Editor’s note: This is the third article in an ongoing series by Dr. Andrew Maxwell, the Bergeron Chair in Technology Entrepreneurship in the Lassonde School of Engineering at York University. Every other week – and occasionally every week – we’ll present a new article by Maxwell, in a series whose wide-ranging and incisive themes encompass: Canada and innovation policy; productivity and industry; innovation frameworks; AI and higher education; research and intellectual property; technology adoption; entrepreneurship and commercialization; universities and higher education; entrepreneurship education; and AI and the future of work. The first article was published on May 20and the second on May 27, 2026.

 Canada’s innovation crisis: Why more research isn’t enough

Canada’s universities are world-class at producing knowledge – but not at turning it into impact.

When the U15 warns that research capacity is eroding, they’re right. But the real danger isn’t fewer graduate students – it’s our failure to translate ideas into productivity.

When Robert Asselin, CEO of the U15 group of leading research universities, appeared before Parliament, he made a compelling case: international graduate students are vital to discovery, innovation, and national competitiveness.

He’s right – but only partly.

The deeper issue isn’t how many researchers Canada trains.
It’s how little of their research actually changes anything.

“Canada’s challenge is not a shortage of ideas – it’s a shortage of impact.”

We keep funding and evaluating research as if activity equals innovation. Yet our productivity has stagnated, even as research spending and publication output rise.
That disconnect reveals a system optimized for discovery, not deployment – for publishing papers, not improving performance.

It’s time to rethink what we mean by research “impact.”

Nine shifts we need to make

1. Link research funding to productivity-oriented outcomes.

Not every project must be applied, but a higher share of research investment should target near-term productivity gains – especially in areas where discovery can quickly scale into value: clean energy, sustainable manufacturing, and advanced health systems.

Curiosity-driven science is vital, but discovery disconnected from deployment is a luxury we can’t afford.

2. Redefine research success around impact.

We’re still measuring motion, not progress.
Publications and citations quantify attention, not adoption.

“If impact isn’t part of the scoreboard, it won’t be part of the strategy.”

Canada’s research funding councils are piloting “impact frameworks,” but universities must go further – embedding diffusion, adoption, and system learning into tenure, promotion, and funding criteria.

3. Start with the problem, not the discipline.

Too often, research begins with “What can we study?” instead of “What problem can we solve?”
Anchoring inquiry in well-defined societal or industrial challenges connects discovery to consequence. This doesn’t diminish academic freedom; it amplifies relevance.

Problem-orientation is where the next wave of interdisciplinary impact will emerge.

4. Reinvent how academia and industry interact.

Canada’s innovation deficit is not an “ideas gap” – it’s an interaction gap.
Traditional technology transfer offices and licensing models are necessary but insufficient.
We need embedded partnerships: graduate students in firms, researchers in field settings, and shared infrastructure for co-development.

Other countries didn’t close their productivity gap by chance – they did it by design.

5. Recognize that innovation is behavioral, not just technological.

Even the best ideas fail if no one changes behavior.
Adoption is driven by trust, incentives, and culture — not just technical superiority.

“Innovation inertia is as much about habits as it is about hardware.”

We must integrate behavioral science and change management into STEM and business education – ensuring technology and human systems evolve together.

6. Build absorptive capacity and stronger links to users.

Firms and communities need the capacity to absorb and apply knowledge.
That means investing in translational institutions – Canada’s “missing middle” – that connect university research to user contexts.

The U.K. has Catapult Centres.
Germany has Fraunhofer Institutes.
The U.S. has Manufacturing Innovation Institutes.
Canada needs its own network of living, learning testbeds.

7. Reimagine education as lifelong and applied.

Innovation doesn’t stop at graduation.
We need stackable, flexible learning pathways that help professionals continually upgrade both their technical fluency and understanding of how technology is used.

“The future of learning isn’t degrees – it’s dynamic capability.”

Education should integrate behavioral economics, systems thinking, and design to equip engineers and scientists to lead change – not just manage technology.

8. Strengthen receptor capacity across sectors.

Universities can’t diffuse knowledge into a vacuum.
Industry, government and community partners need receptor capacity – the ability to identify, interpret, and integrate new ideas.

That requires secondments, co-funding, and new models of partnership that treat researchers as collaborators in value creation, not mere consultants.

9. Bring research into undergraduate education.

Research shouldn’t begin in graduate school.
Embedding inquiry, experimentation, and community-based projects into undergraduate curricula builds curiosity, creativity and early exposure to real-world problem solving.

Undergraduates who understand how knowledge becomes action will become lifelong innovators.

From discovery to diffusion

The U15 is right: international graduate students are essential to Canada’s research ecosystem.
But protecting our research capacity means asking: capacity for what?

If we continue to equate research activity with innovation performance, we’ll keep mistaking motion for progress.
If we focus instead on diffusion, adoption, and behavioral change, we can finally convert knowledge into productivity — and productivity into prosperity.

“Canada doesn’t need more research. It needs to make more of the research it already has.”

Universities are not just places where knowledge is created – they are where a nation learns how to learn.
Canada must now transform its universities from research institutions into living labs – engines of experimentation where discovery meets deployment, and where learning fuels lasting change.

R$