New era of cooperation

The Council of Canadian Academies (CCA) and its three member organizations have committed to greater collaboration and cooperative use of resources to ensure that Canadians receive the best possible evidence-based science advice. The recently released Statement of Common Understanding (SCU) comes six years after the CCA became operational and could help to resolve festering disagreements over how the organization is funded as well as the role of its members in the future.

The idea of developing an SCU has been the focus of some discussion within the CCA and was included as a recommendation in a 2010 mid-term external evaluation of the organization. That panel noted that "the relationship between the Council and its three Member Academies has not been as productive or cooperative as it could be" and urged the organizations to examine the US model and work with government "towards a funding model that would … enhance the capacity of the assessment process to support public policy".

"All of us thought the statement was a good idea. It's important for us to stand up collectively," says CCA president and CEO Elizabeth Dowdeswell. "A strong relationship and coherent voice is seen as important to be able to express our common view for evidence-based public policy."

After years of protracted, on-and-off again negotiations, the government in 2005 allocated $30 million over 10 years to the CCA (then known as the Canadian Academies of Science), which is comprised of the Royal Society of Canada (RSC), Canadian Academy of Engineering (CAE) and the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences (CAHS). The inability of member academies to access funding had been an ongoing point of contention prior to the funding agreement announcement and has remained a source of frustration on the part of the academies. They have had to secure alternate funding in order to undertake their own expert panel assessments.

Yet despite attempts to dissuade Industry Canada from including the firewall in the funding agreement, the government refused to budge — a position likely reinforced by the unfolding sponsorship scandal prompted by a scathing report from the Auditor General of the day on the misuse of public funds within the governing Liberal Party. Critics contend that the inability of the member academies to access CCA funds has reduced the CCA members to nominal roles, which is arguably a factor in the decision to develop the SCU.

The SCU doesn't address the use of the CCA's financial resources but at least one academy president says the work and goodwill that went into the document could pave the way for a change in the funding agreement if the CCA is renewed in 2015.

"The goal is to work more closely with the CCA which has built up tremendous expertise over several years," says Dr Thomas Marrie, CAHS president and dean of Dalhousie Univ's faculty of medicine. "If the government sees how integral the members are to the CCA, the next time, some of the money may go to member academies."

RSC foreign secretary Dr Jeremy McNeil says the differing nature of the reports produced by the CCA and the member academies, combined with the fiscal firewall, have forced the academies to find other funding sources, which they have done with varying degrees of success.

While the CCA assessments are demand driven and do not contain recommendations, RSC reports are driven by the interests of its fellows. The CCA has historically received the vast majority of its panel topics from government departments and agencies, although that is changing.

"I've heard the criticism of the CCA but let's be realistic. The CCA has goals and objectives and working together will make it more effective and efficient," says McNeil. "I came on board in December and have only attended one meeting but I saw very positive interactions. The individual academies are looking for alternate funding but showing collaboration helps to raise money."

academies developing separate funding capacity

The member academies have been making significant headway in funding assessments of their own, with the RSC producing the most with several more in development. The RSC is working with an expert panel model developed by Dr William Leiss, a past RSC president and one of the early advocates of the CCA. The RSC is about to undertake an assessment on early childhood development sponsored by the Calgary-based Norlien Foundation which specializes in supporting research on childhood development, addiction, and mental health.

"The RSC picks topics that the CCA would never do and they've been a tremendous success," says Leiss, referring to recent assessments on End-of-Life Decision Making and the Environmental and Health Impact of Canada's Oil Sands Industry. "The society now has resources at its disposal to pay for the panels itself."

The CAHS has also produced several well-received reports and the CAE broke new ground by partnering with the David Suzuki Foundation to conduct an assessment on the future of Canadian energy and energy supplies with support from the Trottier Family Foundation (R$, June 18/10).

The CCA has also begun to diversify its funding base with four assessments supported with money outside of its funding agreement with Industry Canada. Dowdeswell calls these assessments pilot projects.

"I have set for myself the goal of choosing five different sponsors or methods and we're developing a portfolio that allows us to do this," she says, adding that some of these could be joint assessments in collaboration with one or more member academies. "There are many cross-cutting issues and thorny political questions that may surface from other sources ... We've already done one with the CAHS and they funded it. They (the academies) don't have our expertise in terms of process and they like our rigour."

"The CCA's mandate is growing and it's slowly going outside for funding support," says Paul Dufour, principal of Paulicyworks and a key driver behind the CCA's formation. "I see the glass as half or three quarters full as opposed to half empty. We've got to work with what we've got and encourage it."

Greater collaboration will be pursued in several areas including the development of a collaborative process for the solicitation of membership to the CCA's scientific advisory committee, development of a project portfolio of assessment questions, development of a collaborative process to request candidates for assessment panels and development of coordinated capacity to undertake and develop a brand for joint projects, building on the CCA's process for conducting assessments.

R$