ARCHIVED - Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
This page has been archived.
Archived Content
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
2006-2007
Departmental Performance Report
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
The Honourable Jim Prentice
Minister of Industry
Analysis of Program Activities by Strategic Outcome
- Highly Skilled Science and Engineering Professionals in Canada
- High Quality Canadian-Based Competitive Research in the NSE
- Productive Use of New Knowledge in the NSE
- Operations and Organizational Structure
- Financial Tables
- Response to Parliamentary Committees, Audits and Evaluations for 2005-06
- Service Improvement Initiative
A – Audited Financial Statements
B – Council Membership
List of Tables
List of Abbreviations
|
CFI
|
Canada Foundation for Innovation |
| CGS | Canada Graduate Scholarships |
|
CIHR
|
Canadian Institutes of Health Research |
| CRC | Canada Research Chair |
|
CRD
|
Collaborative Research and Development Grant |
| DPR | Departmental Performance Report |
| HQP | Highly Qualified Personnel |
| I2I | Idea to Innovation |
| IP | Intellectual Property |
| IPM | Intellectual Property Mobilization |
| IRDF | Industrial Research and Development Fellowship |
| MFA | Major Facilities Access |
| MRS | Major Resources Support |
| NCE | Networks of Centres of Excellence |
| NSE | Natural Sciences and Engineering |
| NSERC | Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada |
| OECD | Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development |
| Postdoctoral Fellowship | |
| PWGSC | Public Works and Government Services Canada |
| R&D | Research and Development |
| SSHRC | Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada |
| USRA | Undergraduate Student Research Award |
Section 1 – Agency Overview
1.1 Minister’s Message
I am pleased to present NSERC’s Departmental Performance Report for 2006–07.
My goal as Minister of Industry, and one of the top priorities of Canada’s New Government, is to ensure we maintain a strong economic environment – one that allows Canadians to prosper in the global economy. We are seeing great changes in the international marketplace. New trade agreements, rapidly advancing technologies and the emergence of developing countries are all contributing to today’s business environment. Canada needs to keep pace.
Part of my mandate is to help make Canadians more productive and competitive. We want our industries to continue to thrive and all Canadians to continue to enjoy one of the highest standards of living in the world.
For this to happen, the government is committed to maintaining a fair, efficient and competitive marketplace – one that encourages investment, sets the stage for greater productivity, and facilitates innovation. We are relying on market forces to a greater extent, regulating only when it is absolutely necessary. Our policies have helped turn research into new products and business processes. In addition, we are making efforts to increase awareness of sustainability practices among Canadian industry, emphasizing the social, environmental and economic benefits they bring.
The Department and the Industry Portfolio have made progress on a wide range of issues this past year, most notably in the areas of telecommunications, science and practical research, manufacturing, small business, consumer protection, patents and copyrights, tourism and economic development.
The Industry Portfolio is composed of Industry Canada and 10 other agencies, Crown corporations and quasi-judicial bodies. These organizations collectively advance Canada’s industrial, scientific and economic development, and help ensure that we remain competitive in the global marketplace.
We have accomplished much this year. Using Advantage Canada – the government’s long-term economic plan – as our roadmap, we have made great strides toward many of our most important goals. We will continue to focus on these goals to support the conditions for a strong economy – an environment that Canadians expect and deserve.
Jim Prentice,
Minister of Industry
1.2 Management Representation Statement
I submit for tabling in Parliament, the 2006–2007 Departmental Performance Report for the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).
This document has been prepared based on the reporting principles contained in the Guide for the Preparation of Part III of the 2006–2007 Estimates: Reports on Plans and Priorities and Departmental Performance Reports:
- It adheres to the specific reporting requirements outlined in the Treasury Board Secretariat guidance;
- It is based on the department's approved Strategic Outcome(s) and Program Activity Architecture that were approved by the Treasury Board;
- It presents consistent, comprehensive, balanced and reliable information;
- It provides a basis of accountability for the results achieved with the resources and authorities entrusted to it; and
- It reports finances based on approved numbers from the Estimates and the Public Accounts of Canada.
Suzanne Fortier, President
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
1.3 Summary Information
Canada's prosperity depends upon people, knowledge and innovation, especially in science and technology, as we transform our economy from one based on commodities to one based on value-added products in all sectors. Science and technology will also continue to enhance our quality of life by helping us improve the management of our resources, environment, public education and health system.
NSERC is the primary federal agency investing in research and research training in the natural sciences and engineering disciplines. It is funded directly by Parliament and reports to it through the Minister of Industry.
Our mission is to invest in people, discovery and innovation to build a strong Canadian economy and to improve the quality of life for all Canadians. NSERC advances government-wide priorities of building a stronger Canada, creating opportunities for young Canadians and investing in knowledge and creativity.
Created in 1978, NSERC’s legal mandate, vision and mission are outlined in Figure 1.
The agency’s ultimate objective is to advance Canada’s prosperity and high quality of life by supporting the creation and transfer of knowledge in the natural sciences and engineering (NSE) in Canada, and by ensuring people are trained to use and create that knowledge. To achieve this, NSERC supports research in Canadian universities and colleges that meets the highest international standards of excellence and supports the education of young people in that research.
As a result, Canada has access to leading-edge science and technology from around the world and highly-qualified experts. Partnerships with industry connect researchers with those who can use the new knowledge productively and enhance Canada’s capacity for innovation. Innovation contributes to wealth creation in the economy, which produces prosperity. New knowledge in the NSE also enhances our quality of life through its impact on many policies, regulations, practices and institutions.
Figure 2 highlights the financial resources expended by NSERC priority and expected outcomes. The evidence presented in Section 2 suggests that all of the 2006-07 results successfully met expectations.
|
Mandate
|
|
NSERC was created in 1978. “The functions of the Council are to promote and assist research in the natural sciences and engineering, other than the health sciences; and advise the Minister in respect of such matters relating to such research as the Minister may refer to the Council for its consideration.” (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Act, 1976-77, c.24.) |
|
Vision
|
| NSERC will help make Canada a country of discoverers and innovators for the benefit of all Canadians. |
|
Mission
|
| NSERC will achieve its vision by investing in people, discovery and innovation through programs that support university research in the natural sciences and engineering on the basis of national competitions. |
Reason for Existence:
|
The Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) works to make Canada a country of discoverers and innovators. To achieve this, we invest in people, discovery and innovation in Canadian universities and colleges. |
Total Financial Resources:
|
Planned Spending |
Total Authorities |
Actual Spending |
|
$906.1M |
$903.7M |
$895.4M |
Total Human Resources:
|
Planned |
Actual |
Difference |
|
313 |
308 |
-5 |
Departmental Priorities:
| Priority |
Program Activity – |
Performance Status
|
2006-07
|
|
|
Planned Spending
|
Actual Spending
|
|||
|
Strategic Outcome: Highly skilled science and engineering professionals in Canada |
||||
|
Develop Tomorrow’s |
Promote Science and Engineering – Increase student interest and abilities in science, mathematics, and research. |
Successfully Met |
$4.1M
|
$4.0M
|
|
Support Students and Fellows - Number of students gaining research and professional experience, the employment and salary levels of award recipients compared to the general population, and the average degree completion rates and time to completion of award. |
Successfully Met |
$137.8M
|
$128.0M
|
|
|
Attract and Retain Faculty - Number of researchers attracted to and retained by Canadian universities |
Successfully Met |
$167.7M
|
$145.2M
|
|
|
Strategic Outcome: High quality Canadian-based competitive research in the natural sciences and engineering |
||||
| Build on Canada’s Strength in Discovery |
Fund Basic Research - The creation and dissemination of knowledge to the research community and end users, the practical research experience gained by students and fellows who work with supported researchers, the employment of postgraduate students in well-paying jobs, and the diversified intellectual and infrastructure base maintained at postsecondary institutions across Canada. |
Successfully Met |
$406.3M
|
$440.8M
|
| Seize Emerging Research Opportunities |
Fund Research in Strategic Areas – The amount of research funding leveraged from other partners, metrics on knowledge creation and dissemination, experience gained by students and fellows supported through such research and subsequent employment and salary levels, the development of long-term relationships between partners, and the increased collaboration between researchers in different disciplines and the new knowledge or technologies that result from such interdisciplinary collaborations. |
Successfully Met |
$54.4M
|
$53.1M
|
|
Strategic Outcome: Productive use of new knowledge in the natural sciences and engineering |
||||
| Realize the Benefits of University Research |
Fund University-Industry-Government Partnerships - Research funds leveraged from partners, knowledge creation and dissemination to research community and users, experience gained by students and fellows and subsequent employment and income levels, long-term relationships established between partners, numbers of patents and licences generated, and economic value of intellectual property generated through funded research. |
Successfully Met |
$115.2M
|
$112.3M
|
|
Support Commercialization - The performance of supported institutions in managing their intellectual property (IP) assets for economic and social benefits, and the number of commercialization specialists trained and their subsequent employment and income levels. The number of successful validations of technical and economic feasibility of an invention or discovery, the ability of small and medium-sized companies to acquire new technical capabilities and/or take a new product to market, and the number of HQP trained through such projects. |
Successfully Met |
$16.5M
|
$12.0M
|
|
1.4 Departmental Performance
Before NSERC’s departmental performance is described, it would be useful to situate NSERC in Canada’s and the world’s systems of innovation. NSERC’s support for research and training is typical of many similar agencies around the world known as “granting councils.” Along with the more traditional role of education, universities worldwide have become centres of knowledge creation. In most industrialized countries, universities play a key role in the economic development of the nation. Because of the socio-economic benefits of university education and research, government funding of these institutions and their activities has become the norm.
Environmental Context
University research is now a very large endeavour. In 2005, member countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) spent $171 billion on university research (see Figure 3). Canadian university professors and students performed 6% of this total. When measured as a percentage of GDP, Canada spends more on university research than all of its G7 competitors and places second among OECD countries, only slightly behind Sweden (see Figure 4).
In 2006, university research represented 39% of all Canadian research, as measured by expenditures (see Figure 5). This percentage is much higher than the OECD average of 18% of R&D performed by universities in member countries. Of the $10.9 billion of direct and indirect investment in Canadian university research in 2006, 42% was allocated to the natural sciences and engineering (NSE).
NSERC is the most important funder of research in the natural sciences and engineering in Canadian universities. In 2006, $4.6 billion was spent on research in the natural sciences and engineering in Canadian universities. NSERC directly provided almost one-sixth of the total funding. Since many of the other expenditures from university, industry and government sources are contingent upon NSERC funding and peer review assurance of quality, a reasonable estimate makes the agency directly or indirectly responsible for slightly less than half of the total expenditure. Figure 6 gives a breakdown of the total funding by direct source.
NSERC does not conduct any research in-house, nor does the organization have any training facilities. NSERC supports research in Canadian universities and colleges that meets the highest international standards of excellence, and it supports the training of young people in that research. As a result, universities, colleges, companies, government agencies and other institutions with which NSERC collaborates are all key co-delivery partners.
More than 11,000 university professors and nearly 25,000 university students and postdoctoral fellows are supported by NSERC. (For a searchable database of all NSERC grant and scholarship recipients see http://www.nserc.gc.ca/funding/funding_dec_e.asp.) The Council also supports a considerable number of university technicians and research associates. Most Canadian universities benefit from NSERC programs, as do a growing number of colleges. Canadian industries and government departments are increasingly partnering with NSERC. Figure 7 presents the details of NSERC’s client support and partnerships. Estimates of the share of the population of eligible individuals and organizations funded or participating, and trends over the past 10 years, are also included.
As the main beneficiaries of NSERC funding, university professors and students are NSERC’s key clients. University administrative offices, such as research and scholarship liaison offices, are key partners in ensuring cost-effective NSERC program delivery. Further downstream, university technology transfer offices assist in generating the socio-economic returns at the core of one of NSERC’s desired strategic outcomes. In addition, several NSERC programs require the involvement of industry and/or government partners. Some company trends and important government partners are highlighted in Figures 8 and 9.
There are other important partners that also contribute to the fulfilment of NSERC’s strategic outcome of the productive use of new knowledge. These partners are typically involved in the intermediate outcomes and include such players as venture capital firms, angel investors, government agencies involved in financing businesses, banks and other partners providing financing and/or advice.
Given the multitude of partners involved, it must be emphasized that the outcomes presented in Section 2 are shared achievements. There is no easy way of isolating the impact of NSERC funding. However, because NSERC funding is the key driver in the early stages of the process and exercises quality control at that stage, it is doubtful that many of these outcomes could occur without it.
|
Number Supported or Participating
|
Share of the Population1
|
Trends in Share of the Population
Over Past 10 Years |
|
| Clients: | |||
| University Professors |
11,544 |
75% |
Small Increase
|
| Undergraduate Students |
8,903 |
7%
|
Moderate Increase |
| Master's/Doctoral Students |
13,470
|
35 - 40%
|
Moderate Increase |
| Postdoctoral Fellows |
2,090 |
40 - 45%
|
Small Increase
|
| University Technicians and Research Professionals |
2,756
|
25 - 30%
|
Moderate Decrease |
| Partner Organizations: |
|
|
|
| Universities and Colleges |
80
|
75% 3
|
Small Increase
|
| Companies Performing R&D2 |
1,402
|
10%
|
Moderate Increase
|
| Federal Science Departments/Agencies2 |
26
|
80%
|
Small Increase
|
| Provincial Science Departments/Agencies2 |
23
|
25 - 40%
|
Small Increase
|
Source: NSERC
1. The percentage that NSERC supports of all individuals and organizations eligible for NSERC funding.
2. Organizations in partnership with NSERC (across all NSERC programs).
3. Percentage only applies for universities.
Companies
Over the past decade, an increasing number of companies have contributed to NSERC’s research partnership programs and co-funded students and fellows. More than 1,400 firms participated in NSERC programs in 2006-07.
NSERC is well-known to companies heavily involved in R&D. In 2005-06, sixty-five of the top 100 Canadian R&D companies (as ranked by RE$EARCH MONEY, 2006) have collaborated with NSERC to support university research and training. Figure 8 highlights the number of firms by sector of the top 100 Canadian R&D companies participating in NSERC’s scholarship and partnership programs.
| Industry Group Sector |
Top 100
No. of Companies |
Companies Collaborating with NSERC
|
||||
|
Number
|
% of Sector
|
|||||
|
2004
|
2005
|
2004
|
2005
|
2004
|
2005
|
|
| Pharmaceuticals/biotechnology |
35
|
37
|
24
|
20
|
68.6%
|
54.1%
|
| Comm/telecom equipment/services |
16
|
16
|
10
|
9
|
62.5%
|
56.3%
|
| Energy and Utilities |
13
|
11
|
12
|
11
|
92.3%
|
100.0%
|
| Electronic parts and components |
9
|
7
|
7
|
5
|
77.8%
|
71.4%
|
| Software and computer services |
9
|
10
|
5
|
3
|
55.6%
|
30.0%
|
| Mining, metals, chemicals and forestry |
7
|
8
|
7
|
8
|
100.0%
|
100.0%
|
| Transportation |
7
|
7
|
6
|
6
|
85.7%
|
85.7%
|
| Other |
4
|
4
|
2
|
3
|
50.0%
|
75.0%
|
| Total |
100
|
100
|
73
|
65
|
73.0%
|
65.0%
|
Sources: Research Infosource, Canada’s Top 100 Corporate R&D Spenders List 2006, NSERC.
Government Departments/Agencies
NSERC is also well known to most federal and provincial science-based departments and agencies. A list of federal and provincial departments and agencies that NSERC collaborated with in 2006-07 is presented in Figure 9.
|
Federal Departments/Agencies
|
Provincial Departments/Agencies
|
| Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency Canada Border Services Agency Canada Economic Development (Quebec) Canadian Grain Commission Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation Canadian Heritage Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Canadian Space Agency Communications Research Centre Canada Communications Security Establishment Environment Canada Fisheries and Oceans Canada Health Canada Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Industry Canada National Defence National Research Council Canada Natural Resources Canada Parks Canada Public Health Agency of Canada Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada Public Works and Government Services Canada Royal Canadian Mounted Police Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) Transport Canada |
Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development |
Every year, NSERC reviews more than 11,000 applications for new grants and scholarships. In addition, NSERC manages thousands of ongoing grants and scholarships that were previously awarded. Detailed statistics on NSERC applications and awards can be found at: http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/fact_e.asp.
Departmental Performance
NSERC measures its performance by evaluating its programs of research and training support according to their impact, cost effectiveness and continuing relevance. When reviewing performance of research support programs, it is important to remember that these investments take longer to bear fruit than most other government investments. The impact of NSERC’s investment in research and training in the NSE can be fully assessed only over the long term. Therefore, the expected results reported in NSERC’s Report on Plans and Priorities 2006-07 should be considered as planned results for the future. The performance information presented in this year’s DPR is a retrospective look at outcomes resulting from NSERC funding over the past decade, and in some cases even longer.
In recent years, NSERC has been successful in:
- maintaining a strong presence in world science and engineering research by annually supporting over 11,000 of the most creative and productive Canadian university professors;
- supporting the training of approximately 70,000 master’s and doctoral students, and young research professionals since 1978, who have found well-paying, productive jobs and who are contributing to Canada’s knowledge-based economic sectors;
- supporting the development of new processes and products, some leading to the formation of new companies, all of which contribute significantly to the national economy; and
- introducing new programs to ensure the research community optimises its contributions to Canada’s prosperity and competitiveness.
Link to the Government of Canada Outcome Areas
NSERC investments contribute significantly to many of the Government of Canada’s strategic outcomes. All of the NSERC-funded outcomes presented in Section 2 are linked to the Government of Canada outcome: an innovative and knowledge based economy. Because NSERC funds research and training leading to a wide-range of economic and societal impacts in virtually every sector, many of NSERC’s long-term outcomes are also directly linked to other important Government of Canada outcomes, such as, strong economic growth, income security and employment for Canadians, a clean and healthy environment, healthy Canadians with access to quality health care, and safe and secure communities. It would be a significant challenge to develop performance measures and an attribution methodology for all of these outcomes. For the reason of simplicity, the “innovative and knowledge based economy” outcome is by far the most appropriate single outcome relationship for NSERC to use.
Section 2 – Analysis of Program Activities by Strategic Outcome
NSERC strives to provide Canadians with economic and social benefits arising from the provision of a highly-skilled workforce and knowledge transfer of Canadian and international discoveries in the natural sciences and engineering from universities and colleges to other sectors. In more detailed terms, NSERC’s overall performance expectations are highlighted in Figure 10. The performance model presents NSERC’s strategic outcomes along with the immediate and intermediate outcomes expected. The pace of realization of immediate and intermediate outcomes will vary with the research projects and students funded, taking from a few years to decades. This progression is also not risk free, with some research projects and students not realizing their full potential. As well, no one indicator can be used to measure a defining accomplishment; rather a whole suite of indicators must be taken into consideration. In addition, many of the immediate and intermediate outcomes shown for the three priority areas overlap.
NSERC invests government funds through a variety of programs with different objectives and complimentary strategic outcome expectations (for example, students are supported through virtually all NSERC programs). All of NSERC’s programs achieve a number of immediate and intermediate outcomes. Linking resources to any one expected outcome is, therefore, virtually impossible. Sections 2.1 to 2.3 provide details of the performance measures by strategic outcome and program activity to the best and most reasonable extent currently possible. NSERC along with the other granting councils and Industry Canada will be developing a performance measurement plan in the near future.
2.1 Highly Skilled Science and Engineering Professionals in Canada
By supporting students and fellows at Canadian universities and abroad, providing programs to support university faculty, and promoting science and engineering to Canadian youth, NSERC will ensure a reliable supply of highly qualified personnel (HQP) for Canadian industry, government, and academia. The following three sections provide details of NSERC’s performance by program activity for the strategic outcome of highly skilled science and engineering professionals in Canada.
2.1.1 Promote Science and Engineering
An overview of the “promote science and engineering” program activity is presented below:
|
Description: |
This program activity encourages popular interest in science, mathematics and engineering and aims to develop science, mathematics and engineering abilities in Canadian youth. |
|
Expected Results: |
The performance indicators to be used to assess the effectiveness of these science promotion programs will be student interest and abilities in science, mathematics and research, as determined through progress reports collected by NSERC. |
|
Planned Spending: |
$4.1M |
|
Number of Organizations Supported: |
111 |
Young Canadians are less inclined to select science or engineering as a discipline when they enter university (see Figure 11) as compared to many other nations. To help improve the interest of Canadian youth in science and engineering, NSERC has launched two programs. The key programs under this program activity include PromoScience ($2.7M) and the Centres for Research in Youth, Science Teaching and Learning ($0.9M), with the remaining funds spent on science promotion awards and administration.
The PromoScience program provides support to non-profit and public organizations that work with young Canadians in order to build their interest in science and engineering, motivate and encourage their participation in science and engineering activities, and train teachers who are responsible for the science and math education of young Canadians. NSERC monitors closely the progress of these grants and reviews final reports to ensure impact. A selection of early outcomes from PromoScience grants is presented in Figure 12. The program is allowing organizations to expand their offerings and to engage many more young Canadians, especially girls and aboriginal youth. A potential indicator of the long-term impact of PromoScience funding can be gauged from an exit survey of NSERC Undergraduate Student Research Award recipients (see Section 2.1.2) in which 30% of 10,545 respondents (who are currently enrolled in an NSE bachelor’s degree program) took part in science camps or fairs either in elementary school or high school.
The Centres for Research in Youth, Science Teaching and Learning (CRYSTALs) is a pilot program designed to establish effective collaborations between researchers in education with those in science, mathematics and engineering, as well as with the education and science promotion communities. The program was launched in 2004-05 and is slated for an evaluation in 2007-08 to determine early outcomes.
|
Organization Supported |
Impact of NSERC Funding |
|
|
Actua |
Actua is a national charitable organization dedicated to providing young Canadians with positive, hands-on learning experiences in science, technology and engineering. |
Actua was able to expand its programs to reach 81 per cent more Aboriginal participants.
The group also expanded their all-girls programs.
NSERC funding helped provide local training for staff and volunteers and was also used to subsidize participation fees for Aboriginals and girls. |
|
Canadian Association for Girls in Science |
CAGIS is a network of girls, aged seven to 16 who like science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and want to learn more. The purpose of CAGIS is to promote, educate and support interest and confidence in STEM among girls. |
CAGIS is expanding:
|
|
F�d�ration des c�geps |
Science, on tourne! is an annual challenge for college students to invent and build a gadget able to accomplish a very specific task. |
The 2006 challenge was held in May:
|
|
Future SET |
Future SET is a science, engineering and technology education program founded by Professional Engineers and Geoscientists and Memorial University in 1994 to provide Newfoundland's youth with hands-on exposure to exciting projects. |
Registration for Future SET hit record numbers for most programs:
|
|
Let's Talk Science |
Let's Talk Science strives to improve science literacy through leadership, innovative educational programs, research and advocacy. They motivate and empower youth to use science, technology and engineering to develop critical skills, knowledge and attitudes needed to thrive in our world. |
Let’s Talk Science offers in-class workshops:
The group also offers community workshops:
Professional development for teachers:
Partnership Program:
|
|
Scientists in School |
Scientists in School is dedicated to inspiring an excitement for science and technology in children of all ages. |
Scientists in School has grown:
|
2.1.2 Support Students and Fellows
An overview of the “support students and fellows” program activity is presented below:
|
Description: |
This program activity supports training of highly qualified personnel through scholarship and fellowship programs. |
|
Expected Results: |
The number of students gaining research and professional experience, the employment and salary levels of award recipients compared to the general population, and the average degree completion rates and time to completion of award recipients compared to the general population. |
|
Planned Spending: |
$137.8M |
|
Number of clients supported by NSERC: |
4,191 |
NSERC provides direct financial support to students from the undergraduate to postdoctoral levels through key programs such as:
- Undergraduate Student Research Awards ($19.0M): Held in university or industry laboratories, this program provides funding for an undergraduate student to spend a four-month work term in a university or industrial research environment. This program is important to help attract the best students to advanced studies and careers in research. It is also an important element of developing research capacity at small universities in Canada that do not have postgraduate degree programs.
- Postgraduate Scholarships ($83.9M): At the master’s and doctoral levels, NSERC supports students by providing an annual stipend that enables them to continue to pursue their research interests. Up to four years’ support is available over the course of a candidate’s graduate studies. Opportunities for study at institutions in Canada and abroad as well as at Canadian industrial laboratories are available. Canada Graduate Scholarships (tenable only at Canadian universities) are awarded to the most outstanding candidates.
- Postdoctoral and Industrial R&D Fellowships ($19.0M): These awards provide two years of support to researchers who have completed their Ph.D., and provides them with funds to continue their programs of research. These awards may be held at any academic institution through a Postdoctoral Fellowship, or at a Canadian company that conducts research through an Industrial R&D Fellowship.
The remaining funds under the program activity were used for the administration of the programs above.
NSERC also funds students and fellows through support provided by an NSERC-funded professor from his or her NSERC grant. More students and fellows are funded through this indirect route (15,400) than through the direct scholarships or fellowship awards (9,000) presented under this program activity. General macro-level economic outcomes for university graduates in the natural sciences and engineering provide ample evidence of the positive outcomes for NSERC-funded students, both directly and indirectly supported.
NSERC conducts several surveys of its scholarship and fellowship winners and is able to assess performance against expected results. In addition, Statistics Canada collects labour market information that provides ample evidence of the successful career outcomes of NSE graduates. The following sections present data from both sources for this program activity.
Undergraduate Student Research Awards:
NSERC provides four-month positions for undergraduate students in the natural sciences and engineering through our Undergraduate Student Research Awards (USRA) program (note: NSERC-funded professors also support undergraduate students through their NSERC research grants). NSERC’s current annual investment of $19 million in this program brings this experience to nearly 4,200 students every year. Providing these students with valuable experience in a university or industrial laboratory encourages them to undertake graduate studies. This is an important indicator of the impact of the program. Figure 13 provides outcome data from five surveys conducted with USRA recipients involving 10,545 respondents (62% response rate). Overall, the program is offering students a high quality training experience and is encouraging a significant number to pursue postgraduate studies in the NSE.
|
Short-term |
|
|
Longer-term |
|
|
Recipients’ |
|
NSERC Postgraduate Scholarships:
NSERC provides scholarship support for Canadians to pursue master’s or doctoral degrees in the natural sciences and engineering. These programs support more than 4,100 students annually at a cost of $84 million per year.
The career status of former NSERC-funded master’s and doctoral students and the degree to which NSERC funding affects their ability to undertake or continue with their studies are important indicators of the impact of the scholarship support. Over the past ten years, NSERC has completed ten surveys (two exit surveys – 1,680 respondents/68% response rate; and eight follow-up surveys nine years after the award – 1,850 respondents/49% response rate) of directly-funded master’s and doctoral students. Some of the key findings related to the short and longer-term outcomes experienced by these students are highlighted in Figure 14. Virtually all of the training objectives of the program are being met and labour market outcomes of the students early on in their careers are very promising.
|
Short-term |
|
|
Longer-term |
|
|
Recipients’ |
|
Postdoctoral Fellowships:
After a doctoral degree, in many of the NSE fields, a significant proportion of graduates go through additional postdoctoral research training. NSERC directly funds postdoctoral fellows (PDFs) for up to two years to continue their research training. NSERC invested $15 million to support 482 Canadian PDFs in 2006-07.
The career status of former NSERC-funded postdoctoral fellows and the degree to which NSERC funding affects their ability to pursue a research career are important indicators of the impact of the postdoctoral support. Over the past seven years, NSERC has completed four surveys (573 respondents/40% response rate) of directly-funded postdoctoral fellows seven years after their award and one exit survey (150 respondents/65% response rate) after the completion of the award. Some of the key findings from the surveys are presented in Figure 15. NSERC-funded postdoctoral fellows are actively engaged in research and experience the same positive labour market outcomes as postgraduate students.
|
Short-term |
|
|
Longer-term |
|
|
Recipients’ |
|
Industrial Research and Development Fellowships:
An important route for doctoral graduates to gain additional research experience is through NSERC’s Industrial R&D Fellowships (IRDF) program. The program currently invests approximately $5 million per year to help place 150-200 Canadian Ph.D.s annually in industrial laboratories. This investment has contributed significantly to the number of doctoral graduates working in Canadian industrial labs. More than 20% of Canadian industrial researchers with a Ph.D. have been funded by NSERC through the IRDF program.
To determine if the program is staying on track, NSERC routinely monitors the employment situation of former IRDF winners. Some key findings are presented in Figure 16.
|
Short-term |
|
|
Recipients’ |
|
Labour Market Outcomes
Since 1978, NSERC has supported the training of approximately 70,000 master’s and doctoral students in the NSE. These graduates are major contributors to knowledge creation and technology transfer in Canada. Surveys of NSERC-funded students early in their careers indicate extremely positive employment outcomes.
These results are not surprising given the strong demand for natural science and engineering graduates. Unemployment levels for persons employed in natural science or engineering occupations are considerably below national levels (see Figure 17) and annual salaries for this group are nearly 32% greater than the national average (see Figure 18). The income differential for postgraduate degrees is even greater. As shown in Figure 19, average earnings increase for NSE graduates as their degree qualifications improve.
Although the employment and salary prospects for postgraduates in the NSE are very good in Canada, this has not translated into large numbers of doctoral graduates in the NSE. In fact, Canada ranks rather poorly in the per capita production of NSE doctorates as shown in Figure 20. The Canada Graduate Scholarships (CGS) program established in 2003 and subsequently increased as a result of the 2007 federal budget and recent increases to NSERC’s base funding may help to improve Canada’s ranking. The first cohort of CGS doctoral recipients is expected to graduate in 2007.
NSERC supports graduate students in the natural sciences and engineering to meet the needs of the country. Without these long-term investments in young people, Canada will experience a decline in its ability to compete and innovate in a knowledge-based world and will be unable to rank highly among top R&D performing countries. As mentioned, approximately 70,000 postgraduates have been funded by NSERC since 1978. These individuals are now part of a growing natural science and engineering labour force of more than 1,000,000 people (see Figure 21). As the knowledge economy continues to grow in Canada, employers will hire increasing numbers of NSE graduates, as they have in the past (see Figure 22). As also shown in Figure 22, natural science and engineering positions have been the fastest growing occupational group over the past 17 years.
2.1.3 Attract and Retain Faculty
An overview of the “attract and retain” program activity is presented below:
|
Description: |
This program activity aims to attract and retain faculty at Canadian postsecondary institutions. It includes a number of Chairs programs that strengthen research excellence and teaching at Canadian universities by providing support for faculty in specific fields. |
|
Expected Results: |
Faculty support programs will be evaluated based on performance indicators such as the number of researchers attracted to and retained by Canadian universities, the impact of supported faculty on the research teams with whom they work, the number of continuing collaborations established through such support, the number of students and fellows trained by the supported researcher, and the number of patents, publications, and new products developed by supported researchers. |
|
Planned Spending: |
$167.7M |
|
Number of clients supported by NSERC: |
1,098 |
Key programs under this program activity include:
- Canada Research Chairs ($111.2M): This Tri-Council (NSERC, CIHR and SSHRC) program provides financial support for up to 2,000 professors across Canada, including 900 positions by 2007-08 within the NSE. The key objective of this program is to enable Canadian universities to achieve the highest levels of research excellence and to become world-class research centres in the global knowledge-based economy.
- Industrial Research Chairs, Other Chairs and Faculty Support Programs ($29.9M): This program helps universities build the critical mass of expertise and long-term relationships with corporate partners in areas of research that are of importance to industry. Industrial Research Chairs can also enhance the ability of universities to recruit senior-level researchers and research leaders from industry or other sectors. The demand for this program has been growing recently. Support of university faculty in targeted areas such as Northern Research, Management of Technological Change, Fuel Cells, Design Engineering, and Women in Science and Engineering helps address specific needs in particular disciplines. In addition, the University Faculty Awards program seeks to decrease the under-representation of women and aboriginal peoples in faculty positions in the NSE by providing partial salary support to Canadian universities that appoint promising female or aboriginal researchers to tenure-track or tenured positions in science and engineering faculties.
- Prizes ($1.8M): NSERC prizes recognize outstanding Canadian individual researchers, research teams and students. They enhance the career development of outstanding and highly promising scientists and engineers and distinguish the sustained excellence of faculty members of Canadian universities. They also publicly recognize lasting partnerships in R&D between university and industry and celebrate young Canadian entrepreneurs. Examples of NSERC prizes include the Gerhard Herzberg Canada Gold Medal for Science and Engineering, the Brockhouse Canada Prize for Interdisciplinary Research in Science and Engineering, and the Innovation Challenge Awards.
The remaining funds under the program activity were used for administration of the programs above.
By far, the largest program of this program activity is the Canada Research Chairs program. The first awards were made in 2000-01 and by 2006-07 the program supported nearly 800 positions in the natural sciences and engineering in universities, and almost 1,000 in other disciplines. A fifth year evaluation of the program was recently completed (the evaluation was for all disciplines and a copy of the report can be found at: http://www.chairs.gc.ca/web/about/publications_e.asp). Some of the major findings from the evaluation are as follows:
- As of August 2004, 359 Chairholders have been attracted from outside Canada and 84% of Chairholders surveyed (attracted from outside Canada) viewed the Chair award as important in their decision to accept a position in Canada.
- A substantial percentage (23.2%) of Chairholders reported that they would have relocated outside of Canada if they had not received a Chair in the next five years.
- Chairholders cited a substantial increase in the number of students and other HQP supervised since their Chair awards. Chairholders reported that they supervised 779 more doctoral students and 490 more postdoctoral fellows in 2002-2003 than in 1999-2000, a significantly greater increase than other researchers over the same time period.
- Based on the evaluation results, the evaluation consultants concluded that the Canada Research Chairs program has helped to create a research environment that is conducive to the long-term retention and attraction of top researchers. In addition, significant increases in research productivity and in the number of highly qualified personnel being trained at the graduate level were found. Also, Chairholders reported research impacts such as patents, inventions and potential health treatments.
An evaluation of NSERC’s Industrial Research Chairs (IRC) program was conducted in 2006-07. Key findings from the evaluation indicate a strong impact on Chairholders and universities in terms of enhanced research capacity and building critical mass. Partners are also benefiting immediately through more unfettered access to longer-term research and specialized expertise with opportunities to share costs and risks associated with conducting longer-term research. More detailed evaluation findings are as follows:
- The majority of partner respondents reported the strongest impacts with respect to increased access to specialized expertise and research results. These impacts are consistent with the partners’ expectations of the IRC program. Ongoing access to the Chairholder’s expertise was considered to benefit the partner organizations by facilitating the transfer of knowledge/technology with respect to cutting edge research, and potential new processes, products and methodologies for exploring research problems. Moreover, the Chair, through its network of collaborations, provides the partner organization with access to expertise beyond the Chair. According to survey evidence, about half of the partner organizations experienced moderate to strong impacts with respect to increased R&D capacity.
- Survey evidence shows that IRC research is being used by industry, most commonly to improve or develop processes and products (see Figure 23). Additionally, other receptor organizations typically use research results. A comparison of earlier and more recent Chairs revealed that, with the exception of prototype or pilot development, a greater percentage of the earlier Chairs showed evidence of transfer of knowledge/ technology (e.g. increases in the number of patents issued, numbers of technologies licensed, and improved and new processes and products) indicating that commercialization of results is being realized over time.
- The IRC program plays a strong role in strengthening existing partnerships and in creating new partnerships between industrial partners and universities. Sixty-seven (67) percent of industrial partner respondents reported that the existing partnerships with universities have been strengthened as a result of the IRC program. Forty-two (42) percent of all partner respondents reported that their organization had formed new partnerships with university researchers and 31 percent reported that they had formed new partnerships with other organizations as a result of the IRC.
- The IRC program was reported to contribute significantly to the achievement of critical mass and helped to bridge gaps in existing programs or developed niche areas (e.g. automotive sector, environmental science, construction engineering and management). The building of critical mass in industrially relevant areas was linked to a number of the program’s features and benefits such as its leveraging effect, its effectiveness as a tool to recruit and retain faculty (through salary support and increased prestige), and its ability to attract HQP.
- About one-third of industrial partner respondents indicated that they have hired HQP from the program. Survey results indicated that more than two-thirds of HQP who obtain employment are employed by industrial partners and industry upon completion of their involvement with the IRC.
- All lines of evidence supported the assertion that the Chair program contributed substantially to the Chairholder’s research capacity (see Figure 24) in terms of increased size of research team, increased ability to attract more qualified personnel, enhanced reputation within the research community, and increased visibility of the research program with industry in general. There was also strong consensus that research was strongly impacted by the IRC program in terms of increased productivity and in terms of an expansion of the research scope.
- According to case study evidence, collaborations with industry also benefit the Chair and its research in the following ways: by helping to keep informed of industrial needs and context; by helping to identify fundamental, long-term research objectives; by providing data for future research and development; by providing a “testing-ground” for tools and knowledge; and by providing feedback on the results of the research.
Other evidence of outcomes related to the attraction/retention of faculty comes from NSERC corporate data. Although NSERC does not collect the citizenship history of its applicants, a reasonable guess at citizenship can be made through the education history of applicants. Figure 25 presents the number of new applicants to NSERC’s largest program, the Discovery Grants program, who received both their bachelor’s and Ph.D. degrees outside the country (this program is a good proxy for an overall evaluation of the “attraction” activity since the vast majority of new professors in the natural sciences and engineering apply to the program). As the figure indicates, Canadian universities continue to attract hundreds of foreign educated personnel every year to become professors. More than 30% of the high number of NSERC new applicants are foreign educated. Recent investment by the government in university research have created an attractive environment to conduct research and seems to have attracted the attention of highly trained people from other countries.
NSERC also tracks the reasons grantees provide when they terminate their awards before the end date. As shown in Figure 26, only a small number of professors receiving NSERC support listed “leaving the country” as their reason for terminating their award over the past eight years. The number of NSERC-funded professors leaving the country is an extremely small percentage of the more than 11,000 professors receiving NSERC support.
The strong federal support of the granting councils and the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) since 1997-98, and the increased support for university operating budgets from provincial governments has dramatically improved the research environment on university campuses across the country. The success witnessed above in the attraction and retention of faculty can not be attributed to any one program and has resulted from system-wide investments.
To recognize the important achievements of Canadian research scientists and engineers, and in the process help to retain faculty in Canada, NSERC awards significant research prizes to individuals and teams. The 2006-07 winners of NSERC’s Gerhard Herzberg Canada Gold Medal for Science and Engineering and the Brockhouse Canada Prize for Interdisciplinary Research in Science and Engineering are highlighted below.
|
Richard Bond A University of Toronto cosmologist who listens to “cosmic music” is the latest winner of the Gerhard Herzberg Canada Gold Medal for Science and Engineering, Canada’s most prestigious science prize. Named for Canadian Nobel laureate Gerhard Herzberg, the annual prize guarantees the winner $1 million in research funding over the next five years. As Director of the Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics (CITA) from 1996 to 2006, Bond promoted that organization's mandate for a pan-Canadian approach to world-class science, attracting postdoctoral students from across Canada and the world. He was named an Officer of the Order of Canada in 2005, and is a Fellow of the Royal Society of London and of Canada. With more than 12,000 citations, Bond is Canada's most highly cited astronomer. For more than 25 years, Bond’s research has provided important insights into the deep questions science poses about the origin, history and nature of the universe. By analyzing cosmic microwave background radiation (the oldest light energy that any telescope can detect), he has found ways to sketch details of the events just after the Big Bang that gave the universe its current structure. Through a combination of theoretical and experimental work, Bond has explored the origin of large-scale structure in the universe, with special attention to dark matter – a major component of the universe that cannot be observed directly but can be detected by its gravitational effect. Over the years he has helped develop cosmology into an increasingly precise science for mapping the size, shape and age of the universe. |
|
Prize-Winning Team Unlocks Secrets of Viruses and Other Biomolecules A team of researchers based at the University of Manitoba, along with their collaborators at MDS Sciex and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada , have won the third annual Brockhouse Canada Prize for Interdisciplinary Research in Science and Engineering. The prize includes $250,000 in funding for future research activities. Members of the team have spent more than a decade refining proteomics techniques that can be applied to a wide range of problems in medicine and biology. One of their greatest successes came in 2003 when team members, led by Kenneth Standing, were the first worldwide to determine the structure of the protein component of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) virus. Along the way, the team has also developed patented improvements to their key tool, the mass spectrometer. While genes provide a blueprint, proteins actually carry out the cell’s work. Because proteins are so numerous, analysing them is a far more complex process than sequencing a genome. In addition to Kenneth Standing, the University of Manitoba researchers being honoured with the Brockhouse Prize include chemists Harry Duckworth and H�l�ne Perreault, physicists Werner Ens and Oleg Krokhin, and cell biologist John Wilkins. Other members of the winning team are Steve Haber, a plant virologist at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada , and MDS Sciex scientists Igor Chernushevich, Alexandre Loboda and Bruce Thomson. The involvement of MDS Sciex, a world leader in the design and manufacturing of mass spectrometers, has enabled some of the team’s innovations to be incorporated into equipment that is used by researchers around the world. “This year’s winners form a ‘virtuous circle’ where academic researchers and private sector engineers collaborate to develop the leading-edge equipment needed for new discoveries,” said Dr. Fortier. “I’m especially impressed to see the team combine such a wide variety of disciplines, including physics, engineering, chemistry and cell biology.” Named after Bertram Brockhouse, the Canadian Prairie-born Nobel laureate, the prize honours teams of researchers that combine different disciplines to produce achievements of international scientific or engineering significance. |
2.2 High Quality Canadian-Based Competitive Research in the NSE
Basic research provides the foundation for all scientific and technological advances, and also trains the people who can generate new knowledge in Canada and understand new knowledge generated around the world.
2.2.1 Fund Basic Research
An overview of the “fund basic research” program activity is presented below:
|
Description: |
This program activity invests in discovery through grants focusing on basic research activities. Basic research provides the foundation for advances in all disciplines within the NSE, and also trains people who can generate new knowledge in Canada. Furthermore, funding for basic research ensures Canada has the capacity to access and understand new knowledge created in other research institutions internationally. This is critical as Canada generates only four percent of the world’s new knowledge, as measured by published scientific papers. |
|
Expected Results: |
Creation and dissemination of knowledge to the research community and end users, the practical research experience gained by students and fellows who work with supported researchers, the employment of postgraduate students in well-paying jobs, and the diversified intellectual and infrastructure base maintained at postsecondary institutions across Canada. |
|
Planned Spending: |
$406.3M |
|
Number of clients supported by NSERC: |
10,503 |
Key programs under this program activity include:
- Discovery Grants ($328.3M): This program is the mainstay of support for university-based research. The program provides funding for ongoing programs of basic research. These grants recognize the creativity and innovation that are at the heart of all research advances, whether made individually or in groups. Researchers are free to work in the mode most
appropriate for the research area and they may pursue new research interests provided they are within NSERC’s mandate. To be funded, they must demonstrate both research excellence and high productivity, and contributions to the training of HQP.
The discovery, innovation and training capability of university researchers in the NSE is enhanced by the provision of support for the direct costs of ongoing programs of basic research.
- Research Tools and Instruments Grants (RTI) ($50.8M): RTI grants enable professors to purchase the laboratory equipment necessary to conduct world-class research. This critical source of funding ensures researchers have access to the modern research tools required to ensure the maximum return on other investments in research, such as Discovery Grants. CFI funding further enhances the laboratory setting by funding major equipment and infrastructure purchases.
- Major Resources Support (MRS) ($24.1M): The MRS program (formerly known as the Major Facilities Access (MFA) program) supports researchers’ access to major regional or national research facilities by assisting these facilities to remain in a state of readiness for researchers to use. This program is the vehicle for NSERC investments in facilities such as the Canadian Light Source synchrotron and the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory.
- Special Research Opportunity (SRO) Grants ($11.1M): These grants enable researchers to pursue new and emerging research opportunities at the time they become apparent or investigate and develop new collaborations necessary to respond to national and international opportunities.
This is particularly important in situations where there is a limited “window of opportunity” to address a particular research interest, such as the opportunity to participate in an international collaborative research effort.
Other programs under this program activity include funding for the Perimeter Institute ($5M), Research Capacity Development in Small Universities ($1.9M), General Support ($1.2M) and funding for the administration of all of the above programs.
The most recent evaluation of the Discovery Grants program can be found at the following site: http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/aud_eval_e.asp. An evaluation of the RTI and MFA (now named MRS) programs was completed in 2006-07 and is discussed later on in this section.
Section 2.1.2 provided a broad perspective on student outcomes for undergraduate and postgraduate students in the natural sciences and engineering. For the remainder of this section, highlights of performance measures related to basic science funding will be presented. The outcomes presented also capture performance from most of NSERC’s other grants programs. As mentioned, it is very difficult to disentangle broad performance measures by NSERC program.
One of the first tangible outcomes of an investment in university R&D is a publication in a scientific or engineering journal. The worldwide culture of university research places a great deal of importance on publishing new discoveries and advances in widely-circulated journals. Investment in this very public forum gives the country’s researchers access to the latest international research and the ability to build on this research. Since the vast majority of Canada’s and the world’s scientific and engineering publications are produced by university researchers, it is a good indicator of the immediate outcome from NSERC research funding.
In a previous comprehensive study of publications and their relationship to NSERC-funded professors (see http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/bibliometric_e.htm) it was determined that NSERC-funded professors are by far the major contributors to Canada’s science and engineering publication output. NSERC accomplishes this by funding a critical mass of professors and students in all disciplines of the natural sciences and engineering. This ensures that Canada has access to world knowledge produced in all fields and that the country’s researchers can quickly participate in new emerging areas. When publications were examined by discipline (see Figure 27), it was shown that for nearly every major field NSERC-funded professors were responsible for a majority of publications. For this reason, the review of national output as follows can be correlated to NSERC-funding.
Canada is among an elite group of countries publishing a significant number of articles in science and engineering journals. Canadian researchers (all sectors) in the natural sciences and engineering (NSE) have been publishing roughly 17,000 to 18,000 journal articles per year over the past decade, but this number has jumped to 21,000 papers in 2005 as shown in Figure 28. Overall, Canada’s world share of NSE papers has been climbing back since the low of 4.1% in 2001 and now stands at 4.5% in 2005. However, the 2005 figure is still below the 4.8% world share in 1996. As shown in Figure 29, Canada’s performance in NSE article production versus many of our major competitors has been similar, as most industrialized countries lose publication share to developing countries such as China, India and Brazil. Since there could be a significant time delay (up to 6 six years) to publishing after an increase in research funding, the upswing of Canada’s publications and world share of publications seen in 2005 may be the first signs of the impact of the additional investments in university research over the past several years.
World article production in the NSE has averaged roughly 400,000 articles per year, with a significant increase in 2005 as more journals were included in the dataset. The U.S. dominates publication production with nearly one-third of NSE articles in any given year. The next closest output is from Japan at only one-third the size of the U.S. output (see Figure 30 for world share of NSE publications for the top 10 countries after the U.S.). Canada ranked in 7th position in 2005, improving from its 9th place showing in 2001 to 2003 and remaining in the same spot as in 1996. Over this ten-year period, Canada was overtaken by China in the rankings, while Canada surpassed Russia. Publication output by Spain, India and South Korea are closing in on Canada and their output may surpass Canada’s in the next ten years. Canada’s world rankings by discipline ranged from 5th spot for biology and earth and space sciences to 12th position in chemistry.
Another important NSERC objective under basic research funding is to maintain a significant presence in all fields of the natural sciences and engineering. As was previously indicated, most of Canada’s NSE publications are produced by university researchers funded by NSERC. When publications are examined by discipline (see Figure 31) it can be seen that diversification, for the most part, is being accomplished. (Note: for the biomedical sciences and clinical medicine disciplines the Canadian Institutes of Health Research contributes significantly to publication output.)
Similar to common rating systems, in which a higher score indicates more viewers, listeners or readers, the impact factor is a measure of the potential use of a researcher’s work by fellow researchers. If a researcher’s work is being referenced or cited more often by his/her peers, then there may be more intrinsic value to the work. Each scientific journal is rated and assigned an impact factor based on the number of citations the articles appearing in the journal receive. A standardized measure called the Average Relative Impact Factor (ARIF) is then calculated for each country and field and normalized to 1.0. An ARIF value above 1.0 for a country and field means that, on average, the country’s publications in that field are cited more often than the world average. An ARIF value below 1.0 would mean that a country is publishing in journals in that field that are not cited as often as the world average.
Figure 32 presents the ARIF values for the top 32 countries (those publishing more than 3,000 articles in the NSE in 2005) in the NSE for 2005. Canada’s ARIF in the NSE ranks 9th and is in a tight grouping with the G7, and only significantly behind the top four countries (Switzerland, Israel, U.S. and the Netherlands). The ARIF value falls below 1.0 or the world average, beginning at Taiwan.
Publishing in the top journals in a scientific field is a potential indicator of excellence and a complimentary indicator to the average relative impact factor. Science and Nature are two journals in the natural sciences that are highly influential and widely read. Figure 33 presents the number of Canadian articles and Canada’s share of the world total in these journals from 1996 to 2005. Canadian researchers were authors on nearly 6% of articles appearing in Science and Nature in 2005. Figure 34 presents a “Science and Nature Index” in which a country’s share of Science and Nature articles is compared to a country’s share of publications in the natural sciences (engineering is excluded since it is not a prominent component of Science or Nature). For example, from 2001 to 2005, the U.S. share of Science and Nature articles was 2.2 times their share of natural science publications. The corresponding figure for Canada was 1.2. Using this index measure, Canada ranks 8th for the time period in question (the analysis was once again limited to those countries producing more than 3,000 articles in the NSE).
Figure 35 highlights for the most recent time period: 2001-2005, the ratio of a country’s world’s share of citations in a particular subfield to the country’s world share of publications in that subfield. For example, the percentage of citations to Canadian space science publications exceeded Canada’s world production of space science papers by 57% in 2001-2005. Canada is only one of three countries to have a positive relative citation impact for all 17 subfields presented.
Indicators of productivity as they relate to scientific publication production can also be useful. One indicator is a measure of a country’s output of NSE publications per capita population. Figure 36 present the 2005 per capita output per one million inhabitants for those countries producing a significant number of articles (the cut-off chosen was at least 3,000 articles published in 2005). Using this criterion, Switzerland has the highest per capita output while Canada ranks in 8th position, but ahead of some significant players such as the U.K., France, Germany, United States, Japan and Italy.
In many cases the published research funded by NSERC are recognized as significant contributions to world science and engineering. A sample of significant research findings funded by NSERC in the areas of the environment, energy, information and communication technologies, and health are highlighted in Figure 37.
|
|
What |
Where |
Who |
How |
|
Environment |
Arctic melt warning |
McGill University |
Bruno Tremblay |
By calculating the impact of greenhouse gases and other factors on Northern sea ice, researchers found the predicted time-frame for the disappearance of a year-round Arctic ice cover is now a few decades earlier than the previous forecast. |
|
Fish stock collapse by 2050 |
Dalhousie University |
Boris Worm |
Study shows the catches of 29% of fish and seafood species have already collapsed to less than 10% of their historical maximum. Research shows the rest may soon follow suit as the erosion of marine ecosystems appears to be accelerating. |
|
|
Source of chemicals detected |
University of Toronto |
Scott Mabury |
Nearly every living creature on the planet is contaminated with a suspected carcinogen known as perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA. Research shows stain-repellents, widely used on fabrics, carpets and paper products, are a significant source of the chemical. |
|
|
Climate model’s reconstruction of past sheds light on future |
University of Calgary |
Shawn Marshall |
Using a sophisticated climate model, the University of Calgary researcher, along with a team of others, has successfully recreated the last significant period of global warming. The results show this warming caused widespread glacial retreat, sea-level rise and the complete loss of Arctic sea ice during the summer months. This accurate prediction of the past increased the team’s confidence in the model’s ability to predict future climate change. |
|
|
Energy |
Advance in hydrogen fuel cells |
University of Windsor |
Douglas Stephan |
Researchers found a new way to capture and release hydrogen. Their method involves a compound called phosphonium borate, which takes on hydrogen at room temperature, then releases it as temperatures rise above 100 C. This technique may be used to modify existing technologies to store and release hydrogen more efficiently. |
|
Separating oil and water |
Queen’s University |
Philip Jessop |
A chemical developed by the researchers either binds oil and water together or separates them whenever you want it to. Carbon dioxide and air are used to turn the chemical on (for binding together) and off (for separating). |
|
|
Information and Communications |
Laser to help with computing bottleneck |
University of Toronto |
Ted Sargent |
A new paint-on semiconductor laser produces the invisible colours of light needed to carry information through fiber-optics. This could help the computing industry when microchips reach their capacity sometime around 2010. |
|
Atoms dance to researchers’ tune |
University of Waterloo |
Raymond Laflamme |
Raymond Laflamme and colleagues have successfully manipulated the highest number of quantum bits (qubits) – controlling a 12-qubit system – essentially making atoms “dance.” If they are successful in building a quantum computer, it would use the many states of an atom in order to process much more information than a traditional computer – and do it more quickly. |
|
|
Smarter spam detection on the way |
University of Calgary |
John Aycock |
Trying to stay one step ahead of spammers, researchers have figured out a way to make smarter spam and improve our knowledge of spam detection. The messages would contain abbreviations, personal signatures or misspellings that people would expect to see in e-mail from someone they know – making them more likely to open the messages and infect their computers. |
|
|
Health |
Help for diabetics |
University of Calgary |
Leo Behie |
Researchers can now grow human pancreatic cell aggregates. These cells show great promise in treating diabetics. The research team is working on strategies to expand these cells to the quantities necessary for clinical therapy. |
|
Quick workout as good as a long one |
McMaster University |
Martin Gibala and Kirsten Burgomaster |
A quick, intense workout is just as good for you as daily, moderate exercise. Research shows performing three 20-minute sessions of intense exercise each week gives the same aerobic benefits as doing four to six hours per week of moderate exercise. |
|
|
HIV discovery brings hope |
Universit� de Montr�al |
Rafick-Pierre S�kaly |
Researchers have long wondered how HIV defeats the human immune system. Now they found the virus takes advantage of a cellular molecule called PD-1 which renders HIV-specific T cells unable to mount an effective HIV-specific immune response. The researchers also found this effect can be reversed, allowing the PD-1 molecule to become a likely target for HIV immunotherapy. |
|
|
Dietary link to autism |
University of Western Ontario |
Derrick MacFabe, Klaus-Peter Ossenkopp, Donald Cain, Martin Kavaliers, Elizabeth Hampson |
The researchers investigated a compound called propionic acid which is found at low levels in wheat and dairy products, and is also produced by some gut bacteria. When this compound was put into the brains of rats, the animals showed a number of symptoms similar to autism: becoming hyperactive, showing repetitive and abnormal behaviours as well as showing signs of social impairment. |
|
|
Soil microbes immune to antibiotics |
McMaster University |
Gerard Wright |
Researchers discovered a vast reservoir of soil microbes from farms, forests and urban areas which possess a “stunning” level of resistance to antibiotic drugs. The study found the microbes were not only resistant to medications that have been on Canadian shelves for years, but that they could also resist the effects of new drugs not yet sold in the country. |
Awards and prizes are another measure of excellence in the research community. NSERC collects and updates data on 191 international awards and prizes annually. Over the past 10 years. NSERC-funded professors have received roughly 2.5% of the awards and prizes included in the analysis (see Figure 38). This percentage is slightly below the 4-5% of publications attributable to the community. Lower levels of funding available to Canadian “star” researchers, as compared to their American counterparts, may partially explain this difference. Also, a less-aggressive attitude in seeking prizes and nominating our best for them may help to explain the difference.
|
Dr. Art McDonald Dr. Art McDonald, Director of the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Institute, SNO, received the 2007 Benjamin Franklin Medal in Physics awarded by The Franklin Institute. Dr. McDonald shares this prize with Dr. Yoji Totsuka, Special University Professor Emeritus at the University of Tokyo. The two received the gold medal for finding proof that the Standard Model, one of the most stable theories in 20th century physics, is wrong when it comes to neutrinos. The model states there are three stable kinds of neutrinos: electron, muon and tau. It also says that neutrinos have no mass. McDonald and Totsuka showed that neutrinos aren’t stable, instead, they transform from one form to another as they travel, and they do in fact have mass. The list of Franklin Institute laureates includes an impressive number of innovators: Alexander Graham Bell, Pierre and Marie Curie, Thomas Edison, Niels Bohr, Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking. To date, 105 winners of Franklin Institute prizes have been honoured with 107 Nobel Prizes. |
The contributions of established researchers to their fields of study are usually recognized by various awards and honours, such as invitations to give special lectures or to serve on editorial boards of scientific and technical journals and boards of professional societies. On this basis, membership on an editorial board is an indicator of “excellence.”
In a study conducted by NSERC, the top 10% of journals in 2005 in each science and engineering discipline were selected as the sample for editorial board membership. Canada ranked fourth in the world in terms of number of researchers serving on the editorial boards of top NSE journals (see Figure 39). The Canadian share of the total number of members of editorial boards was 4%, in line with publication output. The study sample identified 243 Canadian researchers as editorial board members. NSERC-funded board members accounted for 80% of the Canadian share from the university sector.
Knowledge dissemination occurs through virtually every NSERC program. The new knowledge created by NSERC-funded university professors is often used by researchers in Canadian industry and government laboratories. One of the first indications of this dissemination to users is through collaborative publications. Figure 40 indicates that over 800 university-government publications and, on average, 400 university-industry publications are produced annually. This trend has been fairly steady over the past decade, although the downturn in Canadian industrial R&D in recent years has also had an impact on the number of university-industry collaborative papers.
In 2007, NSERC conducted a survey of NSERC-funded professors (2,590 respondents/45% response rate) to gauge their activities in terms of knowledge dissemination to users (industry and government) and knowledge transfer/commercialization. Figure 41 highlights the percentage of the survey respondents who carried out research with industry or government partners in the last five years, or involved users in helping set the direction of their research programs. A large percentage of the respondents participated in this type of collaborative R&D, ensuring quick knowledge dissemination to users.
Also from the survey, Figure 42 presents the frequency with which NSERC-funded professors took user needs into consideration when planning their research projects. To some degree, the majority of professors took into account the needs of users in planning their projects. It must be noted that not all research, especially basic research, has clearly-defined users or applications. Although the majority of respondents engage in a variety of knowledge-dissemination efforts, a minority do not. Improving knowledge dissemination to potential users will be an important goal for NSERC and future surveys will monitor the situation. From the previous knowledge transfer survey (conducted in 2000), respondents mentioned many impediments to knowledge transfer to users. Nearly half of the respondents mentioned lack of expertise of users, lack of firms in the region, lack of academic rewards for dissemination and the pressure to publish as various obstacles to knowledge dissemination.
Figure 43 highlights the frequency with which NSERC-funded professors performed services for private firms related to their research. NSERC-funded professors used a variety of methods to communicate to private firms the results of their research.
|
Dissemination Activity by NSERC-funded Professors |
Never or rarely |
Sometimes |
Often or very often |
|
Dedicated time for disseminating research results |
14.5 |
23.8 |
61.7 |
|
Identified what part of their research results they want to disseminate to users |
27.0 |
25.2 |
47.8 |
|
Identified individuals or organizations that could benefit by applying the research results |
29.4 |
31.1 |
39.6 |
|
Dedicated financial resources for disseminating research results |
35.0 |
26.5 |
38.5 |
|
Dedicated human resources for disseminating research results |
37.8 |
24.0 |
38.2 |
|
Identified individuals, organizations or networks through whom they can reach end users of research |
37.7 |
30.4 |
31.9 |
|
Identified specific communication channels for disseminating research results (newsletters, websites, mass media, etc.) |
40.6 |
28.6 |
30.8 |
Source: NSERC Researcher Survey 2007
|
Dissemination Activity to Private Firms by NSERC-funded Professors |
Never or rarely |
Sometimes |
Often or very often |
|
Sent my research results directly |
49.4 |
29.8 |
20.9 |
|
Sent technical reports |
50.8 |
28.4 |
20.8 |
|
Gave presentations in a technical seminar organized by the firm |
53.0 |
27.9 |
19.0 |
|
Presented my research results to private firms who could make direct use of them |
55.0 |
27.2 |
17.8 |
|
Provided, without being paid, information or technical support to my former students who worked in private firms (technologies, products, processes) |
58.6 |
26.6 |
14.8 |
|
Provided expertise or technical support, without being paid, to help solve technical problems |
58.1 |
27.3 |
14.6 |
|
Organized seminars or workshops to raise awareness regarding opportunities to apply my research results or research results in my field |
68.5 |
18.2 |
13.3 |
|
Participated in industry expert groups or expert committees that were involved in efforts to directly apply new knowledge including my own research |
68.7 |
20.0 |
11.3 |
Source: NSERC Researcher Survey 2007
As previously mentioned, an evaluation of NSERC’s Research Tools and Instruments (RTI), and Major Facilities Access Grants (currently called the Major Resources Support (MRS) program) programs was conducted in 2006-07. Some of the major findings from the evaluation are presented below:
- RTI funding leads to more, faster and more in-depth research as well as better trained HQP. These impacts were felt across the spectrum of disciplines, in all regions and in large and small institutions. Small institutions tended to report benefiting more from RTI funding than larger institutions — as long as they were able to secure such funding since data have shown that the probability of funding was less for small institutions than for medium-size and large institutions. These observations support the notion that the RTI program is achieving its objectives to enhance the discovery, innovation and training capability of university researchers.
- Three key messages from this evaluation study were:
- a significant proportion of the existing equipment infrastructure will require replacement over the coming five years — between one quarter and one third (about $1.5 billion) of the value of existing equipment is at play;
- about 20% of existing equipment (worth about $1 billion) will require major maintenance over the coming five years; and
- it is difficult for researchers to find funding for small equipment.
- Due to the amount and nature of the equipment funding, there is currently little overlap between NSERC’s RTI program and Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) grants. In fact, constraints to usage of CFI (large-scale, state-of-the-art projects within university strategic priorities) make unlikely a dramatic overlap in financial support with RTI/MFA/MRS projects. The current MRS program complements CFI funding on several projects (e.g., Canadian Light Source) by proving the necessary operating and research support to fully utilize the faclilties.
- The key impacts of MFA (now called MRS) program were identified as better use of the facilities, increased collaboration among researchers and improved international competitiveness of Canadian researchers. Effects of a grant appear more intense for MFA projects than for RTI projects — be they the positive effects of obtaining a grant or the negative effects of not obtaining it. Increased collaboration among researchers and organizations as well as attraction and retention of faculty are much more prominent effects for MFA than RTI.
2.2.2 Fund Research In Strategic Areas
An overview of the “fund research in strategic areas” program activity is presented below:
|
Description: |
This program activity funds project research of national importance and in emerging areas that are of potential significance to Canada. This program activity addresses all three of NSERC’s stated priorities. Such funding opportunities encourage experts in these areas of interest to locate and pursue their research careers in Canada, fostering brain gain. By creating linkages between university, industry and government, and addressing areas of strategic importance to Canada, this funding ensures Canadians reap the benefits of their investments in research. Finally, students and fellows involved in such projects receive excellent training in disciplines of national importance, encouraging the development of Tomorrow’s Innovators. |
|
Expected Results: |
Research funding leveraged from other partners, knowledge creation and dissemination, experience gained by students and fellows supported through such research and subsequent employment and salary levels, the development of long-term relationships between partners, and the increased collaboration between researchers in different disciplines, and the new knowledge or technologies that result from such interdisciplinary collaborations. |
|
Planned Spending: |
$54.4M |
|
Number of clients supported by NSERC: |
1,079 |
The key program under this program activity is:
- Strategic Project Grants ($44.7M): This program accelerates research and training in targeted and emerging areas of national importance. The research is early stage with the potential to lead to breakthrough discoveries. In 2005-06, NSERC redefined the target areas for the next five-year cycle of this program. The areas include: Advanced Communications and Management of Information Biomedical Technologies, Competitive Manufacturing and Value-Added Products and Processes, Healthy Environment and Ecosystems,Quality Foods and Novel Bioproducts, Safety and Security,Sustainable Energy Systems (Production, Distribution and Utilization). These target areas coincide extremely closely to the government’s current priority areas of the environment, energy, information and communications technologies, and health.
Other programs under this program activity include funding for the Collaborative Health Research Projects ($3.2M), Innovation Platforms ($1.4M) and funding for the administration of all of the above programs.
In 2006-07, a total of $20.9M was leveraged from partners on Strategic Project grants versus NSERC’s funding of $44.7M. The pre-competitive nature of the Strategic Project grants makes the resulting leverage ratio of 47% a better than acceptable result.
In 2004, a five-year follow-up of NSERC’s Strategic Project grants was undertaken. Interviews were conducted with a total of 229 Strategic Project grant recipients (66% response rate) and 127 partners (67% response rate) from either industry or government. The margins of error for the two samples are �5 percentage points for the university researcher sample and �8 percentage points for the industry sample, with a 95% confidence interval. Some of the highlights from the survey are presented below:
- Almost all respondents indicated that their Strategic Project grant experience had been worthwhile (i.e., 99.6% of university researchers, 95.7% and 100% of industry and public sector partners respectively).
- Highly qualified personnel (HQP) involved in the Strategic Project and estimates of their subsequent employment (when known) are presented in Figure 44.
- In assessing post-award collaboration, a total of 163 researchers (i.e., 71%) indicated that they had continued to collaborate with their strategic project grant partners. This represents 144 researchers (i.e., 64%) who continued working with the same partner(s) in the same area as their strategic project grant, and an additional 19 researchers (i.e., 8%) who indicated that they had continued to work with their partners, but on different projects.
- A large number and variety of publications were generated from the Strategic Project grants studied in the follow-up as listed in Figure 45.
- Figure 46 presents the benefits industry and government partners realized from their participation on the Strategic Project grant.
Overall, the Strategic Projects program is achieving its main objectives and is resulting in significant HQP production and knowledge transfer to the user community.
|
|
Number of HQP Trained |
Category of Employers |
|
||||||
|
Type of HQP |
Total |
Mean per |
Industry partner |
Gov’t partner |
User Sector |
Academia |
Other |
Total |
Mean |
|
Graduates (n=228) |
561 |
2.46 |
32 |
14 |
189 |
13 |
87 |
335 |
1.46 |
|
Ph.D. (n=229) |
414 |
1.81 |
23 |
11 |
134 |
69 |
43 |
281 |
1.22 |
|
Postdoctoral Fellow (n=229) |
360 |
1.57 |
9 |
11 |
106 |
96 |
49 |
270 |
1.18 |
|
Technical Personnel (n=229) |
224 |
0.98 |
- |
1 |
16 |
19 |
14 |
52 |
0.22 |
|
Overall Total |
2,249 |
- |
83 |
44 |
534 |
203 |
233 |
1,097 |
- |
|
Overall Mean per project |
- |
9.82 |
0.36 |
0.19 |
2.33 |
0.89 |
1.02 |
- |
4.79 |
1. HQP hired as known at the time of the survey. Many students were still continuing on with their education.
|
Number of publications |
Refereed journal articles |
Non-refereed journal articles |
Theses, related to SPG |
Department seminars |
Symposia or conferences |
Technical reports |
|
None |
2.6 |
70.2 |
5.3 |
8.5 |
1.8 |
47.5 |
|
1 |
5.3 |
6.7 |
13.2 |
3.6 |
3.9 |
9.4 |
|
2 |
8.3 |
7.6 |
24.1 |
13.4 |
7.5 |
15.7 |
|
3 |
12.7 |
4.9 |
18.0 |
10.7 |
11.8 |
9.9 |
|
4 or more |
71.1 |
10.7 |
39.5 |
63.8 |
75.0 |
17.5 |
|
Total |
100.0 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
Total publications |
1,643 |
268 |
889 |
1,561 |
2,250 |
502 |
|
Mean number per project |
7.20 |
1.19 |
3.90 |
6.97 |
9.87 |
2.25 |
2.3 Productive Use of New Knowledge in the NSE
Wealth is created when Canadians add value in producing goods and services that are sold in world markets and knowledge is the modern basis for adding value. NSERC aims to maximize the value of public investments in research for the benefit of all Canadians by promoting research-based innovation, university-industry partnerships, technology transfer activities and the training of people with the required scientific and business skill sets to create wealth from new discoveries in the NSE.
2.3.1 Fund University-Industry-Government Partnerships
An overview of the “fund university-industry-government partnerships” program activity is presented below:
|
Description: |
This program activity fosters collaborations between university researchers and other sectors, including government and industry, in order to develop new knowledge and expertise, and to transfer this knowledge and expertise to Canadian-based organizations. This activity supports NSERC’s priority of realizing the benefits of public investments in research by creating productive collaborations between university researchers and the industrial receptors who are able to create value from new discoveries. |
|
Expected Results: |
Research funds leveraged from partners, knowledge creation and dissemination to research community and users, experience gained by students and fellows and subsequent employment and income levels, long-term relationships established between partners, numbers of patents and licences generated, and economic value of intellectual property generated through funded research. |
|
Planned Spending: |
$115.2M |
|
Number of clients supported by NSERC: |
2,425 |
The key programs under this program activity are:
- Collaborative Research and Development Grants ($47.9M): This program gives companies operating from a Canadian base access to the unique knowledge, expertise and educational resources available at Canadian postsecondary institutions and offers opportunities for mutually beneficial collaborations that result in industrial or economic benefits to Canada. It also facilitates world-class research and ensures a strong source of well-trained graduates. Funding for the Canadian Microelectronics Corporation ($9.7M) is included under this activity.
- Networks of Centres of Excellence (NCEs) ($40.2M): The Networks of Centres of Excellence are unique partnerships among universities, industry, government and not-for-profit organizations aimed at turning Canadian research and entrepreneurial talent into economic and social benefits for all Canadians. These nationwide, multidisciplinary and multi-sectoral research partnerships connect excellent research with industrial know-how and strategic investment. They create a critical mass of research capacity by networking researchers and partners across Canada.
- Strategic Network Grants ($12.1M): This program funds large scale, complex research programs that involve multi-sectoral collaborations on a common research topic. The topic to be investigated can be of local concern, requiring a focused local network, or of regional or national importance, requiring a larger, more complex network.
- Research Partnership Agreements ($4.2M): A number of initiatives have been established through the Research Partnership Agreements signed with several federal government departments and agencies. The objective of these programs is to build strong linkages between the private sector, researchers in universities, and researchers in federal institutes. NSERC has agreements with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the Department of National Defence, the Canadian Forest Service (in collaboration with SSHRC) and the Earth Sciences Sector of Natural Resources Canada.
Funding for the administration of the above programs rounds out the spending under this program activity.
Section 2.1.2 provided a broad perspective on students outcomes for postgraduate students in the natural sciences and engineering, while Section 2.2.1 presented results on basic research outcomes. For the remainder of this section, specific program outcomes as well as general performance measures related to technology transfer will be presented. The general outcomes presented in this section also result from investments made in most of NSERC’s other grants programs. As mentioned, it is very difficult to disentangle broad performance measures by NSERC program. The outcomes presented in this section usually take longer to become reality than the outcomes in the previous sections. Most of the expected results are part of the technology transfer process. This process can be described as the movement of ideas, tools and people from university professors and students supported by NSERC to the private and public sector. This movement leads to socio-economic benefits for Canadians as a result of NSERC research support.
The Collaborative Research and Development (CRD) program is intended to give companies operating from a Canadian base access to the special knowledge, expertise and educational resources at Canadian postsecondary institutions and to offer opportunities for mutually beneficial collaborations that result in industrial or economic benefits to Canada. Bringing university professors and Canadian firms together is one of the first methods of stimulating technology transfer. These industrial partners also contribute financially to these university research projects. Because of the socio-economic impacts of university research, NSERC views any additional investment in university research as a positive impact on the Canadian economy. Many of NSERC’s programs, especially the CRD program, require a contribution from industry and are often complemented by additional contributions from universities and government departments and agencies. A comparison of NSERC funding to industry contributions for the CRD program is presented in Figure 47. Over the past decade, industrial contributions to the CRD program have outpaced NSERC’s investment by over 50%, demonstrating the value Canadian industries place on university R&D and the training of students.
From a more global perspective, the impact of NSERC’s partnership programs has been to increase the share of university research funding from industry to levels well beyond most industrialized nations (see Figure 48). The partnership programs of CIHR also contribute to this total.
NSERC tracks the outcomes of its Collaborative Research and Development (CRD) program by following-up with partners two years after the completion of a grant. Results from the last survey of the industrial participants' perceptions of their CRD experience and outcomes are described below:
- The vast majority of both university and industry partners felt that their partnership on the CRD project was successful (i.e., 91% and 94% of university and industry respondents respectively).
- Of the 135 projects studied to date, 87% of the industrial partners felt that the research objectives of the project had been achieved.
- An estimated total of 783 students and postdoctoral fellows participated in the 135 CRD projects sampled for the two-year follow-up (with a mean of 6.53 HQP per project).
- A total of 46 patents and 35 licences have so far been issued with respect to the 135 projects examined. According to the industrial partners, commercializable results were achieved for 39% of the projects.
- Figure 49 shows how often and for what purpose the industrial partners used the research results generated by the CRD project.
Additional evidence of industrial use of knowledge generated by the university sector comes from a Statistics Canada survey of manufacturing firms related to issues of innovation conducted in 2005 (see the following site for more information on the survey http://www.statcan.ca/cgi-bin/imdb/p2SV.pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=4218&lang=en&db=IMDB&dbg=f&adm=8&dis=2). For the respondent firms that are considered “innovative”, Figure 50 presents the sectors/mediums that provided information for new innovation projects, contributed to the completion of existing innovation projects or provided information for the commercialization of innovation during the three years, 2002 to 2004. The relative importance of the source of information is also highlighted. Universities and scientific journals (dominated by academic publications) are important sources of information for innovative firms in many sectors (e.g. pulp and paper, petroleum and coal, pharmaceutical, navigational and medical instrumentation, and information and communications technologies).
NSERC has initiated a new system to collect information from final reports related to the Collaborative Research and Development program, and will report on performance data collected in future DPRs.|
Figure 50
Sources of Information for Manufacturing Plant Innovation1 (2002 to 2004 - percentage of innovative plants) |
| Sector |
Universities
Degree of importance |
Scientific/Trade/Technical Journals
Degree of importance |
Federal Gov't Labs
Degree of importance |
Provincial Gov't Labs
Degree of importance |
||||||||||||
|
High
|
Medium
|
Low
|
Not relevant
|
High
|
Medium
|
Low
|
Not relevant
|
High
|
Medium
|
Low
|
Not relevant
|
High
|
Medium
|
Low
|
Not relevant
|
|
|
percent
|
percent
|
percent
|
percent
|
|||||||||||||
| Logging |
0.0
|
5.0
|
22.1
|
72.9
|
0.0
|
19.0
|
55.2
|
25.7
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
27.1
|
72.9
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
27.1
|
72.9
|
| Manufacturing |
3.8
|
10.6
|
30.8
|
54.7
|
8.5
|
26.8
|
36.4
|
28.3
|
1.3
|
5.1
|
28.8
|
64.8
|
1.0
|
4.5
|
28.5
|
66.0
|
| Food manufacturing and beverage and tobacco product manufacturing |
8.1
|
13.1
|
38.7
|
40.1
|
2.6
|
31.4
|
39.7
|
26.3
|
3.0
|
8.5
|
37.3
|
51.2
|
3.2
|
8.4
|
38.8
|
49.7
|
| Textile mills and textile product mills |
1.6
|
13.9
|
35.5
|
49.0
|
5.5
|
33.1
|
44.5
|
16.8
|
1.4
|
12.9
|
31.2
|
54.5
|
0.0
|
8.3
|
30.3
|
61.4
|
| Clothing manufacturing and leather and allied product manufacturing |
0.9
|
6.1
|
20.7
|
72.3
|
7.7
|
22.8
|
32.0
|
37.6
|
0.4
|
7.8
|
14.5
|
77.3
|
0.4
|
6.9
|
15.4
|
77.2
|
| Wood product manufacturing |
0.6
|
5.0
|
39.8
|
54.6
|
3.5
|
23.4
|
37.8
|
35.4
|
1.4
|
6.3
|
27.1
|
65.2
|
0.3
|
4.8
|
32.5
|
62.4
|
| Sawmills and wood preservation |
0.0
|
7.0
|
52.9
|
40.1
|
3.8
|
32.2
|
35.0
|
28.9
|
0.0
|
13.4
|
31.5
|
55.0
|
0.0
|
6.1
|
52.5
|
41.4
|
| Veneer, plywood and engineered wood product manufacturing |
0.0
|
6.6
|
37.3
|
56.1
|
5.8
|
24.0
|
56.8
|
13.5
|
0.0
|
4.6
|
25.0
|
70.5
|
0.0
|
7.6
|
23.0
|
69.3
|
| Other wood product manufacturing |
1.2
|
3.0
|
31.1
|
64.6
|
2.5
|
16.7
|
33.5
|
47.4
|
2.8
|
1.6
|
24.6
|
70.9
|
0.7
|
2.9
|
21.1
|
75.3
|
| Paper manufacturing |
4.4
|
9.8
|
33.0
|
52.8
|
10.8
|
27.9
|
32.2
|
29.1
|
0.7
|
3.0
|
31.5
|
64.8
|
1.3
|
3.5
|
29.1
|
66.0
|
| Pulp, paper and paperboard mills |
12.4
|
20.0
|
38.6
|
29.0
|
12.1
|
38.4
|
32.7
|
16.7
|
2.3
|
7.5
|
40.3
|
49.9
|
4.1
|
9.2
|
38.6
|
48.1
|
| Converted paper product manufacturing |
0.5
|
5.0
|
30.4
|
64.0
|
10.2
|
22.9
|
31.9
|
35.0
|
0.0
|
0.9
|
27.3
|
71.8
|
0.0
|
0.9
|
24.7
|
74.4
|
| Printing and related support activities |
1.2
|
2.7
|
22.8
|
73.4
|
7.7
|
41.1
|
24.7
|
26.5
|
0.0
|
1.7
|
18.2
|
80.1
|
0.0
|
0.8
|
18.2
|
80.9
|
| Petroleum and coal products manufacturing |
14.0
|
8.5
|
34.1
|
43.4
|
12.0
|
34.1
|
39.9
|
13.9
|
0.0
|
4.4
|
28.1
|
67.5
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
31.4
|
68.6
|
| Chemical manufacturing |
6.1
|
16.5
|
35.1
|
42.3
|
13.3
|
29.9
|
31.1
|
25.6
|
1.1
|
6.4
|
35.6
|
56.9
|
0.9
|
4.6
|
37.6
|
57.0
|
| Chemical manufacturing (excluding pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing) |
4.4
|
17.0
|
36.2
|
42.5
|
13.5
|
28.6
|
31.2
|
26.6
|
1.3
|
5.7
|
34.6
|
58.3
|
1.0
|
4.9
|
36.8
|
57.2
|
| Pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing |
15.2
|
14.2
|
29.4
|
41.2
|
12.3
|
36.9
|
30.4
|
20.4
|
0.0
|
9.9
|
40.8
|
49.3
|
0.0
|
3.0
|
41.3
|
55.7
|
| Plastics and rubber products manufacturing |
2.2
|
14.8
|
27.7
|
55.3
|
12.2
|
25.7
|
31.8
|
30.3
|
1.6
|
7.0
|
23.9
|
67.4
|
1.9
|
7.8
|
23.0
|
67.3
|
| Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing |
0.9
|
6.3
|
35.7
|
57.0
|
6.2
|
23.2
|
45.9
|
24.7
|
1.0
|
3.2
|
37.2
|
58.5
|
0.3
|
2.8
|
35.0
|
61.9
|
| Primary metal manufacturing |
9.5
|
6.5
|
43.3
|
40.7
|
6.2
|
40.8
|
33.4
|
19.5
|
0.7
|
8.5
|
34.1
|
56.6
|
0.0
|
8.3
|
29.7
|
62.0
|
| Fabricated metal manufacturing |
3.4
|
9.7
|
21.7
|
65.1
|
10.4
|
19.7
|
35.6
|
34.3
|
1.4
|
1.4
|
27.1
|
70.2
|
1.1
|
2.0
|
23.4
|
73.6
|
| Machinery manufacturing |
3.8
|
12.5
|
28.8
|
54.9
|
7.4
|
19.3
|
45.4
|
27.9
|
1.3
|
3.1
|
33.5
|
62.1
|
1.1
|
2.5
|
31.2
|
65.2
|
| Machinery manufacturing (excluding commercial and service industry machinery manufacturing) |
3.7
|
12.3
|
29.5
|
54.6
|
7.0
|
19.3
|
45.6
|
28.1
|
1.2
|
3.2
|
34.4
|
61.3
|
1.2
|
2.4
|
32.1
|
64.3
|
| Commercial and service industry machinery manufacturing2 |
5.3
|
14.7
|
21.5
|
58.5
|
12.7
|
18.2
|
42.9
|
26.2
|
2.5
|
2.1
|
22.9
|
72.5
|
0.0
|
3.6
|
20.6
|
75.9
|
| Computer and electronic product manufacturing |
7.2
|
17.0
|
36.6
|
39.3
|
14.3
|
40.6
|
35.5
|
9.6
|
3.2
|
10.4
|
33.2
|
53.2
|
1.4
|
5.9
|
34.4
|
58.3
|
| Computer and peripheral equipment manufacturing2 |
4.3
|
17.1
|
39.7
|
38.9
|
8.7
|
31.6
|
52.3
|
7.4
|
0.0
|
2.1
|
36.4
|
61.5
|
0.0
|
6.6
|
29.5
|
63.9
|
| Communications equipment manufacturing |
3.9
|
22.0
|
40.2
|
33.9
|
9.4
|
50.2
|
32.1
|
8.3
|
4.4
|
14.8
|
32.1
|
48.7
|
1.5
|
7.4
|
36.5
|
54.6
|
| Telephone apparatus manufacturing2 |
4.8
|
15.2
|
43.8
|
36.2
|
0.0
|
24.8
|
56.2
|
19.0
|
9.5
|
0.0
|
35.2
|
55.2
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
35.2
|
64.8
|
| Radio and television broadcasting and wireless communications equipment manufacturing2 |
2.5
|
26.9
|
49.2
|
21.5
|
15.8
|
55.3
|
23.1
|
5.8
|
4.2
|
15.9
|
39.4
|
40.6
|
2.5
|
5.1
|
46.8
|
45.7
|
| Other communications equipment manufacturing |
7.3
|
14.6
|
9.8
|
68.3
|
0.0
|
61.0
|
34.1
|
4.9
|
0.0
|
26.8
|
7.3
|
65.9
|
0.0
|
22.0
|
7.3
|
70.7
|
| Audio and video equipment manufacturing2 |
0.0
|
8.3
|
25.0
|
66.7
|
16.7
|
33.3
|
33.3
|
16.7
|
0.0
|
16.7
|
33.3
|
50.0
|
0.0
|
16.7
|
50.0
|
33.3
|
| Communications equipment manufacturing and audio and video equipment manufacturing |
3.5
|
20.6
|
38.6
|
37.3
|
10.2
|
48.4
|
32.2
|
9.2
|
4.0
|
15.0
|
32.2
|
48.8
|
1.3
|
8.4
|
37.9
|
52.4
|
| Semiconductor and other electronic component manufacturing2 |
5.5
|
15.9
|
37.2
|
41.4
|
24.2
|
37.3
|
23.0
|
15.5
|
1.6
|
5.4
|
36.0
|
57.0
|
3.1
|
1.5
|
31.2
|
64.2
|
| Navigational, measuring, medical and control instruments manufacturing |
11.5
|
15.8
|
35.7
|
37.0
|
12.6
|
40.6
|
39.4
|
7.4
|
4.9
|
13.8
|
31.7
|
49.6
|
0.8
|
7.2
|
36.6
|
55.4
|
| Navigational and guidance instruments manufacturing2 |
17.8
|
17.2
|
27.8
|
37.2
|
16.8
|
27.8
|
48.3
|
7.2
|
17.2
|
18.8
|
35.0
|
29.0
|
4.1
|
3.7
|
55.0
|
37.2
|
| Measuring, medical and controlling devices manufacturing2 |
10.1
|
15.5
|
37.5
|
37.0
|
11.7
|
43.6
|
37.3
|
7.4
|
2.2
|
12.6
|
30.9
|
54.3
|
0.0
|
8.0
|
32.5
|
59.6
|
| Manufacturing and reproducing magnetic and optical media |
0.0
|
15.5
|
17.5
|
67.0
|
0.0
|
47.5
|
52.5
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
7.3
|
25.7
|
67.0
|
0.0
|
7.3
|
25.7
|
67.0
|
| Navigational, measuring, medical and control instruments manufacturing and manufacturing and reproducing magnetic and optical media |
10.7
|
15.8
|
34.4
|
39.2
|
11.7
|
41.1
|
40.3
|
6.8
|
4.6
|
13.3
|
31.3
|
50.8
|
0.7
|
7.2
|
35.9
|
56.3
|
| Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing |
4.8
|
9.4
|
30.7
|
55.1
|
10.7
|
28.2
|
42.8
|
18.3
|
0.0
|
4.2
|
29.0
|
66.8
|
0.4
|
1.9
|
29.5
|
68.2
|
| Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing (excluding communication and energy wire and cable manufacturing) |
5.4
|
10.3
|
29.7
|
54.6
|
11.2
|
26.8
|
43.2
|
18.8
|
0.0
|
3.6
|
29.9
|
66.6
|
0.5
|
1.6
|
30.2
|
67.7
|
| Communication and energy wire and cable manufacturing2 |
0.0
|
3.5
|
37.7
|
58.8
|
6.8
|
37.9
|
40.5
|
14.7
|
0.0
|
8.7
|
22.6
|
68.6
|
0.0
|
3.5
|
25.1
|
71.4
|
| Transportation equipment manufacturing |
3.8
|
14.5
|
34.1
|
47.6
|
10.3
|
24.8
|
35.8
|
29.1
|
0.0
|
4.0
|
29.2
|
66.8
|
0.0
|
3.7
|
28.8
|
67.5
|
| Transportation equipment manufacturing (excluding aerospace product and parts manufacturing) |
3.6
|
15.4
|
34.7
|
46.2
|
12.0
|
24.6
|
33.8
|
29.7
|
0.0
|
3.2
|
30.3
|
66.6
|
0.0
|
2.9
|
31.1
|
66.1
|
| Aerospace product and parts manufacturing |
4.8
|
9.0
|
30.6
|
55.6
|
0.0
|
26.6
|
48.0
|
25.4
|
0.0
|
9.0
|
22.6
|
68.5
|
0.0
|
9.0
|
15.1
|
75.9
|
| Furniture and related product manufacturing |
0.2
|
9.7
|
25.9
|
64.2
|
10.7
|
27.1
|
29.2
|
33.0
|
0.0
|
3.0
|
16.3
|
80.7
|
0.0
|
3.6
|
17.2
|
79.2
|
| Miscellaneous manufacturing |
3.4
|
6.7
|
27.4
|
62.6
|
9.5
|
23.0
|
33.6
|
34.0
|
0.8
|
4.9
|
24.1
|
70.3
|
0.3
|
4.8
|
23.9
|
71.1
|
| Information and communication technology (ICT) manufacturing industries |
6.7
|
16.0
|
35.8
|
41.6
|
14.4
|
36.4
|
36.5
|
12.7
|
3.1
|
8.6
|
32.1
|
56.1
|
1.2
|
4.9
|
32.9
|
61.0
|
1. Percentage of plants using sources of information that provided information for new innovation projects, contributed to the completion of existing innovation projects, or provided information for the commercialization of innovation during the three years, 2002 to 2004
2. Contributes to estimates for information and communication technology (ICT) manufacturing industries.
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey of Innovation, 2005.
Two evaluations of the Networks of Centres of Excellence (NCE) program have been conducted (see http://www.nce.gc.ca/pubs_e.htm for reports) and a third has almost been completed. The 2002 evaluation found that it was often possible to link specific impacts to the different processes used within networks. Many of the networks accomplishments were believed to be of high economic and social importance and many examples were provided of potential applications. Roughly a third of researchers, and nearly 60% of partners, believed that their networks had scientific and/or commercial results that were truly groundbreaking in nature. A high proportion of partners (85%) were satisfied or very satisfied with their NCE experience overall. Most of the HQP trained by networks (at least 88% in 2000-2001) found employment after leaving the network (typically after graduation), with roughly half subsequently employed by industry, an effective means of knowledge transfer.
A sample of some highlights from NCE networks supported by NSERC are presented in Figure 51.
|
Network |
Innovation |
|
AllerGen |
Canada has broken new ground internationally with the AllerGen Clinical Investigator Collaborative (CIC) – a unique consortium that pools the nation's collective expertise in allergy research to conduct early-stage clinical trials at McMaster, the University of Saskatchewan, University of Alberta,The University of British Columbia and Universit� Laval. The CIC provides a cost-effective way to evaluate how well new molecular compounds treat inflammation in people's breathing passages. |
|
ArcticNet |
ArcticNet represents Canada's single largest scientific response to understanding changes in the Arctic. Over 100 ArcticNet researchers and 200 graduate students, post-doctoral fellows, research associates and technicians from 27 Canadian universities and five federal departments collaborate with more than 100 partner organizations from Canada and abroad to study the impacts of climate change in the coastal Canadian Arctic. Their main research platform is the CCGS Amundsen research icebreaker, a retrofitted Canadian Coast Guard vessel which began crisscrossing the Canadian Arctic in 2003 to investigate the environmental, social and economic impacts of a warming Arctic. |
|
Auto21 |
Dr. Mohini Sain and his team have successfully manufactured a lightweight, biodegradable material that is currently being tested for use as interior door panels for cars. For the average North American market, such a panel would have a lifespan of 10 to 15 years. Dr. Sain's team tried fibres from all over the world before settling on wheat, hemp and wood fibre. Then they worked on developing a cost-effective manufacturing process. The savings here were twofold: in the process itself and in the reduced need for petroleum-based products. Dr. Sain and his team isolated individual fibres from agricultural and woody plants, combined them with chemicals and separated the fibres under pressure. The result is a product that looks and feels somewhat like fibreglass, has the strength of carbon fibre and is just as light. If the fibres are combined with natural polymers, the result is totally biodegradable. |
|
Canadian Institute for Photonic Innovations |
A new quantum cryptography method, designed at the University of Toronto uses particles of light to share secret encryption keys transmitted over fibre-optic networks. By varying the intensity of laser light particles (photons) used in fibre-optic communications, senders can create decoys that catch eavesdropping attempts. |
|
Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network |
Dr. Lily Dyson's work has shown that low-income environments have a negative correlation to children's literacy levels, with poorer children falling behind in Kindergarten and losing ground with each passing year. |
|
Canadian Water Network |
One technology funded by the network is already showing results at a mine site in Trail BC. Developed by Nature Works Remediation Corp., the system uses inexpensive biodegradable nutrient sources (i.e. manure, spent mushroom compost) to filter arsenic. The process produces less contaminated sludge than chemical systems. |
|
Geomatics for Informed Decisions (GEOIDE) |
As part of a geomatics projects, called the Geosalar project, Dr. Patrice Carbonneau developed computer software that automatically translates high resolution aerial photos into maps that provide detailed measurements of the physical environment below, including water depth and even the size of pebbles on the riverbed. The research team led by Dr. Julian Dodson and Dr. Normand Bergeron then used acoustic transmitters to track young salmon as they abandon their freshwater nursery streams and venture out to sea. They also moored instruments to measure current, salinity and temperature. The data were then plugged into a hydrodynamic model, which government agencies and environmental consulting companies will be able to use to predict fish migration patterns and sediment movement. Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) technology was used to track even younger salmon, called parr. The research team developed a portable antenna to increase the detection range of parr from about 30 centimetres to about 1 metre, and a new 5-metre long portable antenna that can more rapidly scan large stream areas. They also modified the design of commercially available transponders in order to be able to mark fish as small as 8.5 cm. The team is currently burying a wired network of 256 PIT antennas in the substrate of a small river in eastern Quebec. The tools developed in the Geosalar project will help Canada and other countries to manage salmon stocks more effectively through better habitat management. |
|
Intelligent Sensing for Innovative Structures (ISIS Canada) |
ISIS has won international praise for its expertise in developing fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) and fibre optic sensor (FOS) technologies. FRPs offers many advantages over conventional steel reinforcements in bridges, dams, pipelines, buildings and other structures. The material is six-to-ten times stronger than steel and it is non-corrosive, resulting in a structure that lasts longer and requires less maintenance. The technology is currently used in over 50 structures in Canada, including the Confederation Bridge. Its other breakthrough technology, FOS, is fueling rapid advances in the emerging field of structural health monitoring (SHM). Miniature fibre optic sensors installed in structures during construction can measure – in real-time – the effects of stress, wind, precipitation and even temperature. The research has already led to commercial products, including two readout instruments and a sensor system component. ISIS is now looking at developing a wireless equivalent of the technology. |
|
Mathematics of Information Technology and Complex Systems (MITACS) |
Dr. Fahima Nekka and her team are breaking new ground using complex mathematics, supported by in vivo research, to predict the impact of swine feeding behaviour on the animals' exposure to feed-administered antibiotics. |
|
Sustainable Forest Management Network |
This network’s research is improving forest management practices across Canada, and having a direct impact on public policy. Network findings have helped to support sweeping changes for forest management in Quebec (the Coulombe Commission) and provided significant input to the Ontario Forest Management Guide for Natural Disturbance Pattern Emulation. In Western Canada, Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc. (Al-Pac) is using Network research results to better understand the cumulative effects of human activities in one of Canada's busiest corners of the boreal plain, and helping them to understand the interactions of land use and hydrology in the boreal plain. Several aspects of Louisiana-Pacific Canada's proposed 20-year Forest Management Plan in Manitoba are based on Network research. In Manitoba, Ducks Unlimited is using Network research findings to provide input into changing buffer and riparian guidelines in Manitoba. In New Brunswick, J.D. Irving is continuing to work with Network researchers to determine the range of silviculture intensity that is compatible with the persistence of forest bird populations on the lands it manages. |
What follows is a more general presentation of important performance measures related to the productive use of new knowledge. Many NSERC programs have contributed to the successes illustrated below.
Invention disclosures, patents and licences obtained
Statistics Canada conducts a survey of intellectual property (IP) commercialization in the university sector every one to two years. The latest report can be found at the following site: http://www.statcan.ca/cgi-bin/downpub/listpub.cgi?catno=88F0006XIE2006011. The key results from the first four surveys are highlighted in Figure 52. The survey data are confidential and it is therefore impossible to link the outcomes in the figure below to NSERC funding. However, from NSERC’s analysis of patents and publications, it is highly likely that the majority would be attributable to NSERC funding. The sizeable increases seen over the five-year period for most of the commercialization activities presented is a positive result. Other commercialization trends are presented below.
|
Commercialization Activity |
1999 |
2001 |
2003 |
2004 |
|
Inventions disclosed |
829 |
1,105 |
1,133 |
1,432 |
|
Inventions protected |
509 |
682 |
597 |
629 |
|
New patent applications |
616 |
932 |
1,252 |
1,264 |
|
Patents issued |
325 |
381 |
347 |
397 |
|
Total patents held |
1,826 |
2,133 |
3,047 |
3,827 |
|
New licences |
218 |
320 |
422 |
494 |
|
Total active licences |
1,109 |
1,338 |
1,756 |
2,022 |
|
Royalties from licensing ($M) |
$18.9 |
$52.5 |
$55.5 |
$51.2 |
|
Total spin-off companies |
454 |
680 |
876 |
968 |
|
Source: Statistics Canada |
|
|
|
|
A patent is issued when an invention is deemed to be new, useful and non-obvious. As shown in Figure 52, Canadian universities are seeking patent protection at an increasing rate. Another measure of this activity is the number of U.S. patents being issued to Canadian universities. As shown in Figure 53, university patent production has increased as compared to the beginning of the decade but has recently fallen back from the highs in the late nineties. An analysis of the nearly 1,400 patents issued to Canadian universities over the past 10 years has found that nearly a 1,000, or 68%, of the patents listed an NSERC-funded professor as one of the inventors. In addition, start-up companies linked to NSERC have been issued 788 U.S. patents over the past decade. As shown in Figure 54, all NSERC-related patents combined account for 5% to 8% of the institutional U.S. patents assigned to Canadian organizations every year.
From NSERC’s 2007 researcher’s survey, patenting activity by the 2,590 respondents was considerable. Over the past five years, 360 Canadian patents and 723 U.S. patents were issued to NSERC-funded professors. This suggest that patent activity is more prevalent than can be seen from just an analysis of patents assigned to universities (i.e., many patents are held/owned by the professor instead of the university).
Another means of measuring research results used by the private and public sector is to study the relationship between patents and scientific literature cited in the patent. It was found that patents issued in the U.S. had cited NSERC-funded science literature to a high degree as compared to all Canadian science literature cited (see Figure 55). Therefore, Canadian companies and foreign firms are likely to frequently cite NSERC-funded science in their patents.
Another way university research is transferred to industry is through a licence, giving the industrial buyer the right to commercialize the research. Commercial use of the licensed technology results in royalty income to the university and typically the researcher. The amount of licensing royalty revenues is another measure of the value of university research. Figure 56 presents an estimate of licensing revenues for Canadian universities. Most of these revenues can at least be partially attributed to funding from NSERC and CIHR. The trend in revenue growth has generally been positive over the decade and it should continue to grow as universities strive to secure additional revenues. Examples of licences based on NSERC-funded research are presented in Figure 57. From Statistics Canada’s Survey of Innovation, Figure 58 presents the frequency with which “innovative firms” licensed technologies from universities or government sources from 2002 to 2004. The pharmaceutical, primary metal, chemical, and plastics and rubber industries were significant licensees of university technologies.
From a survey conducted by the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM), a comparison of 30 Canadian universities (including universities such as Queen’s, McGill, Alberta, Toronto, Waterloo, Dalhousie, Calgary, UBC, etc.) to 158 U.S. universities on several commercialization activities is shown in Figure 59. These activities were normalized for sponsored research expenditures. Ratios below 1.0 indicate that the Canadian universities in the sample are engaged in the activity less frequently than their U.S. counterparts. Canadian universities perform significantly below U.S. universities on licence income received and patents issued, as well as U.S. institutions on start-up company formation and inventions disclosures, and perform much better than the U.S. institutions on licences and options executed.
|
What |
Where |
Who |
Licensed to |
|
Aquamat, a multi-layered capillary mat to capture water and distribute it evenly to plants in nurseries. |
Universit� Laval |
Dr. Jean Caron |
Soleno Textiles (Laval, QC) |
|
OsteoScaf™, a synthetic scaffold that provides a framework for growing tissue to speed the healing of severe bone breaks. |
University of Toronto |
Dr. Moillet Shoichet |
Tissue Regeneration Therapeutics (Toronto, ON) |
|
Complex mathematical formulas allow machines to recognize objects. Sony uses the computer vision package in its AIBO dog robots. |
University of British Columbia |
Dr. David Lowe |
Evolution Robotics (Pasadena, CA) |
|
Autostitch™, the first 2-D image-stitcher which stitches pictures together to form a composite image that can be view in a panorama of up to 360�. |
University of British Columbia |
Dr. David Lowe |
3Cim (Santa Clara, CA) |
|
An inhaler that contains thousands of nanoparticles to deliver lung cancer medication directly to the lungs. |
University of Alberta |
Dr. Warren Finlay |
LAB International (St-Laurent, QC) |
|
A new design for power amplification of cellular base stations to improve efficiency and power consumption. |
Simon Fraser University |
Dr. Shawn Stapleton |
PulseWave RF (Austin, TX) |
|
Sonar technology that provides high-resolution underwater acoustic mapping and imaging in three dimensions. |
Simon Fraser University |
Dr. John Bird |
Teledyne Benthos (North Falmouth, MA) |
|
Viscofiber�, Cevena’s brand name for beta-glucan, is a fiber found in the cell walls of oat and barley. |
University of Alberta |
Dr. Thava Vasanthan |
Cevena Bioproducts (Edmonton, AB) |
|
MAPLE, a software program that tracks radar-based precipitation patterns to forecast future precipitation for up to six hours. |
McGill University |
Dr. Isztar Zawadzki |
Weather Decision Technologies (Norman, OK) |
|
Technology produces single-walled carbon nanotubes (C-SWNT), based on a plasma process that is more efficient, less costly and non-polluting. |
Institut national de la recherche scientifique |
Dr. Barry Stansfield |
Raymor Industries (Boisbriand, QC) |
|
mBOT is a new adaptive learning music recommendation system that automatically proposes songs based on past knowledge to play them through the Internet. |
McGill University |
Dr. Daniel Levitin |
Double V3 (Montreal, QC) |
|
Algorithms bring panchromatic and multispectral imagery together to create a high-resolution colour image. |
University of New Brunswick |
Dr. Yun Zhang |
PCI Geomatics (Richmond Hill, ON) |
| Canada, Innovative Plants |
A Canadian university
|
A Canadian federal government lab
|
A provincial or territorial government lab
|
||
| Logging |
x
|
x
|
x
|
||
| Manufacturing |
2.7
|
4.3
|
2.5
|
||
| Food manufacturing and beverage and tobacco product manufacturing |
0.0
|
20.7
|
21.4
|
||
| Textile mills and textile product mills |
5.1
|
5.1
|
0.0
|
||
| Clothing manufacturing and leather and allied product manufacturing |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Wood product manufacturing |
0.0
|
8.9
|
0.0
|
||
| Sawmills and wood preservation |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Veneer, plywood and engineered wood product manufacturing |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Other wood product manufacturing |
0.0
|
F
|
0.0
|
||
| Paper manufacturing |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Pulp, paper and paperboard mills |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Converted paper product manufacturing |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Printing and related support activities |
3.7
|
1.2
|
0.0
|
||
| Petroleum and coal products manufacturing |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Chemical manufacturing |
12.2
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Chemical manufacturing (excluding pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing) |
8.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing |
21.8
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Plastics and rubber products manufacturing |
10.4
|
3.0
|
1.5
|
||
| Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Primary metal manufacturing |
15.6
|
3.3
|
0.0
|
||
| Fabricated metal manufacturing |
0.5
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Machinery manufacturing |
0.9
|
0.8
|
0.0
|
||
| Machinery manufacturing (excluding commercial and service industry machinery manufacturing) |
0.0
|
0.9
|
0.0
|
||
| Commercial and service industry machinery manufacturing1 |
8.9
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Computer and electronic product manufacturing |
4.9
|
8.1
|
0.0
|
||
| Computer and peripheral equipment manufacturing1 |
0.0
|
5.3
|
0.0
|
||
| Communications equipment manufacturing |
3.2
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Telephone apparatus manufacturing1 |
x
|
x
|
x
|
||
| Radio and television broadcasting and wireless communications equipment manufacturing1 |
6.1
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Other communications equipment manufacturing |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Audio and video equipment manufacturing1 |
x
|
x
|
x
|
||
| Communications equipment manufacturing and audio and video equipment manufacturing |
8.7
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Semiconductor and other electronic component manufacturing1 |
0.0
|
4.2
|
0.0
|
||
| Navigational, measuring, medical and control instruments manufacturing |
6.9
|
17.7
|
0.0
|
||
| Navigational and guidance instruments manufacturing1 |
5.1
|
15.6
|
0.0
|
||
| Measuring, medical and controlling devices manufacturing1 |
7.9
|
18.9
|
0.0
|
||
| Manufacturing and reproducing magnetic and optical media |
x
|
x
|
x
|
||
| Navigational, measuring, medical and control instruments manufacturing and manufacturing and reproducing magnetic and optical media |
6.5
|
16.7
|
0.0
|
||
| Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing |
2.7
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing (excluding communication and energy wire and cable manufacturing) |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Communication and energy wire and cable manufacturing1 |
12.4
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Transportation equipment manufacturing |
0.0
|
2.4
|
2.4
|
||
| Transportation equipment manufacturing (excluding aerospace product and parts manufacturing) |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Aerospace product and parts manufacturing |
0.0
|
11.4
|
11.4
|
||
| Furniture and related product manufacturing |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Miscellaneous manufacturing |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
||
| Information and communication technology (ICT) manufacturing industries |
6.0
|
7.8
|
0.0
|
||
1. Contributes to estimates for information and communication technology (ICT) manufacturing industries.
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey of Innovation, 2005.
Start-up companies established
The creation of a company remains one of NSERC’s more tangible outcomes of university-funded research. Every two years, NSERC engages in a detailed study to uncover firms that were created based on university research. The profiles of these companies are published in the report Research Means Business, available on the web at: http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/corp_pub_e.asp. (Note: The next edition of the report will be available in the Fall of 2007.) The start-up companies highlighted in the latest report have all been founded on results of research funded partially by NSERC. The 141 start-up companies featured (see Figure 60 on the next page) are currently in the business of producing goods and services for Canadian and international markets. Combined, these companies employ nearly 13,000 Canadians and generate more than $3.5 billion in annual sales/revenue. Creating innovative goods and services using the latest technologies, these firms make an important contribution to Canada's economy. The potential for future growth of many of these advanced technology companies, which may be tomorrow’s multi-nationals, is high. They range in size from new start-ups with only a few employees to well-established firms with hundreds of workers.
As of June 2007, 28 of the 141 start-up companies examined are/were publicly-traded firms. Although the gyrations of the markets have been significant in recent years, the market capitalization of these 28 publicly-traded firms on June 20, 2007 was an impressive $13.8 billion (see Figure 61). The overall market capitalization of these firms is once again approaching records highs not seen since the dot-com bubble. In addition to the direct economic benefits of contributing to Canadian GDP and employment, longer-term potential benefits of these start-up companies also exist. One already mentioned is the nearly 800 U.S. patents issued to the start-up companies over the past 10 years. Another secondary benefit has been the growth of major R&D firms in the country. In 2006, six of the top 100 Canadian R&D companies (as ranked by Research Infosource, 2006) were NSERC-related start-up companies with a combined R&D expenditure of $296M (see Figure 62). Many other university start-up companies not linked to NSERC are also part of the top 100 R&D companies. These results are important as Canada strives to increase R&D spending by Canadian firms.
| Company |
Market Capitalization
|
|||||||
|
June 20,
2007 |
July 21,
2006 |
June 28,
2005 |
June 14,
2004 |
July 28,
2003 |
July 29,
2002 |
August 15,
2001 |
June 12,
2000 |
|
| Shire BioChem Pharma | $3,406 M1 | $3,406 M1 | $3,406 M1 | $3,406 M1 | $3,406 M1 | $3,406 M1 | $3,406 M | $3,607 M |
| MDS Sciex | $2,646 M | $2,978 M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M |
| MacDonald Dettwiler | $1,892 M | $1,617 M | $1,229 M | $1,038 M | $903 M | $727 M | $836 M | $- M |
| Stantec | $1,669 M | $434 M | $563 M | $472 M | $341 M | $292 M | $208 M | $95 M |
| Open Text | $1,171 M | $722 M | $858 M | $1,921 M | $728 M | $544 M | $638 M | $845 M |
| ZENON Environmental | $760 M1 | $760 M1 | $789 M | $633 M | $427 M | $429 M | $319 M | $153 M |
| QLT | $615 M | $654 M | $1,176 M | $1,668 M | $1,636 M | $1,177 M | $2,249 M | $6,152 M |
| Wi-LAN | $417 M | $62 M | $35 M | $110 M | $94 M | $54 M | $85 M | $852 M |
| DALSA | $227 M | $261 M | $298 M | $392 M | $245 M | $123 M | $71 M | $49 M |
| Westport Innovations | $207 M | $70 M | $103 M | $125 M | $110 M | $200 M | $303 M | $359 M |
| Certicom | $173 M | $229 M | $191 M | $134 M | $42 M | $33 M | $125 M | $896 M |
| Biomira | $138 M | $96 M | $163 M | $139 M | $100 M | $185 M | $460 M | $674 M |
| TIR Systems | $75 M1 | $26 M | $42 M | $103 M | $25 M | $10 M | $6 M | $6 M |
| AD OPT Technologies | $73 M1 | $73 M1 | $73 M1 | $53 M | $34 M | $31 M | $36 M | $62 M |
| Migenix | $64 M | $32 M | $25 M | $58 M | $22 M | $31 M | $- M | $- M |
| SatCon Power Systems | $51 M | $106 M | $59 M | $92 M | $17 M | $- M | $- M | $- M |
| SemBioSys Genetics | $45 M | $51 M | $57 M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M |
| Forbes Medi-Tech | $31 M | $78 M | $71 M | $94 M | $52 M | $14 M | $73 M | $155 M |
| Cell-Loc Location | $30 M | $14 M | $6 M | $9 M | $15 M | $47 M | $27 M | $- M |
| International Road Dynamics | $29 M | $18 M | $16 M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M |
| Virtek Vision International | $25 M | $35 M | $21 M | $33 M | $17 M | $24 M | $60 M | $53 M |
| TurboSonic | $18 M | $20 M | $8 M | $4 M | $6 M | $3 M | $- M | $- M |
| BIOREM Technologies | $16 M | $21 M | $2 M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M |
| Prescient NeuroPharma | $15 M | $1 M | $1 M | $1 M | $4 M | $7 M | $- M | $- M |
| Advitech | $6 M | $4 M | $1 M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M |
| FreshXtend Technologies | $5 M | $8 M | $4 M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M |
| GeneMax Pharmaceuticals | $2 M | $2 M | $2 M | $13 M | $33 M | $21 M | $- M | $- M |
| Newmerical Technologies | $2 M | $2 M | $2 M | $9 M | $4 M | $- M | $- M | $- M |
| Innova LifeSciences | $- M | $- M | $- M | $38 M | $40 M | $35 M | $18 M | $21 M |
| Lumenon Lightwave Technologies | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $2 M | $6 M | $- M | $- M |
| Kipp & Zonen | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $2 M | $2 M | $- M | $- M |
| Magistral Biotech | $- M | $-M | $5 M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M |
| Millenium Biologix | $- M | $10 M | $48 M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M |
| Nexia Biotechnologies | $- M | $- M | $4 M | $40 M | $20 M | $66 M | $158 M | $- M |
| Polyphalt | $- M | $- M | $- M | $- M | $2 M | $9 M | $13 M | $- M |
| Total | $13,808 M | $11,790 M | $9,258 M | $10,585 M | $8,327 M | $7,476 M | $9,091 M | $14,470 M |
1. Market capitalization at time of buyout.
Source: Globe and Mail
|
|
|
R&D Expenditure |
|
QLT Inc. |
30 |
$90.4 |
|
Open Text Corporation |
33 |
$78.9 |
|
MacDonald Dettwiler & Associates |
48 |
$49.0 |
|
DALSA Corporation |
63 |
$36.8 |
|
Westport Innovations |
78 |
$24.4 |
|
Biomira |
92 |
$16.9 |
Source: Research Infosource, Canada’s Top 100 Corporate R&D Spenders List 2006
New and improved products and processes introduced to market
NSERC-funded researchers have created or developed many new products and processes, the value of which is difficult to estimate. Respondents to NSERC’s 2007 researcher’s survey, previously mentioned, indicated significant involvement in the development of new goods or services (see Figure 63).
Also as part of a past evaluation of NSERC’s largest program, the Discovery Grants program, over 20% of the 3,032 respondents who held a grant indicated a major contribution to the development of new or improved products or processes. By way of example, Figures 64, 65, 66 and 67 list a sample of some of the new products or processes developed by NSERC-funded professors in the environmental, information technology, health and energy sectors, respectively.
|
What |
Where |
Who |
Why |
|
Biodegradable packaging for cosmetics |
University of Toronto |
Dr. Mohini Sain |
Working with Cargo cosmetics, Dr. Sain and his team developed a lipstick tube made entirely from biodegradable plastic. |
|
Biofilter System |
University of Waterloo & BIOREM |
Dr. Owen Ward |
Use natural microbial activity to clean up toxic sites. Bioremediation is a cost efficient biological process that uses naturally occurring microorganisms to degrade and reduce toxic materials and accelerate the treatment of soils contaminated with toxic organic chemicals. |
|
Biological weed control |
McGill University |
Dr. Alan Watson |
The fungus, Sclerotina minor, used to control of dandelions, without harming the surrounding environment, including birds. |
|
CO2 to kill pests |
University of Manitoba |
Dr. Digvir Jayas |
Dry ice to kill insects in grain stores. The product costs the same as chemical pesticides, but is safer to administer and is environmentally friendly. |
|
HYFRAN |
Institut national de la recherche scientifique |
Dr. Bernard Bob�e |
HYFRAN software is used by staff at Hydro Quebec to improve the management of surface waters on their land. |
|
Non-Insecticidal Pest Management |
Simon Fraser University & Phero Tech Inc. |
Dr. John Borden |
Use semiochemicals to lure and trap pests in order to monitor pest population. |
|
Organic Compounds |
University of Waterloo & EnviroMetal Technologies Inc. |
Dr. Robert Gillham |
Technology is able to destroy harmful organic compounds by using granular ion. This can be used in order to solve a wide range of environmental problems including those involving the release of chlorinated organic chemicals. |
|
Polluted soil remediation technology |
University of Saskatchewan |
Dr. Gordon Hill |
Has developed a prototype bead bioreactor in the lab, successfully removing creosotes and other pollutants from contaminated soil. |
|
Reduction of sludge |
Carleton University |
Dr. Banu �rmeci |
Developed early stage technology to remove the water from the sludge effectively using innovative dewatering techniques. |
|
(RTP) Rapid Thermal Processing |
University of Western Ontario & Ensyn Technologies |
Dr. Maurice Bergougnou |
Disposing of large amounts of solid wastes in an environmen-tally friendly fashion can be done using RTP technology, which transforms forest residues, municipal wood waste and agricultural wastes into valuable liquid fuels and chemicals. |
|
Septic tank failure prevention device |
Dalhousie University |
Dr. Mysore Satish |
The “flow balancer” eliminates the threat of saturation from a septic tank by forcing the effluent into two equal streams which distributes it evenly across the disposal bed. |
|
Wastewater Treatment |
University of Ottawa & Hydromantis Inc. |
Dr. Gilles Patry |
Powerful simulation software enables wastewater treatment plant operators to save money by managing their facilities more efficiently, from the conceptual stage to full-scale operations. |
|
What |
Where |
Who |
Why |
|
A better chip |
University of Toronto |
Dr. Ted Sargent |
‘Wet chemistry’ used to create a semiconductor in a test tube. |
|
Faster cellphone functions |
Concordia University |
Dr. Mourad Debbabi |
The dynamic selective compiler program improves cellphone applications by 400%. |
|
Computer model to assess ecosystem |
University of British Columbia |
Dr. Younes Alila |
Computer model capable of measuring 6,000 variables in a forest system. Helped researchers assess the effects of the mountain pine-beetle infestation and subsequent logging in the Fraser River watershed. |
|
Computer that writes articles |
Simon Fraser University |
Dr. Anoop Sarkar |
SQuASH (SFU question answering summary handler) is a computer program that scans newspapers, academic abstracts and other documents and, with a set of questions from the user, creates a short summary. |
|
Computer simulation helps transportation |
University of Toronto |
Dr. Eric Miller |
Software simulates the lives of 100,000 households – basically a whole city – to help them to design transportation systems. |
|
Eliminating confusing drug names |
University of Alberta |
Dr. Greg Kondrak |
Developed two computer programs used by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to create drug names that don’t sound or look the same. Confusion over the names of drugs has led to over 160,000 deaths in the United States. |
|
New cryptography technique |
University of Toronto |
Dr. Hoi-Kwong Lo |
Developed a new technique that uses a photonic decoy to encrypt data over fibre optic cable. |
|
Optical and digital recognition technique |
Universit� Laval |
Dr. Henri Arsenault |
Optical and digital techniques recognize patterns in objects that change position, orientation or distance from where they are being observed making it easier to identify the faces of people moving around in a crowd for security purposes. |
|
Software to manage winter road maintenace operations |
Universit� de Montr�al |
Dr. Michel Gendreau |
Developped software that takes into account 21 factors to help municipalities manage snow clearning and road salt applications. |
|
Tracking terrorists’ communications |
Queen’s University |
Dr. David Skillicorn |
A set of measures to detect messages with words that have been deliberately replaced to conceal their real content. |
|
TransType |
Universit� de Montr�al |
Dr. Guy Lapalme |
Series of language tools designed specifically for translators. The "TransType" tries to anticipate in real time what a translator will type next. The software makes suggestions which can be incorporated directly into a translated text or simply used as a source of ideas. |
|
Wireless network monitors potash mines |
University of Saskatchewan |
Dr. Brian Daku |
Developed a prototype wireless network to monitor a potash mine’s roof and floor. |
|
What |
Where |
Who |
Why |
|
Alternative to artery-clogging trans fats |
University of Guelph |
Dr. Alejandro Marangoni |
A new way to package oils and change them into a solid fat-like gel. The gel provides the same structural and functional benefits as trans and saturated fats, but it releases fats to the body in a more controlled way. |
|
Armrest reduces repetitive strain injuries |
University of Guelph |
Dr. Michele Oliver |
New armrest reduces muscle activities in the neck, which helps prevent repetitive strain injuries. Originally designed for machinery operations, it can be used on any chair. |
|
Diagnosing asthma in children |
Dalhousie University |
Dr. Geoffrey Maksym |
A more sensitive and reliable diagnostic technique that measures spasms in the smooth muscle lining a patient’s airways. |
|
First instrument to travel inside blood vessels |
�cole Polytechnique de Montr�al |
Dr. Sylvain Martel |
The first prototype of a micro-instrument capable of travelling inside an animal’s carotid artery. The device travels a set trajectory previously established by software. |
|
Mini vehicles to treat cancer |
Universit� de Sherbrooke |
Dr. Yue Zhao |
A process to encapsulate medication in a microscopic molecule, called nanovehicles, which are dispatched directly to the area targeted for chemotherapy. |
|
Preventing ‘fertility twins’ |
McGill University |
Dr. David Burns |
In vitro fertilisation, IVF, can help produce twins or triplets because doctors implant more than one embryo in order to improve the odds that one baby will survive. Dr. Burns has developed a test to help screen for the best embryo allowing doctors to implant only one candidate, thereby avoiding the complications of multiple births. |
|
Software program to detect knee disorders |
University of Western Ontario |
Dr. Karthikeyan Umapathy |
A computer program that can detect knee disorders like arthritis with a high degree of accuracy. |
|
Tactile Sensors for Surgical Tools |
Concordia University |
Dr. Javad Dargahi |
Sensors that can be attached to surgical tools to capture images of internal organs to provide minimally invasive surgery. |
|
Vital Signs Monitor |
University of British Columbia |
Dr. Guy Dumont |
A new device that alerts doctors to changes in the vital signs of their patients by providing a vibration, pressure, heat or pulses of air instead of noise which already proliferates healthcare settings. |
|
Virtual scoliosis surgical software |
�cole Polytechnique de Montr�al |
Dr. Carl-�ric Aubin |
Pre-operative surgical simulation tool allows surgeons to test the effects of scoliosis operations before they make an incision and plan which implants to use in order to obtain optimal correction. |
|
What |
Where |
Who |
Why |
|
Biodiesel fuels |
University of Toronto |
Dr. David Boocock |
By using any feedstock, including vegetable oils, agricultural seed oils, animal fats/greases and recycled cooking oils can turn them into biodiesel fuel at a cost that is competitive with petroleum diesel. |
|
Environmentally- friendly way to separate oil from dirt |
Queen’s University |
Dr. Philip Jessop |
A chemical that binds or separates water and oil on command. Can be used to remove oil from the ground and separate it from clay while minimizing costs and impacts on the environment. |
|
Ethanol |
University of British Columbia |
Dr. Jack Saddler |
Use of microorganisms and enzymes to convert wood and forestry waste into ethanol fuel. |
|
Gas sensors for the mining industry |
McGill University |
Dr. James Finch |
Gas sensor instruments have been adopted by mining companies around the world. |
|
Heat recovery ventilators |
University of Saskatchewan DEL-AIR Systems Ltd. |
Dr. Robert Besant |
System brings fresh air into the barn and recovers heat that would otherwise need to be supplemented. |
|
Hydride materials |
McGill University |
Dr. John Str�m-Olsen |
Hydride materials can be absorbed and released as hydrogen which have distinctive heat and pressure characteristics. This means that they are well suited for solid state hydrogen storage, hydrogen compression, heating and cooling, and nickel-hydrogen batteries. |
|
Natural lighting in buildings |
University of British Columbia |
Dr. Lorne Whitehead |
A system by which the sun can be bounced 15 metres or more into a building without losing brightness. |
|
Solar power heats greenhouses year-round |
University of Manitoba |
Dr. Qiang Zhang |
Method uses a heat-absorbing cement wall and swaths of clear plastic “pillows” filled with argon gas to capture and release the sun’s energy and keep plants warm through cold winter nights. |
|
Solid state hydrogen storage |
University of New Brunswick |
Dr. Sean McGrady |
A more efficient way to store hydrogen in a solid state. The discovery moves things one step closer to making hydrogen fuel a cost-effective alternative to traditional fuel sources. |
|
Westport High Pressure Direct (HDT) injection technology |
University of British Columbia |
Dr. Philip Hill |
System converts diesel engines to natural gas. HPD injection technology maintains the efficiency and high performance of a diesel engine, while cutting particulate and nitrogen oxide emissions in half. The system is retrofitted to existing engines, so the changeover will cause little disruption. |
|
Capturing hydrogen fuel cells |
University of Windsor |
Dr. Douglas Stephan |
Discovered a new way to capture and release hydrogen. This may eventually prove useful in the development of lightweight fuel cells to power vehicles. |
In addition to new process and product development, NSERC funding can also have an impact on public policy. Figure 63 also indicates the frequency with which NSERC-funded professors have contributed to new government policies or standards. In addition, as part of the Discovery Grants program evaluation, 12.7% of the 3,032 respondents who held a grant indicated a major contribution to changes in policies or standards.
2.3.2 Support Commercialization
An overview of the “support commercialization” program activity is presented below:
|
Description: |
This program activity supports innovation and promotes the transfer of knowledge and technology to Canadian companies. It directly addresses NSERC’s priority of Realizing the Benefits by funding the pre-commercial development of promising innovations, supporting technology transfer activities at Canadian universities, and supporting the training of people with the scientific and business skills sets required to exploit new discoveries for economic benefit. |
|
Expected Results: |
Supported institutions managing their intellectual property (IP) assets for economic and social benefits, and the number of commercialization specialists trained and their subsequent employment and income levels. Number of successful validations of technical and economic feasibility of an invention or discovery, the ability of small and medium-sized companies to acquire new technical capabilities and/or take a new product to market, and the number of HQP trained through such projects. |
|
Planned Spending: |
$16.5M |
|
Number of clients supported by NSERC: |
18 |
The key programs under this program activity are:
- Intellectual Property Mobilization (IPM) Program ($3.3M): Developed by NSERC in 1995, this program is now funded by NSERC, SSHRC and CIHR. The objective of this program is to accelerate the transfer of knowledge and technology residing in Canadian universities and hospitals for the benefit of Canada. The IPM program provides funding in partnership with
universities and hospitals to support activities related to managing and transferring intellectual property resulting from publicly funded research performed at universities.
The Networked Training Initiative is a critical component of the IPM program. This successful program provides seed funding for the development of technology transfer and commercialization specialists through commercialization internship programs.
- Idea to Innovation (I2I) Program ($6.2M): I2I accelerates the pre-competitive development of promising technologies and promotes its transfer to Canadian companies. The program supports R&D projects with recognized technology transfer potential by providing crucial assistance to university researchers in the early stages of technology validation
and market connection.
The I2I program helps increase the technology transfer of university discoveries by providing a flexible, two-phase funding arrangement. Phase I awards are made for a proof-of-concept stage where NSERC will support 100% of the research; while Phase II grants focus on technology enhancement and research costs in this phase are also supported by a private-sector partner.
- College and Community Innovation Program ($1.2M): This program increases the capacity of colleges to support innovation at the community or regional level. The program design and funding are intended to stimulate new partnerships and increased entrepreneurship, and to assist the colleges to take risks and be nimble in developing new ways of working with local businesses and industries to spur innovation and economic growth.
Funding for the administration of the above programs rounds out the spending under this program activity.
As presented in Figure 52, university technology transfer offices are handling an ever increasing load of intellectual property management. NSERC was a pioneer in funding university technology transfer offices when it started its Intellectual Property Mobilization program in 1995-96. In 2006-07, funding for the program was $3.2 million compared to technology transfer office expenditures of $36.9 million (2004). Combined with additional funding from CIHR and SSHRC, the granting councils are important contributors to technology transfer operations on university campuses and in hospitals. In addition, the launch of the Indirect Cost program has benefited technology transfer offices. An evaluation is currently underway of the IPM program and performance measures will be reported in the next DPR. From the 2007 NSERC researcher’s survey, Figure 68 presents the level of satisfaction with the intellectual property policy of the institution. Overall, the level of satisfaction is fairly high, with less than 16% of respondents (1,927) being dissatisfied. From the same survey respondents also identified the types of services provided to them by their technology transfer offices (see Figure 69). Almost one-third of respondents used the services of their technology transfer offices in the past 5 years. The most frequently used service was preparing contracts, patent assessment and applications, and negotiating licences.
|
|
Never or rarely |
Sometimes |
Often or |
|
Assessing the patentability of inventions |
47.7 |
35.5 |
16.8 |
|
Applying for patents |
59.0 |
25.8 |
15.2 |
|
Negotiating or arranging licenses |
61.7 |
23.5 |
14.8 |
|
Providing incubator facilities to companies |
88.8 |
8.1 |
3.1 |
|
Preparing contracts needed to initiate research projects and those linked to the exploitation of a new technology (new discovery) |
43.1 |
32.8 |
24.1 |
|
Publicising technology in order to raise general awareness to business media, technology transfer networks and to selected industrial sectors |
74.6 |
16.8 |
8.6 |
|
Marketing technology by specifically making face to face contacts with potential customers (rather than simply promotional activities) |
80.4 |
13.3 |
6.3 |
|
Attracting investors especially when formation of a spin-off is contemplated |
85.9 |
10.8 |
3.4 |
|
Producing business plans and exploitation strategies |
87.9 |
8.9 |
3.2 |
|
Identifying and assessing market opportunities that are most appropriate for a technology (new discovery) |
77.8 |
15.6 |
6.7 |
Source: NSERC Researcher Survey 2007
NSERC’s I2I program was launched in December 2003. A project tracking system has been put in place and a summary of the outcomes for the early project funded in shown in Figure 70. Early results for the program are very positive, with 3 spin-off companies created and numerous licences signed. The uptake by partner companies has been impressive and most projects are reaching a successful technology transfer result.
An evaluation of the College and Community Innovation Program was conducted in 2006-07 and the major findings from the case studies were as follows:
- When interviews were conducted for this review, colleges were only just completing their second year of funding. It was expected that immediate outcomes would be observed, but that only progress towards intermediate outcomes might be expected. It is noteworthy that even during the award period, intermediate outcomes such as new products and competitive advantages were observed.
- Although it was too soon to know the full impact of the work with the colleges, industry partners anticipated product and process improvements that will save money. In three cases partners foresaw economic benefits when the results were eventually applied, and believed that they could be quantified in a cost-benefit analysis. Even at this early stage in their collaborations, partners reported specific benefits. These benefits, broadly grouped, included: access to information and technology; improvements in products or processes; and potential economic impacts.
- The program had a positive impact on all six colleges, and for some, it also had a particular impact on an individual school, department or centre. Positive impacts on research capacity and infrastructure, recognition and credibility and training and curricula were reported by all participating colleges.
In the 2007 federal budget, permanent funding for an expanded college program was allocated.
Section 3 – Supplementary Information
3.1 Operations and Organizational Structure
Only a small fraction (approximately 5%) of NSERC’s budget is spent on administration, which includes an extensive system of volunteer peer review and site visit committees whose travel expenses are a major part of the cost of quality control of funded research. NSERC management monitors the effective use of these resources and conducts several audits each year to review various aspects of the operations. NSERC audit reports can be found at http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/aud_eval_e.asp. These audits help contribute to process improvement and reassure Canadians of the most efficient use of their funds.
NSERC operates within a framework of:
- programs developed in consultation with the Canadian research and business communities, in the context of the present and future challenges facing the Canadian university and college research system, and in light of Canada's needs and government priorities; and
- a rigorous process of peer review for awarding funds within the programs.
The peer review system ensures that funds go only to the best professors and students, and the best research programs and projects. NSERC's involvement guarantees objective and fair review of applications for support.
Applications for research funding are judged first and foremost on the merits of the proposed research and on the excellence of the research team; other criteria vary among NSERC's programs and include the training of students, the level of commitment from industrial partners, the plans for interacting with the partners, and (especially for large projects) the design of the project and the proposed management structure.
Applications for direct student support, through NSERC's Scholarships and Fellowships programs, are judged on the student's academic qualifications, as well as his or her potential for research achievement and an assessment of his or her leadership and communication abilities. NSERC recognizes that success in graduate studies, and in a subsequent research career, is dependent on more than academic excellence. An enquiring mind, adaptability and the ability to work well in a team are also essential. In addition to direct support, many other students receive NSERC support indirectly, through research grants awarded to their faculty supervisors.
NSERC is governed by a Council whose members are drawn from industry and universities, as well as from the private non-profit sector, and appointed by the Governor-in-Council. Members serve part-time and receive no remuneration for their participation. The President serves full-time and functions as the Chief Executive Officer of the Council. In 2007, Council agreed to proceed with making changes to NSERC’s by-laws and assigned the role of the Chair of Council to the elected Vice-President. Council is advised on policy and programming matters by several committees. Figure 71 presents NSERC’s committee structure.
NSERC is committed to building a network of small regional offices and playing a stronger role in supporting research, training and innovation in all regions of the country. NSERC officially opened its Atlantic Regional Office in Moncton, New Brunswick in October 2004. The second Regional Office was oopened in 2005 in Winnipeg, Manitoba and a third in Vancouver in 2006. NSERC will create further offices in Qu�bec and in Ontario in the next two years.
3.2 Financial Tables
An agency overview of financial information for the year 2006-07 is provided below. In addition, Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 present the financial information required from NSERC for the Departmental Performance Report. The agency’s audited financial statements can be found in Appendix A.
Table 1 offers a comparison of the main estimates, planned spending, total authorities, and actual spending for the most recently completed fiscal year, as well as historical figures for Actual Spending. Planned spending is established in the Report on Plans and Priorities which was completed in March 2006. NSERC’s actual spending was $6.6 million below planned levels. The variance is mainly due to a lapse in the Canada Research Chairs Program of $5.8 million.
|
Program Activity ($ millions )
|
2004–05
Actual |
2005-06
Actual |
2006-07
|
|||
|
Main
Estimates |
Planned
Spending |
Total
Authorities |
Actual
|
|||
| 1.1 - Promote Science and Engineering |
2.8
|
3.8
|
1.5
|
4.1
|
1.5
|
4.0
|
| 1.2 - Support Students and Fellows |
120.1
|
127.7
|
135.2
|
137.8
|
135.3
|
128.0
|
| 1.3 - Attract and Retain Faculty |
114.6
|
128.7
|
163.8
|
167.7
|
163.5
|
145.2
|
| 2.1 - Fund Basic Research |
391.8
|
417.7
|
411.9
|
406.3
|
427.8
|
440.8
|
| 2.2 - Fund Research in Strategic Areas |
60.5
|
56.0
|
47.9
|
54.4
|
50.2
|
53.1
|
| 3.1 - Fund University-Industry-Government Partnerships |
102.0
|
110.5
|
107.5
|
115.2
|
107.8
|
112.3
|
| 3.2 - Support Commercialization |
11.2
|
15.0
|
17.5
|
16.5
|
17.6
|
12.0
|
| Total |
803.0
|
859.4
|
885.3
|
902.0
|
903.7
|
895.4
|
| Total |
803.0
|
859.4
|
885.3
|
902.0
|
903.7
|
895.4
|
| Less: Non‑Respendable revenue |
(0.9)
|
(1.1)
|
n/a
|
(0.8)
|
n/a
|
(1.6)
|
| Plus: Cost of services received without charge |
4.8
|
5.0
|
n/a
|
4.9
|
n/a
|
5.4
|
| Total Departmental Spending |
806.9
|
863.3
|
885.3
|
906.1
|
903.7
|
899.2
|
| Full Time Equivalents |
307
|
300
|
n/a
|
313
|
n/a
|
308
|
Note: Total Authorities are Main Estimates plus Supplementary Estimates plus other authorities
Table 2 provides information on how resources are used for the most recently completed fiscal year. The difference between the planned spending and the main estimates is mainly explained by the increase received from the 2006 federal budget ($17 million).
|
2006-07
|
|||
|
Program Activity
($ millions) |
Budgetary
|
Total
|
|
|
Operating 1
|
Grants and Contributions
|
||
| 1.1 - Promote Science and Engineering | |||
| Main Estimates |
0.2
|
1.3
|
1.5
|
| Planned Spending |
0.2
|
3.9
|
4.1
|
| Total Authorities |
0.2
|
1.3
|
1.5
|
| Actual Spending |
0.2
|
3.8
|
4.0
|
| 1.2 - Support Students and Fellows | |||
| Main Estimates |
6.8
|
128.4
|
135.2
|
| Planned Spending |
6.9
|
130.9
|
137.8
|
| Total Authorities |
6.9
|
128.4
|
135.3
|
| Actual Spending |
6.1
|
121.9
|
128.0
|
| 1.3 - Attract and Retain Faculty | |||
| Main Estimates |
2.9
|
160.9
|
163.8
|
| Planned Spending |
2.9
|
164.8
|
167.7
|
| Total Authorities |
2.9
|
160.6
|
163.5
|
| Actual Spending |
2.5
|
142.7
|
145.2
|
| 2.1 - Fund Basic Research | |||
| Main Estimates |
15.9
|
396.0
|
411.9
|
| Planned Spending |
16.1
|
390.2
|
406.3
|
| Total Authorities |
17.5
|
410.3
|
427.8
|
| Actual Spending |
18.4
|
422.4
|
440.8
|
| 2.2 - Fund Research in Strategic Areas | |||
| Main Estimates |
3.6
|
44.3
|
47.9
|
| Planned Spending |
3.7
|
50.7
|
54.4
|
| Total Authorities |
3.9
|
46.3
|
50.2
|
| Actual Spending |
3.7
|
49.4
|
53.1
|
| 3.1 - Fund University-Industry-Government Partnerships | |||
| Main Estimates |
10.0
|
97.5
|
107.5
|
| Planned Spending |
10.1
|
105.1
|
115.2
|
| Total Authorities |
10.3
|
97.5
|
107.8
|
| Actual Spending |
8.0
|
104.3
|
112.3
|
| 3.2 - Support Commercialization | |||
| Main Estimates |
0.7
|
16.8
|
17.5
|
| Planned Spending |
0.7
|
15.8
|
16.5
|
| Total Authorities |
0.8
|
16.8
|
17.6
|
| Actual Spending |
1.3
|
10.7
|
12.0
|
1 Operating includes contributions to Employee Benefit Plans
Table 3 compares total actual spending versus the total authorized spending. Total authorities refers to spending levels approved by the Treasury Board of Canada. As shown above, NSERC did not spend all available funding in 2006-07, incurring a surplus of $8.3 million. Lapsed funding was mainly the result of Canada Research Chairs program.
|
($ millions)
|
2006-07
|
||||
|
Main
Estimates |
Planned
Spending |
Total
Authorities |
Actual
|
||
| 70 | Operating expenditures |
36.0
|
36.5
|
38.8
|
36.5
|
| 75 | Grants and Contributions |
845.2
|
861.4
|
861.2
|
855.2
|
| (S) | Contributions to employee benefit plans |
4.1
|
4.1
|
3.7
|
3.7
|
| Total |
885.3
|
902.0
|
903.7
|
895.4
|
|
Table 4 is designed to show the net cost of a department. It begins with the actual spending and adds services received without charge, and then subtracts non-respendable revenue to arrive at the net cost of the department.
| ($ millions) | 2006-07 |
| Accommodation provided by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) |
3.6
|
| Contributions covering employers’ share of employees’ insurance premiums and expenditures paid by TBS (excluding revolving funds) |
1.7
|
| Salary and associated expenditures of legal services provided by Justice Canada |
-
|
| Other services provided without charge |
0.1
|
| Total 2006–2007 Services received without charge |
5.4
|
Table 5 highlights non-respendable revenues. Refunds of previous years' expenditures are passed on to the Receiver General for Canada and cannot be spent on programs or operations. NSERC did not receive any respendable revenue in 2006-07.
|
($ millions )
|
2004-05
Actual |
2005-06
Actual |
2006-07
|
|||
|
Main
Estimates |
Planned
Spending |
Total
Authorities |
Actual
|
|||
| Fund Basic Research | ||||||
| Refunds of previous years's expenditures |
0.9
|
1.1
|
n/a
|
0.8
|
n/a
|
1.6
|
| Total Non-Respendable Revenue |
0.9
|
1.1
|
n/a
|
0.8
|
n/a
|
1.6
|
Table 6 summarizes total NSERC actual spending on grants versus planned spending, the authorized levels and the main estimates. The difference between the 2006-07 actuals and the authorized levels is due to the lapse in the Canada Research Chairs Program. The difference between the planned spending and the main estimates is in large part explained by the amount received from the 2006 federal budget ($17 million).
|
($ millions )
|
2004–05
Actual |
2005-06
Actual |
2006-07
|
|||
|
Main
Estimates |
Planned
Spending |
Total
Authorities |
Actual
|
|||
| Grants | ||||||
| 1.1 - Promote Science and Engineering |
2.7
|
3.6
|
1.3
|
3.9
|
1.3
|
3.8
|
| 1.2 - Support Students and Fellows |
113.9
|
121.7
|
128.4
|
130.9
|
128.4
|
121.9
|
| 1.3 - Attract and Retain Faculty |
112.3
|
126.3
|
160.9
|
164.8
|
160.6
|
142.7
|
| 2.1 - Fund Basic Research |
375.5
|
400.4
|
396.0
|
390.2
|
410.3
|
422.4
|
| 2.2 - Fund Research in Strategic Areas |
57.0
|
52.3
|
44.3
|
50.7
|
46.3
|
49.4
|
| 3.1 - Fund University-Industry-Government Partnerships |
94.8
|
103.2
|
97.5
|
105.1
|
97.5
|
104.3
|
| 3.2 - Support Commercialization |
10.0
|
13.7
|
16.8
|
15.8
|
16.8
|
10.7
|
| Total grants |
766.2
|
821.2
|
845.2
|
861.4
|
861.2
|
855.2
|
| Contributions |
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
| Other Transfer Payments |
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
| Total Grants, Contributions And Other Transfer Payments |
766.2
|
821.2
|
845.2
|
861.4
|
861.2
|
855.2
|
3.3 Response to Parliamentary Committees, Audits and Evaluations for 2006-07
In 2006-07 NSERC did not have to respond to questions or recommendations made by Parliamentary Committees. NSERC did not have to respond to any questions from the Auditor General.
In 2006-07 the following audits and evaluations were completed:
- College and Community Innovation Pilot Program Mid-term Review
- Joint Evaluation of Research Tools and Instruments Grants (RTI) and Major Facilities Access Grants (MFA)
- Summative Evaluation of the Industrial Research Chairs Program
The NSERC audit and evaluation reports posted on the web can be found at: (http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/aud_eval_e.asp).
3.4 Service Improvement Initiative
NSERC has implemented a formal and structured service improvement plan that covers the key services it provides to its clients. The plan addresses NSERC's four main lines of business: Operations and Transactions, Program Delivery, Responding to Enquiries and On-line Services. It sets priorities for service improvement and will allow for monitoring progress towards client satisfaction targets. It also calls for periodic client-satisfaction surveys with the objective of improving service delivery and for the updating of the current client-centred internal service standards applied by NSERC's directorates. It is important to note that most of NSERC's key services are delivered to its clientele through the eBusiness Initiative, the NSERC web site and the Helpdesk service.
In compliance with the government-wide Service Improvement Initiative (SII) and on the basis of its service improvement plan, NSERC developed and published its Performance and Service Standards, which include a section on the Service Improvement Initiative at NSERC and implemented client satisfaction surveys to establish satisfaction baselines, apply improvement targets and monitor progress towards those targets. The Council will continue to conduct external surveys to gauge the satisfaction level of its clientele with the quality of the key services (please visit the following site for more detailed information: http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/p_s_standards_e.asp.)
Main achievements in improving service from a citizen-centered perspective – The key client services prioritized for improvement relate to the on-line application submission system, the financial data submission and reconciliation system (FDSR), the NSERC Web site, the Helpdesk service and the annual information visits to Canadian postsecondary institutions. NSERC has continued to refine the delivery and quality of its key services with a citizen-centered perspective in mind, such as:
- Continued improvement of the on-line application submission system to encourage users to conduct NSERC-related business electronically. In 2006-07, more than 80% of applications for funding were received electronically and this percentage is likely to increase in the future. There are plans to consider and possibly introduce the use of a commercial off-the shelf (COTS) grants management system to replace the current eSubmission system. A COTS solution will be easier to maintain and update, will provide significant cost-savings and will help lighten the workload of internal and external users.
- Implementation of an additional 9 client-centered Extranets in 2006-07, for a total of 36 implemented to date. The objective of these Extranets is to share business information, data and/or operations with external clients and to help improve on-line interactions between NSERC, peer review committees and postsecondary institution representatives. Extranets will lighten the administrative load, speed up exchange of documents and offer more convenient, efficient and innovative ways of working with NSERC staff and research community partners.
- Sustained improvement of the Tri-Council (NSERC-SSHRC-CIHR) Financial Data Submission and Reconciliation on-line system (FDSR). An updated, more user-friendly version was implemented earlier this year. This electronic service is currently hosted by NSERC and it allows postsecondary institutions to transfer financial award data in a single file to the granting councils once all web-based statement of expenditures forms are validated by individual grantees. It provides an on-line alternative to the annual paper submission process.
- Configuring, testing and validating the functionality – for future implementation – of the PWGSC Secure Channel ePass Service. This service will give clients a single user ID and password to authenticate and to self-identify, and to gain access to all of NSERC external electronic services. Currently, users are required to utilize multiple IDs and passwords to access an increasing number of on-line services offered by NSERC. The secure channel mechanism, when implemented, will eliminate client frustration with the current process.
Appendix A – Audited Financial Statements
for the year ended March 31, 2007
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Appendix B – Council Membership
NSERC is governed by a Council composed of a full-time president and up to 21 members selected from the private sector, the public sector, and the universities, each appointed by Order-in-Council. In accordance with the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Act, the President is the Chair of Council and the Chief Executive Officer, responsible for directing the work and the staff of NSERC.
The following is the membership as of March 31, 2007.|
President Dr. Suzanne Fortier
|
Vice-President Dr. Joanne Keselman |
|
Members Mr. Alain Bellemare
Dr. Max Blouw Dr. Edwin Bourget Dr. Jillian M. Buriak Dr. Mike Lazaridis Dr. Eugene McCaffrey Dr. Murray McLaughlin Dr. Maurice Moloney
|
Dr. Harold Edward Alexander Campbell Dr. Adam Chowaniec Dr. Christopher Essex Dr. Haig deB Farris Dr. Louis Fortier Dr. Barbara Sherwood Lollar Dr. Mary Anne White Dr. Robert Young |
|
Associates of Council Dr. Alan Bernstein Dr. Pierre Coulombe Dr. Chad Gaffield |
Corporate Secretary Ms. Barbara Conway |