Paul Dufour, adjunct professor and fellow, ISSP, University of Ottawa

A new future for the research councils?

By Paul Dufour

Ever wonder why Canada has three separate federal granting councils when integration and interdisciplinarity are the new research paradigms? Curious as to why Canadians do not have a single portal or concierge service for understanding how and why research grants are awarded across the country? Have some questions about whether granting councils are strategically addressing the issues of competition and collaboration in science and innovation? Read on...

Readers may not realize that NSERC and SSHRC are celebrating their 35th anniversary this year and that the CIHR's origins can be traced back 75 years. NSERC emerged from the granting functions of the National Research Council (NRC); SSHRC from the loins of the Canada Council; and CIHR's forerunner was an Associate Committee for Medical Research established at the NRC in 1938. Over the years, they have all undergone various strategic planning exercises and other transformations, with the CIHR being the most recent to morph into a more comprehensive health research funding agency from its Medical Research Council origins. And while their mandates clearly state they are funded by Parliament, the councils de facto report through two separate ministers — one responsible for Industry, the other for Health.

Yet, as critical actors in Canada's so called innovation eco-system, there is rarely any public debate about their collective future. Are they doing the job they are supposed to be doing, do they have their eyes on the horizon, and are these agencies asking whether Canada has the right governance in place for our next generation of scholars, trained personnel and researchers?

To be sure, the landscape has changed dramatically over the years to fill perceived gaps that the granting councils could not address adequately. In some cases, the provinces have created their own equivalent agencies to be both responsive to local and regional needs and to tackle new — oft unilateral — program decisions from the federal level. With the addition of Genome Canada, Canada Foundation for Innovation, multiple versions of Networks of Centres of Excellence (NCEs), Canada Research Chairs and others, it is a challenge for anyone to describe what Canada's research system actually looks like, let alone to our partners internationally.

Colleges, polytechnics, CEGEPs and their contributions to the eco-system are receiving more attention and rightfully so given their contributions to innovation. And if universities are now viewed by politicians largely as surrogates for industrial research, then the granting councils have fast become the chosen instruments in delivering new partnership models to accommodate the trend for short-term returns on investment, job creation and economic growth. Indeed, the prime minister has spoken about the fact that "science powers commerce". And his part-time, junior science minister likes to remind Canadians and global partners alike that the Harper government will weigh the "benefits of investments against return".

Much of this is not new. In the ‘80s and throughout the ‘90s, there was a vigorous national debate — open and engaged — to examine what might be the best way to assure the continued support for research excellence and to review the direction for the Canadian model in being responsive to its users. Somehow we've lost that momentum.

Meanwhile, others are moving ahead with experimentation. The seven Research Councils of the UK are now coordinated via the Research Councils UK which also maintains offices in China, India and the US to present a unified voice for the UK. A triennial review of the councils' governance is underway to assess its overall impact.

The Australian Research Committee, chaired by the chief scientist, was established to provide integrated and strategic advice on future research investments, including in the areas of human capital, infrastructure and collaborative activities.

The US President's Council of Science and Technology Advisors argued in a recent report that the US should review mechanisms for increasing the stability and predictability of federal research funding, including research infrastructure and facilities, via a cross-agency, multiyear program.

Quebec has a chief scientist who oversees that province's three granting councils while providing incentives that regularly recognize young scientists for their work.

There's no question that the federal research funding councils have been tweaking a more collaborative approach amongst themselves and with the CFI. Common CVs, research integrity, management of the NCES and scholarships are all areas where collaboration has become more active. But this is largely ‘tweeting' at the edges. Science and research are moving far more rapidly with a modality that is global and team-oriented in nature. Our research funding institutions need to catch up.

The Jenkins expert panel report suggested that perhaps it was time for NSERC and CIHR to help manage selected basic research institutes and major science initiatives of the NRC by having these transferred to universities (oddly, they left out SSHRC). While this recommendation has seen little take up to date, at least the panel raised the question for debate.

It may well be time to have a national dialogue (let's NOT call it a summit or conclave) around some of the emerging issues on the changing nature of science, its governance and funding in Canada, with an objective of developing coordinated public services made available to Canadians via the granting councils. The agenda for such a discussion could examine the following public policy questions:

* Are the federal granting agencies well integrated into Canada's funding eco-system for science, training and innovation? What new architecture, including a joined-up national and international presence, could provide a more responsive public service with Canadians?

* Should Canada be looking at other models abroad that are perceived to have a more integrated approach in funding of research and what can we learn from these?

* On what basis should this dialogue engage other research funding and performing agencies within the federal and provincial government ambits?

* What new measures could be introduced to assess progress in achieving new directions?

It may well be time to address the rapidly changing global research paradigm by refreshing our funding apparatus with a more responsive service for our citizens and researchers.

Paul Dufour is an adjunct professor and fellow, ISSP, University of Ottawa.