Canada’s Science, Technology and Innovation Policy

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Literature Review
Methodology
Hypothesis
Study
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

Statement of the Problem

Technology and science play a significant role in the development of any country and perform a large contribution to its international image. In the age of the global progress, a thorough, well-planned innovation policy seems to be an essential condition for the maintenance of the competitive status of a country. The key target of such a policy is to establish an efficient approach that allows the beneficial integration of the innovation into the fundamental fields of a country’s environment – science and technology. Thus, the primary concern is not only to monitor the relevant, innovative trends in the scientific institutions but to find the ways of their practical application. Realizing the necessity of the operationalization of the innovative trends, every country tries to work out its unique method that will take into account local economic and political peculiarities.

Nowadays, the efficiency of Canada’s innovation policy in science and technologies can hardly be questioned. However, one should point out that this country had to make a long way before finding the proper innovative approach. In 2012, the National Institute for Science, Society and Policy published a detailed report that claimed the introduction of a new innovation policy that was said to reflect the specific Canadian perspectives (Hawkins 5). Hence, the principle goal of this study is to examine the innovation policy of Canada and define the factors that determine its successful integration in the scientific and technological environment.

Definition of Terms

While analyzing the innovation policy of a country one should initially work out a precise definition of the relevant concept and the related terms. According to the Global Director of IT PMO and a high-qualified innovation specialist, Alexis Goncalves, an innovation should be generally interpreted as “the successful exploitation of new ideas” (170). It is particularly important that the author points out the change that this notion has undergone within the past decades.

Thus, whereas some years ago, one would freely draw parallels between inventions and innovations, presuming that both the concepts imply the introduction of a new idea, today, such an approach is not relevant anymore. The modern implication requires not only the creation of a new plan but also its practical application – it comprises the principal distinguishing feature of an innovation today. Therefore, accepting Goncalves’s definition as the basis, one will consequently consider an innovation policy as a plan aimed at the efficient implementation of innovations in the technological, scientific, and other social fields.

Literature Review

The issue of innovation strategy and targeting has been widely studied by different scientists and analysts worldwide. One of the most notable contributors to the examination of the relevant question within the Canadian context is Professor Bruce Doern whose works are primarily aimed at the enlightenment of Canadian innovation policy’s problem and its progress. His papers will constitute a sufficient part of the research’s theoretical basis. Moreover, one will also rely on the data provided by the relevant governmental institutions such as the Ero-Canadian research center, Era-Can+, and the National Institute for Science, Society, and Policy. A significant part of data referring to the current state of the innovation policy in Canada is provided by the official governmental report that is annually published by the authorities.

Methodology

The methodology strategy is defined in accordance with the qualitative character of the research. As a consequence, the principal data collecting tool is the literature analysis, based on the inductive approach. As the qualitative research design suggests, the following paper is aimed at formulating the relevant conclusion relying on the examination of all the facts gathered during the study. The collected data is limited by the ten-year framework so that one can both operate the actual facts and pursue the progression of the problem throughout the time.

Hypothesis

In the context of the modern interpretation of the innovation concept, one can suggest a hypothesis that the success of the Canadian innovation policy is significantly connected with the practical character of its application to the scientific and technological fields. Thus, the key question of the study is put as follows:

Does the practical character of the Canadian innovation policy represent the determining factor of its efficiency?

The null hypothesis is, subsequently, represented by the assumption that practical application of innovations does not play an important role in science, technology, and an innovation policy itself.

Significance of the Study

The rapidly changing global innovation environment provides a lot of opportunities for the inner development of a country. Meanwhile, it, likewise, presents a certain challenge to its authorities, putting them in front of a choice between following the current international tendencies and concentrating on the national peculiarities and their cultivation. The creation of a wise innovation policy requires a lot of effort on the part of the government and the society. Therefore, the examination of a successful innovation approach on the example of Canada can help one receive a better understanding of the major difficulties existing in the relevant field and also to think of the potential solutions for these problems.

Study

Background of the Problem

Major challenges

The question of innovation policy in Canada represents a complex problem, mainly, due to its regulation structure on the social and political levels. Professor Doern notes that unlike welfare and health policies, any innovation field implies a relatively small extent of the governmental regulation’s capacity (3). Thus, for example, the interests of science and technological spheres are more likely to be presented by the national elites and particular institutions rather than by the political parties of the relevant country.

As far as the innovation issue is not included on the top list of an average voter’s interests, the non-governmental organizations sometimes remain beyond the funded directions. As a consequence, Doern points out a tendency in the context of which the innovation policy puts a particular emphasis on the projects that are potentially most profitable in order to receive the assured benefits. According to the author such profit-focused approach can largely restrain the truly innovative breakouts on the basis of their initial low cost-effectiveness (4).

Another problem connected with the proper innovation managing has been precisely defined by the Canadian Professor Richard Hawkins. According to Hawkins, one of the key factors that prevent one from maintaining an efficient innovation policy is the commonly spread assumption that the success of the relevant activity is to be measured by the technologies’ development exclusively. Thus, the professor notes that such an erratic interpretation of the innovation concept results in the initially wrong targeting.

Hawkins suggests that in order to work out an efficient innovation policy one is to consider all the spheres of the social life where innovations can be potentially applied. He, furthermore, assumes that it is necessary to have a broader understanding of the innovation concept, which basically implies not only the new technological inventions but also the introduction of innovative scientific approaches and methods (Hawkins 10). Otherwise stated, the innovation activity can be equally focused on the development of the innovative ideas and methods that will, in their turn, help to optimize the performance of a particular industry or social field.

Structural Changes

In the context of the challenges mentioned above, Canadian innovation policy has undergone significant changes throughout the past decades. Thus, in 1997, Canadian Government founded the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) – a special structure aimed at encouraging the innovations’ development. The relevant institution became the first organization that was officially funded by the authorities on the regular basis. One of the principal competence spheres was the science innovations and the research activity’s support.

The consistent financial support let the innovation centers focus on its direct activity, eliminating the necessity to search for the most profitable projects for investigation. As a result, according to the CFI’s annual report, by the end of 2006, the Foundation had sponsored more than 47 national research projects and had helped numerous universities develop their innovation activity (Doern 106). Thus, today, the CFI has become an efficient tool that provides the essential connection between the government and researchers in Canada.

Another significant change in the Canadian innovation policy’s structure took place in 1996 when Canada signed the Agreement for Scientific and Technological Collaboration with the European Community (EC). The agreement implied the maintenance of a close collaboration aimed at supporting the development of innovation. According to their corporate guide, the cooperation has turned out to be highly beneficial for both the sides. Thus, in 2014, on would easily track at least 16 innovation projects funded by the EC including scientific, technological and IT researches and programs (“Guide to Canadian Science, Technology & Innovation Programs” 19).

As a consequence, one might assume that the country has a multi-faceted approach to the innovation policy’s performance. Moreover, one should necessarily note, that among the principal targets of the innovations’ integration in Canada is the health care sector. Hence, in 2006, the Institute of Health Economics appeared in the country – an organization aimed at the support of the interconnection between the medical structures and the science and technology investigation centers. Due to this cooperation, a lot of new technologies have been introduced to the national health care system (Battista et al. 57).

New Directions

The transformation of the innovations’ interpretation requires a more global and profound transformation than the certain segmental changes mentioned above. As a consequence, in the annual report, the Canadian government established the new directions and goals of the national innovation policy. Hence, the Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, announced that the new strategy called “Seizing Canada’s Moment: Moving Forward in Science, Technology and Innovation” had been worked out with a particular focus on the practical application of the new innovation policy (“Seizing Canada’s Moment: Moving Forward in Science, Technology and Innovation” 6).

According to the governmental report, the principle streamlines of the stated policy are represented by the implement of innovation technologies and ideas in all the spheres of the Canadian social life, including science, economics, business, and education. It is also recommended that Canadian business performs the maximum contribution to the encouragement of the innovation development and its further operationalization. Meanwhile, the authorities equally emphasize the necessity for innovation projects to consider the current industrial-demand. Furthermore, a special focus is also made toward the support of the Canadian digital programs as these projects are presumed to constitute one of the key aspects of the innovation field in general (“Seizing Canada’s Moment: Moving Forward in Science, Technology and Innovation” 10).

On the whole, among the main directions of the new policy, the government points out the promotion of world-leading excellence, the priority-focused approach, the partnership’s encouragement, and the accountability’s enhancement. According to the report, the world-leading excellence implies the close collaboration with the national institutions, universities, and other centers engaged in the innovative research activity. The priority-focused approach, in its turn, supposes a thorough monitoring of the current innovation market in order to define the niches that Canada can potentially occupy as a competitive global player. As to the partnership’s encouragement, the new strategy suggests a clear distinction between the governmental and private funding responsibilities in the innovation field. In other words, this direction is aimed at finding an efficient approach to unite different stakeholders for the benefit of the innovations’ development.

Finally, the accountability’s enhancement implies an utterly transparent activity of the innovation research centers as well as a practical focus on their performance. Hence, the government presumes that the more vivid the results of the innovation policy are for an average Canadian, the more cost-effective the relevant policy tends to be (“Seizing Canada’s Moment: Moving Forward in Science, Technology and Innovation” 21). Therefore, one might conclude that the new innovation policy of Canada is worked out in accordance with the current global environment that implies the practical innovations’ application as the determining principle of the innovation strategy’s efficiency.

Presentation and analysis of data

The principal sources of the collected data are represented by the annual governmental report devoted to the problem of the innovation policy in Canada and the discussion paper of the National Institute for Science, Technology and Policy. The key object of the study is the question of the efficiency of the Canadian policy and its interconnection with its practically-focused approach. The thorough examination of the relevant materials allows one to make a series of conclusions.

First of all, the current innovation policy of Canada is, indeed, focused on the practical application of the innovation products in the technology and science fields. This idea was primarily elucidated by Professor Hawkins in 2012. In his discussion paper, Hawkins claims that the operationalization of the national innovation approach constitutes the fundamental principle of the policy (8). The relevant proposal was further repeated on the authority level in 2014. Thus, one of the key messages of the annual governmental report is that the innovation policy should be primarily worked out in such a manner that every Canadian citizen can personally benefit from its results (“Seizing Canada’s Moment: Moving Forward in Science, Technology and Innovation” 40).

Secondly, the practically-focused approach of the innovation policy in Canada suggests that the country performs its innovation targeting taking into account its national background and conditions instead of following the all international trends that appear in the global market. Hence, Hawkins claims, that considering the country’s peculiarities, the innovation strategy should be mainly focused on the so-called “knowledge” industries instead of the utterly technological projects (19).

Otherwise stated, the professor suggests that the best application of an innovation policy is the introduction of new ideas and progressive methods that can be used for the optimization of a concrete industry’s performance. Meantime, the governmental report in 2014 showed that the current Canadian innovation policy was, indeed, worked out with allowances made for the national history and existing conditions. Thus, one of the key ideas of the potential strategy is the profound niche targeting and the particular focus on the digital innovations that are considered to be one of the most promising fields in Canada (“Seizing Canada’s Moment: Moving Forward in Science, Technology and Innovation” 19).

Finally, due to the practically-focused approach the efficiency of the Canadian innovation policy has risen significantly throughout the past decade. Hence, the innovation project funding in Canada has increased almost twice since 2006. It is important to note that the best financial support has been targeted for the science and research fields, whereas the technology sphere is on the third place of the funded top-list (“Seizing Canada’s Moment: Moving Forward in Science, Technology and Innovation” 50). Moreover, the number of collaborative projects with EU has risen by ten and is expected to expand in the course of the next few years.

Here, one should take into account both the Canadian projects that are sponsored by EU and the abroad programs funded by the government of Canada (“Guide to Canadian Science, Technology & Innovation Programs” 9). According to the national research, the Canadian innovation field has become twice more attractive for foreign investors than in was in the year 2006. The most popular investing fields are represented by digital programs and scientific medicine institutions (“Seizing Canada’s Moment: Moving Forward in Science, Technology and Innovation” 32).

Therefore, one can make a conclusion that Canadian innovation policy represents a well-thought and efficient strategy that has been showing positive progressive results throughout the past ten years. Furthermore, one should necessarily note that one of the principal changes in the innovation rhetoric within the past decade is a shift to the focus on the practical application of the innovation products to the science and technology spheres. Today, one is mostly interested in physical results that in merely innovative ideas. Thus, the study’s hypothesis that the practical character of the Canadian innovation policy is the determining factor of its efficiency proves to be relevant.

Conclusion

The innovation policy of Canada has overcome a series of considerable transformations within the past decades. One had to perform a profound analysis of both the global context and the inner economic and political environment in order to work an efficient strategy that would fit the requirements of the Canadian society. The government of Canada has performed a significant contribution to the development of a complex plan that takes into account the funding responsibilities matter, the targeted market niches’ and the inner industry-demand.

Therefore, today the national innovation policy of Canada is primarily focused on the encouragement of the innovations that can be practically applied to science and technologies or any other sphere of the social life in Canada. A particular focus is made on the development of the innovative methods and approaches that will be able to improve the performance of a particular field or industry. The government of Canada assures its citizens that the national innovation policy looks, first and foremost, after the inner national interests rather than after the country’s status in the global innovation competition.

In conclusion, one should point out that the relevant study has shown that a successful innovation policy is largely determined by the perspectives of its practical application as well as the consideration of the local environment and the national distinguishing features of a particular country.

Works Cited

Battista, Renaldo, Brigitte Côté, Matthew Hodge and Don Husereau. “Health technology assessment in Canada.” International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 25.1 (2009): 53-60. Print.

Doern, Bruce. Innovation, Science, Environment 06/07: Canadian Policies and Performance, 2006-2007, Montreal: McGill-Queen’s Press, 2006. Print.

Goncalves, Alexis. Innovation Hardwired, Raleigh: Lulu Press, 2008. Print.

Guide to Canadian Science, Technology & Innovation Programs. Ottawa: Era-Can+, 2014. Print.

Hawkins, Richard. Looking at Innovation from a Uniquely Canadian Perspective. Ottawa: Institute for Science, Society and Policy, 2012. Print.

Seizing Canada’s Moment: Moving Forward in Science, Technology and Innovation 2014. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!