Author: Sophia Thomas

Susan Delacourt named new host of Canada 2020’s Brief Remarks podcast

Posted on

Share this

brief-remarks-header

Award-winning journalist and author taking over hosting duties for Season 2

18 January 2017 (Ottawa) – Canada 2020 is proud to announce that award-winning journalist and best-selling author Susan Delacourt will be the next host of its Brief Remarks podcast.
Susan takes over hosting duties from Jennifer Robson and Rob Silver, who helped the show debut as one of the most-listened to Canadian political podcasts. Jen and Rob will remain involved as regular guests and contributors to the show. You can listen to the three hosts discuss the change on today’s episode, starting at 40:20.
“I’ve been urging people to listen to Brief Remarks since it launched last fall,” said Susan Delacourt. “It offers great, often-unexpected insights into how politics and government really work. So when I was asked to follow in the trail blazed by Jennifer and Rob, I was delighted. It’s a chance to do political journalism in a different way, and the coming months promise to give us lots more to discuss.”
Susan Delacourt is one of Canada’s best-known political journalists. Over her long career she has worked at the country’s top newsrooms, including the Toronto Star, The Globe and Mail, the Ottawa Citizen and the National Post. She is a frequent political panelist on CBC Radio and CTV. Author of four books, her latest — Shopping For Votes — was a finalist for the prestigious Hilary Weston Writers’ Trust Prize for Canadian non-fiction in 2014.
“Susan Delacourt is an inspired choice as host,” said Jennifer Robson. “She’s going to have smart conversations about Canadian politics and I’m keen to be part of that. I’m going to be listening to Season 2 while I get back to a bunch of research and writing projects.”
Every week, Brief Remarks reveals the behind-the-scenes world of federal politics in Canada. Fun, fast and largely factual, Susan and a host of regular guests and contributors introduce the people who make decisions in Canada – as well as those who influence the decision makers. Some of them you know, others you should get to know.
New episodes are released every Wednesday afternoon. The Brief Remarks podcast is available on iTunes, Google Play, Stitcher, SoundCloud and Canada2020.ca.
###

Dr. Danielle Martin: Six Big Ideas To Improve Health Care For Canadians

Posted on

Share this

Canada 2020’s Senior Associate Reva Seth spoke to Dr. Danielle Martin about her new book Better Now: Six Big Ideas To Improve Health Care For All Canadians ahead of her sold out talk at the Telfer School of Business in Ottawa on Wednesday, Jan. 18, 2017.

Dr. Danielle Martin's book is Better Now: Six Big Ideas to Improve Health Care for All Canadians
Dr. Danielle Martin’s latest book is Better Now: Six Big Ideas to Improve Health Care for All Canadians

Reva Seth:  Danielle, congratulations on an incredibly interesting and important book – the more Canadians can join in a shared conversation on what the future of our country’s health care should look like – the better.  Six Big Ideas is the perfect way to kick off a dialogue on health care in 2017. 
So let’s start with the basics, what are your 6 Big Ideas in this book?
Dr. Martin: All the big ideas are about making changes to our health care system that will improve health without spending a whole lot more money, and without giving up on the value of fairness that underpins Medicare.
Canadians believe in the fundamental principle that access to health care should be based on need, not ability to pay, and we should be proud that we have built a system around that principle. But to deliver on the promise of universal health care, we need to do better. There are real challenges in the system, so I propose 6 things we can do together to meet those challenges:

  • Big Idea 1 is about ensuring relationship-based primary health care for every Canadian
  • Big Idea 2 is focused on bringing prescription drugs under Medicare
  • Big Idea 3 talks about reducing unnecessary tests and interventions in health care
  • Big Idea 4 is about reorganizing the way we deliver health care to reduce wait times and improve quality
  • Big Idea 5 talks about implementing a basic income guarantee for basic health
  • Big Idea 6 looks at how we can scale up successful solutions across the country so that all Canadians will benefit from innovation in health care.

Reva Seth: I have to go to straight to Big Idea 2 -that we still don’t cover the cost of prescription drugs for Canadians, a dangerous reality given that more and more Canadians are working freelance, contract or are self-employed.   How did we get here?
Dr. Martin: Well, the exclusion of prescription drugs from medicare is really an accident of history.
When medicare was developed in the 1950s and 1960s, physicians provided the bulk of health care and hospitals were the typical care setting – now things are very different.
As more and more Canadians age, we’re seeing that they want to live and stay well at home. They want to receive treatment during the day when it’s needed, but they want to manage chronic conditions at home, not in the hospital.
This also applies to Canadians in other age groups. For example, we know that nearly one–third of Canadian adults and youth live with at least one chronic condition.
Canadians believe in the principle that access to health care should be based on need, not ability to pay. That principle needs to be extended beyond doctors and hospitals to include universal access to a publicly-funded formulary of essential medicines.
Reva Seth: It has been reported that 94% of Canadians say national health care is a point of pride – which suggests that with 2017 also being our country’s 150th, there is untapped interest in getting more Canadians engaged in shaping the future of health care.   What can those of us who are not in the medical profession do to support the recommendations you suggest?
Dr. Martin: The kind of change will be driven not only by politicians but by regular Canadians and their families, and by people like me who work in the health care system. It’s going to take a concerted effort by doctors, nurses and other providers to change the way we do our work in order to deliver better, more consistent care.
Patients also have an important role to play, and I talk about some of the ways they can participate in the book. I have also put a toolkit on my website for people who want to take action: www.6bigideas.ca
Reva Seth: How about medical schools? What are your thoughts on the role (and current effectiveness) of how medical schools are used to implement these changes? What would you like to see more of?
Dr. Martin: Medical education has changed a lot since I was in medical school. We are increasingly training our students and residents to see that they have a role in the system, which is so important. We can’t just go to work as doctors, see the patients on the list, and go home.
Physicians need to take a leadership role in solving health system challenges – indeed every one of the ideas in this book requires commitment and participation on the part of the medical profession. I think we are beginning to understand how to prepare our trainees for that shifting role, but there is always more to do.
Much of that links to a culture change that has to happen within the medical profession so that we don’t see ourselves as outside the system but as embedded in it.
Reva Seth: I’m always up for a health hack or short cut so I have to ask as a Doctor – and as a super busy (and effective person) – I have to ask: what’s the one health hack or daily must do you recommend.”
Dr. Martin: Brush your teeth. Your future self will thank you!
Reva Seth: Great advice Danielle, that’s a lesson still lost on my kids. 
 

Canada 2020: A Decade in Photos (2006-2016)

Posted on

Share this

This year, Canada 2020 is celebrating 10 years as Canada’s leading, independent, progressive think-tank. Founded in June 2006, we have hosted hundreds of people on our stage, and thousands more in the crowd. Here’s a look at just some of the thought leaders, policy experts and influencers that Canada 2020 has had the privilege of hosting over the past 10 years.

Open Government in Transition

Posted on

Share this

A Pan-Canadian Conversation on Open Dialogue and Open Data

Last April, Canada 2020 and PubliVate co-sponsored CODF 2016, a two-day conference in Ottawa on Open Government and Open Dialogue, co-chaired by former Clerk of the Privy Council, Wayne Wouters, and Ontario Deputy Premier Deb Matthews.
The co-chairs also hosted a private Delegates’ Dinner to discuss Open Government with senior officials from across the country, who discussed their governments’ approaches to Open Government. While everyone agreed that using digital technology to liberate data was essential, there was a shared sense that this is only a first step and that the challenge now is to put this resource to work—what one participant called “leveraging” the data.
Our conference theme of “Open Dialogue” provided the perfect backdrop for this discussion. Presenters offered some stimulating examples of how multi-stakeholder engagement processes can be combined with Open Data to support informed policymaking, better transparency and accountability, and product innovation; and this, in turn, provoked our dinner delegates to consider the implications for Open Government.
Now Canada 2020 is building on the conference and dinner with a cross-country consultation process led by Don Lenihan to identify and examine innovative initiatives where federal, provincial, or territorial governments are successfully leveraging Open Data through Open Dialogue to achieve Open Government’s goals.
The process includes a one-day, intra-governmental roundtable in participating federal-provincial/territorial capitals with about invited 25 participants, including senior and elected officials, as well as representatives from academia, civil society, and the private sector.
So far, events have been held in the Northwest Territories, New Brunswick, and Nova scotia, with others planned for Nunavut, BC, Alberta, Ontario, PEI, and Ottawa in January and February. More governments are expected to confirm their participation shortly.
An intergovernmental roundtable will follow in Toronto next March with reps from all participating governments, and about 10 other invitees. Together, they will review a draft of a final report. The final report will be published on the Canada 2020 website and circulated to all participants, as well as to our 15,000 subscribers.
A second national conference on Open Dialogue will follow. Policymaking in the Digital Age: Open Dialogue Meets Big Data will be held in Ottawa on April 26th – 27th. The conference will be co-chaired by Matthew Mendelsohn, Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Results and Delivery), who is heading the Government of Canada’s initiative on “Deliverology.” A second co-chair will be named shortly.
Further information on both the cross-country roundtables and the conference will be posted on this site as they unfold.
Thank you to our partners:

facebook-wordmark
Open Text
sshrc

 

2016: In Review

Posted on

Share this

2016-lookbackOver the past 12 months, we’ve expanded the dialogue around progressive politics in Canada, brought thousands of progressive thinkers together, and we’ve produced original research around innovation.
See some of our favorite moments from all these events and initiative in this highlight video:

Don’t have time for the video? Take a look at this impressive list of Canada 2020’s activities in 2016, complete with links to photo galleries:

  • We hosted discussion on foreign policy at our 2016 Ottawa Forum.
  • We hosted a Global Progress book launch, and The Prime Ministers Reception at the Renwick Gallery in Washington, D.C.
  • We focused on open government, open dialogue and transforming the way policy is made in the 21st century at our Canadian Open Dialogue Forum.
  • We tackled climate change at the Global Energy Outlook 2016, where we hosted a discussion with Minister of Natural Resources Jim Carr and Daniel Yergin.
  • During the North American Leaders’ Summit, we hosted a panel discussion with Minister of the Environment and Climate Change Catherine McKenna, her Mexican counterpart Rafael Pacchiano-Alamán.
  • We hosted progressive leaders from more than 20 countries in Montreal to talk about inclusive prosperity, diversity, innovation and digital democracy at Global Progress 2016.
  • At a time when federal, provincial and territorial decision-makers prepared to re-negotiate a New Health accord, we hosted, in partnership with the CMA, the Health Summit: A New Health Accord for All Canadians.
  • We celebrated the day Women were included in the definition of Persons under the law in Canada at our Women in the House: The Person’s Day Panel.
  • We convened leading innovators, entrepreneurs and risk-takers to talk about the building blocks of Canada’s innovative future at our Third Annual Canada 2020 Conference: The Innovation Project.
  • We deepened the conversation around the actions government can take to “nudge“ our health system into a new paradigm – one focuses on personal care, new technologies and lowering the cost curve at the 2016 Health Innovation Conference.
  • We got an inside look at the U.S. Presidential elections from Sasha Issenberg, who was embedded in the Trump campaign, at our free public event What Just Happened? Inside the 2016 U.S. Presidential Elections.

But that’s not all… In June, we launched our multi-phased initiative, The Innovation Project at our one-day conference, Canada’s Next Big Challenge: Being Innovative. Through this project, the Canada 2020 team traveled to seven Canadian cities coast to coast to host roundtable discusions with key sector stakeholders. While the first phase of this project concluded at our annual conference, and with Canada 2020’s 10 Big Ideas to Drive Innovation in Canada by Mike Moffatt and Hannah Rasmussen, we look forward to continuing the conversation on innovation in 2017.
In October, we launched the Canada 2020 podcast Brief Remarks, where co-hosts Jennifer Robson and Rob Silver reveal the behind the scenes world of federal politics in Canada.
Whether you were on our stage, attended our events in person as a delegate or via our live streams, thank you. Thank you for helping to make 2016 an outstanding year for Canada 2020 – by far our most ambitious year yet. Your support and participation in the past year helped us accomplish great things.
We also want to thank our sustaining partners and event sponsors. We couldn’t have done any of this work without your support.  Thank you.
Here’s to an even more successful 2017!

Big Idea: Create a Set of “Canada 150 Goals and Prizes”

Posted on

Share this

twitter_goals
In June, Canada 2020 launched The Innovation Project, an initiative devoted to studying Canada’s innovation agenda – the risks, the opportunities, and key factors involved in making Canada a more innovative nation.
As part of this project, we asked Mike Moffatt, Senior Associate at Canada 2020 and Director at the Lawrence Centre at Western University’s Ivey Business School and Hannah Rasmussen, Director at Projection North and Professor at Western University’s Brescia College, to consider how to foster innovative growth in Canada. 
Moffatt and the Canada 2020 team traveled to eight cities across Canada to hold roundtable discussions with key stakeholders representing sectors ripe for transformation. We are grateful for the thoughtful discussion and time these roundtable participants gave the effort. While the sectors themselves were very different, common themes emerged: talent and immigration, availability of venture capital and Canadians’ adversity to risk.
From their research and these roundtables, Moffatt and Rasmussen developed 10 Big Ideas for Canada. Canada 2020 will be releasing an idea a day on our website leading up to our 3rd Annual Canada 2020 Conference: The Innovation Agenda.
Each idea is thoughtful and detailed, and Canada 2020 hopes they will spur discussion and debate on the topic as we continue to explore innovation in Canada.   
—

Big Idea: Create A Set of “Canada 150 Goals” and “Canada 150 Prizes”

What is the idea?

Canada needs innovative thinking to solve some of the more difficult social and economic problems the country faces, such as:

  • A lack of safe drinking water and substandard housing on First Nations reserves.
  • A persistently large gender wage gap.
  • Growing rates of fentanyl and other opioid addiction.

To tackle these problems, we recommend the use of goals and prizes, which we have adapted from both the XPrize Foundation and the United Nations Millennium Development Goals.

Recommendation: The federal government should identify a set of measurable national goals, the Canada 150 Goals.(1)

Canada has already set some of these goals. Canada’s commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 certainly counts as a measurable national goal,(2) as does the prime minister’s commitment to “end boil-water advisories on First Nations reserves within five years.”(3) Canada’s goals should follow the SMART criteria :(4)

  • Specific
  • Measurable
  • Achievable
  • Relevant
  • Time-based

Some of the UN Millennium Development Goals have been criticized for being unachievable or lacking measurability; the Canada 150 Goals must avoid such goals.

Recommendation: The federal government should create a set of Canada 150 Prizes, with large cash prizes for projects that will help meet these goals.

The prizes are different from the goals, but they should be related to them. One such example is Canada’s emissions goal, and the NRG COSIA Carbon XPRIZE:(5)
Goal: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.
Prize: “The $20M NRG COSIA Carbon XPRIZE will challenge the world to reimagine what we can do with CO2 emissions by incentivizing and accelerating the development of technologies that convert CO2 into valuable products. These technologies have the potential to transform how the world approaches CO2 mitigation, and reduce the cost of managing CO2.”
In this way, the prizes assist Canada in achieving the final goals. Canada’s boil-water advisory goal could be matched with a prize for new water-treatment technologies, and the goal of reducing opioid addiction could be matched with a prize for treatment programs that prove to reduce addictions by a measurable amount.
These prizes would encourage investment of time and capital in finding innovative solutions to our goals and would incentivize Canadians to use their skills and imagination to solve some of the more difficult social and economic problems the country faces.

Recommendation: The federal government should ensure that Canada 150 Prize competitions are open to all Canadians.

Who will be responsible for administering the idea?

The Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development will be responsible for administering the Canada 150 prizes and identifying the formidable problems to be solved.

Recommendation: The federal government should hold open consultations with Canadians to determine the list of Canada 150 Goals and Canada 150 Prizes.

What mechanisms for accountability or measurement can be put in place for the idea?

One of the benefits of using a prize-based approach is that projects are only funded if they are successful, creating an automatic layer of accountability. The federal government must ensure that both the goals and the prizes have measurable criteria.

What failures is the idea trying to solve?

Regulatory Failure: A common theme that came up repeatedly in our roundtable was that governments were trying to do too much and were spreading innovation dollars around too thinly, rather than focusing on a few areas where it can realistically expect to succeed. There was a consensus that Canadian governments are too afraid to try to “pick winners,” and this aversion leads to a suboptimal use of resources. The Canada 150 Goals and Prizes are designed to “focus the mind” on a few key areas where Canada has the potential to be a world leader. By choosing specific problems to solve, we allow the government, firms and individuals to focus on developing and showcasing specific core competencies.
Risk Aversion: The Canadian government’s approach to risk aversion in the innovation sphere is to try to “de-risk” the space, by transferring risk from firms to governments. While appropriate in some circumstances, this approach does not teach Canadians how to take risks. Attaching large financial prizes to problems rewards risk-takers and creates an environment in which taking chances is more socially acceptable.
Evangelism: Canada currently has the world’s attention thanks, in part, to the international popularity of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. By choosing specific problems to solve and by having large prizes attached to solving them, the prime minister can use his star power to highlight our innovative clusters to the world and make Canada “the place to be” for innovation.
Inequality of Opportunity: A large segment of Canada’s population is left out of government programs on innovation because they do not know how to navigate a complex regulatory environment. Using prizes that anyone can access opens up government-driven innovation to all Canadians.

What are the potential benefits of the idea and what are the costs?

Benefits: The approach of goals and prizes forces the government to focus on a few key priority areas. Furthermore, since prizes are only awarded for success, there is little financial risk for the government. If no innovation occurs, no prizes are awarded.
Costs and Risks: As with most, if not all, innovation programs, the government could end up paying for innovations that would have happened without the program. Furthermore, the government may choose the wrong areas as “winning” ones and fail to incent innovation in areas with a greater chance for success.

Will the idea increase economic inclusion and/or enhance autonomy? If so, how?

Economic Inclusion: Since many of the goals will be around assisting vulnerable populations, successful completion of these goals will lead to an improved quality of life, a lower cost of living and higher incomes for those in need.
Autonomy: We would recommend that when choosing the Canada 150 Goals, the government try to have at least one or two that would be autonomy-increasing if successful.

Footnotes
1 Canada 150 is in reference to 2017 being the 150th anniversary of Confederation.
2 Margo McDiarmid, “Canada sets carbon emissions reduction target of 30% by 2030,” CBC News, May 15, 2015.
3 “Justin Trudeau vows to end First Nations reserve boil-water advisories within 5 years,” Canadian Press, December 18, 2015.
4 Robert L. Bogue, “Use S.M.A.R.T. goals to launch management by objectives plan,” TechRepublic, April 25, 2005.
5 NRG COSIA Carbon XPRIZE, NRG COSIA Carbon XPRIZE Overview (NRG COSIA Carbon XPRIZE, 2016).

 

Big Idea: Creation of a Network of Cluster Research Centres

Posted on

Share this

twitter_networks
In June, Canada 2020 launched The Innovation Project, an initiative devoted to studying Canada’s innovation agenda – the risks, the opportunities, and key factors involved in making Canada a more innovative nation.
As part of this project, we asked Mike Moffatt, Senior Associate at Canada 2020 and Director at the Lawrence Centre at Western University’s Ivey Business School and Hannah Rasmussen, Director at Projection North and Professor at Western University’s Brescia College, to consider how to foster innovative growth in Canada. 
Moffatt and the Canada 2020 team traveled to eight cities across Canada to hold roundtable discussions with key stakeholders representing sectors ripe for transformation. We are grateful for the thoughtful discussion and time these roundtable participants gave the effort. While the sectors themselves were very different, common themes emerged: talent and immigration, availability of venture capital and Canadians’ adversity to risk.
From their research and these roundtables, Moffatt and Rasmussen developed 10 Big Ideas for Canada. Canada 2020 will be releasing an idea a day on our website leading up to our 3rd Annual Canada 2020 Conference: The Innovation Agenda.
Each idea is thoughtful and detailed, and Canada 2020 hopes they will spur discussion and debate on the topic as we continue to explore innovation in Canada.   
—

Big Idea: Creation of a Network of Cluster Research Centres

What is the idea?

Clusters are beneficial because they allow for economies of scale, and access to skilled labour and innovation largely happens in geographic clusters of interrelated companies and institutions. In his 2014 report, Spencer 72 identified 230 separate geographic clusters in 21 different industries in Canada. This included a higher education cluster in Charlottetown that employed 2,066 people in 2011, the aluminum cluster in Saguenay that employed 3,687 people and the food and beverage cluster in London that employed 6,972 people. Firms in these clusters benefit from being in the same geographic region with shared local knowledge and a shared pool of talented workers.
However, there are large information gaps at the local cluster level, as clusters have very different needs and are facing very different challenges regarding innovation. Through the creation of cluster research centres, gaps in the cluster’s ecosystem will be identified, idea sharing will be increased, data will be collected and shared and regulatory failures will be identified.

Recommendation: The federal government should fund the creation of a network of cluster research centres across the country at universities within the geographic area of the cluster that would be required to provide a yearly set of deliverables to maintain their funding.

The deliverables for each cluster research centre would include the following:

Recommendation: Each cluster research centre must convene a minimum of one meeting per year with local stakeholders, including industry, academia and government, to network and share information and aid in the creation of reports and white papers on the challenges the cluster is facing.
Recommendation: Each cluster research centre must ensure they collect data, both qualitative and quantitative, about the cluster.
Recommendation: Each cluster research centre must, once per year, update (or create) a publicly available map of their local cluster ecosystem.
Recommendation: Each cluster research centre must, once per year, release a white paper with policy recommendations for governments.
Recommendation: Each cluster research centre must, once per year, report on the state of the cluster and identify possible gaps in the local ecosystem.
Recommendation: Each cluster research centre must, once per year, report on the local cluster’s best practices and those from other clusters.
Recommendation: Each cluster research centre must, once per year, report on what initiatives, if any, companies in the cluster have undertaken to increase the hiring of underrepresented groups, including women, visible minorities and Aboriginal Canadians.
Recommendation: Each cluster research centre must, once per year, report on the labour needs of the cluster, identify any skills training gaps in the sector and provide curriculum and co-operative education recommendations to universities, colleges and other educational institutions.
Recommendation: Each cluster research centre must, once per year, award up-and-coming young innovators in the local ecosystem.

Who will be responsible for administering the idea?

The development and ongoing administration of the cluster research centres will be the responsibility of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development and the universities and colleges where the centres are located. In his 2015 mandate letter to the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, the prime minister mandated the development of an Innovation Agenda that included expanding effective support for “the emerging national network for business innovation and cluster support.”73

What is the mechanisms for accountability or measurement can be put in place for the idea?

The requirement for a yearly set of deliverables to maintain funding provides accountability. Checks and balances must be put in place by the ministry to ensure the delivered materials are of acceptable quality. These deliverables will be made public to disseminate information and to ensure quality.

What failures is the idea trying to solve?

The cluster research centres are designed to address, either directly or indirectly, a wide array of market and regulatory failures that can occur in a cluster.
Thin Markets: Cluster markets are thickened by more workers and more firms. The research centres help increase the supply of labour through their recommendations to address skills training gaps,
as well as sharing of best practices to tap into historically excluded sources of labour. More firms can be created through the centres better matching start-ups with sources of capital to obtain funding. Both sides of the market can also be thickened through the advice the centers provide to governments on skills and funding gaps.
Externalities and Knowledge Spillovers: Knowledge spillovers will be created through the meetings assembled by the centre and by increasing “collisions” through the other activities of the centres.
The centres will disseminate best practices and other forms of knowledge that can be adopted by other firms.
Network Externalities and Co-ordination Failures: The cluster research centres create a geographic space for people in the cluster to meet, share ideas and develop new approaches.74
Evangelism Externalities: The cluster research centres act, in part, as a champion for the local cluster and should serve to promote the values of the cluster to other Canadians, enhancing the reputation of the cluster.
Regulatory Failure: One of the responsibilities of the centres is to address regulatory failures by providing regulators and lawmakers more local knowledge of and feedback about the cluster. A common complaint we heard from regulators in our roundtable was this: “We hear from 40 different cluster stakeholders about 40 different issues; we don’t know which problems are the most important.” Cluster research centres can provide “triage” guidance to regulators, so the most pressing priorities are addressed first.
Risk Aversion: One of the tasks of the centre is to provide awards to innovators and other successful risk takers, thereby creating role models and encouraging others to do the same.
Inequality of Opportunity: The cluster research centres will directly reduce inequality of opportunity by looking for bottlenecks that are excluding people from the local market. Additionally, these centres will look for ways promote companies that seek ways to diversify their hiring.

What are the potential benefits of the idea and what are the costs?

Benefits: These centres will help address skills shortage, and gets universities and the private sector used to working with each other. If these centres create stronger clusters, it not only benefits the workers and companies within the cluster but creates spin-off employment and prosperity in other local industries.
Costs and Risks: There is a financial cost to setting up and running these centres will cost money. Industry Canada recently funded a similar research centre at Western University with $1 million a year for five years. We estimate that each cluster research centre would cost between $500,000 and
$1 million a year to run.
Firms may resist participating in centres or may see them as a way to ensure the government enacts policies and approaches that benefit the industry but not the overall goal of the research centre. There is also the possibility of political interference with the work of the cluster research centres or in choosing which research centres get funded. The centres will need to have a level of independence to ensure this does not happen.

Footnotes
1 Office of the Prime Minister, Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Mandate Letter (2015).
2 This is referred to in economics literature on co-ordination failures as a “Schelling point.”
© 2024 Canada 2020. All Rights Reserved.