1. Page 1 BioDiscovery Toronto @ May 5, 2005

2. Page 2 “Institutions for Collaboration” / “Fourth Pillar Organizations” - central to the concept of clusters (Porter) - focus of Biotechnology Cluster Innovation Program The MaRS Discovery District represents an investment to create ‘physical capital’ in the form of a ‘hub’ organization for the commercialization of discoveries in the medical and related sciences. BioDiscovery Toronto represents an investment to create ‘social capital’ at MaRS through leveraging the business development capacity of 8 research hospitals and universities and providing a two-way interface with the bio-finance and bio-medical industries. 1. What kind of policy instruments can shape the evolution of clusters?

3. Page 3 To maximize commercialization of research in Toronto by linking research, industry and capital BioDiscovery Toronto Mandate Focus Provision of a fully functional central interface between the research community and industry as well as a facilitator of cross-institutional activity

4. Page 4 –Networking that yields better leverage, focus, continuity, cohesion –Better opportunities to bundle IP –Clearer ‘branding’ –A dynamic public-private interface – ….. still missing is any real direct policy support for ‘downstream’ private sector initiatives 2. What are policy outcomes & can they be linked to specific policy initiatives

5. Page 5 –IFCs are probably the best mechanism going –Too many levels of governance in Canada! –Should we really need such mechanisms? –Our approach is to try and collapse these!! 3. What mechanisms enable multi-level governance in the cluster?

6. Page 6 –Clusters are largely defined by the private sector –Reverse the question … instead of asking ‘what place is left in cluster governance mechanisms for the private sector?’ –We should be asking ‘what mechanisms do the private sector believe to be necessary for development of their cluster?’ 4. What place do they leave for private sector participants?

7. Page 7 –Tendency to be focus on ‘ex post’ issues presumably because science policy in Canada is very much a process of ‘revealed preferences’. –Should we not be concerned with the development of a more robust and transparent science and cluster policy process? not only for Life Sciences but for all areas affecting innovation systems? 5. Do we need a better science/cluster policy ‘process’ in Canada?

8. Page 8 Supplementary slides

9. Page 9 Ontario’s Life Sciences Gateway Southwest Ontario Waterloo London Golden Horseshoe Toronto York Region Western GTA PeterboroughKingston Ottawa & Eastern Ontario Northern Ontario Guelph Technology-based SMEs Entrepreneurs Researchers pursuing commercial opportunities Regional Innovation Networks Align Regional Resources (address gaps) Leverage Federal Funding Linkages to business support infrastructure Linkages to Research Infrastructure MaRS Knowledge Management System (Gateway to the World) RIN Support e-tools (MaRS Web Portal) Domestic / International VC Connections Commercialization Initiatives (Province Wide)

10. Page 10 Commercialization Opportunity bundling Support for company creation Network of service providers Management of BDO fund Interface Marketing Branding Networking Central information resource Member Institutions Industry Member Institutions Capital BioDiscovery Toronto Operational Model Tech Transfer Market analysis (internal/external) Best practices & professional development BioDiscovery Toronto Institution for Collaboration CustomersInputs