Advanced manufacturing pillar is lone major addition to refreshed STI strategy

Underwhelming response

Canada's science, technology and innovation (STI) strategy took a step into the 21st century with the addition of advanced manufacturing (AM) as a fifth priority area for future growth and development. Its inclusion marks one of the few changes to the original 2007 strategy which has been given a refresh and a new title — Seizing Canada's Moment: Moving Forward in Science, Technology and Innovation 2014.

After months of delay, the strategy was unveiled December 2nd in Markham ON by prime minister Stephen Harper during an event staged to announce details of the new $1.5-billion Canada First Research Excellence Fund (CFREF) (see page 3). The two initiatives are intertwined by the CFREF's conditions that require institutions to align their funding proposals to the strategy's priority areas, which now include advanced manufacturing. The strategy also added agriculture to its environment priority and increased the prominence of aerospace.

The other priorities of the 2007 version — health and life sciences, natural resources and energy and information and communications technologies — remain largely unchanged, save for a slightly different mix of focus areas (see chart page 2).

What's really different in the 2014 iteration is the language used to describe STI and the opportunities and challenges that Canada faces as it grapples with its status as an emerging knowledge economy. The somewhat insular focus of the original has been jettisoned in favour of a wider perspective that places Canada in a global context. That expanded perspective is also reflected in the change to one of the strategy's central pillars which has been expanded from entrepreneurship to encompass innovation.

What hasn't changed is the strategy's partisan flavour, with the bulk of the document dedicated to recounting and trumpeting past investments. Considerable text is devoted to detailing existing programs and investments made since the Conservative Party gained control in 2006. While the inclusion of sections on long-standing initiatives such as Mitacs, Canada Foundation for Innovation, Genome Canada and CAN-ARIE signal that these programs are valued and likely to be retained, there's little to indicate new thrusts and spending that can be expected in the years to come.

Election document

"It's a political document going into the election — a progress report of what the government has done since 2007 and they've done a lot," says Paul Dufour, principle of Paulicy Works and a veteran of Canada's science policy community. "It's an opportunity missed … There have been some adjustments to the global challenge but no significant changes to governance."

Dufour says the strategy refresh also missed the opportunity to seek input from the provinces or improve strained relations with science-based federal departments. It's also silent on the 260 submissions generated during the strategy's opaque consultation phase and how it intends to reduce administrative burden while simultaneously increasing transparency.

"There's language in there about how we have to catch up to our global competitors but there's nothing really new for how the government plans to do this," says Dufour. "The weak link continues to be the business sector but the strategy continues to emphasize Canada's reliance on surrogates for industrial research, which is companies working with universities, colleges and federal labs. It's all about partnerships and collaboration but it's not the job of institutions to do industrial research."

A somewhat more positive perspective is provided by Adam Holbrook, a long-standing science policy practitioner, adjunct professor and associate director at Simon Fraser Univ's Centre for Policy Research on Science and Technology. Holbrook says the strategy is right to expand its entrepreneurship pillar to encompass innovation and recognize that people are Canada's competitive advantage. But those attributes are undermined by its silence over what the government plans to do to support AM or where the re-tooled National Research Council (NRC) fits into those plans. In addition, there is little guidance on how Canada can overcome the persistent valley of death between discovery and commercial exploitation.

"The strategy doesn't fix that ... We need a more careful consensus on what our competitive advantages are and a more nuanced discussion," says Holbrook. "You need to run as hard as you can to stay where you are because everyone else is doing the same thing, but doing it better by investing in areas where Canada can't compete."

The strategy's overall lack of new initiatives doesn't mean specific programs aren't referenced. In fact, the bulk of the 68-page document is devoted to existing activity and past budgetary expenditures — what one observer described as "self congratulatory claptrap" — with little indication of what resources the government is prepared to commit to halting or even reversing its declining support for STI.

"There's an election coming up so it's a dump of programs that have often existed forever ... There's no strategy there, no focus on anything," says Dr Richard Hawkins, a political economist and chair in Science, Technology and Innovation Policy at the Univ of Calgary. "It appears to be focusing on strategic areas but those five areas are far too broad, they include everything."

Advanced Manufacturing

Even the addition of AM is greeted with muted enthusiasm. While there's agreement on its importance, Dufour contends that it appears to be a surrogate for continuing support of the aerospace and automotive sectors.

Hawkins says it's important that Canada recognizes the transformation impact AM will have on manufacturing, as most factories continue to use a modified 19th century model.

"In 10 years, mass producing and shipping products around the world could be obsolete. Advanced manufacturing is really about command and control technologies, which is all about computing," he says. "It's good that we're getting in on the ground floor but there's nothing in the strategy about what it is or its potential ... The strategy talks about building capacity in this area but do we know how many companies there are in this space and their supply chains? Our organs of information are broken so we're flying blind."

Hawkins points to the recently announced federal investment in Pratt & Whitney Canada (see article opposite) as an example of the kinds of industry support the government should aggressively pursue.

"The press has been dumping on it but this where the government should be going. Aerospace is a big industry in Canada so let's put more money into it so that Pratt & Whitney can manufacture new lines of engines," he says. "It delivers results. The aerospace market is continually contracting. There used to be dozens of engine makers and now there's only three of four and Canada has one of them. Invest in industry for strategic reasons and build and support a cluster around companies like Pratt & Whitney."

As the association most responsible for advocating AM's inclusion in the strategy, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters. (CME) sees the addition as a major step forward in coordinating the growing research expertise resident in universities, colleges and research institutes across Canada.

"Technologies being developed and introduced right now are revolutionizing manufacturing. Advanced manufacturing is a real anchor for the government in its strategy, particularly when it comes to commercializing these technologies and their widespread application," says CME president and CEO Jayson Myers. "The government gets it and a lot of other things line up around advanced manufacturing like international trade and financing."

Myers says that with the NRC's forthcoming Factory of the Future initiative (R$, November 27/14), these technologies could be made available to smaller firms.

"For (smaller firms), the big challenges are, how do you learn about these technologies and the opportunities for your company. There's also the management, training and use of the technology.

R$