New report says Canada requires technology foresight capability to properly establish nation's research priorities

Canada needs to build expertise in technology foresight to correct and strengthen the alignment between its research capabilities and areas where the nation has enough potential critical mass to be globally competitive, concludes a new report. Entitled Setting Priorities For Research in Canada, it urges the federal government to establish such a body to identify emerging technologies with support from Industry Canada, as well as increasing its support for certain key technologies it identifies as crucial to Canada's future socio-economic well being (see box below).

The report was produced by the Committee to Advance Research (CAR), a sub-group of the Partnership Group for Science and Engineering (PAGSE), and examined the need for research priority setting in government, industry and academia. The study is based on a survey conducted by the Groupe Secor, a Montreal-headquartered management consulting firm with financial assistance from the National Research Council (NRC) and the Canada Foundation for Innovation.

The project was launched last year by PAGSE to address concerns that Canada does not place enough emphasis on the identification and direction of S&T investment, and that its research support is insufficient to sustain the nation as a globally competitive player. As an example, it found that funding for medical research far outstrips industrial receptor capacity, while the opposite is true for technologies underlying the information and communications technologies (ICT) sector. Technology foresight, it contends, would help to identify and rectify such mismatches and pave the way for a more informed approach to picking technology winners and losers. Canada is one of the few industrialized nations that does not have such a capability.

"There doesn't seem to be any strategy at the national level for R&D priorities of the country," says Dr Claudine Simson, CAR chair and Nortel Networks' VP disruptive technologies for networks and business solutions. "We have an S&T strategy, but we need to look at it again and make it a high priority to drive Canada on the international stage. We need to look at the macro picture and adopt a more risk-driven approach. "

It's hoped the report will stimulate broad discussion and spur government to act. Copies have already been presented to Industry Canada DM Peter Harder and Dr Gilbert Normand, secretary of state for science, research and development, with plans to meet with Industry minister John Manley in the near future.

The report also makes specific recommendations on which research disciplines require additional public funding if Canada is to capitalize on its strengths and future opportunities. Simson says the areas were singled out after surveying 50 innovative firms, 12 leading research universities and all federal departments with significant R&D programs (with the exception of Health Canada, which did not participate).

The report contends that better coordination between innovation players and guidance by technology foresight could help avoid the mismatch in resources facing the pharmaceutical and ICT sectors. Health is the biggest university research priority in Canada, with the majority of research applications geared towards the pharmaceutical sector. Yet the Canadian pharmaceutical sector represents less than 0.5% of GDP, compared to ICT which has a GDP share of 4.5%. The health field as a whole accounts for 7.5% of GDP and includes all forms of medical treatment and care.

Match investment to receptor capacity

"We need a good match between what the universities are producing and the workforce that is available to them. We have to be conscious of that but we also have to reserve capability for areas of research where there is no industry yet," says Simson. "There has been improvement, but we need foresight to be able to look out 20 years from now."

For those in the ICT sector pushing for additional research funding, the CAR report is a welcome addition to their case. Dr Birendra Prasada, president of the Canadian Institute for Telecommunication Research, agrees that there's very little correlation between industry activity and research conducted in Canada. He has been an instrumental force behind a proposal to boost funding of ICT research by $350 million over five years and he says that if long term technology trends had been heeded, ICT would already have a larger share of the R&D funding pie.

"These changes are not temporary and they've been coming for a long time," says Prasada. "Fundamental changes are taking place in student enrolment. From a manpower and training point-of-view, we're trying to get foreign investment into Canada and exports are a major factor. As an educator, that opens up tremendous opportunities for us, but there is a broader problem of building a critical mass of talent and we can only do this with a stronger university system."

Government research facilities are also in need of strengthening, although the report concludes that federal departments appear to be more adept in defining strategic research objectives and less pressured to find operating resources for the short term. Nevertheless, government labs must have the capability to support economic and industry trends, and Simson says organizations like the NRC must be supported at a higher level.

"Government laboratories represent Canada as a force for the future and the NRC has to be the ice breaker in the country. The federal role is not clearly defined."

While the report's recommendations have appeared on the radar screen of Industry Canada's S&T policy shop, it is not yet an active file. An Industry Canada official says activities are currently focused on responding to the BEST report (R$, April 21/00) and supporting the expert panel examining international S&T.

Simson hopes the government will positively respond to the report and initiate at least some of its recommendations by the fall at the latest. She says a technology foresight panel should be composed of individuals from government, government laboratories, industry, academia and the social sciences sector, all of whom should have a special interest in interaction amongst universities, government and industry. R$