R&D Skepticism: Regional International Scientific Advisory Boards

Among the chief pain points identified were skepticism toward LATAM’s R&D capabilities and a fragmented regulatory landscape. Deep Tech companies rely extensively on R&D at top-tier academic institutions; their defining characteristic is that they emerge after years of rigorous research by individual scientists or teams of PhDs.

This process involves developing robust intellectual property and a lengthy, strategic technology transfer from academia to the commercial sector. The entire journey, from research and prototyping through development, validation, and commercialization, takes 25–40% longer to translate into returns than a conventional software company, according to Boston Consulting Group estimates.⁴⁶ But before commercialization, the primary risk at early stages is the robustness of the underlying science.

Latin American ventures often face skepticism from international investors regarding the robustness and credibility of their early-stage scientific research.

U.S. investors, accustomed to evaluating founders and technologies emerging from prestigious institutions like Stanford, MIT, and Harvard, might doubt the credibility of innovations presented by founders from lesser-known universities in LatAm. This skepticism forces founders to undertake the additional challenge of proving the reliability of their technology and data.

Garret Dempsey Global investor, 2024

Consequently, this skepticism often results in an extended deliberation process for international investors, sometimes even perceived as biased, at a crucial stage in company development.

# Recommendation: Regional International Scientific Advisory Boards

To enhance credibility and accelerate investment decisions, we recommend establishing Regional International Scientific Advisory Boards within each major vertical. These impartial, high-caliber validation panels would combine global expertise, senior scientists and technology-transfer officers at institutions such as MIT, Stanford, ETH Zurich and Cambridge, with the local insight of distinguished LATAM researchers who have proven commercialization track records.

To ground the boards in excellence, they should include leaders from Latin America’s top patent-producing academic institutions: Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Universidade Estadual de Campinas (Unicamp), and Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) in Brazil; Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM) and Instituto Politécnico Nacional (IPN) in Mexico; Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile and Universidad de Concepción in Chile; Universidad de los Andes in Colombia; and CONICET in Argentina, among the top 20 LATAM patent filers over the past two decades.⁴⁷

These boards could conduct rigorous peer reviews of early-stage ventures at Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) 3–5, evaluating experimental design, reproducibility and IP robustness. Ventures that meet these benchmarks could receive a formal endorsement seal for investor materials, alongside tailored expert and policy support. Finally, the boards could publish an annual "State of Deep Tech Science" briefing highlighting validated breakthroughs and de-risked technologies.

Depending on needs, the boards could be housed (1) within a multilateral institution such as the IDB; (2) in an intergovernmental academic body like the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research;⁴⁸ (3) under a consortium of leading LATAM academic institutions; or (4) within a newly established, neutral committee run by an ecosystem enabler such as the LADP or the proposed Regional Deep Tech Coalition. The financing architecture could mix public–private partnerships, multilateral and philanthropic grants, and program-tied corporate sponsorships, with a package that balances financial honoraria and non-financial incentives to preserve independence.