Major new study offers comprehensive snapshot of Canada's S&T landscape

First report by Council of Canadian Academies

After years of unsuccessful attempts, Canada finally has a comprehensive baseline of information on its science and technology (S&T) capacity and capabilities. A major new report offers a rich and at times contradictory view of Canadian S&T research, technology and research infrastructure strengths that is certain to spur debate.

Using a synthesis of expert opinion and published data, the inaugural report of the Council of Canadian Academies (CCA) was commissioned in June by Industry Canada for use in formulating a new S&T strategy this fall in collaboration with Finance Canada.

Entitled The State of Science and Technology in Canada, the massive 214-page report was overseen by a 10-person scientific advisory committee, chaired by Elizabeth Dowdeswell, former president of the Nuclear Waste Management Association. It shows that Canada has excellent research in many areas but often falls short when it comes to converting that knowledge into marketable products and services. It identifies four research/technology clusters where Canada is particularly strong (see chart on page 2), offering a complex, multifaceted perspective on how Canada ranks internationally in a wide variety of research areas

"Canada is strong in many areas of research and the bibliometric data certainly bear this out," says CCA president Dr Peter Nicholson. "Seventy percent of the 197 sub-sectors we looked at are above the world average. And knowledge production and infrastructure were given good marks in the survey. There were no real surprises but a high degree of consensus."

The report — researched and written in just two months —employs a unique four-lens approach, combining a major survey of Canada's S&T community, bibliometric (publishing) and technometric (patenting) data, a literature review and international comparisons. The approach was the product of the short timeframe the government allowed for the report's completion and discussion with colleagues.

"We came up with the four-lens approach over a cup of coffee. It just dawned on us, but we've done something original here," he says. "There's a lot of subtle understanding when you look at the S&T strength and S&T trends scales. It will produce a lot of interesting conversations."

The major new element of the report is the online opinion survey, which was sent out to about 5,000 S&T leaders,from academia, industry and government and garnered 1,529 responses — a respectable return of nearly 30%.

Survey respondents ranked natural resources highly, especially oilsands and related technologies as the strongest component of Canada's overall S&T capabilities. Yet the bibliometric and technometric data of the underlying research don't confirm such an upbeat assessment.

"Oil sands is a great example of perception in a logical sense being absolutely right. Canada is in a class of its own (but) there is a gap between perception and reality. Hopefully it will spur more conversation and a deeper understanding," says Nicholson. "Chemistry and physics are another example. They have good bibliometrics but they're not as strong in the survey. There appears to be a migration of aspiration toward multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary areas. People see the future in areas of convergence but they need strong research disciplines to contribute to them."

The infrastructure that underpins Canadian S&T is highly rated by the survey respondents to the online survey, leaving the question as to why Canada is weak in translating research into innovative activity. The answer is partly derived from the low opinion many respondents held for critical components of Canada's commercialization system and its regulatory bodies, in particular Canada's banking system and venture capital providers. Nearly half of the respondents deemed these two critical components of commercialization to be a disadvantage, while the regulatory bodies overseeing health and safety, intellectual property, environment and business were also given low grades. Nicholson says he was surprised at the negative perception of these financial institutions, citing OECD data that show Canada second only to the US in VC.

The survey's identification of cluster strength in ICT seems natural, given Canada's long history in the sector. The areas of greatest strength within ICT are new media, gaming, animation and multimedia.

"These are not big industrial machines but strong niches," says Bernard Courtois, president of the Information Technology Association of Canada. "The report also confirms the realization that ICT are in everything from nanotech to energy to new media."

Nicholson says it's too early to say whether Industry Canada will ask the CCA to conduct a follow-up to the report, but many, including Courtois, contend that such a study of the S&T landscape should become a regular occurrence.

Dr Richard Hawkins also supports the idea of conducting the study regularly. A Canada Research Chair holder in science, technology and innovation at the Univ of Calgary and a member of the CCA's scientific advisory committee, he says repeating the exercise will inevitably produce an even greater understanding of Canada's S&T strengths, weaknesses and future potential.

"It's about time we drew a line in the sand.," he says, adding that he hopes human resources will be considered in future studies. "Peter (Nicholson) and his team have demonstrated that you can put together high-quality work in a short period of time. Imagine what they could do with more time and resources."

R$