Canada must move quickly to create a comprehensive national action plan for biotechnology or risk losing more ground to countries that have implemented more aggressive strategies. The call for a national action agenda was issued in a recent report from the Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee (CBAC), nearly two years after its previous call for strategic renewal was met with silence and inaction by Ottawa.
CBAC is recommending that a new agenda contain an overarching policy goal for biotech, a focus on linking actions with outcomes and the identification of specific actions in all areas relating to the sector, from the bench to sales.
During consultations held earlier this year, CBAC heard concerns over the government's lack of response to CBAC reports, lack of engagement with the DM coordinating committee established to liaise with the Committee and underfunding the 1998 strategy's horizontal thrust. In the absence of meaningful government engagement it was decided to prepare its latest report, entitled Toward a Canadian Action Agenda for Biotechnology.
"We decided to revisit the strategy to see if we were on the right track so we engaged in a series of consultations," says Dr Arnold Naimark, CBAC's chair and director of the Univ of Manitoba's Centre for the Advancement of Medicine.
CBAC is currently working under a mandate established in 1998, when the original 1983 industrially focused strategy was replaced. Naimark says that the current approach is now eight years old and does not take into account many of the changes that have taken place in the research landscape, the global arena and within the sector itself. CBAC was created with a sunset clause that came and went more than a year ago, prompting it to continue on a series of one-year extensions to its mandate.
"A strong case for a different approach emerged. There have been many changes in the past few years … The clear message we received was that the earlier strategy was OK for its time. But we need to move from a process orientation and broad themes to specific goals and measured outcomes."
Several years ago, federal officials frequently cited the biotech industry as the second largest in the world in terms of number of firms. That claim no longer applies, with Canada slipping to sixth or even seventh according to that measure. Company failure in the biotech sector has risen sharply.
"The industry is established but it needs to move from this thin layer of (mainly small) firms to build up greater economic strength. A strategy has to be holistic and look at all phases in the value chain from R&D to sales," says Naimark. "But it must also take into account that a lot of innovation translates into improved health and procedures and not just industrial development."
SPECIFIC PROPOSALS
The report calls for actions in specific areas, enhancing Canada's capacity to:
* generate knowledge that may lead to the development and use of novel biotech-based goods, services, processes and practices;
* develop, produce and market those outcomes;
* regulate the introduction of goods and services into the marketplace and monitor long-term effects;
* adopt the use of biotech applications in enhancing and protecting human and animal health, the environment and the economy;
* contribute to and benefit from international linkages; and,
* and engage Canadians in comprehensive and sustained discussions about the implications of biotech applications.
Naimark says that whether a new biotech strategy is distinct or part of a general S&T strategy (now in development) does not negate the need for measures that are nuanced, focused and specific.
"Our proposal will require a clear commitment at the ministerial level to drive this agenda," says Naimark. "We need a governance mechanism to ensure continuous engagement. That means senior leadership and a commitment to sufficient funding. It needs a source of expert, even-handed advice — a CBAC-like body."
The report can be found at www.cbac-cccb.ca under Publications/Consultations.
R$