2016 REPORT ON RESULTS. An analysis of investments in research infrastructure

Transcription

1 2016 REPORT ON RESULTS An analysis of investments in research infrastructure

2

3 ABOUT THE CANADA FOUNDATION FOR INNOVATION Created by the Government of Canada in 1997, the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) strives to build our nation s capacity to undertake world-class research and technology development to benefit Canadians. The CFI s expected results are to enhance the capacity of institutions to: attract and retain the world s top research talent; train the next generation of researchers; enable researchers to undertake world-class research and technology development that lead to social, economic and environmental benefits for Canada; and support private-sector innovation and commercialization. Since its creation, the CFI has committed more than $6.7 billion in support of 9,415 projects at 147 research institutions in 71 municipalities across Canada (as of October 2016). For more information about the CFI, please visit THE REPORT ON RESULTS The purpose of the Report on Results is to provide a summary of the outputs and outcomes achieved through CFI-funded infrastructure as they relate to the overall objectives of the CFI, based on information provided through annual Project Progress Reports (PPRs). The PPR is an online questionnaire which is completed by the project leader and submitted by the host institution. Institutions are required to submit a PPR for each funded project by June 30 each year, for up to five years after the infrastructure becomes operational. The data collected pertains only to the past year (CFI fiscal year April 1 to March 31). Data is self-reported, and not independently verified. For information on the composition of the 2016 PPR sample, see the Appendix. Canada Foundation for Innovation Fondation canadienne pour l innovation

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Figure 1. Researcher attraction & retention... 1 Figure 2. New talent... 2 Figure 3. Trainees using infrastructure... 3 Figure 4. Quality of training environment... 4 Figure 5. HQP employment... 5 Figure 6. Operation & maintenance... 6 Figure 7. Infrastructure quality & useful life... 7 Figure 8. Infrastructure use... 8 Figure 9. Sharing research results... 9 Figure 10. Productive collaborations Figure 11. Research agreements Figure 12. From research to innovation Figure 13. New jobs Figure 14. A range of benefits Figure 15. Areas of impact and user groups Figure 16. Challenges Appendix. Composition of the 2016 Project Progress Report sample... 17

5 FIGURE 1 Researcher attraction & retention The majority of project leaders indicated that CFI infrastructure was important in their decision to join or remain at their institution. Just under half of newly recruited researchers work in health. 100% 86 4 Importance of infrastructure in decision to join or stay at institution 90% 25 80% 416 New recruits by area of application % of projects 70% 60% 50% Social Sciences and Humanities 6% (12) Science 18% (35) Engineering 24% (47) 40% 167 Environment 8% (16) 30% 1,032 Health 44% (86) 20% 10% 0% Researcher Retention Researcher Attraction Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Attracting and retaining world-class researchers 2016 Report on Results 1

6 FIGURE 2 New talent CFI-funded infrastructure helped attract a diverse pool of national and international talent. Among 196 project leaders newly recruited to the institution, just over half came from outside Canada. Of those already in Canada, 10% originated from outside of the academic sector. Newly recruited project leaders Canada 92 (47%) Foreign countries 104 (53%) Sector Citizenship University/ College/ Research Hospital 83 (90%) Other Public 4 (4%) Private 5 (6%) Foreign 58 (56%) Canadian 46 (44%) Attracting and retaining world-class researchers 2016 Report on Results 2

7 FIGURE 3 Trainees using infrastructure 97% of project leaders reported that CFI-funded infrastructure was a key resource for the next generation of research leaders. Types of trainees using infrastructure 23,062 post-doctoral fellows (PDFs) and higher education students had the opportunity to expand their research skills using CFI-funded infrastructure. Of those, 56% used the infrastructure for the first time. PDFs 1,488 1, repeat users 100 first-time users PhDs 4,195 2,881 Masters 2,568 Undergraduates 3,068 1,499 5,442 49% of project leaders reported a total of 2,001 technical personnel who were trained for the first time last year on the use and maintenance of the infrastructure. Developing highly qualified personnel 2016 Report on Results 3

8 FIGURE 4 Quality of training environment 93% of project leaders credited their infrastructure with having a high or very high impact on the quality of the training environment. 1,400 Impact on training 1,200 72% 1,000 No. of projects % % 1% 0% Very high High Medium Low Very low Developing highly qualified personnel 2016 Report on Results 4

9 FIGURE 5 HQP employment A total of 1,584 post-doctoral fellows (PDFs) and graduate students using the infrastructure last year completed their training and moved into the workforce. Among them, a large proportion (79%) secured employment in Canada. Employment in Canada by sector Total: 728 (58%) PDFs No. of trainees Total: 328 (26%) PhDs Masters Total: 193 (16%) Private University/ college/ research hospital Public/ non-profit Close to 60% (728) of the highly qualified personnel (HQP) who completed their training and became employed in Canada joined the private sector. Developing highly qualified personnel 2016 Report on Results 5

10 FIGURE 6 Operation & maintenance The majority (87%) of project leaders reported that they had both adequate financial and human resources for the operation and maintenance (O & M) of the infrastructure. Sources of funds for O & M 1,200 1,000 No. of projects Grants or awards Revenues CFI (IOF) Institutional funds Federal gov't Provincial gov't Foreign gov't Municipal gov't Research contracts User/ service fees Consulting Use of diverse funding sources, including research contracts and user fees, contributes to the sustainability of the infrastructure. Capacity for world-class research 2016 Report on Results 6

11 FIGURE 7 Infrastructure quality & useful life The quality of CFI-funded infrastructure was highly rated overall, with 88% of highly specialized research equipment reported as state-of-the-art. Infrastructure quality and remaining years of useful life 100% % of projects 80% 60% 40% % Obsolete Useful 0% Highly specialized research equipment Non-specialized/ standard research equipment Computing hardware or software Research space Building(s) State of the art remaining years Capacity for world-class research 2016 Report on Results 7

12 FIGURE 8 Infrastructure use The majority of project leaders reported full utilization of infrastructure. 84% of project leaders (1,343) reported at least one researcher at their institution using the infrastructure to advance their research while 60% of project leaders (962) reported at least one user from outside their institution. Types of infrastructure users Inside institution 7,185 users Local users 2,234 Outside institution 8,543 users Provincial users 1,483 National users 2,021 International users 2,805 The majority of international infrastructure users were from the United States, France, the United Kingdom and Germany. Capacity for world-class research 2016 Report on Results 8

13 FIGURE 9 Sharing research results Conferences, symposiums and workshop presentations were the most frequent type of research output reported, closely followed by peer-reviewed publications. Dissemination by area of application 100% 50% 90% 86% 36% Engineering (273 projects) 8% 12% 11% % of projects with at least one output 0% 100% 50% 0% 100% 50% 0% 100% 50% 94% 90% 95% 87% 89% 88% Environment (152 projects) 37% 9% 10% 12% Health (705 projects) 12% 8% 7% 7% Science (257 projects) 24% 12% 10% 14% 0% 100% 50% 98% 84% Social sciences and humanities (105 projects) 34% 38% 29% 21% 0% Presentations Peer-reviewed publications Research or technical reports Books Reference or training tools/materials Internet publishing Capacity for world-class research 2016 Report on Results 9

14 FIGURE 10 Productive collaborations Researchers have made use of infrastructure to enable external research collaborations that resulted in traditional academic activities and outputs such as funding applications and publications ,113 collaborations Types of external research collaborations 800 5,337 collaborations ,538 collaborations 1,501 collaborations No. of projects Peer-reviewed copublications Conference presentations Grant or award applications Funded grants or awards 69% of project leaders reported at least one type of collaboration with individuals from outside their institution. Of those, 23% of project leaders reported all four types, suggesting CFI-funded infrastructure enables broad and varied collaboration. Productive networks and collaborations 2016 Report on Results 10

15 FIGURE 11 Research agreements CFI-funded infrastructure facilitated new formal collaborative research agreements in 35% of projects, for a total of 1,875 agreements. Agreements by type 181 consultancies (10%) 700 research contracts (37%) 994 collaborative research agreements (53%) The private sector was the most often identified sector for both consultancies and research contracts while the academic sector was most frequently reported for collaborative research agreeements. Productive networks and collaborations 2016 Report on Results 11

16 FIGURE 12 From research to innovation CFI-funded infrastructure has contributed to the development of new technologies and the creation of new companies. 137 provisional patents 70 patents granted 51 projects reported licensing agreements 46 spin-off companies 164 project leaders reported at least one of the above four types of innovation outcomes. Economic growth and job creation 2016 Report on Results 12

17 FIGURE 13 New jobs 28% of project leaders reported one or more jobs created due to the CFI-funded infrastructure. Jobs created jobs 350 No. of jobs outside host institution jobs A recent analysis of financial data showed that CFI funding spent on construction or renovation to house infrastructure created or supported an estimated 19,940 construction job years between 1999 and 2015 (CFI Annual Report ) jobs 22 jobs 0 Private University/college/ research hospital Non-profit Public (other than academic) Three-fifths (60%) of all jobs created were within the host institutions. Just over twothirds of the 542 jobs created outside the institution were in the private sector. Economic growth and job creation 2016 Report on Results 13

18 FIGURE 14 A range of benefits Almost half of project leaders reported at least one type of benefit, highlighting the role of CFI-funded infrastructure in enabling research that produces outcomes for Canadians Types of benefits reported Exercise program to improve physical functioning of people suffering from knee osteoarthritis Improved detection of awareness in vegetative or minimally conscious patients. Read more here. No. of projects Training program for police to improve deescalation skills and reduce unnecessary use of force encounters New/revised process, model or plan Public education, cultural enrichment New/improved product or service New/revised policy, regulation, bill or program The proportion of projects producing each type of benefit remained consistent across reporting years. Benefits for Canadians 2016 Report on Results 14

19 FIGURE 15 Areas of impact and user groups Areas of impact * Education/training, public health and economic were the most frequently reported areas of impact No. of benefits Education/ training Public health Economic Environmental Cultural Social Political, legal or ethical Organizational/ human capital No. of benefits User groups Private-sector enterprise/ industry Federal, prov. and municipal gov't The private sector was reported as the primary beneficiary of CFI-enabled research outcomes. Public and semipublic org./ institution Prof. or industrial assoc. and practitioners General public Charitable/non-profit/ community group *Area of impact categories as defined by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Benefits for Canadians 2016 Report on Results 15

20 FIGURE 16 Challenges The most frequently mentioned challenge by project leaders was funding/support for research operating costs. 40% Significant factors limiting research 30% % of projects 20% 10% 0% Funding/ support for direct costs of research Recruitment/ retention of HQP Acquiring equipment and becoming operational Updating and upgrading of equipment/ space-related issues Funding/ support for O&M Administration of CFI funds None Although issues related to highly qualified personnel (HQP) and the acquisition and updating of equipment were also identified as important challenges, 34% of project leaders reported that they had no significant limiting factors in conducting their research Report on Results 16

21 APPENDIX Composition of the 2016 Project Progress Report 1,611 1,601 expected reports sample * Innovation Fund (IF) type: Leading Edge Fund 2006, 2009, 2012 and New Initiatives Fund 2009, John R. Evans Leaders Fund (JELF) type: Leaders Opportunity Fund (LOF) $1M to $2M, LOF CRC, LOF NSERC, LOF SSHRC, JELF Funding for research infrastructure, JELF CRC, JELF-CERC, JELF-NSERC, JELF-SSHRC Other programs: Research Hospital Fund Large Scale Institutional Endeavors and 2013 Digging into Data Challenge Report on Results 17

22 Ver Queen Street Ottawa ON K1P 5E4 Tel Fax rue Queen Ottawa ON 18 K1P 5E4 Tél Téléc