Canada must do more to boost innovation

There has been much discussion and activity around the topic of innovation. Everyone recognizes the need to create an environment in Canada that fosters innovation, and that supports the development of innovative ideas through to commercialization. The excellence of Canadian research happening at the universities and colleges across the country is well-respected in the world. The federal granting councils have done an excellent job supporting applied research with a synergy of co-operation between government, academia, and industry. A restoration of funding in basic research has Canada maintaining its leadership position in key areas, like genomics, big data, particle physics, brain and vaccine research, and clean tech, all which have a good foundation from which to spring forth innovative ideas. There are still some gaps, and an opportunity to improve the results we see in terms of innovations coming forward and the development of ideas through to job creation. More can be done to boost innovation in Canada. The minister of science assembled a committee to review the current funding for basic science research, and to come up with recommendations by year end. The panel is made up of well-respected Canadian scientists, although none from the natural resource sectors, which are critical today. While we wait expectantly for the panel’s recommendations, there are several barriers to innovation that are sure to be in their list: Cross-disciplinary work. The current fund granting structure is set up to separate hard science from social science. However, we see increasingly that innovations come from a combination of human and technological factors. Projects that combine multiple disciplines in the research are currently disadvantaged in the funding process, so a recommendation that addresses this gap would be helpful. Centres of excellence. If we look to models of countries where innovation is well done, we see that a critical mass of expertise is a breeding ground for innovation. However, those, like Israel, that do innovation quite well, have modelled their centres of excellence in a cross-disciplinary fashion driven by industry-determined problems. Our Canadian centres of excellence have been more grouped around an existing subject area (like bio or clean tech, or particle physics, for example). Tolerance of failure. Nations that innovate well will tell you that about five per cent of innovations are successful (the definition of success is creating a company of more than 100 people or sales of more than $100-million). That, by inference, tells us that one can expect upwards of 95 per cent failure rates. Canada has historically not had the appetite to stomach this kind of financial risk and loss, but we will need to move our risk tolerance to become more innovative. Talent retention. We have seen in key areas like health research and quantum physics the difficulty of attracting and retaining top talent to Canada with the current funding levels and programs. We will continue to compete for talent with the world, and we need to find solutions that will bring the finest minds here to innovate. An area of additional opportunity is to increase the number of women in the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) disciplines as well as in the executive leadership of these institutions. In addition to these opportunities, there are other things aiding our efforts to enhance innovation. One continued from the previous Conservative government is the support for infrastructure at post-secondary institutions. This funding, previously known as the Knowledge Infrastructure Program, ensures that the labs and facilities at our academic institutions are well equipped to deliver innovation. Finally, when there are good ideas that will become the disruptive technology of the future (think of the iPhone, Facebook, plastic packaging), venture capital to support the commercialization is needed. Canada has a long way to go to get the venture capital we need at the risk profile to handle the failure rate of innovations-in-development. However, we are moving in a good direction, and look forward to seeing the recommendations of the panel, as well as the results of the many innovation consultations that have been held. Marilyn Gladu is the science critic for the official opposition Conservative Party and MP for Sarnia-Lambton, Ont. The Hill Times

Canada must do more to boost innovation

We will need to up our risk tolerance and account for cross-disciplinary work.

Here’s what’s still needed to drive innovation

Biotechnology, statistics, collaboration, and the pursuit of the future

Broad support in life sciences innovation vital in preparing for future pandemics, say industry experts

Here’s what’s still needed to drive innovation

Canada needs a modern, national health data architecture

To address online harms, Canada must commit to digital media literacy

A cure for multiple sclerosis could be just around the corner

Renewable energy is the way to go, says letter writer

Supporting local broadcasters is critical for our democracy

Where’s the innovation in our innovation ecosystem?

Canada’s health security depends on increased support for high-risk, high-reward scientific research

Internationally, Canada’s a beacon for science and scientists

The future is interdisciplinary

Government committed to supporting Canadian students, advanced research: Duncan

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Canada must do more to boost innovation

We will need to up our risk tolerance and account for cross-disciplinary work.

Get The Policy Briefings Newsletter