Social Innovation, the Public Good and the Invention- Innovation David Castle Canada Research Chair in Science and Society Department of Philosophy University of Ottawa

2003 Canadian business expenditures on R&D represented only 1.0% of GDP U.S.’s 1.8% or the OECD average of 1.5%. 2005, the World Economic Forum ranked Canadian businesses 27th in the world in terms of their propensity to compete based on unique products and processes 2006, the Expert Panel on Commercialization (commissioned by the Prime Minister’s Advisory Council on Science and Technology) called for a Commercialization Partnership Board to address the invention-innovation We All Know What the Problem Is

Post-Secondary Education Funding CAUT - Almanac of Post-Secondary Education 2007

S&T Framework states Canada is the top-ranked publisher of peer-reviewed scientific papers based on publicly-funded research, but adds / captures little value The Conference Board of Canada reports that private sector investment in training, learning and development in Canada is stagnant, and is slipping behind many of our international competitors. The Council of Canadian Academies finds that fields with high growth potential are not associated with correspondingly consistent science and technology infrastructure, particularly in the regulatory domain that would generate confidence in health and safety, intellectual property protection, and environment and business framework regulation. We All Know What the Problem Is

Vannevar Bush – Linear Model Basic AppliedDevelopmentTechnologyApplication Federal Investment Social Benefit

Innovation Gap S&T Framework Entrepreneurial Knowledge People PPPs Firms VC Change Agents

Innovation Gap PPPs Firms VC Change Agents S&T Framework Entrepreneurial Knowledge People Transfer Translation

Biotechnology IP

Biotechnology IP - PDV

Central to the debate is the question of whether managed innovation within a federal system of devolved governance create appropriate enabling and sustaining social conditions for science and technology to flourish in Canada, and improve the well-being and wealth of Canadians. Central Challenge

1. Systematic review of the governance of innovation which provides improved measures of the social-scientific impact of public and private investment in science and technology 2. Study of boundary-crossing science and technology where traditional categories of science and technology no longer apply, thus destabilizing the regulatory environment and public understanding of science and technology Five Challenges

3. Development of a proactive technology assessment that combines ethical and scientific elements in the evaluation of a technology’s complete life-cycle 4. Extension of Canadian science and technology’s into the international context to address the imbalance in global health equity and food security and reestablish Canada’s preeminence in the development agenda Five Challenges

5. Evaluation of environmental context of science and technology innovation to understand the impact on the social environment, health systems, and the natural environment Five Challenges

Convergence in Biotechnology 1.Complexity obstacle 2.Regulatory culture obstacle 3.Reactive mode obstacle 4.Myth of sound science obstacle 5.Domestic focus obstacle

Innovation in Governance

New methods – for evaluating the social return on science and technology investments, and assessing technological innovation as it arises in its social context New metrics – that ground new methods and models empirically in measures that better capture the social impact of innovation New models – to analyze and evaluate domestic science and technology governance, and to strengthen Canada’s position through international comparison Social Innovation – NOW!

Acknowledgements