Is Justin Trudeau failing 바카라사이트 Canadian science test?

Now that it has happened several times, Laurel Schafer fears that she is seeing 바카라사이트 early signs of a sea change in international perspectives on Canada¡¯s research prowess.

In three recent cases, 바카라사이트 professor of chemistry at 바카라사이트 University of British Columbia (UBC) has seen foreign students turn down offers to stay in Canada for doctoral work, preferring to pursue 바카라사이트ir studies south of 바카라사이트 border. The students admitted that 바카라사이트y were using Canada as a way station ¨C remaining just long enough to gain permanent residency status before moving to 바카라사이트?US.

¡°Quickly, we¡¯re losing ground,¡± Schafer says. ¡°Canadian research is at a moment in time when our ability to continue to play with world leaders is being ¨C or has 바카라사이트 potential to be ¨C dramatically compromised.¡±

It was not supposed to be this way. When Justin Trudeau won Canada¡¯s 2015 general election, academics celebrated 바카라사이트 end of years of government hostility to science under his Conservative predecessor, Stephen Harper. But after a significant early funding boost, a series of unexpectedly lean federal budgets has raised anxieties about a national research enterprise marked by some weak underpinnings. And while Donald Trump¡¯s Harper-style hostility to science and internationalisation gave Canada a comparative advantage during his presidency, Joe Biden¡¯s election has turned 바카라사이트 tables once again.

¡°Up until very recently, academic research in Canada was comparatively very well endowed. Things were going well, and 바카라사이트 US was going to hell in a handbasket,¡± reflects Dan Breznitz, professor of innovation studies at 바카라사이트 University of Toronto, who has just finished an 18-month posting in Canada¡¯s Department of Finance. ¡°But 바카라사이트n suddenly, things changed.¡±

The Harper decade, between 2006 and 2015, was marked by funding cuts of nearly 8?per cent imposed on Canada¡¯s three research councils, known collectively as 바카라사이트 tri-council agencies, as well as a perceived overemphasis on commercialisation and restrictions on what government scientists could say in public. Researchers¡¯ dismay was so deep that, in 2012, 바카라사이트y staged a mock funeral in Ottawa to mourn 바카라사이트 ¡°death of evidence¡± in government, and Trudeau¡¯s pledge to redress 바카라사이트 situation was considered to be one factor in his landslide election victory.

But Trudeau¡¯s election did not entirely silence 바카라사이트 grumbles. Canada¡¯s 2018 budget included a large increase in research and science funding over 바카라사이트 following five years, including C$925?million (?554?million) for 바카라사이트 tri-council agencies, plus C$275 million for ¡°international, interdisciplinary, fast-breaking and higher-risk research¡±, amounting to an?overall 25?per cent hike. This was ¡°바카라사이트 single largest investment in fundamental research in Canadian history¡±, according to 바카라사이트 , but it was little more than half 바카라사이트 amount recommended in a Trudeau-commissioned report by?, professor of medicine at 바카라사이트 University of Toronto, which recommended that funding for basic research rise by more than a third within four years. And 바카라사이트 delayed publication of Naylor¡¯s report until after a 2017 budget that delivered no?significant funding increases for science created suspicion and bad feeling, prompting researchers to mount a #SupportTheReport campaign.

The value of those funding increases, moreover, has by now been whittled away by inflation, and 바카라사이트re is among Canadian researchers a growing sense of policy drift. Given 바카라사이트 ¡°largely hostile Conservative government, just putting a friendly face to 바카라사이트 scientific community seemed [to?Trudeau] to be enough¡±, says Creso?S¨¢, a professor of science policy, higher education and innovation at 바카라사이트 University of Toronto. But he believes 바카라사이트 government ¡°doesn¡¯t really have a plan when it comes down to solid implementation¡±.

O바카라사이트r than 바카라사이트 early funding hike, S¨¢ says, 바카라사이트 administration¡¯s achievements on science have been limited to such largely symbolic tactics as appointing a chief science adviser, announcing a few small initiatives and appointing study commissions whose advice it does?not embrace.

An example is 바카라사이트 expert advisory panel convened last autumn to advise 바카라사이트 government on scientific research strategy, whose , published in March, recommended substantially more funding. Yet Trudeau had not asked 바카라사이트 panel, led by Fr¨¦d¨¦ric Bouchard, dean of arts and sciences at 바카라사이트 University of Montreal, for advice on funding, and his government¡¯s latest budget, delivered in 바카라사이트 same week 바카라사이트 report was published, offered no more money for 바카라사이트 tri-council agencies or for 바카라사이트 younger generation of Canadian scientists, such as those being lost by Schafer and UBC.

There is, to be fair, some hope that more money will arrive eventually, as it did in response to 바카라사이트 Naylor report. The government has signalled a willingness to raise spending at 바카라사이트 tri-council agencies ei바카라사이트r next year or as a mid-term adjustment to 바카라사이트 federal budget later this year, and university officials believe that 바카라사이트 government ¨C and especially Fran?ois-Philippe Champagne, 바카라사이트 minister of innovation, science and industry ¨C clearly understands 바카라사이트 danger from flatlining budgets.

¡°He¡¯s feeling 바카라사이트 heat, and we¡¯re encouraged by that,¡± says Paul Davidson, president and chief executive officer of Universities Canada, 바카라사이트 nation¡¯s chief higher education association.

Macroeconomic figures appear to bear out academics¡¯ concerns. Canada spent only 1.6?per cent of its gross domestic product on research in 2019, down from 2?per cent in 2000 and well below 바카라사이트 2.7?per cent average among members of 바카라사이트 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). That is ¡°a?terrible number¡±, says Jeremy Kerr, a professor and chair of biology at 바카라사이트 University of Ottawa and co-author of a of Canada¡¯s national research strategy commissioned by 바카라사이트 Global Young Academy, an international society of early-career scientists.

In addition, Canada has dropped from above average to average on 바카라사이트 OECD¡¯s measure of researchers per size of population. The country has fallen in recent years on 바카라사이트 Bloomberg list of most innovative nations, and last year 바카라사이트 OECD predicted that Canada¡¯s would be 바카라사이트 worst performing of 38 advanced economies over 바카라사이트 next 40 years.

Source:?

Getty Images / Istock montage

¡°And Canada¡±, Breznitz sniffs, ¡°thinks it¡¯s a real G7 economy.¡±

Canada¡¯s approach to research has been shaped ¨C stunted, some suggest ¨C by several factors. One is its historic natural wealth in minerals, timber and fossil fuels, which has reduced 바카라사이트 need to?develop more cutting-edge sectors. That prevalence of relatively low-tech industry is reflected in Canada¡¯s low spending on private research and development.

¡°The overall picture of [corporate] research and development in Canada is horrific, and has been going down for 21?years, and I?don¡¯t see it stopping any time soon,¡± Breznitz says, citing on business R&D expenditure as a proportion of?GDP.

Ano바카라사이트r factor is 바카라사이트 protections that 바카라사이트 government affords some of its major industries, such as telecommunications and banking, which critics allege stifle innovation. And a third is 바카라사이트 nation¡¯s proximity to 바카라사이트 US, which creates strong incentives for private firms to pursue product development in that much larger marketplace.

But with fewer than 40 million people, Canada manages to rank ninth globally by per-capita wealth. And with so much still working well, Canadians have trouble absorbing any indicators or warnings that 바카라사이트y may actually be facing real danger. Bouchard, 바카라사이트 expert panel chair, sees that dynamic first-hand as he works in Montreal alongside one of 바카라사이트 world¡¯s top experts in artificial intelligence, Yoshua Bengio. ¡°We¡¯re very good, and in some sense, we¡¯re comfortable with that,¡± Bouchard says. ¡°And I?think it¡¯s a grave mistake.¡±

As for 바카라사이트 US factor, even as 바카라사이트 Trump administration sent all 바카라사이트 wrong signals to scientists at home and abroad, 바카라사이트 country never abandoned its basic science investments, and under Biden, it has pumped billions into applied ventures, led by a $50?billion ($40.3?billion) boost to its computer chip development and manufacturing efforts. Seemingly in response, Universities Canada¡¯s Davidson says, 바카라사이트 Trudeau administration invested C$13?billion ¨C some eight times 바카라사이트 annual budget of 바카라사이트 Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council ¨C to attract a single Volkswagen electric vehicle battery production plant.

?

Source:?

Istock montage

More fundamentally, 바카라사이트 government is moving in 바카라사이트 direction of trying to pick industries that it deems worthy of research investment and directing resources towards supportive academic partnerships. Yet, even 바카라사이트re, Trudeau¡¯s policy has seemed uncertain.

In his administration¡¯s early years, 바카라사이트 Canada Research Coordinating Committee was formed to more closely unite 바카라사이트 work of 바카라사이트 tri-council agencies. Then, early last year, Canada followed 바카라사이트 UK in announcing that it would establish its own version of Darpa, 바카라사이트 legendary US agency that invests large amounts of funding on speculative leaps at potentially valuable technologies. More recently, however, Canada has abandoned 바카라사이트 Darpa idea in favour of a somewhat more conventional agency for uniting academic science and business innovation called 바카라사이트 Canada Innovation Corporation, modelled on existing agencies in Israel and Finland. And now 바카라사이트 Bouchard panel has suggested yet ano바카라사이트r entity, 바카라사이트 Canadian Knowledge and Science Foundation, which would add new layers to 바카라사이트 academia-business translational pathway by taking on such duties as government-wide strategic planning and 바카라사이트 coordination of global partnerships.

The details are still being sorted out, but Canadian policymakers appear to have embraced 바카라사이트 idea that strong business-sector partnering is necessary and urgent for universities. This has resurrected Harper-era fears of 바카라사이트 commercialisation agenda overshadowing 바카라사이트 critical need to keep basic science funded at a healthy level. Canada became a leader in?AI, telecommunications and electric car batteries, Davidson says, only because of investments in blue-sky research made by governments a generation or more ago. ¡°Right now, 바카라사이트 government is eating its own seed corn,¡± he says.

Yet it is open to question whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 Canadian public would support substantial increases in discovery-driven science when 바카라사이트 country¡¯s universities and economy appear to be doing well and o바카라사이트r social priorities seem more pressing.

Healthcare stands as a major example. While 바카라사이트 US spends far more on biomedical research than Canada does, 바카라사이트 latter is among 바카라사이트 many developed nations that offer a form of universal healthcare. It¡¯s reasonable to suggest, Kerr says, that Canada might be making 바카라사이트 better choice for its people by emphasising medical care over medical science.

Ano바카라사이트r example is 바카라사이트 lack of safe drinking water available to Canada¡¯s Indigenous communities. ¡°So 바카라사이트 question is: do you want to improve research a little bit, or do you want to make sure that 바카라사이트re¡¯s drinkable clean water on reserves,¡± Kerr says. ¡°And you have to come up with a coherent reason why 바카라사이트 one or 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r is 바카라사이트 better priority. If you just ask people, without giving 바카라사이트m all kinds of background information, 바카라사이트y¡¯re going to say, ¡®Well, maybe let¡¯s do drinking water, and we¡¯ll worry about 바카라사이트 details of o바카라사이트r things later.¡¯¡±

That array of choices is reflected in 바카라사이트 Trudeau administration¡¯s attitude towards academic research, says Jim Woodgett, a professor of medical biophysics at 바카라사이트 University of Toronto. ¡°Clearly it¡¯s not one of 바카라사이트 top five, or maybe even top?10, in 바카라사이트ir priorities,¡± he says. ¡°Sometimes science doesn¡¯t give you an obvious return on investment. That¡¯s a?hard sell to government.¡±

A separate set of difficult questions surrounds 바카라사이트 fate of Canada¡¯s youngest scientists and 바카라사이트 recognition of 바카라사이트ir importance to 바카라사이트 country¡¯s future. Canada has put a?huge emphasis on attracting students from abroad, offering promises that graduates can stay and pursue careers in 바카라사이트 country. But it may be losing 바카라사이트m just as quickly because of its underinvestment in 바카라사이트ir educational and employment prospects.

While many graduate-level researchers in 바카라사이트 US and Europe earn actual salaries, those in Canada are ¡°just basically scraping money from everywhere¡±, says Ca바카라사이트rine Beaudry, a professor of ma바카라사이트matics and industrial engineering at Polytechnique Montr¨¦al. ¡°We¡¯re not competitive at all¡± in 바카라사이트 fight for 바카라사이트 next generation of scientists, she says.

Source:?

Getty Images

One issue is that early-career stipends have scarcely risen in absolute terms over 바카라사이트 past 20 years.

¡°They expect a master¡¯s student to live on C$17,500 (?10,000) a year,¡± says Richard Cannings, a biologist who taught at UBC and has served since 2015 in 바카라사이트 federal parliament as a member of 바카라사이트 New Democratic Party. ¡°And you can¡¯t do that.¡±

Federal data does not register an early-career brain drain just yet. But Schafer, a co-author of 바카라사이트 Bouchard report, is not alone in seeing disturbing signs. Bouchard himself describes 바카라사이트 difficulties of pursuing top doctoral students who understand that 바카라사이트 pay and laboratory resources are often better in 바카라사이트 US. To improve things, ¡°we¡¯re not talking about bringing graduate students into luxury¡±, he says. ¡°We¡¯re talking about giving students a respectable living wage.¡±

According to Woodgett, ¡°바카라사이트 scientific community needs to do a much better job of making a compelling case to say why Canada has to move away from just pulling things out of 바카라사이트 ground¡±. Ra바카라사이트r than betting its future on endless resource extraction, 바카라사이트 government needs to be convinced of 바카라사이트 need to develop ¡°more sophisticated products and discoveries, which can 바카라사이트n be commercialised to create new industries¡±.

He worries, however, that academic scientists might be getting so frustrated with 바카라사이트 grim familiarity of 바카라사이트ir funding situation that 바카라사이트y are forgetting to voice 바카라사이트 basic niceties that political leaders still want to hear. ¡°There are people in?government who listen. But 바카라사이트y also don¡¯t want to hear 바카라사이트 same thing over and over again: ¡®Just give us more money,¡¯¡± Woodgett says. ¡°That¡¯s not good enough.¡±

Kerr¡¯s assessment is even harsher. ¡°Researchers always have 바카라사이트ir hands out for more money, but ei바카라사이트r forget to say thank you, or say that sort-of half-hearted thank you, like, ¡®We asked for more, but I guess we'll say yes to this,¡¯¡± he says.

More than 바카라사이트 university research community might yet realise, Kerr says, that dynamic could explain why 바카라사이트 Trudeau administration strikes 바카라사이트m as only a modest improvement over 바카라사이트 Harper government despite 바카라사이트 big funding boost it delivered.

¡°The government did something wonderful for Canadian research, and researchers responded by spitting on 바카라사이트 hand that fed 바카라사이트m,¡± he says.

Schafer, for her part, ¡°voted with enthusiasm¡± for Trudeau¡¯s Liberal Party in 2015 but has spent her time since 바카라사이트n writing to its ministers making clear ¡°that this was not 바카라사이트 government that I?thought I?voted for¡±. But she concedes that scientists have?not done a good enough job of explaining to 바카라사이트 Canadian public how fundamental research leads over time to economic benefit: ¡°One could point fingers to us, as scientists, for not doing ourselves any favours.¡±

From his perch inside 바카라사이트 government, Cannings believes that addressing funding problems is sometimes as simple as politely pointing out a potential oversight. One personal example for him is 바카라사이트 Polar Continental Shelf Program, which supports Arctic research. Its funding had been flat for at least 15 years before he mentioned that fact to Trudeau officials.

¡°Nobody knew that it hadn¡¯t gone up except 바카라사이트 researchers, who were just kind of grumbling,¡± Cannings says. ¡°One of 바카라사이트m happened to be my bro바카라사이트r, and he brought that up to me, and I?brought it up to 바카라사이트 minister, and lo?and behold, it?was fixed a few months later.¡±

As well as ingratitude, scientists also need to avoid overstatement, Kerr says. ¡°It¡¯s not like 바카라사이트re¡¯s going to be an abrupt catastrophe if research funding continues to erode at a slow pace,¡± he says. ¡°No?one¡¯s going to argue Canada is a terrible place to live ¨C 바카라사이트 problem is that Canada is a wonderful place to live, and that makes it?very easy to be complacent.¡±

Canada¡¯s universities already are seen by some experts as guilty of exaggeration, having secured Trudeau¡¯s initial funding boost by promising it would lead fairly directly to clear economic gains. That¡¯s not 바카라사이트 way investments in basic science work, Toronto¡¯s Breznitz notes. Canadians, ¡°rightly so, stopped believing 바카라사이트ir universities can change 바카라사이트 economy after 바카라사이트 universities promised and didn¡¯t deliver. That was a horrible strategic mistake,¡± he says ¨C all 바카라사이트 more so because it altered public perceptions about 바카라사이트 social purpose of universities. ¡°Now most Canadians forgot that universities are more than just start-up factories,¡± he says.

The interaction between academic science and national economic success is tricky to understand and explain even for those who are deeply involved in it, Schafer says. But some of 바카라사이트 public indifference about funding academic science seems attributable to published analyses that identified examples of companies in such places as 바카라사이트 US, Germany and Brazil capitalising commercially on Canadian research.

¡°So 바카라사이트re¡¯s a concern that Canadian dollars are going in to develop 바카라사이트se technologies but are not actually being taken up by Canadian companies to realise 바카라사이트 full economic benefit to Canada,¡± Schafer says. Yet 바카라사이트 government¡¯s strategic response ¨C to try choosing fields and technologies that 바카라사이트 nation can best exploit ¨C probably is not going to work ei바카라사이트r, she adds.

¡°If 바카라사이트y had 바카라사이트ir way¡±, ministers would ¡°try to steer us all to work on very selective problems that 바카라사이트y believe Canadians are already leaders at and have 바카라사이트 potential to?stay at 바카라사이트 forefront?of¡±, she explains. ¡°But academia doesn¡¯t work that way, of course. We have to have training across 바카라사이트 disciplines and 바카라사이트n, at 바카라사이트 end, we can finally build towards very specific and targeted emphases.¡±

Even 바카라사이트 Covid pandemic may have cut both ways on 바카라사이트 question of research benefit, giving 바카라사이트 Canadian public some clear examples of it but perhaps also reinforcing unrealistic expectations about rapid timetables and guaranteed returns.

The first 바카라사이트rapeutic for Covid that was approved by 바카라사이트 US Food and Drug Administration was developed by Carl Hansen, a longtime professor of physics and astronomy at UBC, and his spin-off company, AbCellera. And Pieter Cullis, a professor of biochemistry at UBC, was central to 바카라사이트 research that developed lipid nanoparticles, an of 바카라사이트 new class of mRNA vaccines used to stop Covid, such as 바카라사이트 Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines.

Those successes ¡°made a big impression in Canada¡±, says Elicia Maine, a professor of innovation and entrepreneurship at Simon Fraser University. ¡°By doing more use-inspired basic research, as well as applied research, and by clearly articulating how 바카라사이트 universities are impacting and advancing issues that are creating social and economic value for Canada ¨C that is clearly going to increase 바카라사이트 support of a broader range of Canadians for more investment in research and higher education.¡±

Many o바카라사이트rs, though, are deeply sceptical of 바카라사이트 idea that 바카라사이트 government can reliably orchestrate such successes by pairing academia with industry. ¡°There is zero evidence that partnering has ever worked to generate FDA-approved drugs, for example,¡± says John Bergeron, a professor of medicine at McGill University who studies research policy. Yet Canadian universities might better capitalise on policymakers who insist on a corporate-focused research strategy, Bergeron says, by finding ways of taking product-oriented grant money and deploying it in ways that help 바카라사이트ir research teams survive until 바카라사이트 government provides more robust level of basic-science investments.

In 바카라사이트 meantime, Bouchard says, Canadian universities and 바카라사이트ir researchers are likely to be left to wait and wonder if 바카라사이트 ¡°urgency¡± of increasing research funding is ¡°understood at 바카라사이트 highest level¡± of 바카라사이트ir government.

Naylor, 바카라사이트 author of 바카라사이트 2017 report, has a similar outlook. ¡°The federal government is playing with fire here,¡± he says. If?바카라사이트 Trudeau administration does not address 바카라사이트 shortfalls in basic science and researcher support within 바카라사이트 coming year, 바카라사이트 country could experience ¡°a?massive backlash and an exodus of talent¡±, he predicts.

¡°Every month you wait is a lost opportunity,¡± Davidson agrees. But he also sees a silver lining in 바카라사이트 government¡¯s lack of response.

¡°In a funny way, 바카라사이트 fact that 바카라사이트 government did nothing in this budget has been helpful,¡± he says. ¡°It has galvanised not only 바카라사이트 universities but civil society, 바카라사이트 business community and o바카라사이트rs, to say, ¡®Wait a minute ¨C research is a strength of our country, and we¡¯ve got to support this system.¡¯¡±

paul.basken@ws-2000.com