Dr Arthur Carty

Strengthening Canada's science culture

By Dr Arthur Carty

Canada's ambivalence towards science and technology and our failure to recognize the centrality of science and technology in and to society can be traced to the lack of a strong embedded science culture. We have some serious challenges ahead of us and science is a key element and driver for all of the changes needed.

We live in a rapidly changing, interconnected world where people, resources and knowledge are increasingly mobile. In this new knowledge-based economy, skilled people are the key resource. Competition for knowledge workers – particularly bright people with a strong background in science and technology – is severe and will only increase.

We should not mislead ourselves into thinking that a shortfall in homegrown and trained talent can be easily satisfied by immigration from abroad. India and China have been Canada's major sources of skilled people in recent years but the emergence of these two countries as economic powerhouses and technological competitors means that they have a demand of their own.

In Canada, too few high school students opt to study science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) at university and we produce far fewer PhDs than our competitors. There are very positive signs that the performance of 15-year-olds in science is very high. But overall the numbers suggest that Canada is not doing a good enough job of instilling that magic and excitement of science in children at an early age and building a lifelong commitment to S&T which results in a healthy output of scientists and engineers choosing careers in research and industry.

So why are Canadian students not attracted to science? The reasons are many:

* a failure to inspire interest and participation in science both inside and outside the classroom;

* a shortfall in the number and quality of teachers to ensure that every child receives a solid grounding in science;

* lack of information and knowledge for students about attractive careers in science;

* a misperception that jobs and careers in science and research are unattractive compared to other professions.

Other countries such as the UK have begun to address these problems and Canada also has a number of innovative and effective programs including:

* Let's Talk Science, a national charitable organization devoted to building children's interest and engagement in science, engineering and technology (SET) through a national outreach program;

* Youth Science Foundation, which helps youths to develop interest, skills and knowledge in science through experiential science;

* Actua, a national organization dedicated to providing young Canadians with hands-on experience in SET through summer camps, workshops and community outreach;

* Shad Valley, the Science Alberta Foundation, Science Pour Tous and the Perimeter Institute. These and other organizations have excellent outreach and experiential programs;

* Virtual Research on Call, an educational initiative of Partners in Research allowing students to interact with top researchers and trainees via real-time videoconference links;

* Science centres across Canada. These institutions attract millions of people with interactive displays and features.

While these are an excellent start, there's much more we can do. To increase the domestic talent pool, there are three missing ingredients. First , we need national leadership. Unlike the UK, our federal government has been virtually silent on science promotion. In a recent draft study commissioned by my former office (Office of the National Science Advisor), there was a high degree of consensus among participating companies that the federal government must step up and play a leadership role to raise the national profile of the issue of S&T promotion. Some companies said we need a national strategy to promote S&T. None now exists.

There's also frustration over federal-provincial jurisdictional challenges that hamper the promotion of S&T. As one study participant noted, we need to build consensus on where we are heading and sharing resources. If silos harden, nothing great happens.

Many science culture organizations struggle to survive from one year to the next and lack the critical mass to have a national impact. Canada is badly in need of increased and stable funding to allow the best programs to expand their reach to a national level.

There has never been a time in history when S&T has had a greater impact on our citizens. Some elemental understanding of science is now an integral part of being an informed citizen. Almost every decision our governments have to make has a science component. But only if the public understands the contributions science makes to our society and is prepared to back it, will governments be convinced to invest in it in a major way.

Ironically, the place where science is most lacking may be with Canada's parliamentarians and decision makers. STEM graduates are apparently not attracted to careers in politics. And this is a serious shortcoming. It means a dearth of scientific understanding that does not augur well for a high level of debate on issues and policies underpinned by scientific evidence. It's also hard to imagine a strong cohort of support for science from a group without the background and interest to appreciate its value to society.

The only program dedicated to improving MPs' knowledge and literacy in science is the Bacon and Eggheads program organized by the Partnership Group for Science and Engineering and NSERC. Unfortunately it is not very well attended by those it is designed to inform.

There is much that can be done to improve this situation, although the demise of the Office of the National Science Advisor removed one natural conduit and coordinator for information flow and contact. We should learn from concrete initiatives developed in the UK, US and elsewhere to bring scientists and politicians closer together. There are readily implementable measures which, if put in place, will help Canada to resolve future and current problems. Ultimately, we need leadership from the very highest levels of government.

As one observer noted, "This is a big social issue. Science is important in a national and global sense. We talk a lot about traditional industries but not science-based industries. We need more conversations with leaders in government, the public and the private sector about science and its importance."

Dr Arthur Carty is the inaugural executive director of the new Waterloo Institute of Nanotechnology. He is the former National Science Advisor and president of the National Research Council. This article is an edited version of a presentation Dr Carty delivered at the Partners in Research dinner in Ottawa on May 7.