of New Mexico, the University of Texas at El Paso, and a number of U.S. businesses specializing in MEMS design, such as MEMSCAP Inc. and Coventor. The objective was to foster the training of Mexican researchers in the MEMS field (Robles-Belmont 2010, FUMEC 2004). It must be noted that not all of the research centers selected continued with the project: only ten of these made up the CDMEMS Network when it was launched. Following is a list of the participants in the network: 1. CINVESTAV (Research and Advanced Studies Center of the National Polytechnic Institute), Guadalajara, Jalisco. 2. IEE (Institute of Electric Research), Cuernavaca, Morelos. 3. INAOE (National Institute of Astrophysics, Optics and Electronics), Tonanzintla, Puebla. 4. UACJ (Autonomous University of Ciudad Juárez), Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua. 5. UV (Veracruz University), Boca del Río, Veracruz. 6. UPAEP (Popular Autonomous University of the State of Puebla), Puebla, Puebla. 7. UNAM (National Autonomous University of Mexico), Distrito Federal. 8. ITESI (Higher Institute of Technology of Irapuato), Irapuato, Guanajuato. 9. ITESM (Technological Institute of Higher Studies of Monterrey), Monterrey, Nuevo León. 10. U de G (Guadalajara, Jalisco). Also in 2003, support came from the president in a workshop organized by FUMEC, CONACYT and the transnational firm AMD (Advanced Micro Devices) to promote cooperation between businesses, universities and research centers in Mexico. In that workshop, FUMEC introduced the initiative for the MEMS development program, with President Fox showing considerable interest. In a follow-up meeting, the Bi-National Sustainability Laboratory initiative was announced, in cooperation with the SNL, and oriented toward the strengthening and development of the border regions’ potential for generating binational clusters of innovation. This included the Paso del Norte region composed of Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, El Paso, Las Cruces and Santa Teresa (Robles-Belmont 2010, FUMEC 2004). In 2004, the MEMS Joint Production Center was created: CAP-MEMS. This center fostered activities in Mexico to drive and implement the MEMS Technologies Strategy. It was formed as a spin-off of FUMEC with the goal of facilitating links between business, academia and decision-makers in order to foster cooperation in the development of new products and businesses (FUMEC 2004). The close relationship between FUMEC and the President of Mexico bore fruit in 2005, initially with the creation of the Network of Laboratories in MEMS Innovation (LI-MEMS), and later with the BNSL. The former, created at the end of 2005, was originally composed of three institutions, later to include a fourth, with the objective of covering the MEMS value chain focusing on the testing of MEMS, development of prototypes, packaging and validation (FUMEC 2006). The second, the BNSL, has the mission of building technology-based border area businesses for the economic develop- México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS 119 ment of this region. This laboratory’s significant characteristic is its funding by both governments, while operating in the United States. Its first task was the creation of the Packaging Cluster of Paso del Norte, comprised of academic institutions and government research laboratories and businesses, with the aim of research, product development and commercialization for MEMS packaging applications in automotive, biomedical and telecommunications systems. Members of this cluster include: the University of Texas at El Paso; New Mexico State University; New Mexico Institute of Technology; El Paso Community College; TVI College in Albuquerque; Sandia National Laboratories; White Sands Missile Range Defense Laboratories, Delphi; the BNSL; the Advanced Materials Research Center (CIMAV); Autonomous University of Ciudad Juárez; and the Higher Education Institute of Technology of Monterrey–Campus Juárez (Maxwell 2006). The Paso del Norte Packaging Cluster project is an industrial corridor that stretches from Chihuahua, Mexico, to Albuquerque, New Mexico. One of the companies benefitting from this project is TEAM Technologies A.C. de C.V, with MEMS manufacturing facilities in Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, Mexico, making it the first company in Mexico with MEMS device manufacturing capability. In April 2007, CAP-MEMS was formed and resulted in the Mexican Microsystems Consortium (CMM), formed as a spin-off of FUMEC and based upon a Canadian operating model. The work of CMM is to identify opportunities in the area of microsystems, aiming to implement solutions based on MEMS. Currently, CMM— with the support of FUMEC—oversees four networks in the MEMS program (FUMEC 2008): • The MEMS Specialists Network, made up of twenty educational institutions and 260 professors / researchers. This network originated at the beginning of FUMEC’s MEMS program. It developed over the years by providing degrees of specialization, conferences, collaboration networks and joint projects bringing together researchers from different institutions, supported by CONACYT and the state Science and Technology Councils, aiming to promote the exchange of academic training. That is, to close the gap in the lack of human resources in the area of MEMS specialization. • The CD-MEMS Network, which consists of ten institutions. This network addresses the needs of the first stage in the MEMS value chain: design and modeling. • The LI-MEMS Network, currently composed of four institutions. Supported by the Mexican Ministry of Economy, it is dedicated to addressing the second challenge in FUMEC’s MEMS program: the building up of technological capacity for MEMS development. In Mexico, only the government has the resources to invest in the necessary infrastructure, as it requires clean room technology that often exceeds the cost of the equipment contained within them. Charged with supporting services that contribute to the MEMS value chain, it developed the following centers (CMM n.d.): a. LI-MEMS (MEMS description). Housed in the Engineering Faculty at the National Autonomous University of Mexico in the Distrito Federal, it focuses on the description and design of MEMS. 120 México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS b. c. d. • LI-MEMS (Prototypes and Testing). This laboratory is headquartered in Puebla at the National Institute of Astrophysics, Optics and Electronics (INAOE), offering services in MEMS testing and fabrication. LI-MEMS (MEMS Packaging). Located in the Research Center of Applied Science and Technology (CICTA) of the Autonomous University of Ciudad Juárez (UACJ), in Chihuahua. LI-MEMS (MEMS Validation). Situated in the Popular Autonomous University of Puebla (UPAEP), it provides services in MEMS validation and reliability testing. Other significant laboratories are in the process of being consolidated, driven by FUMEC’s mandate to offer services in the area of MEMS: o Research Center in Micro and Nanotechnology (MICRONA) of Veracruz University (UV) in Boca del Río, Veracruz. o Nanoscience, Micro- and Nanotechnology Center of the National Polytechnic University, Zacatenco Unit, in the Distrito Federal. The Strategic Alliance and Network of Innovation for Competitiveness (AERI). A network of collaboration backed by CONACYT, FUMEC and CMM, aimed at creating synergies between businesses, universities and research institutions to carry out innovative and competitive business projects to promote economic development (FUMEC 2010). 5. Conclusion MEMS are increasingly associated with nanotechnologies. As a consequence, U.S. federal funding for nanotechnologies includes research in MEMS. MEMS require similar infrastructure and equipment as nanotechnologies, and there is a natural trend to miniaturization that will convert MEMS in NEMS in the long run. MEMS are widely used in the automobile industry and the communication and recreation devices industry, as well many other economic sectors. Its world market is around $9 billion. The MEMS value chain allows the first stages to be done virtually or as prototypes, well before they reach the final mass production stage. Because of the high costs involved in the production of MEMS, mass production requires extremely large and expensive facilities, which today are found in large transnational corporations. This suggests that newcomers to the MEMS field are most likely to specialize in early stage low-cost activities, which are then subordinated to the needs of the large corporations that will turn early-stage virtual testing or prototypes into final products. A parallel yet distinct path is found in MEMS research for military purposes, since the military may not require large-scale production or be constrained by cost and profitability considerations. MEMS are dual-use technologies, which allows for a parallel development in civilian and military areas. The fact that the whole MEMS initiative in Mexico involved a partnership, from the very beginning, with the militaryoriented U.S. Sandia National Laboratories raises the question: will Mexico’s MEMS research and development agenda be shaped, at least in part, by U.S. military interests? The Mexican development of MEMS, largely fostered by FUMEC over the past decade, has reflected both paths involved in their dual use: the civilian path towards the information and automotive industry, both dominated in Mexico by large transnational corporations; and the military path seen in the partnership between the SNL and México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS 121 CONACYT. In less than a decade, Mexico has developed significant human capital in MEMS technology, in addition to technology-based networks both within Mexico and with the U.S. and other foreign partners. Mexico has also developed a substantial infrastructure for MEMS development—an accomplishment that is all the more impressive given the fact that little more than a decade ago there were virtually no MEMS technology development facilities in Mexico. Strong Mexico-U.S. ties have been developed, with Mexico’s MEMS efforts seemingly shaped either by the needs of foreign transnational corporations or U.S. military needs, which calls for further examination of how effectively this vital high-tech area will develop in terms of Mexico’s own high-tech and economic growth aspirations. Although it is still early to see whether this effort will integrate the large automobile and semiconductor maquila industry in Mexico with the MEMS consortium, as visualized by FUMEC in the first years of this century, it demonstrates that given the political will, Mexico can significantly improve its scientific research conditions. Although ten years have passed since MEMS began to be developed in Mexico, it remains too early to analyze the economic and social consequences. However, the public discourse that has accompanied MEMS promotions in the country is focused on competitiveness and the generation of domestic capabilities and employment. These objectives are far from being realized for the reasons previously mentioned in this article and summarized here: First, the significant presence of the Sandía military laboratories in the training of personnel for the initial stages of the MEMS value chain, suggests a virtual propagation of the SNL technologies whose explicit objectives are for the production of armaments. Second, the initial phases of the value chain, which are virtual, are of little value in terms of the generation of employment, as is the case in all high-technology industries. Third, the creation of MEMS material requires an industrial scale very far beyond current capabilities in Mexico, but without which they could not compete with the large international companies that supply the world market. Far from meeting national development objectives in the generation of capacities for innovation, the development of MEMS in Mexico appears to be little more than a subcontracting of the initial virtual phases of production from the U.S. military industry and the long-established transnational maquiladora industry. Acronyms ACG: Advanced Concept Group AERI: The Strategic Alliance and Network of Innovation for Competitiveness AFOSR: Air Force Office of Scientific Research BNSL: Bi-National Sustainability Laboratory CAP-MEMS: MEMS Joint Production Center CD-MEMS: Center for Design of MEMS (Centro de Diseño de MEMS) CICTA: Research Center of Applied Science and Technology (Centro de Investigación en Ciencia y Tecnología Aplicada) CINVESTAV-IPN: Research and Advanced Studies Center of the National Polytechnic Institute (Centro de Investigaciones Avanzadas del Instituto Politécnico Nacional) CMC: Canadian Microsystems Corporation CMM: Mexican Consortium of Microsystems CONACYT: National Council of Science and Technology (Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología) DARPA: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency DoD: Department of Defense DoE: Department of Energy 122 México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS FUMEC: United States–Mexican Foundation for Science (Fundación México-Estados Unidos Para la Ciencia) GOCO: Government-Owned/Contractor-Operated IIE: Institute of Electric Research (Instituto de Investigaciones Eléctricas) IMU: Inertial Measurement Unit INAOE: National Institute of Astrophysics, Optics and Electronics (Instituto Nacional de Astrofísica, Óptica y Electrónica) ITESI: Higher Institute of Technology of Irapuato (Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Irapuato) ITESM: Higher Education Institute of Technology of Monterrey (Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey) LI-MEMS: Network of Laboratories in MEMS Innovation MANCEF: Micro and Nanotechnology Commercialization Education Foundation MEMS/NEMS: Microelectricalmechanical Systems/Nanoelectricalmechanical Systems MICRONA: Research Center in Micro and Nanotechnology (Centro de Investigaciones en Micro y Nanotecnología) NAFTA: North American Free Trade Agreement RF Communications: Radio Frequency Communications S&T: Science and Technology SNL: Sandia National Laboratories SPP: Security and Prosperity Partnership U de G: Guadalajara University (Universidad de Guadalajara) UACJ: Autonomous University of Ciudad Juárez (Universidad Autónoma de Ciudad Juárez) UNAM: National Autonomous University of Mexico (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México) UPAEP: Popular Autonomous University of the State of Puebla (Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla) UPN: National Polytechnic University (Universidad Politécnica Nacional) UV: Veracruz University (Universidad Veracruzana) References Banks, D. (2006) Microengineering and Interfacing. A Practical Guide, Boca Raton: CRC Press. BNSL (El Laboratorio Binacional Sustentable) (n.d.) http://www.bnsl.org/PaginaPrincipal.aspx (retrieved September 16, 2010). Brown, G., Jr., and Sarewitz, D. (1991) Fiscal Alchemy: Transforming Debt into Research, Issues in Science and Technology, 7, Fall: pp. 70-76. Brown, G., Jr. (1993) The Mother of Necessity: Technology Policy and Social Equity, Remarks of Congressman George E. Brown Jr. Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Washington, DC: AAAS Science and Technology Policy Colloquium, Capital Hilton April 16. CMM (Mexican Consortium of Microsystems) (n.d.) MEMS Technology (Micro Electromechanical Systems), http://www.cmm.org.mx/Accesopub/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=103&Item id=18 (retrieved August 24, 2011. Da Silva, M., Giasolli, R., Cunningham, S. and DeRoo, D. (2002) MEMS Design for Manufacturability, Boston: Sensor Expo and Conference, September 2002, http://wenku.baidu.com/view/8e671278168884868 762d685.html (retrieved August 25, 2011). Eurekalert (2005) BiNational Sustainability Laboratory Opens, Hopes to Create Necklace of Labs along Mexican Border, Dream of Sandia's Advanced Concept Group for Better Border Security Takes on Flesh, http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-12/dnl-bsl121205.php (retrieved September 16, 2010). México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS 123 Fedder, G. (1999) Structured Design Methodology for MEMS, Position Paper for Structured Design Methods for MEMS, Final Report, A Workshop Sponsored by the National Science Foundation, (Erik K. Antonsson, (Ed)) California Institute of Technology, http://design.caltech.edu/NSF_MEMS_Workshop/fedder.pdf. Freiburghouse, A. (2001) The MEMS Microcosm: Military, Forbes, http://www.forbes.com/asap/2001/0402/ 052.html (retrieved August 24, 2011). FUMEC (Fundación México-Estados Unidos para la Ciencia—The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science) (1997) Activities Report 1993-1997, http://FUMEC.org.mx/v5/htdocs/informe1993_1997.pdf. (retrieved August 25, 2011). FUMEC (Fundación México-Estados Unidos para la Ciencia—The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science) (1999) Bi-annual Activities Report 1998-1999, México D.F.: The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science. http://FUMEC.org.mx/v5/htdocs/informe1998_1999.pdf (retrieved August 25, 2011). FUMEC (Fundación México-Estados Unidos para la Ciencia—The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science) (2002) Bi-annual Activities Report 2000-2001, México D.F.: The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science. http://FUMEC.org.mx/v5/htdocs/informe2000_2001.pdf (retrieved September 30, 2010). FUMEC (Fundación México-Estados Unidos para la Ciencia—The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science) (2003) Biannual Activities Report 2002-2003, México D.F.: The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science. http://FUMEC.org.mx/v5/htdocs/informe2002_2003.pdf (retrieved August 25, 2011). FUMEC (Fundación México-Estados Unidos para la Ciencia—The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science) (2004) Biannual Activities Report 2003-2004, México D.F.: The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science. http://FUMEC.org.mx/ (retrieved August 25, 2011). FUMEC (Fundación México-Estados Unidos para la Ciencia—The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science) (2006) Biannual Activities Report 2004-2005, México D.F.: The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science. http://FUMEC.org.mx/v5/htdocs/RepEng04_05.pdf (retrieved November 2, 2010). FUMEC (Fundación México-Estados Unidos para la Ciencia—The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science) (2008) Biennial Activities Report 2006-2007, México D.F.: The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science http://FUMEC.org.mx/ (retrieved August 25, 2011). FUMEC (Fundación México-Estados Unidos para la Ciencia—The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science) (2010) Biennial Activities Report 2008-2009, México D.F.: The United States-Mexico Foundation for Science http://www.FUMEC.org.mx/v5/ (retrieved August 25, 2011). Lawton, R., Miller, W., Lin, G. and Ramesham, R. (eds.) (2000) MEMS Reliability for Critical and Space Applications: Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering, Vol. 3880, Bellingham, Washington: SPIE. Lewis, J. (2006) National Policies for Innovation and Growth in Mexico, Washington DC: CSIS (Center for Strategic and International Studies). Maluf, N., and Williams, K. (2004) An Introduction to Microelectromechanical Systems Engineering, London: Artech House. Martínez, M., Campos, G. and Sánchez, G. (2009) ¿México en la economía y sociedad del conocimiento? Una revisión a las políticas públicas, in: Sánchez Daza (ed.) América Latina y el Caribe en la Economía del Conocimiento, Puebla: CLACSO/Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla. Materials Modification Inc. (2004) Frequently Asked Questions, Material Modifications Inc., http://www. matmod.com/FAQ.html (retrieved April 12, 2011). Matsumoto, C. (1999) Sandia Pushes for MEMS Commercialization, 9/21/1999. http://www.eetimes.com/ General/DisplayPrintViewContent?contentItemId=4168626 (retrieved August 26, 2011. 124 México–U.S. Collaboration in MEMS/NEMS Maxwell, P. (2006) BNSL The Bi-National Sustainability Laboratory, Creating Border Businesses, NARC Conference Corpus Christi, TX. http://narc.org/uploads/File/Transportation/Freight%20Summit/Maxwell_ BNSL.pdf (retrieved August 26, 2011). McBrayer, J. (2000) The Transfer of Disruptive Technologies: Lessons Learned From Sandia National Laboratories, in: Engineering Management Society, 2000: Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE, IEEE XPlore, pp. 331-334. MNX (Mems and Nanotechnology Exchange) (n.d.) MEMS and Nanotechnology Applications, http://www. mems-exchange.org/MEMS/applications.html (retrieved August, 26, 2011). Mukherjee, T. (2003) MEMS Design and Verification, ITC International Test Conference, IEEE XPlore, pp. 681-690. ODDRE (Office of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering) (1995) Microelectromechanical Systems: A DoD Dual Use Technology Industrial Assessment, Washington DC: ODDRE, http://www.dtic. mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA304675&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf (retrieved August 25, 2011). Plunkett (2010) Plunkett's Nanotechnology and MEMS Industry Almanac, Houston, Tex.: Plunkett Research. Prasanna, Gandhi (n.d.) Suman Mashruwala Advanced Microengineering Laboratory, [Power Point] http://www.me.iitb.ac.in/~mems/sml/sml.pdf (retrieved March 20, 2011). PRIME Faraday Partnership (2002) An Introduction to MEMS (Micro-electromechanical Systems), Leicestershire: Wolfson School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering. Loughborough University. Rhea, J. (2000) MEMS: Following in the Footsteps of the Internet?, http://www.militaryaerospace. com/index/display/article-display/81597/articles/military-aerospace-electronics/volume-11/issue-9/departmen ts/report-from-washington-and-elsewhere/mems-following-in-the-footsteps-of-the-internet.html (retrieved August 25, 2011). Robles-Belmont, E. (2010) Las Fundaciones en el Desarrollo de Tecnologías Emergentes: Desarrollo de los MEMS en México, Buenos Aires, Arg.: Jornadas Latinoamericanas de Estudios Sociales de la Ciencia y Tecnología. Senturia, S. (2001) Microsystem Design, Boston MT: Kluwer Academic Publishers. SNL (Sandia National Laboratories) (2001a) Sandia, Ardesta Join Forces to Commercialize MEMS and Microsystems, News Releases. Sandia National Laboratories. http://www.sandia.gov/media/NewsRel/ NR2001/ardesta.htm (retrieved September 23, 2010). SNL (Sandia National Laboratories) (2001b) SUMMiT V™ Overview, http://www.mems.sandia.gov/techinfo/summit-v.html (retrieved August 24, 2011. SNL (Sandia National Laboratories) (n.d.) Facts and Figures, http://www.sandia.gov/about/faq/ (retrieved September 16, 2010. Unknown (n.d.) ‘What is MEMS technology?’ http://www.2ic.cn/thread-327920-1-1.html (retrieved August 24, 2011. Wilson, J. (2003) Smart Munitions Development Relies Heavily on MEMS Technology, http://www.militaryaerospace.com/index/display/article-display/165768/articles/military-aerospace-electroni cs/volume-14/issue-1/features/special-report/smart-munitions-development-relies-heavily-on-mems-technolo gy.html (retrieved August 24, 2011). Yolé Développement (2011) Top 30 MEMS Companies 2010, http://www.yole.fr/iso_upload/News/2011/ Top30MEMSCompanies2010_April2011.pdf (retrieved August 20, 2011).