Dr Jacquelyn Thayer Scott

Getting the S&T advice right

By Dr Jacquelyn Thayer Scott

Remember those September essays of your childhood: "What I Did on My Summer Vacation"? This one is re-titled "What I've Learned in My 15 Years as a national and regional S&T and Innovation Mucker-About". The federal government has just announced its long-awaited national strategy in S&T and innovation, and it has a great deal to recommend. Like many others, I hope the new strategy will be implemented quickly, vigorously, and with support at the highest levels across government, business and the research sector.

However promising the strategy's elements and concepts, that old truism will apply: the devil is in the details – i.e., the action plans. Hence, these reflections, which I hope will stimulate more conversation and interest from others who have laboured in similar trenches this past decade and more. So, here goes…

#1. Science is a business (and an industry). Scientists don't work alone. They need other scientists, engineers, equipment, support staff, graduate students, and pushy presidents who constantly trawl for the nets full of money required to perform R&D. But this is less like fishing, and more like oil or mining exploration.

There may be a hundred ‘dry holes' or bad assays before there's a hopeful result, and each of those attempts is costly. Researchers aren't selling a product, but an opportunity, and the best new widget won't always win in the marketplace. Eventually, however, even from "the science industry" there have to be direct payoffs downstream to the investors (i.e., taxpayers) or they'll start looking at other investment options.

#2. Countries, like companies, have to understand their competitive context and how to improve their margins for economic and social benefit at every point of the value chain. Our knowledge-economy investments need to be well integrated from lab to commercialization, and from production to customer sales, delivery and satisfaction.

Thus, S&T&I policies must be strongly integrated with economic and regulatory regimes, education and training resources, transportation infrastructure, and trade and foreign policy actions. As the ACST noted in its 2006 discussion paper — Minding Canada's Business: National Strategy in a Knowledge-Based World of Shifting Trading Patterns — Canada is a small middle power that has had too many natural resources to rely on, thus dulling its competitive edge. Take away the high price-base of our energy exports to the US, Japan and China, and those terrific trade and fiscal surpluses start to look very different in a hurry.

As a country, we have a lot of bad habits to overcome. Our private sector too often has wanted smart (but cheap) labour and easy ideas (funded by lots of public money) to engage their gears toward export success. Our bureaucrats (pick any government) spend too much time maneuvering in departmental turf wars, instead of working cooperatively on integrated strategies across all affected departments and government levels to achieve measurable goals that (1) pay off in economic and social gains for citizens and (2) position Canada well for a variety of strategic future shifts in global political and trading relationships.

connecting the dots

Politicians, for the most part, don't understand either business or science and, really, why should they? They're mostly lawyers, and public-sector or non-profit workers by trade, and we've had a long and cushy run of high commodity prices and high tax revenues to fall back on. How, when and why did we get this way — across business, civil service and legislatures? It wasn't always the case, and need not be so in future. "Connecting the dots" between S&T&I and "what else it takes" for successful, diversified exports may make a huge difference in both our relative and actual prosperity and quality of life.

#3. Good strategy counts. So hurray for a declaration of strategy, as inferred public research investments — helpful as that money has been since 1997 — are not strategic beyond the "kick-start" stage. There are lots of good things in this strategy – regulatory reform is promised (again, but hope springs eternal…), priorities are named (though continued across-the-board support is also promised…hmmm), and private-sector leadership is mandated in new S&T&I networks and partnerships. Science culture promotion is pledged, as is active cooperation with other levels of government to develop regional comparative advantages. A new advisory structure is announced that has broad mandates promoting the integration alluded to above, at least in part. This is all laudable.

So what's missing? A few things, but here's a big one: where is that new advisory structure connected within government? The strategy document is silent. Does that silence mean "Oops, we forgot", "We haven't figured it out yet" or "The bureaucrats are still fighting a rear-guard action to restrict access by ‘outsiders' to senior political Ministers"?

Other middle powers with more successful economic results from their S&T&I policies and programs have already figured this out — the guy (or gal) at the top has to be involved. In countries like Finland, Sweden, Taiwan, Japan and the UK, their advisory structures bring the players to the table with the PM and/or several senior Cabinet Ministers (who report to the PM and, often, to the legislative branch).

The issue of where the new advisory structure "plugs in" is critical to igniting real energy and commitment by business, universities and research institutes, and regions to achieving national goals. If S&T&I's connection to the economy, trade, transportation, etc. doesn't occupy time and energy at the top, real lay-it-on-the-line support from other sectors won't be there either — and that's how it's been for the past 20 years in Canada.

When the answer to this question emerges in the weeks ahead, it will tell us a lot about how serious this government really is about assuring Canada's future economic and social quality of life across a much more robust range of future geopolitical scenarios. You go, Stephen!

Dr Jacquelyn Thayer Scott served from 1996-2006 on the Prime Minister's Advisory Council on Science & Technology (ACST) and was its deputy chair, 2003-2006. A past president & vice-chancellor of Cape Breton University (1993-2003), she serves on the Premier's Council on Innovation (Nova Scotia), the Board of InNOVAcorp, and is a director of two technology-based companies.