Dr Ashley O'Sullivan

Principles for transferring federal labs

By Dr Ashley O'Sullivan

The Government of Canada recently developed a federal science and technology strategy — Mobilizing Science and Technology to Canada's Advantage. Following its creation, the Committee on Federal Laboratory Transfers was established, chaired by Dr Arnold Naimark. The Committee is in the process of identifying up to five transfer opportunities by the end of this year.

The strategy outlines four strategic principles: fostering partnerships; promoting world-class excellence; focusing on priorities; and enhancing accountability. Ag-West Bio supports these principles and applauds the willingness to consider alternative management arrangements for non-regulatory labs to enhance S&T collaboration.

According to Treasury Board, the objectives of laboratory transfers are to: increase the impact of federal investments in research; foster research excellence; enhance learning and transfer of knowledge; and, leverage the strengths of government, university and private sector research. It is unclear how transfers would achieve these goals. They may be counter-productive in the absence of clear opportunity contexts. However, we feel such contexts exist and it is possible to achieve some or all of the stated transfer objectives.

We do not see great gains from the wholesale transfer of federal labs to universities or the private sector. We believe that the identification of national strategic opportunities should be the foundation of such initiatives. Appropriate incentives should be introduced to eliminate institutional barriers that impede achievement of desired outcomes.

Canada's research encompasses the public, private and academic sectors. The nature of public sector research, in particular, has changed over the past 30 years. While universities have engaged in discovery research and teaching, federal science efforts mostly relate to areas of national interest and have sought industry involvement. Universities and public sector research institutions have recognized the need to balance discovery research, public good societal research and the need to be responsive to industry and improve commercialization.

While there was (and remains) many examples of good collaboration, and indeed synergy, very distinct cultural and valuable roles have evolved for each sector. One shortcoming has been institutional divisions in public science capacity. There is an urgent need for more effective means to fully engage public sector science capacity across existing institutional boundaries on issues and opportunities of national interest and with industry-driven engagement.

The reasons for the ongoing success of federal laboratories in meeting industry research needs and public good are not hard to ascertain. One is the ability of federally-managed labs to focus critical mass efforts on priority R&D needs of the nation and especially of industry. Another is the unique ability of government to provide sustained, well-managed programs, enduring the many years required to move new concepts to the threshold of viable industrial innovations.

A third important consideration is the ability of federal labs to focus on national priorities. Finally, they have become adroit at carrying on business partnerships with industries — especially since the 1980s —in terms of effectiveness, research speed and confidentiality, contributing to a secure development environment for innovations.

Some of these same attributes may exist in successful university programs or other public sector research institutions. But due to institutional barriers and other constraints, the full public sector research capacity is seldom, if ever, aligned or marshaled.

Even though they may possess numerous faculty researchers with broadly related interests, university traditions of independent academic research are not conducive to the formation and sustainability of managed research teams, as understood in industry or public labs. Further, our university granting system does not provide sustained or secure support for long-running programs. For essentially similar reasons, universities seldom deploy hierarchical direction to steer and propel research efforts at the operational level. Finally, bridging discovery and commercial development remains a weak spot of most Canadian academic institutions.

Ag-West Bio Inc is concerned that the invaluable strengths of federal labs would be lost upon hasty transfers, whether to industry or (as seems more likely) to universities. We think that making the system more effective should not involve the federal government removing itself from research business nor off-loading responsibilities to universities or provinces.

We believe that one approach to make the system more effective may involve developing new mechanisms to leverage existing structures. For instance, there are in Canada particular clusters where synergies can be leveraged to national interests and industry needs. But stakeholders must first agree on new models for research which are partnership-based, initiative-driven, commercialization-focused and securely funded.

We believe the following principles should be adopted as part of a more effective research system: identification of strategic outcomes; clear criteria for the identification and selection of laboratory, industry and university partners; compelling opportunities for synergy; sustained funding; formal management and governance structures; mechanisms for accountability; and, flexible arrangements and funding for intellectual property (IP) management and commercialization.

Ag-West Bio envisions cluster-based alignment of federal laboratory resources with universities and industry, leading to new productivity and the achievement of most if not all of the transfer aims sought by Treasury Board. One opportunity is to use the laboratory transfer initiative to lower the institutional barriers, bringing researchers and resources together around new opportunities based on national strategic opportunities. As part of a national plan, each region capitalizes on its unique strengths and focuses R&D energies on identified priority areas.

Staff assignments for initiatives come from federal, provincial, university and private industry laboratories, to build the necessary cluster expertise. The partners, with sustained funding, engage in collaborative planning and delivery, IP bundling and commercialization. Such a model requires major resources, some existing and some new.

Saskatchewan is well situated to exploit our new model for strategic advantage in the life sciences. We look forward to the challenge and advantages it will bring Canada.

Dr Ashley O'Sullivan is president and CEO of Ag-West Bio Inc. He prepared this article following extensive stakeholder consultations within Saskatchewan.