High hopes Budget may move on PM’s R&D commitment for developing world

5% target needs effective mechanisms

Optimism is running high that the February 23rd Budget will contain funding for programs to deliver on prime minister Paul Martin’s commitment to devote 5% of Canada’s R&D spending towards issues of the developing world. Four separate proposals appear to be on the table ranging from an expansion of the Global Health Research Initiative (GHRI) to the creation of an international network of centres of excellence program under the authority of International Trade Canada (ITCan).

The growing optimism comes at a time when Canada’s long-awaited foreign policy review nears completion and Canadian officials and others are spreading the word on the need to deploy S&T to address issues in low income and developing nations such as health, the environment and learning. The latest pronouncements were made in London last week by national science advisor Dr Arthur Carty and Dr Peter Singer, director of the Joint Centre for Bioethics (JCB) at the Univ of Toronto.

Carty, Singer and UK chief science advisor Dr David King all spoke to the issue. But in his role as respondent to the two science advisors, Singer went further, challenging the UK to adopt a similar 5% target and work to convince others to follow suit. Singer calculates that if nations such as the US, Japan, the UK, and the rest of the European Union also adopt the 5% target, more than US$30 billion could be marshalled to tackle what he describes as “the greatest ethical issue of our time”.

“The real issue is the five percent R&D commitment … This is a fundamental moral issue put forward by Martin and amplified by the G-8. The reaction has been enormously positive and it has started taking on a life of its own internationally,” says Singer. “The time is ripe to move from the prime minister’s commitment to a concrete action plan to keep Canada in the lead. Canada needs to move from the attention-focussing aspect of the five percent target to real action that others can follow. The time is ripe for February 23rd.”

Singer says the challenge for Canada and the government is to endorse models to effectively engage the public, private and not-for-profit sectors and then create programs that will deliver Canada’s S&T expertise to the world’s citizens who are most in need. He says there are currently four different models that could be applied.

“If it were up to me, I would do all four of them. The are complementary models but each has a specific focus … Since the prime minister made his commitment, my group (JCB) has been working to think through models for action,” says Singer. “But the machinery of government poses a technical problem. There’s no individual minister other than the prime minister to carry it. It needs special attention at the bureaucratic level ”

In addition to praising Martin’s original decision to make the 5% commitment, Singer lauds Carty and his office for their work in bringing attention to the target and what it means for Canadians and those in less fortunate countries. International S&T is one of the key priorities for Carty’s office.

“(Canada has) a global responsibility to provide our expertise and assistance to help develop capacity for the application of knowledge in other lesser-developed countries,” Carty stated in a recent Internet magazine published by the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI). “I am hopeful that the forthcoming International Policy Statement and Emerging Markets Strategy will provide guidance on how we will engage our knowledge sectors in international diplomacy, trade and development assistance.”

The models being pitched for funding consideration are designed to incent engagement by all sectors, including business.

EXISTING PROGRAMS

The first model perpetuates and enhances Canada’s existing S&T efforts on the international stage. Funding programs are already being delivered by several organizations including the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC). Last year, for instance, CIDA contributed $30 million for a biosciences facility in Kenya, one of three networks of centres of excellence established by the New Partnership for Africa Development (R$, July 29/04).

GHRI EXPANSION

A second model would see the expansion of the GHRI, spearheaded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research with participation by IDRC, CIDA and Health Canada. The GHRI was conceived to address the so-called “10-90 gap” whereby only 10% of health R&D is spent on 90% of the world’s health problems (R$, January 23/02). Such a model could also be expanded into non-health areas such as the environment and learning.

RESEARCH CHAIRS

The third model is the creation of a Canada-Africa Research Chairs program. The program would be modelled on the successful Canada Research Chairs program and is an idea originally put froward by former CFI president and CEO, Dr David Strangway. Like the GHRI model, the chairs proposal would be purely research focused and speak to larger issues of the innovation agenda

NEW BREED OF NCE

The fourth and final model is for an internationally focused Network of Centres of Excellence. Tentatively called Canada Biosciences International, it is the only proposal designed to leverage private sector funding. The NCE would link Canadian-funded African institutes with Canadian institutions in the area of the biosciences and could be expanded later to include other areas of commercially promising research.

Singer says he envisions the Network as a modified NCE with sharper commercialization tools to emphasize competitive intelligence and technology development partnerships along the lines of the Industrial Research Assistance Program.

“It would unleash the pent-up desire of Canadian researchers and companies to work with colleagues in the developing world,” says Singer. “On the commercialization side, it would provide commercial benefits to Canada as a trading nation with countries like China and India.”

Two years ago, the JCB proposed a Canadian International Network for Development and Innovation to the NCE program. The bid was unsuccessful but the experience led Singer to conclude that the new model would be better positioned within ITCan to ensure that it meets the government’s objective of integrating its foreign policy and innovation agendas.

“The NCE program as originally structured is not the best program to carry this forward,” he says.

R$